* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download IntAss_intro_2010_post
Global warming controversy wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit documents wikipedia , lookup
Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Kyoto Protocol wikipedia , lookup
Climate change mitigation wikipedia , lookup
Numerical weather prediction wikipedia , lookup
Low-carbon economy wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate change adaptation wikipedia , lookup
German Climate Action Plan 2050 wikipedia , lookup
Global warming wikipedia , lookup
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change wikipedia , lookup
Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Mitigation of global warming in Australia wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming wikipedia , lookup
2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in New Zealand wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on Australia wikipedia , lookup
Climate sensitivity wikipedia , lookup
Years of Living Dangerously wikipedia , lookup
Atmospheric model wikipedia , lookup
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change wikipedia , lookup
Criticism of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Climate change feedback wikipedia , lookup
Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Business action on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Carbon emission trading wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme wikipedia , lookup
Economics of climate change mitigation wikipedia , lookup
Hotelling example (with small change) 1 Note on “shadow prices” or “dual variables” (π) These are extremely important in economic modeling (and more generally in economics). Basic idea is that these represent opportunity costs. I will use the example of cost minimization. In our Hotelling problem, we are minimizing costs (C) subject to the various constraints. Let’s take the resource constraints (sum production < resources = R1 ). If we do this as a Lagrangean, we get the following interesting result: ∂C/∂R1 = π1 = shadow price on reserve grade 1 = $71.75. This says that if we increase the quantity of reserves by 1 unit, this lowers discounted cost by $71.75. (I changed the sign to positive.) An important theorem from econ is that this equals the first-period royalty in competitive markets (!). This grows with the interest rate until exhausted. I calculated this numerically using a linear programming algorithm in the GAMS program and got the πi shown in the table. We can actually do this for 50,000 variables and constraints using a LP algorithm. This is done, for example, in oil refineries to optimize yield from crude oil. 2 Integrated Assessment Models of Economics of Climate Change Economics 331b Spring 2010 3 Integrated Assessment (IA) Models of Climate Change • What are IA model? – These are models that include the full range of cause and effect in climate change (“end to end” modeling). – They are necessarily interdisciplinary and involve natural and social sciences • Major goals: – Project the impact of current trends and of policies on important variables – Assess the costs and benefits of alternative policies – Assess uncertainties and priorities for scientific and project/engineering research Major Components of Models Behavioral and Scientific Equations Identities Value Judgments (markets, policies, ethics, etc.) Person or nation 1 Pareto Improvement from Climate Policy Bargaining region (Pareto improving) Inefficient initial (nopolicy) position Person or nation 26 Elements of IA Models. To be complete, the model needs to incorporate the following elements: - human activities generating emissions - carbon cycle - climate system - biological and physical impacts - socioeconomic impacts - policy levers to affect emissions or other parts of cycle. Representative Scenarios for Models “Baseline” or uncontrolled path: - Set emissions at zero control or zero “tax” level. - Business as usual Alternative strategies: - “Optimal” where maximize objective function - Stabilize emissions, concentrations, or climate - Kyoto Protocol/ Copenhagen Accord limits There are many kinds of IA models, useful for different purposes Policy evaluation models - Models that emphasize projecting the impacts of different assumptions and policies on the major systems; - often extend to non-economic variables Policy optimization models - Models that emphasize optimizing a few key control variables (such as taxes or control rates) with an eye to balancing costs and benefits or maximizing efficiency; - often limited to monetized variables Two Examples 1.Reprise on Hotelling example for pset 1 2. The Samuelson-Negishi equivalence for modeling Maximize (producer + consumer surplus) = Maximize