齊天宇 楊遠(yuǎn)哲 張希良
摘要建立全球性跨區(qū)域碳市場被認(rèn)為是全球氣候治理的有效方式而一直備受關(guān)注。即將在2015年建成的歐盟-澳大利亞鏈接碳市場將成為國際跨區(qū)域碳市場的重要嘗試。為分析建立多國參與的國際跨區(qū)碳市場的全球減排效果及其對各參與國的能源經(jīng)濟(jì)影響,本文采用表達(dá)能源經(jīng)濟(jì)系統(tǒng)相互關(guān)系的全球動(dòng)態(tài)可計(jì)算一般均衡模型做出定量研究。模型將全球經(jīng)濟(jì)體分為20個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)部門和19個(gè)區(qū)域,并刻畫有17種能源生產(chǎn)技術(shù)。同時(shí)為模擬全球碳市場政策,模型將碳排放權(quán)作為與化石能源消費(fèi)相綁定的必要投入考慮到經(jīng)濟(jì)部門的各個(gè)生產(chǎn)與消費(fèi)環(huán)節(jié)當(dāng)中。在外生設(shè)置碳排放配額的同時(shí),模型允許碳排放權(quán)像商品一樣在不同區(qū)域與部門之間進(jìn)行交易??紤]到全球碳市場的進(jìn)展速度,本文選取2020年為研究時(shí)點(diǎn),分別設(shè)計(jì)了四種情景(參考情景、獨(dú)立碳市場情景、歐盟-澳大利亞鏈接情景以及中國-歐盟-澳大利亞鏈接情景)來探討歐盟、中國、澳大利亞三國參與下的全球碳市場及其影響。研究表明,在各國2020年減排目標(biāo)約束下各國碳市場的排放權(quán)價(jià)格有較大差別,澳大利亞碳價(jià)最高(32美元/t CO2),歐盟價(jià)格稍低(17.5美元/t CO2),而中國碳價(jià)最低(10美元/t CO2)。同時(shí)盡管中國的相對減排量(3%)低于歐盟(9%)與澳大利亞(18%),中國的絕對減排量也遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)大于歐盟與澳大利亞兩個(gè)國家。由于中國相對減排成本較低,中國加入歐盟-澳大利亞鏈接碳市場將促使國際碳價(jià)從22美元/t降至12美元/t,歐盟和澳大利亞分別向中國轉(zhuǎn)移71%和81%的本國減排任務(wù),同時(shí)分別獲得0.03%和0.06%的福利增加。由于排放約束影響,中國工業(yè)部門的能效提升1.4%,煤炭發(fā)電量下降3.3%,而清潔能源發(fā)電量則上升3.5%。
關(guān)鍵詞排放交易體系;全球排放市場;可計(jì)算一般均衡模型
中圖分類號(hào)F224文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識(shí)碼A文章編號(hào)1002-2104(2014)03-0019-06doi:103969/jissn1002-2104201403004
全球氣候變化給人類生存和社會(huì)可持續(xù)發(fā)展帶來了嚴(yán)峻挑戰(zhàn),世界各國意識(shí)到在實(shí)現(xiàn)經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的同時(shí),需要降低經(jīng)濟(jì)增長所帶來的碳排放。碳排放交易體系(Emission Trading Schemes, ETS)作為基于市場機(jī)制下的政策工具一直被認(rèn)為是成本有效的減排手段,正在被越來越多的國家所采用。目前已開展排放權(quán)交易體系的國家和區(qū)域包括歐盟、美國加州、澳大利亞、新西蘭、哈薩克斯坦、西部氣候倡議(Western Climate Initiative,包括美國、加拿大、墨西哥部分州/?。┮约爸袊纳钲诘鹊?,另有中國的部分省市以及韓國已經(jīng)明確公布即將開展碳市場的計(jì)劃及實(shí)施方案。據(jù)世界銀行的統(tǒng)計(jì),2011年全球碳市場總交易量達(dá)103億t CO2e[1]。
