A unifying framework for metrics for aggregating the climate effect of different emissions
Multi-gas approaches to climate change policies require a metric establishing ‘equivalences’ among emissions of various species. Climate scientists and economists have proposed four kinds of such metrics and debated their relative merits. We present a unifying framework that clarifies the relationsh...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
IOP Publishing
2012-01-01
|
| Series: | Environmental Research Letters |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044006 |
| _version_ | 1797748522277142528 |
|---|---|
| author | Richard S J Tol Terje K Berntsen Brian C O’Neill Jan S Fuglestvedt Keith P Shine |
| author_facet | Richard S J Tol Terje K Berntsen Brian C O’Neill Jan S Fuglestvedt Keith P Shine |
| author_sort | Richard S J Tol |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Multi-gas approaches to climate change policies require a metric establishing ‘equivalences’ among emissions of various species. Climate scientists and economists have proposed four kinds of such metrics and debated their relative merits. We present a unifying framework that clarifies the relationships among them. We show, as have previous authors, that the global warming potential (GWP), used in international law to compare emissions of greenhouse gases, is a special case of the global damage potential (GDP), assuming (1) a finite time horizon, (2) a zero discount rate, (3) constant atmospheric concentrations, and (4) impacts that are proportional to radiative forcing. Both the GWP and GDP follow naturally from a cost–benefit framing of the climate change issue. We show that the global temperature change potential (GTP) is a special case of the global cost potential (GCP), assuming a (slight) fall in the global temperature after the target is reached. We show how the four metrics should be generalized if there are intertemporal spillovers in abatement costs, distinguishing between private (e.g., capital stock turnover) and public (e.g., induced technological change) spillovers. Both the GTP and GCP follow naturally from a cost-effectiveness framing of the climate change issue. We also argue that if (1) damages are zero below a threshold and (2) infinitely large above a threshold, then cost-effectiveness analysis and cost–benefit analysis lead to identical results. Therefore, the GCP is a special case of the GDP. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change uses the GWP, a simplified cost–benefit concept. The UNFCCC is framed around the ultimate goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations. Once a stabilization target has been agreed under the convention, implementation is clearly a cost-effectiveness problem. It would therefore be more consistent to use the GCP or its simplification, the GTP. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T16:06:00Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-daa35f6133b746a494c09911314db36c |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1748-9326 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-12T16:06:00Z |
| publishDate | 2012-01-01 |
| publisher | IOP Publishing |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Environmental Research Letters |
| spelling | doaj.art-daa35f6133b746a494c09911314db36c2023-08-09T14:22:42ZengIOP PublishingEnvironmental Research Letters1748-93262012-01-017404400610.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044006A unifying framework for metrics for aggregating the climate effect of different emissionsRichard S J Tol0Terje K Berntsen1Brian C O’Neill2Jan S Fuglestvedt3Keith P Shine4Department of Economics, University of Sussex , Brighton, UK; Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit , Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Spatial Economics, Vrije Universiteit , Amsterdam, The NetherlandsCICERO (Center for International Climate and Environmental Research—Oslo) , PO Box 1129 Blindern, NO-0318 Oslo, NorwayInstitute for the Study of Society and Environment, National Center for Atmospheric Research , PO Box 3000, Boulder, CO 80307, USACICERO (Center for International Climate and Environmental Research—Oslo) , PO Box 1129 Blindern, NO-0318 Oslo, NorwayDepartment of Meteorology, University of Reading , Earley Gate, Reading RG6 6BB, UKMulti-gas approaches to climate change policies require a metric establishing ‘equivalences’ among emissions of various species. Climate scientists and economists have proposed four kinds of such metrics and debated their relative merits. We present a unifying framework that clarifies the relationships among them. We show, as have previous authors, that the global warming potential (GWP), used in international law to compare emissions of greenhouse gases, is a special case of the global damage potential (GDP), assuming (1) a finite time horizon, (2) a zero discount rate, (3) constant atmospheric concentrations, and (4) impacts that are proportional to radiative forcing. Both the GWP and GDP follow naturally from a cost–benefit framing of the climate change issue. We show that the global temperature change potential (GTP) is a special case of the global cost potential (GCP), assuming a (slight) fall in the global temperature after the target is reached. We show how the four metrics should be generalized if there are intertemporal spillovers in abatement costs, distinguishing between private (e.g., capital stock turnover) and public (e.g., induced technological change) spillovers. Both the GTP and GCP follow naturally from a cost-effectiveness framing of the climate change issue. We also argue that if (1) damages are zero below a threshold and (2) infinitely large above a threshold, then cost-effectiveness analysis and cost–benefit analysis lead to identical results. Therefore, the GCP is a special case of the GDP. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change uses the GWP, a simplified cost–benefit concept. The UNFCCC is framed around the ultimate goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations. Once a stabilization target has been agreed under the convention, implementation is clearly a cost-effectiveness problem. It would therefore be more consistent to use the GCP or its simplification, the GTP.https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/0440068992climate changemulti-gas climate policyglobal warming potentialequivalences between greenhouse gases |
| spellingShingle | Richard S J Tol Terje K Berntsen Brian C O’Neill Jan S Fuglestvedt Keith P Shine A unifying framework for metrics for aggregating the climate effect of different emissions Environmental Research Letters 89 92 climate change multi-gas climate policy global warming potential equivalences between greenhouse gases |
| title | A unifying framework for metrics for aggregating the climate effect of different emissions |
| title_full | A unifying framework for metrics for aggregating the climate effect of different emissions |
| title_fullStr | A unifying framework for metrics for aggregating the climate effect of different emissions |
| title_full_unstemmed | A unifying framework for metrics for aggregating the climate effect of different emissions |
| title_short | A unifying framework for metrics for aggregating the climate effect of different emissions |
| title_sort | unifying framework for metrics for aggregating the climate effect of different emissions |
| topic | 89 92 climate change multi-gas climate policy global warming potential equivalences between greenhouse gases |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/044006 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT richardsjtol aunifyingframeworkformetricsforaggregatingtheclimateeffectofdifferentemissions AT terjekberntsen aunifyingframeworkformetricsforaggregatingtheclimateeffectofdifferentemissions AT brianconeill aunifyingframeworkformetricsforaggregatingtheclimateeffectofdifferentemissions AT jansfuglestvedt aunifyingframeworkformetricsforaggregatingtheclimateeffectofdifferentemissions AT keithpshine aunifyingframeworkformetricsforaggregatingtheclimateeffectofdifferentemissions AT richardsjtol unifyingframeworkformetricsforaggregatingtheclimateeffectofdifferentemissions AT terjekberntsen unifyingframeworkformetricsforaggregatingtheclimateeffectofdifferentemissions AT brianconeill unifyingframeworkformetricsforaggregatingtheclimateeffectofdifferentemissions AT jansfuglestvedt unifyingframeworkformetricsforaggregatingtheclimateeffectofdifferentemissions AT keithpshine unifyingframeworkformetricsforaggregatingtheclimateeffectofdifferentemissions |