Discounted [U(c) – Cost(c)] = Competitive equilibrium 11 1. Single market q q 0 0 U (q ) MU (q )dq ; C (q ) MC (q )dq ; W (q ) U (q ) C (q ) max W (q ) max CS+PS competitive equilibrium 2. Single market over time: same with time-dated prices (market discount rates) 3. Multiple market : simply have q is a vector of goods, q ( q 1 ,..., q n ) 4. Multiple agents (Negishi): Need appropriate weights. More complicated algorithm 12 Economic Theory Behind Modeling 1. Basic theorem of “markets as maximization” (Samuelson, Negishi) Outcome of efficient competitive market (however complex but finite time) Maximization of weighted utility function: = n W i [U i (c ki ,s ,t )] i 1 for utility functions U; individuals i=1,...,n; locations k, uncertain states of world s, i time periods t; welfare weights . 2. This allows us (in principle) to calculate the outcome of a market system by a constrained non-linear maximization. 13 How do we solve IA models? The structure of the models is the following: max W { ( t )} T max U[c(t ),L(t )]R(t ) t 1 subject to c(t ) H[ (t ),s(t ); initial conditions, parameters] (The H[...] functions are production functions, climate model, carbon cycle, abatement costs, damages, and so forth.) We solve using various mathematical optimization techniques. 1. GAMS solver (proprietary). This takes the problem and solves it using linear programming (LP) through successive steps. It is extremely reliable. 2. Use EXCEL solver. This is available with standard EXCEL and uses various numerical techniques. It is not 100% reliable for difficult or complex problems. 3. MATHLAB. Useful if you know it. 4. Genetic algorithms. Some like these. 14 Can also calculate the “shadow prices,” here the efficient carbon taxes 600 Marginal cost of Emissions Reductions ($) Remember that in a constrained optimization (Lagrangean), the multipliers have the interpretation of d[Objective Function]/dX. So, in this problem, interpretation is MC of emissions reduction. Optimization programs (particularly LP) will generate the shadow prices of carbon emissions in the optimal path. For example, in the problem we just did, we have the following shadow prices: 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 10 20 30 Period 15 Basic economic strategy 1. Begin with a Solow-style economic growth model 2. Add the geophysical equations: note these impose an externality 3. Then add an objective function to be optimized subject to constraints: - 1 + 3 = optimal growth model [Friday] 1 + 2 + 3 = integrated assessment model 4. Then estimate or calibrate the various components. 5. Then do various simulations and policy runs. 16 Modeling Strategies (I): Emissions Emissions trajectories: Start with data base of 70 major countries representing 97 % of output and emissions 1960-2004. Major issue of whether to use PPP or MER (next slide) Estimate productivity growth Estimate CO2 emissions-output ratios Project these by decade for next two centuries Then aggregate up by twelve major regions (US, EU, …) Constrain by global fossil fuel resources This is probably the largest uncertainty over the long run: σ(Q) ≈ .01 T, or + factor 2.5 in 100 yrs, +7 in 200 yrs 17 CO2-GDP: Three countries (PPP v. MER) Sigma: MER (DC) Sigma: PPP (DC) US 3.5 3.5 Russia US 3 Russia China 3 China CO2/GDP 2.5 2 1.5 2 1.5 1 1 0.5 0.5 20 02 19 96 19 90 19 84 19 78 19 72 19 66 2000 1995 1990 1985 1980 1975 1970 1965 19 60 0 0 1960 CO2/GDP 2.5 18 Modeling Strategies (II): Climate Models Climate model Idea here to use “reduced form” or simplified models. For example, large models have very fine resolution and require supercomputers for solution.* We take two-layers (atmosphere, deep oceans) and decadal time steps. Calibrated to ensemble of models in IPCC TAR and FAR science reports. *http://www.aip.org/history/exhibits/climate/GCM.htm 19 Actual and predicted global temperature history .6 .4 .2 .0 -.2 -.4 -.6 1840 1880 1920 1960 2000 YEAR T_DICE2007 T_Hadley T_GISS 20 Projected DICE and IPCC: two scenarios 5 4 3 2 1 0 1920 1960 2000 2040 2080 2120 YE A R T_A2_DICE T_A2_IPCC T_B1_DICE T_B1_IPCC 21 Modeling Strategies (III): Impacts • Central difficulty is evaluation of the impact of climate change on society • Two major areas: – market economy (agriculture, manufacturing, housing, …) – non-market sectors •human (health, recreation, …) •non-human (ecosystems, fish, trees, …) 22 Summary of Impacts Estimates Early studies contained a major surprise: Modest impacts for gradual climate change, market impacts, highincome economies, next 50-100 years: - Impact about 0 (+ 2) percent of output. - Further studies confirmed this general result. BUT, outside of this narrow finding, potential for big problems: - many subtle thresholds abrupt climate change (“inevitable surprises”) ecological