Cost-effectiveness of greenhouse gas mitigation in transport: A review of methodological approaches and their impact

Energy Policy

Volumn 39, Issue 12, 2011, Pages 7776-7793

  Kok, Robert ^a,b   Annema, Jan Anne ^a   van Wee, Bert ^a  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^b ECORYS Netherlands   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness; Greenhouse gas mitigation; Transport

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIOURAL CHANGES; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; GHG MITIGATION; GREENHOUSE GAS MITIGATION; HYBRID MODEL; MARKET RESPONSE; METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH; MITIGATION MEASURES; POLICY DECISIONS; POLICY MAKING; POTENTIAL VARIATIONS; ROAD VEHICLES; TRANSPORT;

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; CARBON DIOXIDE; COST EFFECTIVENESS; COSTS; FUEL ECONOMY; GAS FUEL ANALYSIS; GLOBAL WARMING; GREENHOUSE GASES;

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

BOTTOM-UP APPROACH; CARBON DIOXIDE; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FUEL CONSUMPTION; GREENHOUSE GAS; POLICY APPROACH; POLLUTION POLICY; TRANSPORTATION PLANNING; WELFARE ECONOMICS;

EUROPE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 80855156680     PISSN: 03014215     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.09.023     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. AEA, 2001. Economic Evaluation of Sectoral Emission Reduction Objectives for Climate Change-Economic Evaluation of Emissions Reductions in the Transport Sector of the EU: Bottom-up Analysis. Updated Final Report. Report to the European Commission, Abingdon, UK.
2. AEA, 2008. Impacts of Regulatory Options to Reduce CO2 Emissions from Cars, in Particular on Car Manufacturers. Report to the European Commission, London, UK.
3. Anable, J., Bristow, A.L., 2007. Transport and Climate Change: Supporting Document to the CfIT Report. Prepared for the Climate Change Working Group of the Commission for Integrated Transport (CfIT).
4. Akimoto K., Sano F., Homma T., Oda J., Nagashima M., Kii M. Estimates of GHG emission reduction potential by country, sector, and cost. Energy Policy 2010, 38(7):3384-3393.
5. Barker, T., Qureshi, M.S., Köhler, J., 2006. The Costs of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation with Induced Technological Change: A Meta-Analysis of Estimates in the Literature. Cambridge Centre for Climate Change Mitigation Research, Department of Land Economy, University of Cambridge.
6. CCC, 2008. Building a Supply-Side Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC) for the UK Transport Sector. Committee on Climate Change, UK.
7. CE Delft, 2009. Technical Support for European Action to Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from International Maritime Transport. Report to the European Commission, CE Delft, Delft, the Netherlands.
8. CfIT, 2007. Transport and Climate Change-Advice to Government from the Commission for Integrated Transport. Commission for Integrated Transport, London, UK.
9. Corbett J.J., Wang H., Winebrake J.J. The effectiveness and costs of speed reductions on emissions from international shipping. Transportation Research Part D 2009, 14(8):593-598.
10. Davidson, M.D., Korteland, M., Schroten, A., Smokers, R., De Bruyn, S., 2007. Climate Policy Costing Methodologies: A Comparative Analysis for the Transport Sector. Report to the Netherlands Environmental Planning Agency, CE Delft, Delft, the Netherlands.
11. Davidson, M.D., Van Essen, H.P., 2009. EU Transport GHG: Routes to 2050? Methodological Issues related to Assessing Cost Effectiveness of Climate Change Abatement Options. Report to the European Commission, CE Delft, Delft, the Netherlands.
12. Decicco J., Ross M. Recent advances in automotive technology and the cost-effectiveness of fuel economy improvement. Transportation Research Part D 1996, 1(2):79-96.
13. Defra Synthesis of Climate Change Policy Appraisals 2007, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), London, UK.
14. DfT, 2009. Impact Assessment of the Carbon Reduction Strategy for Transport, Low Carbon Transport: A Greener Future. Department for Transport, London, UK.
15. DTI Synthesis of the Cost-Benefit Analysis Conducted as Part of the Energy Review 'The Energy Challenge' 2006, Department for Trade and Industry (DTI), UK.
16. DTI Synthesis of the Analysis for the Energy White Paper 2007, Department for Trade and Industry (DTI), UK.
17. EPA, 2010. Final Rulemaking to Establish Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards.Regulatory Impact Analysis. United States Environmental Protection Agency.
