Assessment of US GHG cap-and-trade proposals

Assessment of US GHG cap-and-trade proposals
复制标题

DOI:
10.3763/cpol.2007.0437
复制
发表时间:
2008-01-01
期刊:
影响因子:
7.1
通讯作者:
Holak, Jennifer F.
Holak, Jennifer F.
中科院分区:
法学1区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Paltsev, Sergey;Reilly, John M.;Holak, Jennifer F.

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

2007年,美国国会开始审议一系列法案,以实施总量管制和交易制度,限制国家的温室气体(GHG)排放。麻省理工学院的综合全球系统模型(IGSM)及其经济组成部分,排放预测和政策分析(EPPA)模型被用来评估这些建议。在缺乏政策的情况下,EPPA模型预测到2050年美国的温室气体排放量将翻一番。在发展中国家增长的推动下,全球排放量预计将进一步增加。如果不加限制,这些排放将导致全球二氧化碳浓度从目前的380 ppmv增加到2050年的约550 ppmv,到2100年接近900 pi,导致2100年全球温度比目前水平高3.5-4.5摄氏度。国会更雄心勃勃的提案可能会将这一增幅限制在2摄氏度左右,但前提是包括发展中国家在内的其他国家也大力控制温室气体排放。通过这些更积极的削减,到2040-2050年,以美国总福利变化衡量的经济成本可能在1.5%至近2%之间,2015年二氧化碳当量价格在30美元至55美元之间,到2050年将升至120美元至210美元之间。这一成本水平不会严重影响美国的GDP增长,但将意味着其能源系统的大规模变化。
In 2007 the US Congress began considering a set of bills to implement a cap-and-trade system to limit the nation's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The MIT Integrated Global System Model (IGSM) - and its economic component, the Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) model - were used to assess these proposals. In the absence of policy, the EPPA model projects a doubling of US greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Global emissions, driven by growth in developing countries, are projected to increase even more. Unrestrained, these emissions would lead to an increase in global CO, concentration from a current level of 380 ppmv to about 550 ppmv by 2050 and to near 900 pi by 2100, resulting in a year 2100 global temperature 3.5-4.5 degrees C above the current level. The more ambitious of the Congressional proposals could limit this increase to around 2 degrees C, but only if other nations, including developing countries, also strongly controlled greenhouse gas emissions. With these more aggressive reductions, the economic cost measured in terms of changes in total welfare in the United States could range from 1.5% to almost 2% by the 2040-2050 period, with 2015 CO2-equivalent prices between $30 and $55, rising to between $120 and $210 by 2050. This level of cost would not seriously affect US GDP growth but would imply large-scale changes in its energy system.