伴隨碳排放權(quán)交易體系在全球各國的日漸推廣,建立全球跨區(qū)域的國際性碳市場,以實(shí)現(xiàn)在更大范圍內(nèi)匹配減排資源、降低減排成本的方案正在被人們廣泛討論[2-3],但實(shí)際進(jìn)展十分緩慢。這主要一方面是由于當(dāng)前國際社會(huì)尚未形成統(tǒng)一而明確的減排目標(biāo),各國減排權(quán)責(zé)不明,同時(shí)也缺乏具有實(shí)際約束力的“自頂向下”的協(xié)調(diào)機(jī)構(gòu)及機(jī)制來推進(jìn)全球共同減排行動(dòng)的開展;另一方面由于各國碳市場機(jī)制與實(shí)施細(xì)則存在較大差異,實(shí)現(xiàn)各區(qū)域自發(fā)的“自底向上”式的碳市場整合并形成一致性的交易平臺(tái)存在諸多機(jī)制障礙,具有巨大挑戰(zhàn)。此外,全球主要排放國家及區(qū)域只有歐盟已經(jīng)實(shí)施了碳市場政策,盡管中國與美國已開始為建立本國碳市場做出準(zhǔn)備,但是實(shí)際建立時(shí)間尚有很大不確定性。同時(shí),全球還有諸如印度、俄羅斯等主要排放國尚沒有建立碳市場的行動(dòng)計(jì)劃。因此,從目前來看,短期內(nèi)建立全球框架下包含世界主要區(qū)域的全球碳市場具有很大的困難。
盡管困難重重,國際社會(huì)已經(jīng)開始從區(qū)域?qū)用媾c產(chǎn)業(yè)層面為建立全球碳市場做出努力。即將開展的歐盟與澳大利亞兩個(gè)跨區(qū)域碳市場鏈接就是一次重要的嘗試。澳大利亞政府已明確表示計(jì)劃在2015年左右建立本國碳市場并與歐盟碳市場實(shí)現(xiàn)交易對接[4]。如果該鏈接市場得以建立,將使歐盟與澳大利亞成為全球第一個(gè)建立在兩個(gè)獨(dú)立區(qū)域基礎(chǔ)上的國際性碳市場。除了與歐盟合作以外,澳大利亞也在尋求與包括中國在內(nèi)的其他國家合作建立跨區(qū)域碳市場。對此中國也表現(xiàn)出較大興趣[5],并已經(jīng)在多個(gè)場合表示愿意在本國碳市場完善以后加入全球碳市場的意向[6]。當(dāng)前中國已經(jīng)著手在國內(nèi)建立區(qū)域碳市場試點(diǎn),為全國碳市場的建立做好準(zhǔn)備。中國第一個(gè)地方性碳市場試點(diǎn)已經(jīng)開始在深圳運(yùn)行[7],同時(shí)關(guān)于中國參與全球碳市場影響的相關(guān)研究也在逐步開展[8-9]。
本研究基于歐盟與澳大利亞碳市場,考慮中國未來加入全球碳市場后對全球碳市場交易規(guī)模及全球碳價(jià)的影響,以及國際碳排放權(quán)交易體系下對各國能源與經(jīng)濟(jì)系統(tǒng)的影響。
齊天宇等:國際跨區(qū)碳市場及其能源經(jīng)濟(jì)影響評(píng)估中國人口·資源與環(huán)境2014年第3期1模型工具
為模擬市場機(jī)制下的碳排放權(quán)交易機(jī)制與定價(jià)規(guī)則,本研究采用全球能源經(jīng)濟(jì)模型(China in Global Energy Model, CGEM)作為分析工具對全球碳市場及其影響作出評(píng)估。該模型為全球多區(qū)域動(dòng)態(tài)可計(jì)算一般均衡模型,模型基于經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)一般均衡理論,對社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)生產(chǎn)與消費(fèi),產(chǎn)品市場的供給與需求等相互關(guān)系具有清晰表述。模型分為20個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)部門,包括5種能源生產(chǎn)部門(煤炭、原油、天然氣、成品油及電力), 10種工業(yè)部門(化工、鋼鐵、有色、非金屬、金屬制品、裝備制造業(yè)、食品加工業(yè)、采礦業(yè)、建筑業(yè)、其他工業(yè)),3種農(nóng)業(yè)部門(農(nóng)業(yè)、林業(yè)及畜牧業(yè))以及2種服務(wù)業(yè)部門(交通服務(wù)業(yè)及其他服務(wù)業(yè))。各部門生產(chǎn)活動(dòng)采用嵌套結(jié)構(gòu)的常替代彈性生產(chǎn)函數(shù)