18. Greene D.L., Duleep K.G. Costs and benefits of automotive fuel economy improvement: a partial analysis. Transportation Research Part A 1993, 27(3):217-235.
19. Greening L.A., Greene D.L., Difiglio C. Energy efficiency and consumption - the rebound effect - a survey. Energy Policy 2000, 28(6-7):389-401.
20. 2 emissions: a survey and analysis. Annual Review of Energy and Environment 1993, 18:397-478.
21. Grubb M. Policy modelling for climate change: the missing models. Energy Policy 1993, 21(3):203-208.
22. Halsnaes K., Callaway J.M., Meyer H.J. Economics of Greenhouse Gas Limitations: Methodological Guidelines 1998, UNEP Collaborating Centre on Energy and Environment, Denmark.
23. Hamelinck, C.N., 2004. Outlook for Advanced Biofuels. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Utrecht, the Netherlands, ISBN: 90-393-3691-1.
24. Horne M., Jaccard M., Tiedemann K. Improving behavioral realism in hybrid energy-economy models using discrete choice studies of personal transportation decisions. Energy Economics 2005, 27(1):59-77.
25. Hymel K.M., Small K.A., Van Dender K. Induced demand and rebound effects in road transport. Transportation Research Part B 2010, 44(10):1220-1241.
26. IEA Biofuels for Transport: An International Perspective 2004, International Energy Agency, Paris.
27. 2-Moving Towards Sustainability 2009, International Energy Agency, Paris.
28. IEEP, 2005. Service Contract to Carry Out Economic Analysis and Business Impact Assessment of CO2 Emissions Reduction Measures in the Automotive Sector. Institute for European Environmental Policy, Report to the European Commission, London, UK.
29. INFRAS, 2006. Cost-effectiveness of Greenhouse Gas Reductions in Various Sectors. Report to the European Commission, Zürich/Bern, Switzerland.
30. Inhaber H. Shortfall in on-road fuel economy: Implications for public policy. Energy Policy 1982, 10(4):356-359.
31. Jaccard M., Nyboer J., Bataille C., Sadownik B. Modeling the cost of climate policy: distinguishing between alternative cost dentitions and long-run cost dynamics. The Energy Journal 2003, 24(1):49-73.
32. JEC, 2007. Well-to-Wheels Analysis of Future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains in the European Context. European Commission Joint Research Centre, EUCAR, CONCAWE, Version 2c.
33. Kampman, B., de Bruyn, S., den Boer, E., 2006. Cost Effectiveness of CO2 Mitigation in Transport: An Outlook and Comparison with Measures in Other Sectors. Report to the European Conference of Ministers of Transport, CE Delft, Delft, the Netherlands.
34. Kolke, R., 1999. Technical Options for Abating Road Traffic Impacts-Comparative Study of Fuel Cell Vehicles and Vehicles with Internal Combustion Engines. Federal Environmental Agency, Berlin, Germany.
35. Lutsey, N., 2008. Prioritizing Climate Change Mitigation Alternatives: Comparing Transportation Technologies to Options in Other Sectors. Ph.D. Dissertation. Institute for Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis, USA, UCD-ITS-RR-08-15.
36. Lutsey N., Sperling D. Greenhouse gas mitigation supply curve for the United States for transport versus other sectors. Transportation Research Part D 2009, 14(3):222-229.
37. Mau P., Eyzaguirre J., Jaccard M., Collins-Dodd C., Tiedemann K. The 'neighbor effect': simulating dynamics in consumer preferences for new vehicle technologies. Ecological Economics 2008, 68:504-516.
38. McKinsey & Company, 2007a. Costs and Potentials of Greenhouse Gas Abatement in Germany. A Report by McKinsey & Company, Inc., On Behalf of BDI Initiative-Business for Climate. McKinsey & Company, Germany.
39. McKinsey & Company, 2007b. Reducing US Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much at What Cost? US Greenhouse Gas Abatement Mapping Initiative, Executive Report. McKinsey & Company USA.
40. McKinsey & Company, 2009. Roads toward a Low Carbon Future: Reducing CO2 Emissions from Passenger Vehicles in the Global Road Transportation System. McKinsey & Company.
41. 2 reduction cost curves: the case of Denmark. Energy Policy 1994, 22(11):964-970.
42. NHTSA, 2010. Final Regulatory Impact Analysis. Corporate Average Fuel Economy for MY 2012-MY 2016, Passenger Cars and Light Trucks. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).
43. NRC (National Research Council) Effectiveness and Impact of Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards 2002, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
