Advertisement

Frontiers of Engineering Management

, Volume 6, Issue 1, pp 5–18 | Cite as

A global carbon market?

  • Michael G. PollittEmail author
Open Access
Research Article
  • 55 Downloads

Abstract

This paper explores the prospects for a global carbon market as the centerpiece of any serious attempt to reach the ambitious goal for greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions set by climate scientists. My aim is to clarify the extent to which we know what policy might best support global decarbonisation. We begin by discussing what we might mean by a global carbon market and its theoretical properties. We then go on to discuss the EU Emissions Trading System experience and the recent experience with the Australian carbon tax. Next, we assess recent carbon market initiatives in the US and in China. My argument is that while establishing the amount of emissions required and dividing it up acceptably between countries requires an enormous scientific and international negotiations effort, the economic instruments to deliver the agreed targets are readily at hand.

Keywords

carbon market carbon tax EU ETS 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank Michael Mehling, three anonymous referees, the editors of this special issue and various seminar audiences for their comments and encouragement. He acknowledges the financial support of MIT CEEPR. The usual disclaimer applies.

References

  1. Allen M, Frame D, Huntingford C, Jones C D, Lowe J A, Meinshausen M, Meinshausen N (2009). Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2°C. Nature, 458: 1163–1166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boasson E L, Wettestad J (2013). EU Climate Policy: Industry, Policy Interaction and External Environment. Farnham: AshgateGoogle Scholar
  3. Boyd R, Turner J C, Ward B (2015). Intended nationally determined contributions: What are the implications for greenhouse gas emissions in 2030? Policy Paper, ESRC Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy and Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the EnvironmentGoogle Scholar
  4. BP (2017). BP Statistical Review of World Energy June 2017. London: BPGoogle Scholar
  5. Carson E, Kreilis J (2015). Legal Challenges to Clean Power Plan Create Uncertainties for Utilities. Policy Brief. Enerknol Research. https://doi.org/enerknol.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/EKR-EM-Clean-Power-Plan-Legal-Challenges-11-2-2015.pdf Google Scholar
  6. Cramton P, Ockenfels A, Stoft S (2015). An international carbon-price commitment promotes co-operation. Economics of Energy and Environmental Policy, 4(2): 51–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Elgie S, McClay J (2013). BC’s carbon tax shift is working well after four years (Attention Ottawa). Canadian Public Policy, 39(Supplement 2): S1–S10Google Scholar
  8. Ellerman D, Convery F J, De Perthuis C (2010). Pricing Carbon: The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Environmental Protection Agency (2014). Regulatory impact analysis for the proposed carbon pollution guidelines for existing power plants and emission standards for modified and reconstructed power plants. Washington D.C.: EPAGoogle Scholar
  10. Environmental Protection Agency (2015). Carbon pollution emission guidelines for existing stationary sources: Electric utility generating units; Final rule. Federal Register, 80(205): 64661–65120Google Scholar
  11. European Commission (1992). Proposal for a council directive introducing a tax on carbon dioxide emissions and energy. COM (92) 226 final, Brussels: European CommissionGoogle Scholar
  12. Frankfurt School-UNEP Centre/BNEF (2018). Global trends in renewable energy investment 2018, UNEP and BNEFGoogle Scholar
  13. Gollier C, Tirole J (2015). Negotiating effective institutions against climate change. Economics of Energy and Environmental Policy, 4 (2): 5–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goulder L H, Schein A R (2013). Carbon taxes versus cap and trade: a critical review. Climate Change Economics (Singapore), 4(3): 1–28Google Scholar
  15. Grubb M, Newbery D (2008). Pricing carbon for electricity generation: national and international dimensions. In: Grubb M, Jamasb T, Pollitt M (eds.), Delivering a Low Carbon Electricity System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 278–332Google Scholar
  16. Hope C, Newbery D (2008). Calculating the social cost of carbon. In Grubb M, Jamasb T, Pollitt M (eds.), Delivering a Low Carbon Electricity System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 31–63Google Scholar
  17. IEA (2015), World Energy Outlook 2015. Paris: OECDGoogle Scholar
  18. IEA (2017a), Key World Energy Statistics. Paris: OECDGoogle Scholar