本研究在模型中將碳排放空間作為一種自然要素考慮到經(jīng)濟(jì)部門的各個(gè)生產(chǎn)與消費(fèi)環(huán)節(jié)當(dāng)中。在經(jīng)濟(jì)生產(chǎn)與消費(fèi)的過程中,只要有化石能源的消費(fèi)并產(chǎn)生CO2排放的經(jīng)濟(jì)活動(dòng),都必須綁定投入相應(yīng)的CO2排放權(quán),CO2排放權(quán)作為自然要素其供給(亦即排放限額)由外生給定,初始免費(fèi)在各經(jīng)濟(jì)部門之間分配,并可自由貿(mào)易。在實(shí)際生產(chǎn)與消費(fèi)過程中,各經(jīng)濟(jì)部門消費(fèi)自身分配的排放空間,自身排放空間不足的要么通過減少自身的化石能源消費(fèi),要么通過向其他主體購買CO2排放權(quán)獲得?;茉聪M(fèi)的CO2排放數(shù)量采用IPCC中規(guī)定的常排放因子[10]進(jìn)行核算。
模型數(shù)據(jù)庫主要基于最新的全球貿(mào)易分析項(xiàng)目(GTAP 8)全球能源與經(jīng)濟(jì)數(shù)據(jù)庫[11]。該數(shù)據(jù)庫包括了全球129個(gè)國家57個(gè)產(chǎn)業(yè)部門的2007年經(jīng)濟(jì)與能源的生產(chǎn)與消費(fèi)量數(shù)據(jù),以及不同地區(qū)間的能源與商品雙邊貿(mào)易流量。研究中根據(jù)需要我們將其整合形成包含全球19區(qū)域(見圖2)與20個(gè)生產(chǎn)部門的模型數(shù)據(jù)庫。2.1情景框架
考慮到全球碳市場的進(jìn)展速度,本文以2020年為研究時(shí)點(diǎn),開發(fā)了四種情景以研究歐盟、中國、澳大利亞三國參與下的全球碳市場及其影響(見表1)。第一種情景為各國無碳市場下的參考情景(No ETS),以觀察沒有碳市場政策下各國能源與排放情況。另外三種為有碳市場下的政策情景:①三個(gè)區(qū)域建立獨(dú)立碳市場情景(Separate),沒有跨區(qū)域碳市場形成;②歐盟與澳大利亞碳市場進(jìn)行鏈接的情景(EUANZ),中國仍為獨(dú)立碳市場;以及③中國、歐盟與澳大利亞三個(gè)地區(qū)碳市場全部連接的情景(EAC)。
2.2碳市場設(shè)計(jì)
為在模型中對各國碳市場的影響作出模擬,需要對歐盟、澳大利亞以及中國2020年碳市場的排放配額及覆蓋部門等關(guān)鍵運(yùn)行機(jī)制做出設(shè)定。歐盟已經(jīng)出臺(tái)了碳交易體系第三階段(2013-2020)具體運(yùn)行方案,相關(guān)機(jī)制比較明確。而中國與澳大利亞兩國碳市場機(jī)制尚未構(gòu)建,本文在研究過程中基于可獲得信息對這兩個(gè)區(qū)域的排放配額與覆蓋部門等細(xì)則作出相應(yīng)假設(shè)。具體三區(qū)域相應(yīng)設(shè)定介紹如下。
覆蓋部門。 根據(jù)歐盟ETS第三期實(shí)施方案,其覆蓋范圍沿用已有的涵蓋部門(包括農(nóng)業(yè)、非金屬礦物質(zhì)制品業(yè)、黑色金屬冶煉及壓延業(yè)、有色金屬冶煉及壓延業(yè)、金屬制品業(yè)、電熱力生產(chǎn)與供應(yīng)、石油制品業(yè)),本研究中歐盟碳市場涵蓋部門據(jù)此設(shè)計(jì)。澳大利亞目前尚沒有明確未來ETS覆蓋部門,考慮到其即將與歐盟碳市場對接,本研究假定其覆蓋部門與歐盟相同。中國目前也沒有全國性碳市場的設(shè)計(jì)細(xì)則,從7個(gè)試點(diǎn)省市的碳交易機(jī)制方案來看,覆蓋部門范圍差異較大。當(dāng)前已實(shí)施的深圳碳市場主要覆蓋了工業(yè)與大型公共建筑業(yè)[13],而上海則在此基礎(chǔ)上包括了航空、港口、商業(yè)、賓館與金融等行業(yè)的排放[14]。本研究假定中國選取最廣泛的覆蓋范圍,即中國碳市場覆蓋除農(nóng)業(yè)以外的所有經(jīng)濟(jì)部門。
