Download GTAP Resource 4386

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
TOWARDS FINDING THE TAX
INCIDENCE OF CARBON TAXES IN
SOUTH AFRICA
Jan H van Heerden
Heinrich Bohlmann
OUTLINE OF THE PAPER
•
•
•
•
•
The Problem
Possible Solutions
Previous Study
The Data
Adjusting the Model
•
•
•
•
Policy Simulations
Results
Conclusion
Further work
THE PROBLEM
• South Africa ranks amongst the first world countries in
the world in CO2 pollution, and its footprint looks bad
CO2 per capita: 1999
25
20
15
10
5
Ki
ng
Cz
do
ec
m
h
Re
pu
bl
ic
Au
st
ra
Un
lia
it e
d
St
at
es
Ko
re
a
Un
it e
d
Po
la
nd
So
ut
h
Af
ric
a
Ita
ly
Po
rtu
ov
ga
ak
l
Re
pu
bl
ic
Sl
co
ex
i
M
In
di
a
0
Ton CO2 per capita
CO2/95 pppUS$ GDP: 1999
1,2
1
Emissions intensity
0,8
0,6
0,4
0,2
Ko
Un
re
a
it e
d
St
at
es
Au
st
Sl
ra
ov
lia
ak
Re
pu
Cz
bl
ec
ic
h
Re
pu
bl
ic
Po
la
nd
So
ut
h
Af
ric
a
co
ex
i
M
ng
do
m
Ki
In
di
a
Un
it e
d
Po
rtu
ga
l
Ita
ly
0
kg CO2/95 pppUS$ GDP
Source: International Environmental Agency (IEA). 2001. Key world energy
statistics. Paris: IEA. (www.iea.org/statist/key2001/keyworld-2001.pdf)
GHG Emissions M-Tons - 2009
Rank
Country
M - ton
%
1
China
7 711
25.40%
2
United States
5 425
17.80%
3
India
1 602
5.30%
4
Russia
1 572
5.20%
5
Japan
1 098
3.60%
6
Germany
766
2.50%
7
Canada
541
1.80%
8
Korea, South
528
1.70%
9
Iran
527
1.70%
10
United Kingdom
520
1.70%
11
Saudi Arabia
470
1.50%
12
South Africa
450
1.50%
13
Mexico
444
1.50%
14
Brazil
420
1.40%
15
Australia
418
1.40%
16
Indonesia
413
1.40%
17
Italy
408
1.30%
18
France
397
1.30%
19
Spain
330
1.10%
20
Taiwan
291
1.00%
21
Poland
286
0.90%
POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
1. Carbon Emissions Tax
Actual measured emissions; or
2. Proxy tax bases:
A.
Fossil Fuel Input (Upstream):
where fuels enter the economy based on the carbon content of the
fuel.
B.
Output Tax (Downstream):
(i) At point where fuel is combusted.
(ii) May be based on average emissions of production
processes.
Previously
• In 2004/5 the Dutch government funded a project
(PREM) to search for double dividends in the
environment and economy of South Africa.
• We used a static CGE model to simulate the effects of
carbon, fuel and energy taxes in the country.
• We found triple dividends with some tax and recycling
combinations (environment, economy and poverty)
•
Van Heerden, et al., Searching for Triple Dividends in South Africa: Fighting
CO2 pollution and poverty while promoting growth, The Energy Journal,
2006
This paper
• Gives preliminary results of a World Bank project to
search for double dividends in the environment and
economy of South Africa.
• We use a dynamic CGE model to
• expand the electricity industry from being a single
producer and distributor of electricity to a few
generators and one distributor, and
• simulate the effects of a fuel input tax in the country.
THE DATA (1)
• Updated 2011 database of South Africa
• Core data taken from the 2011 SU tables (StatsSA)
• Database aggregated to 45 sectors, with the electricity
sector
then
split
between
8
generators
transmitter/distributor based on available data.
and
1
THE DATA (2)
Electricity
Supply, R
Leontief
Good 1
up to
(not electricity)
Good N
(not electricity)
Primary
factors
CES
CES
CES
Imported
Good 1
Domestic
Good 1
Imported
Good N
Electricity
Domestic
Good N
Land
CES
Good 1 from
region 1
Good 1 from
region 2
Other costs
Labour
Capital
CES
up to
Good 1 from
region R
Labour
type 1
Labour
type 2
NEM
CES
Generation 1,
NEM region 1
Generation M,
NEM region 1
Source: MMRF document from http://www.copsmodels.com/archivep.htm#tppa0080
up to
Generation M,
NEM region N
up to
Labour
type O
Database split of the electricity sector
• We used the procedure followed by the MMRF model of
CoPS:
• Database split.docx
THE MODEL (1)
• Change in revenue dR= T.dX + X.dT
• T is rate and X is base
• But % change in X is x = 100*dX/X
• Therefore dR = TxX/100 + X.dT
•
= Rx/100 + X.dT
• dR affects government revenue and dT all prices
THE MODEL (2)
•
! Leontief demand for inputs !
•
Equation E_x1_sa # Demands for commodity composites #
(all,c,COM)(all,i,IND52) x1_s(c,i) - [a1_s(c,i) + a1tot(i)] = z(i);
•
Equation E_x1_sb # Demands for commodity composites #
(all,c,COM45) x1_s(c,"ElecSup") - [a1_s(c,"ElecSup") + a1tot("ElecSup")]
= z("ElecSup");
! CES demand for inputs !
•
Equation E_x1_sc
(all,c,GEN) x1_s(c,"ElecSup") - a1_s(c,"ElecSup")
•
= z("ElecSup") - SIGMAGEN(c)*[p1_s(c,"ElecSup") + a1_s(c,"ElecSup") - p1_gen];
POLICY SIMULATIONS
• The modelling exercises focus on two pieces of
government policy in South Africa
• Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) for Electricity (2010-2030)
•
http://www.doe-irp.co.za/content/IRP2010_updatea.pdf
• Carbon tax of R120/ton CO2e from 2016
•
http://www.thedti.gov.za/parliament/Reducing_greenhouse_gas.pdf
Baseline forecast (1)
120
% change in selected macro-economic
variables (cumulative)
100
80
60
40
20
0
2012
2017
Real GDP
2022
2027
2032
CO2: CoalGen constrained
Baseline forecast
% change in output growth for different power
generation sources (cumulative)
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
-20
2012
CoalGen
2017
WindGen
2022
SolarPVGen
2027
SolarCSPGen
2032
GasGen
OtherGen
RESULTS:
Carbon tax/no recycling
1,400
Million ton CO2-equiv
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
2015
2020
Growth without constraints (range)
Required by science (range)
Baseline
CO2: No CoalGen Constraints
2025
2030
Baseline & Tax
2035
CONCLUSIONS
• Implementing a CES demand function for generated electricity by
the supplying industry causes a switch to green electricity but not
nearly enough. Currently the supplier merely uses coal generated
power much more efficiently and not enough substitution takes
place.
• The carbon tax by itself – especially with all the exemptions for the
first five years – is not enough. Regulation of coal generated power,
as well as pro-active stimulation of green generation together with
the tax will be necessary to reach the targets.