Abstract
Temperature responses and optimal climate policies depend crucially on the choice of a particular climate model. To illustrate, the temperature responses to given emission reduction paths implied by the climate modules of the well-known integrated assessments models DICE, FUND and PAGE are described and compared. A dummy temperature module based on the climate denialists' view is added. Using a simple welfare-maximising growth model of the global economy, the sensitivity of the optimal carbon price, renewable energy subsidy and energy transition to each of these climate models is discussed. The paper then derives max-min, max-max and min-max regret policies to deal with this particular form of climate (model) uncertainty and with climate scepticism. The max-min or min-max regret climate policies rely on a non-sceptic view of global warming and lead to a substantial and moderate amount of caution, respectively. The max-max leads to no climate policies in line with the view of climate sceptics.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 4-16 |
Number of pages | 13 |
Journal | Energy Economics |
Volume | 68 |
Issue number | October |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2018 |
Funding
Rezai is grateful for financial support from the Austrian Science Fund (FWF): J 3633 and Van der Ploeg for the support from the BP funded Oxford Centre for the Analysis of Resource Rich Economies. We are very grateful for the constructive and helpful comments of two editors and of Carlos Miguael. We also thank Sweder van Wijnbergen and Tim Willems for a helpful discussion on max-min policies in presence of climate sceptics.
Funders | Funder number |
---|---|
BP | |
Austrian Science Fund | J 3633 |
Keywords
- Carbon price
- Climate model uncertainty
- Climate sceptics
- Max-max
- Max-min
- Min-max regret
- Renewable energy subsidy
- Temperature modules