配額設(shè)計(jì)。配額設(shè)計(jì)方面,本文假定各區(qū)域碳市場的排放配額與各區(qū)域2020年減排目標(biāo)成比例。在計(jì)算過程中,本研究先核算出2020年減排目標(biāo)下各國2020年目標(biāo)排放量(歐盟2020年的國家減排目標(biāo)是在2010年的水平上減少21%的溫室氣體排放[15];澳大利亞2020年的國家減排目標(biāo)是在2000年排放標(biāo)準(zhǔn)上無條件減排5%;中國則為2020年的排放強(qiáng)度在2005年水平減少40%-45%),再根據(jù)各國2010年的碳市場覆蓋部門的排放量占總排放量的份額,將2020年各地區(qū)目標(biāo)排放量按比例計(jì)算得到相應(yīng)碳市場覆蓋部門的排放配額量。
3.1獨(dú)立碳市場影響
我們首先對各區(qū)域獨(dú)立碳市場做出分析,獨(dú)立碳市場的影響結(jié)果如表3所示。各地區(qū)碳價(jià)有較大差別,澳大利亞碳價(jià)最高,達(dá)到32美元/ t CO2($32/t CO2),歐盟價(jià)格稍低($17.5/t CO2),而中國碳價(jià)最低($10/t CO2)。中國碳價(jià)相對較低反應(yīng)了中國相對另外兩個(gè)區(qū)域具有更低的減排成本。具體來說,中國碳價(jià)的高低與排放約束的強(qiáng)度、生產(chǎn)技術(shù)水平以及碳市場覆蓋范圍等相關(guān),同時(shí)也受到未來經(jīng)濟(jì)增速假設(shè)等不確定性因素的影響。從排放配額來看,中國的減排比例低于其他兩個(gè)地區(qū)。根據(jù)本研究假設(shè),盡管2020年中國絕對減排量(351 106 t)比歐盟(177 106 t)以及澳大利亞(53 106 t)要大,但從減排成本來看,中國總體生產(chǎn)技術(shù),尤其是高耗能工業(yè)的生產(chǎn)技術(shù)比歐盟及澳大利亞要落后,且相對于其他地區(qū)中國的煤炭在能源生產(chǎn)中所占比例更大。 2010年中國單位經(jīng)濟(jì)產(chǎn)出的碳排放為1.59 kg CO2/美元,比歐盟(0.39 kg CO2/美元)高出六倍,比澳大利亞高出三倍(0.39 kg CO2/美元)。中國通過采用新技術(shù),以及使用資本、勞動(dòng)力來代替能源及煤炭消耗等途徑有著較大的減排空間。
3.2全球碳市場影響
全球碳市場情景EUANZ與EAC兩種情景的結(jié)果如表3所示。首先在沒有中國的參與下,歐盟與澳大利亞鏈接的EUANZ情景中,歐盟與澳大利亞碳市場連接后的碳價(jià)為22美元/ t CO2($22/t CO2),澳大利亞從歐盟碳市場中購買14.41 106 t的排放配額,這一交易額占到了澳大
利亞減排總量的27%。與此同時(shí),澳大利亞將會(huì)支付歐盟3.2億美元。
4結(jié)論
碳排放作為基于市場的政策工具被認(rèn)為是成本有效的減排手段,并被期望在國際應(yīng)對全球氣候變化合作中扮演更加重要的角色。本文選取歐盟、澳大利亞和中國三個(gè)區(qū)域?yàn)榘咐?,基?015年即將形成的歐盟-澳大利亞鏈接碳市場,分析中國-歐盟-澳大利亞這三個(gè)地區(qū)形成全球碳市場后的規(guī)模,及其對各地區(qū)產(chǎn)生的影響。通過分析我們發(fā)現(xiàn),即使給中國設(shè)定3%減排這樣一個(gè)較為溫和的減排目標(biāo),中國的絕對減排量也遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)大于歐盟與澳大利亞兩個(gè)國家。巨大的經(jīng)濟(jì)與排放規(guī)模使得中國的加入對歐盟-澳大利亞碳市場產(chǎn)生巨大的影響。中國的低成本減排機(jī)會(huì)將會(huì)使全球碳價(jià)從22.2美元/t下降至12.12美元/t。歐盟和澳大利亞分別向中國轉(zhuǎn)移71.2%和81.1%的減排責(zé)任,最終會(huì)使各地區(qū)的福利增加。同時(shí),由于排放約束影響,中國工業(yè)部門的能效提升1.4%,煤炭發(fā)電量下降3.3%,而清潔能源發(fā)電量則上升3.5%。