  19. IEA (2017b), World Energy Outlook 2017. Paris: OECDGoogle Scholar
  20. IPCC (2014), Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R. K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. Summary for Policy Makers, Geneva: IPCC King D, Browne J, Layard R, O’Donnell G, Rees M, Stern N, Turner A (undated). A global Apollo Programme to combat climate change. London: LSE Centre for Economic PerformanceGoogle Scholar
  21. Meadows D, Slingenberg Y, Zapfel P (2015). EU ETS: Pricing carbon to drive cost-effective reductions across Europe’. In: Delbeke, J. and Vis, P. (eds.), EU Climate Policy Explained. London: Routledge, 29–60Google Scholar
  22. National Development and Reform Commission (2013). Market Readiness Proposal (MRP): Establishing a national emission trading scheme in China. Beijing: NDRCGoogle Scholar
  23. Neuhoff K, Ismer R (2007). Border Tax Adjustment: A feasible way to support stringent emission trading. European Journal of Law and Economics, 24(2): 137–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Olivier J G J, Schure K M, Peters J A HW (2017). Trends in global CO2 and total greenhouse gas emissions: 2017 Report. PBL Netherlands EnvironmentalGoogle Scholar
  25. Palmer K (2014). Climate regulation in the United States. IAEE New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Robson A (2014). Australia’s carbon tax: An economic evaluation. Journal of Economic Affairs, 34(1): 35–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schmalensee R, Stavins R N (2017). Lessons learned from three decades of experience with cap-and-trade. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 11(1): 59–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sinn H W (2008). Public policies against global warming. International Tax and Public Finance, 15(4): 360–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Smith S (1998). Environmental and public finance aspects of the taxation of energy. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 14(4): 64–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Stern N (2008). The economics of climate change. American Economic Review, 98(2): 1–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stiglitz J (2015). Overcoming the Copenhagen failure with more flexible commitments. Economics of Energy and Environmental Policy, 4(2): 29–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. The Global Commission on the Economy and Climate (2014). Better growth, better climate: The new climate economy report. The Global Commission on the Economy and ClimateGoogle Scholar
  33. Tuerk A, Mehling M, Flachsland C, Sterk W (2011). Linking carbon markets: concepts, case studies and pathways. Climate Policy, 9(4): 341–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Weitzman M (1974). Prices vs. quantities. Review of Economic Studies, 41(4): 477–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Weitzman M (2015). Internalising the climate externality: Can a uniform price commitment help? Economics of Energy and Environmental Policy, 4(2): 37–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. World Bank (2014). State and trends of carbon pricing. Washington DC: Ecofys, World BankGoogle Scholar
  37. World Bank World Bank (2015). State and trends of carbon pricing. Washington DC: Ecofys, World BankGoogle Scholar
  38. World Bank (2016). State and trends of carbon pricing. Washington DC: Ecofys, Vivid Economics, World BankGoogle Scholar
  39. World Bank (2017). State and trends of carbon pricing. Washington DC: Ecofys, Vivid Economics, World BankGoogle Scholar
  40. World Economic Forum and Bain Consulting (2015). The Future of Electricity: Attracting investment to build tomorrow’s electricity sector. Geneva: World Economic ForumGoogle Scholar
  41. World Resources Institute (2018). CAIT-Historical Emissions Data (Countries, U.S. States, UNFCCC). https://doi.org/www.wri.org/resources/data-sets/cait-historical-emissions-data-countries-us-states-unfccc Google Scholar
  42. Xiong L, Shen B, Shaozhou Q, Price L (2015). Assessment of Allowance Mechanism in China’s Carbon Trading Pilots. Energy Procedia, 75: 2510–2015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zhang Z (2015). Carbon emissions trading in China: Features and compliance of pilots and their transition to a nationwide scheme. Review of Environment, Energy and Economics (Re3), https://doi.org/papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2634916 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s), July/2019 2019

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Energy Policy Research Group, Judge Business SchoolUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations