Pollution from the electric power sector in Japan and efficient pollution reduction

Energy Economics

Volumn 34, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 1124-1130

  Matsushita, Kyohei ^a   Yamane, Fumihiro ^b  

^a SHIGA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b KOBE UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Carbon dioxide; Directional output distance function; Indirect Morishima elasticity; Low level waste; Shadow price

Indexed keywords

A-CARBON; CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS; ELECTRIC POWER SECTOR; EMISSIONS TRADING SYSTEM; ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES; KYOTO PROTOCOL; LOW-LEVEL WASTE; MARGINAL ABATEMENT COSTS; OUTPUT DISTANCE FUNCTION; POLLUTION REDUCTION; RELATIVE PRICES; SHADOW PRICE;

ELASTICITY; ELECTRIC GENERATORS; ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION; ELECTRICITY; EMISSION CONTROL; GLOBAL WARMING; INTERNATIONAL LAW; POLLUTION; RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL; RADIOACTIVE WASTES;

CARBON DIOXIDE;

CARBON DIOXIDE; CARBON EMISSION; ELECTRICITY GENERATION; EMISSION CONTROL; EMISSIONS TRADING; IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS; KYOTO PROTOCOL; POLLUTANT SOURCE; POWER PLANT; TAX SYSTEM;

JAPAN;

EID: 84862202379     PISSN: 01409883     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2011.09.011     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Aigner D.J., Chu S.F. On estimating the industry production function. Am. Econ. Rev. 1968, 58:826-839.
2. Anthoff D., Tol R.S.J. On international equity weights and national decision making on climate change. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 2010, 60:14-20.
3. Aomori prefecture http://www.pref.aomori.lg.jp/life/tax/003_18kakunen.html.
4. Azar C., Sterner T. Discounting and distributional considerations in the context of global warming. Ecol. Econ. 1996, 19:169-184.
5. Blackorby C., Russell R.R. The Morishima elasticity of substitution: symmetry, constancy, separability, and its relationship to the Hicks and Allen elasticities. Rev. Econ. Stud. 1981, 48:147-158.
6. Blackorby C., Russell R.R. Will the real elasticity of substitution please stand up? (A Comparison of the Allen/Uzawa and Morishima Elasticities). Am. Econ. Rev. 1989, 79:882-888.
7. Chambers R.G., Chung Y., Färe R. Profit, directional distance functions, and nerlovian efficiency. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 1998, 98:351-364.
8. 2 allowances. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 1996, 30:58-72.
9. European Commission Externalities of energy: extension of accounting framework and policy applications, Brussels 2005.
10. Färe R., Grosskopf S. New directions: efficiency and productivity 2004, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.
11. Färe R., Primont D. Multi-output production and duality: theory and applications 1995, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.
12. Färe R., Grosskopf S., Knox Lovell C.A., Yaisawarng S. Derivation of shadow prices for undesirable outputs: a distance function approach. Rev. Econ. Stat. 1993, 75:374-380.
13. Färe R., Grosskopf S., Noh D.W., Weber W. Characteristic of a polluting technology: theory and practice. J. Econom. 2005, 126:469-492.
14. Färe R., Grosskopf S., Weber W.L. Shadow prices and pollution costs in U.S. agriculture. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 56:89-103.
15. Färe R., Grosskopf S., Hayes K., Margaritis D. Estimating demand with distance functions: parameterization in the primal and dual. J. Econom. 2008, 147:266-274.
16. Färe R., Martins-Filho C., Vardanyan M. On functional form representation of multi-output production technologies. J. Prod. Anal. 2010, 33:81-96.
17. Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan http://www5.fepc.or.jp.
18. Gollop F.M., Roberts M.J. Cost-minimizing regulation of sulfur emissions: regional gains in electric power. Rev. Econ. Stat. 1985, 67:81-90.
19. Grosskopf S., Hayes K., Hirschberg J. Fiscal stress and the production of public safety: a distance function approach. J. Public Econ. 1995, 57:277-296.
20. Gupta M. Costs of reducing greenhouse gas emissions: a case study of India's power generation sector. Fondazione Eni Enrico Matti, Nota di lavoro 2006, 147.
21. International Energy Agency (IEA) Energy balances of OECD Countries 2005.
22. Japan Nuclear Energy Safety Organization Current status of nuclear facilities in Japan http://www.jnes.go.jp.
23. Kumbhakar S.C., Lovell K.C.A. Stochastic frontier analysis 2000, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
24. Kwon O.S., Yun W.C. Estimation of the marginal abatement costs of airborne pollutants in Korea's power generation sector. Energy Econ. 1999, 21:547-560.
25. Lee M. The shadow price of substitutable sulfur in the US electric power plant: a distance function approach. J. Environ. Manage. 2005, 77:104-110.
26. Minister of Economy, Trade Industry http://www.enecho.meti.go.jp/denkihp/shiryo/ryokin-suii.pdf.
27. Minister of Environment http://www.env.go.jp/earth/ondanka/det/index.html.
28. Newell R.G., Pizer W.A. Discounting the distance future: how much do uncertain rates increase valuations?. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 2003, 46:52-71.
29. 2 abatement options for electric power plants in Korea. Energy Policy 2009, 37:1834-1841.
30. Pearce D.W. The social cost of carbon and its policy implication. Oxford Rev. Econ. Pol. 2003, 19:1-32.
31. Rezek J.P., Campbell R.C. Cost estimates for multiple pollutants: a maximum entropy approach. Energy Econ. 2007, 29:503-519.
32. Shephard R.W. Theory of cost and production functions 1970, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
33. Tol R.S.J. The marginal damage costs of carbon dioxide emissions: an assessment of the uncertainties. Energy Policy 2005, 33:2064-2074.
34. Vardanyan M., Noh D.W. Approximating the cost of pollution abatement via alternative specifications of a multi-output production technology: a case of the U.S. electric utility industry. J. Environ. Manage. 2006, 80:177-190.