本研究對我國未來建立國內(nèi)碳市場機(jī)制具有一定的啟示作用。首先通過本文分析說明了碳市場配額與市場覆蓋范圍對于未來碳價(jià)具有重要影響,因而在我國未來設(shè)計(jì)時(shí)應(yīng)予以重點(diǎn)考慮;其次,研究表明未來碳市場在促進(jìn)我國工業(yè)能效提升的同時(shí),也會(huì)增加我國高耗能產(chǎn)業(yè)的生產(chǎn)成本,影響產(chǎn)業(yè)競爭力,在設(shè)計(jì)中應(yīng)予以綜合考慮;此外,研究通過不同國家貿(mào)易的推演,間接反映出初始配額在不同部門的分配將影響到未來各部門在碳市場中的利益分配,未來設(shè)計(jì)碳市場時(shí)也應(yīng)認(rèn)真考慮。
值得注意的是,本研究是對未來國際區(qū)域性碳市場的減排效果及其經(jīng)濟(jì)影響的初步分析,由于分析對象中澳大利亞與中國的碳市場機(jī)制尚未形成,分析過程中做了較多假設(shè),使得分析結(jié)果具有較多的不確定性。例如,在本研究中假設(shè)中國碳市場覆蓋了工業(yè)和服務(wù)業(yè)所有部門,但在實(shí)際制定我國碳市場范圍時(shí)考慮到核查成本與市場效率等因素肯定無法覆蓋這么多部門。同時(shí)在本研究中碳配額的數(shù)量按照我國碳強(qiáng)度下降目標(biāo)制定,受到我國未來經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展不確定性的影響。這些因素都會(huì)間接影響到我國未來碳市場的碳價(jià)格。此外本文在研究中采用完全自由市場假設(shè),沒有將市場缺陷、碳排放戰(zhàn)略發(fā)展資源與中國參與全球碳市場的可行性等復(fù)雜因素考慮在內(nèi),可作為以后進(jìn)一步研究討論的方向。
(編輯:劉照勝)
參考文獻(xiàn)(References)
[1]World Bank. State and Trends of the Carbon Market 2012 [R]. Washington DC: World Bank, 2012.
[2]EU Commission. Towards a Comprehensive Climate Change Agreement in Copenhagen: Communication from the Commission [R]. Brussels: the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, 2009.
[3]ICAP. International Carbon Action Partnership Political Declaration [N/OL]. Lisbon, 2007-10-29[2013-09-05]. http://icapcarbonaction.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=12&Itemid=4.
[4]Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. Securing a Clean Energy Future: the Australian Governments Climate Change Plan [R]. Canberra: Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, No. ACT 2601,2011.
[5]張小軍,唐明. 中國和澳大利亞同意在建立碳市場領(lǐng)域加強(qiáng)合作 [N/OL]. 北京:新華社, 2013-3-27[2013-9-5]. http://www.gov.cn/jrzg/2013-03/27/content_2364158.htm.[Zhang Xiaojun, Tang Ming. China and Australia Agree to Strengthen Cooperation in the Field of Carbon Market Establishment [N/OL]. Beijing: Xinhua News Agency, 2013-3-27[2013-9-5]. http://www.gov.cn/jrzg/2013-03/27/content_2364158.htm.]
[6]Han G Y, Olsson M, Hallding K, et al. Chinas Carbon Emission Trading: An Overview of Current Development [R]. Sweden: FORES, 2012.
[7]周強(qiáng). 深圳率先啟動(dòng)碳排放權(quán)交易探路中國碳市場 [N/OL]. 北京:新華社, 2013-6-30[2013-9-5]. http://news.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2013-06/20/c_116227291.htm.[Zhou Qiang. Shenzhen to Start Emission Trading Scheme, Explore Carbon Market in China [N/OL]. Beijing: Xinhua News Agency, 2013-6-30[2013-9-5]. http://news.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2013-06/20/c_116227291.htm.]
[8]中華人民共和國國家發(fā)展和改革委員會(huì). 解振華副主任主持召開中國低碳發(fā)展宏觀戰(zhàn)略研究項(xiàng)目領(lǐng)導(dǎo)小組和專家委員會(huì)會(huì)議 [N/OL]. 北京:中華人民共和國國家發(fā)展和改革委員會(huì), 2012-6-13[2013-9-5]. http://www.ndrc.gov.cn/tpxw/t20120613_485787.htm.[National Development and Reform Commission. Xie Zhenhua, Deputy Director, Holds the Leading Group and Expert Committee Meeting of Development of China Low-carbon Macro Strategy Research Project[N/OL]. Beijing: National Development and Reform Commission, 2012-6-13[2013-9-5]. http: //www.ndrc.gov.cn/tpxw/t20 120613_485787.htm.]
[9]Claire G, Niven W, Henry J. What to Expect from Sectoral Trading: A US-China Example [J]. Climate Change Economics, 2011, 2(1): 9-26.
[10]IPCC. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories [R]. Geneva: IPCC, 2006.
[11]Rutherford T F, Sergey P V. GTAP in GAMS and GTAP-EG: Global Datasets for Economic Research and Illustrative Models [G/OL]. 2000.
[12]Badri N, Angel A, Robert M. Global Trade, Assistance, and Production: The GTAP 8 Data Base [M]. 2012.
[13]林群燁,王登楷.中國大陸碳市場發(fā)展現(xiàn)狀介紹 [N/OL]. 綠基會(huì)通訊,2013-10 [2013-11-5]. http://www.tgpf.org.tw/upload/publish/publish_70/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9C%8B%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%B8%E7%A2%B3%E5%B8%82%E5%A0%B4%E7%99%BC%E5%B1%95%E7%8F%BE%E6%B3%81%E4%BB%8B%E7%B4%B9.pdf.[Lin Qiuye, Wang Dengkai. State of Carbon Market in China [N/OL]. Green Foundation Newsletter, 2013-10 [2013-11-5]. http://www.tgpf.org.tw/upload/publish/publish_70/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9C%8B%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%B8%E7%A2%B3%E5%B8%82%E5%A0%B4%E7%99%BC%E5%B1%95%E7%8F%BE%E6%B3%81%E4%BB%8B%E7%B4%B9.pdf.]
[14]China Daily. Shanghai to Pilot Carbon Trade in 2013 [N/OL]. Beijing: China Daily, 2012-7-27[2013-9-5] http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2012-07/27/content_15624507.htm.
[15]European Union. Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) [R]. Brussels: European Commission, 2012.
AbstractThe establishment of global multiregional carbon market is considered as a cost effective approach to facilitate global emission abatement and has been widely concerned. The ongoing planned linkage between the European Unions carbon market and a new emissions trading system in Australia in 2015 would be an important attempt to the practice of building up an international carbon market across different regions. To understand the abatement effect of such a global carbon market and to study its energy and economic impact on different market participants, this paper adopts a global dynamic computable general equilibrium model with a detailed representation of the interactions between energy and economic systems. Our model includes 20 economic sectors and 19 regions, and describes in detail 17 energy technologies. Bundled with fossil fuel consumptions, the emission permits are considered as an essential input in each of the production and consumption activities in the economic system to simulate global carbon market policies. Carbon emission permits are endogenously set in the model, and can be traded between sectors and regions. Considering the current development of global carbon market, this study takes 2020 as the study period. Four scenarios (reference scenario, independent carbon market scenario, EUAustralia scenario, and ChinaEUAustralia scenario) are designed to evaluate the impact of the global carbon market involving China, the EU, and Australia. We find that the carbon price of the three countries vary a lot, from 32 $/t CO2 in Australia, to 17.5 $/t CO2 in the EU, and to 10 $/t CO2 in China. Though the relative emission reduction (3%) of China is lower than that of the EU (9%) and Australia (18%), the absolute emission reduction of China is far greater than that of the EU and Australia. When China is included in the carbon market which already includes the EU and Australia, the prevailing global carbon price falls from 22 $/t CO2 to 12 $/t CO2, due to the relatively lower abatement cost in China. 71% of the EUs and 81% of Australias domestic reduction burden would be transferred to China, increasing 0.03% of the EUs and 0.06% of Australias welfare. The emission constraint improves the energy efficiency of Chinas industry sector by 1.4%, reduces coal consumption by 3.3%, and increases clean energy by 3.5%.
Key wordsemissions trading system; global carbon market; computable general equilibrium model
[9]Claire G, Niven W, Henry J. What to Expect from Sectoral Trading: A US-China Example [J]. Climate Change Economics, 2011, 2(1): 9-26.
[10]IPCC. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories [R]. Geneva: IPCC, 2006.
[11]Rutherford T F, Sergey P V. GTAP in GAMS and GTAP-EG: Global Datasets for Economic Research and Illustrative Models [G/OL]. 2000.
[12]Badri N, Angel A, Robert M. Global Trade, Assistance, and Production: The GTAP 8 Data Base [M]. 2012.
[13]林群燁,王登楷.中國大陸碳市場發(fā)展現(xiàn)狀介紹 [N/OL]. 綠基會(huì)通訊,2013-10 [2013-11-5]. http://www.tgpf.org.tw/upload/publish/publish_70/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9C%8B%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%B8%E7%A2%B3%E5%B8%82%E5%A0%B4%E7%99%BC%E5%B1%95%E7%8F%BE%E6%B3%81%E4%BB%8B%E7%B4%B9.pdf.[Lin Qiuye, Wang Dengkai. State of Carbon Market in China [N/OL]. Green Foundation Newsletter, 2013-10 [2013-11-5]. http://www.tgpf.org.tw/upload/publish/publish_70/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9C%8B%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%B8%E7%A2%B3%E5%B8%82%E5%A0%B4%E7%99%BC%E5%B1%95%E7%8F%BE%E6%B3%81%E4%BB%8B%E7%B4%B9.pdf.]
[14]China Daily. Shanghai to Pilot Carbon Trade in 2013 [N/OL]. Beijing: China Daily, 2012-7-27[2013-9-5] http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2012-07/27/content_15624507.htm.
[15]European Union. Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) [R]. Brussels: European Commission, 2012.
AbstractThe establishment of global multiregional carbon market is considered as a cost effective approach to facilitate global emission abatement and has been widely concerned. The ongoing planned linkage between the European Unions carbon market and a new emissions trading system in Australia in 2015 would be an important attempt to the practice of building up an international carbon market across different regions. To understand the abatement effect of such a global carbon market and to study its energy and economic impact on different market participants, this paper adopts a global dynamic computable general equilibrium model with a detailed representation of the interactions between energy and economic systems. Our model includes 20 economic sectors and 19 regions, and describes in detail 17 energy technologies. Bundled with fossil fuel consumptions, the emission permits are considered as an essential input in each of the production and consumption activities in the economic system to simulate global carbon market policies. Carbon emission permits are endogenously set in the model, and can be traded between sectors and regions. Considering the current development of global carbon market, this study takes 2020 as the study period. Four scenarios (reference scenario, independent carbon market scenario, EUAustralia scenario, and ChinaEUAustralia scenario) are designed to evaluate the impact of the global carbon market involving China, the EU, and Australia. We find that the carbon price of the three countries vary a lot, from 32 $/t CO2 in Australia, to 17.5 $/t CO2 in the EU, and to 10 $/t CO2 in China. Though the relative emission reduction (3%) of China is lower than that of the EU (9%) and Australia (18%), the absolute emission reduction of China is far greater than that of the EU and Australia. When China is included in the carbon market which already includes the EU and Australia, the prevailing global carbon price falls from 22 $/t CO2 to 12 $/t CO2, due to the relatively lower abatement cost in China. 71% of the EUs and 81% of Australias domestic reduction burden would be transferred to China, increasing 0.03% of the EUs and 0.06% of Australias welfare. The emission constraint improves the energy efficiency of Chinas industry sector by 1.4%, reduces coal consumption by 3.3%, and increases clean energy by 3.5%.