disruptions stress to small, topical, developing countries gradual coastal inundation of 1 – 10 meters over 1-5 centuries OVERALL: “…global mean losses could be 1-5% Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for 4 ºC of warming.” (IPCC, FAR, April 2007) 23 Estimated Damages from Yale Models and IPCC Estimate 11% Climate damage/global output 10% RICE-1999 9% DICE-2007 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% IPCC estimate 3% 2% 1% 0% 0 1 2 3 4 5 Mean temperature increase (oC) 6 7 24 Major problems of impacts analysis Most impacts analyses impose climate changes on current social-economic-political structures. Example: impact of temp/precip/CO2 on structure of Indian economy in 2005 However, need to consider what society will look like when climate change occurs. Example looking backward: – 2 ˚C increase in 6-7 decades – that was Nazism, period of Great Depression, Gold Standard, pre-Keynesian macro – 4 ˚C increase in 15 decades –Ming Dynasty, lighting with whale oil, invention of telegraph, no cars, many horses…. 25 Modeling Strategies (IV): Abatement costs IA models use different strategies: – Some use econometric analysis of costs of reductions – Some use engineering/mathematical programming estimates – DICE model generally uses “reduced form” estimates of marginal costs of reduction as function of emissions reduction rate 26 Derivation of mitigation cost function Start with a reduced-form cost function: C = Qλμ (1) where C = mitigation cost, Q = GDP, μ = emissions control rate, λ, are parameters. Take the derivative w.r.t. emissions and substitute σ = E0 /Q (2) dC/dE = MC emissions reductions = Qλβμ-1[dμ/dE] = λβμ-1/σ Taking logs: (3) ln(MC) = constant + time trend + ( β-1) ln(μ) We can estimate this function from microeconomic/engineering studies of the cost of abatement. 27 Example from McKinsey Study 28 Reduced form equation: C=.0657*miu^1.66*Q 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 29 Further discussion However, there has been a great deal of controversy about the McKinsey study. The idea of “negative cost” emissions reduction raises major conceptual and policy issues. For the DICE model, we have generally relied on more micro and engineering studies. The next set of slides shows estimates based on the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report survey of mitigation costs. The bottom line is that the exponent is much higher (between 2.5 and 3). This has important implications that we will see later. 30 Note that the MC is much more convex than McKinsey: much more diminishing returns Source: IPCC, AR4, Mitigation. 31 Source for estimates of (elasticity of cost function) Source: IPCC, AR4, Mitigation, p. 77. 32 Using the IPCC as data for the cost function Least squares estimate of cost function from IPCC [Equation is MC = a*(%reduction)^(β-1) Approach β-1 SE(β-1) t(β-1) Bottom up: A1B Bottom up: B2 Top down: A1B Top down: B2 1.8 1.8 3.3 3.4 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 5.7 6.4 7.4 6.7 Conclusion is that the cost function is EXTREMELY convex. 33 Alternative abatement cost functions: From IPCC Parameterized as C/Q = aμ2.8 , with backstop price(2005) = $1100/tC 34 Alternative abatement cost functions Parameterized as C/Q = aμ2.8 , with backstop price(2005) = $1100/tC 35 Alternative abatement cost functions: IPCC and MK 2000 1600 1200 800 400 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 Parameterized as C/Q = aμ2.8 , with backstop price(2005) = $1100/tC 36 Applications of IA Models How can we use IA models to evaluate alternative approaches to climate-change policy? I will illustrate analyzing the economic and climatic implications of several prominent policies. For these, I use the recently developed DICE-2007 model. 37 1. No controls ("baseline"). No emissions controls. 2. Optimal policy. Emissions and carbon prices set for economic optimum. 3. Climatic constraints with CO2 concentration constraints. Concentrations limited to 550 ppm 4. Climatic constraints with temperature constraints. Temperature limited to 2½ °C 5. Kyoto Protocol. Kyoto Protocol without the U.S. 6. Strengthened Kyoto Protocol. Roughly, the Obama/EU policy proposals. 7. Geoengineering. Implements a geoengineering option that offsets radiative forcing at low cost. Illustrative Policies for DICE-2007 38 Per capita GDP: history and projections Per capita GDP (2000$ PPP) 100 10 US WE OHI Russia EE/FSU Japan China India World 1 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 39 CO2-GDP ratios: history CO2-GDP ratio (tons per constant PPP $) .7 .6 China Russia US World Western/Central Europe .5 .4 .3 .2 .1 .0 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 40 IPCC AR4 Model Results: History and Projections DICE-2007 model 2-sigma range DICE model 41