44. NRC (National Research Council) Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles 2011, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
45. Parry I.W.H. Are the costs of reducing greenhouse gases from passenger vehicles negative?. Journal of Urban Economics 2007, 62(2):273-293.
46. Parry I.W.H., Williams R.C., Goulder L.H. When can carbon abatement policies increase welfare? The fundamental role of distorted factor markets. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 1999, 37(1):52-84.
47. Proost, S., De Ceuster, G., 2006. TREMOVE 2-Service Contract for the Further Development and Application of the TREMOVE Transport Model-Lot 3. Part 3 Policy Runs. Report to the European Commission, K.U. Leuven and TML.
48. Rabl, A., Spadaro, J.V., Rabl, V.A., Kreider, J.F., 2007. Costs of carbon dioxide abatement in the United States. In: Proceedings of the Energy Sustainability 2007, Long Beach, California, USA.
49. Rubin E.S., Cooper R.N., Frosch R.A., Lee T.H., Marland G., Rosenfeld A.H., Stine D.D. Realistic mitigation options for global warming. Science 1992, 257(5067):148-149,. 261-266.
50. SERPEC-CC, 2009. Sectoral Emission Reduction Potentials and Economic Costs for Climate Change (SERPEC-CC): Transport-Passenger Cars, Road Freight and Aviation. Ecofys, Joint Research Centre IPTS, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
51. Smokers, R., de Buck, A., van Valkengoed, M., 2009. GHG Reduction in Transport: An Expensive Option? Marginal Abatement Costs for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction in Transport compared with other Sectors. Report to the Joint Transport Research Centre of the OECD and the International Transport Forum, CE Delft, Delft, the Netherlands.
52. Stern Review STERN REVIEW: The Economics of Climate Change 2006, Cambridge University press.
53. Tippichai A., Fukuda A., Morisugi H. Introduction of a sectoral approach to transport sector for post-2012 climate regime-a preliminary analysis using marginal abatement cost curves. IATSS Research 2009, 33(2):76-87.
54. TML, 2008. CO2 Targets. Report to Greenpeace, Transport & Mobility Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
55. TNO, 2006. Review and Analysis of the Reduction Potential and Costs of Technological and other Measures to Reduce CO2-Emissions from Passenger Cars. Task A Final Report. Report to the European Commission, Delft, the Netherlands.
56. TNO, 2010. CO2 uitstoot van personenwagens in norm en praktijk-analyse van gegevens van zakelijkerijders. Report to the Dutch Ministry of Environment (VROM), Delft, the Netherlands.
57. TRB, 2009. A Transportation Research Program for Mitigating and Adapting to Climate Change and Conserving Energy. Transportation Research Board Special Report 299, USA.
58. UK-ERC, 2009. What Policies are Effective at Reducing Carbon Emissions from Surface Passenger Transport? A Review of Interventions to Encourage Behavioural and Technological Change. UK Energy Research Centre, London, UK.
59. US DoT, 2010. Transportation's Role in Reducing US Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Report to the Congress, vol. 2: Technical Report. US Department of Transportation, Washington DC, USA.
60. Van den Brink, R.M.M., Annema, J.A., 2004. Look Before You Leap! The Necessity of Short-term CO2 Emission Reduction in Transport. World Resource Review, Global Warming International Center.
61. Van Vuuren D.P., Hoogwijk M., Barker T., Riahi K., Boeters S., Chateau J., Scrieciu S., van Vliet J., Masui T., Blok K., Blomen E., Kram T. Comparison of top-down and bottom-up estimates of sectoral and regional greenhouse gas emission reduction potentials. Energy Policy 2009, 37(12):5125-5139.
62. Verhoef E.T., Van Wee B. Car ownership and status-implications for fuel efficiency policies from the viewpoint of theories of happiness and welfare economics. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research 2000, 0(0):41-56.
63. Wang M.Q. Mobile source emission control cost-effectiveness: issues, uncertainties, and results. Transportation Research Part D 1997, 2(1):43-56.
64. Wilson D., Swisher J. Exploring the gap: top-down versus bottom-up analyses of the cost of mitigating global warming. Energy Policy 1993, 21(3):249-263.
65. Wright L., Fulton L. Climate change mitigation and transport in developing nations. Transport Reviews 2005, 25(6):691-717.
66. ZEW, 2006. Service Contract in Support of the Impact Assessment of Various Policy Scenarios to Reduce CO2 Emissions from Passenger Cars. Report to the European Commission, Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW) and B&D Forecast, Mannheim, Germany.