Key wordsemissions trading system; global carbon market; computable general equilibrium model
[9]Claire G, Niven W, Henry J. What to Expect from Sectoral Trading: A US-China Example [J]. Climate Change Economics, 2011, 2(1): 9-26.
[10]IPCC. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories [R]. Geneva: IPCC, 2006.
[11]Rutherford T F, Sergey P V. GTAP in GAMS and GTAP-EG: Global Datasets for Economic Research and Illustrative Models [G/OL]. 2000.
[12]Badri N, Angel A, Robert M. Global Trade, Assistance, and Production: The GTAP 8 Data Base [M]. 2012.
[13]林群燁,王登楷.中國大陸碳市場發(fā)展現(xiàn)狀介紹 [N/OL]. 綠基會(huì)通訊,2013-10 [2013-11-5]. http://www.tgpf.org.tw/upload/publish/publish_70/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9C%8B%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%B8%E7%A2%B3%E5%B8%82%E5%A0%B4%E7%99%BC%E5%B1%95%E7%8F%BE%E6%B3%81%E4%BB%8B%E7%B4%B9.pdf.[Lin Qiuye, Wang Dengkai. State of Carbon Market in China [N/OL]. Green Foundation Newsletter, 2013-10 [2013-11-5]. http://www.tgpf.org.tw/upload/publish/publish_70/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9C%8B%E5%A4%A7%E9%99%B8%E7%A2%B3%E5%B8%82%E5%A0%B4%E7%99%BC%E5%B1%95%E7%8F%BE%E6%B3%81%E4%BB%8B%E7%B4%B9.pdf.]
[14]China Daily. Shanghai to Pilot Carbon Trade in 2013 [N/OL]. Beijing: China Daily, 2012-7-27[2013-9-5] http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2012-07/27/content_15624507.htm.
[15]European Union. Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) [R]. Brussels: European Commission, 2012.
AbstractThe establishment of global multiregional carbon market is considered as a cost effective approach to facilitate global emission abatement and has been widely concerned. The ongoing planned linkage between the European Unions carbon market and a new emissions trading system in Australia in 2015 would be an important attempt to the practice of building up an international carbon market across different regions. To understand the abatement effect of such a global carbon market and to study its energy and economic impact on different market participants, this paper adopts a global dynamic computable general equilibrium model with a detailed representation of the interactions between energy and economic systems. Our model includes 20 economic sectors and 19 regions, and describes in detail 17 energy technologies. Bundled with fossil fuel consumptions, the emission permits are considered as an essential input in each of the production and consumption activities in the economic system to simulate global carbon market policies. Carbon emission permits are endogenously set in the model, and can be traded between sectors and regions. Considering the current development of global carbon market, this study takes 2020 as the study period. Four scenarios (reference scenario, independent carbon market scenario, EUAustralia scenario, and ChinaEUAustralia scenario) are designed to evaluate the impact of the global carbon market involving China, the EU, and Australia. We find that the carbon price of the three countries vary a lot, from 32 $/t CO2 in Australia, to 17.5 $/t CO2 in the EU, and to 10 $/t CO2 in China. Though the relative emission reduction (3%) of China is lower than that of the EU (9%) and Australia (18%), the absolute emission reduction of China is far greater than that of the EU and Australia. When China is included in the carbon market which already includes the EU and Australia, the prevailing global carbon price falls from 22 $/t CO2 to 12 $/t CO2, due to the relatively lower abatement cost in China. 71% of the EUs and 81% of Australias domestic reduction burden would be transferred to China, increasing 0.03% of the EUs and 0.06% of Australias welfare. The emission constraint improves the energy efficiency of Chinas industry sector by 1.4%, reduces coal consumption by 3.3%, and increases clean energy by 3.5%.
Key wordsemissions trading system; global carbon market; computable general equilibrium model