Gtap e
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 12

GTAP-E PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 139 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

GTAP-E. From GTAP technical paper 16 Jean-Marc Burniaux and Truong Truong. Energy moved from intermediate input to value added tier. Shares a tier with capital. The model has 8 regions and 8 commodities.

Download Presentation

GTAP-E

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Gtap e

GTAP-E

From GTAP technical paper 16

Jean-Marc Burniaux and Truong Truong


Gtap e

  • Energy moved from intermediate input to value added tier. Shares a tier with capital.

  • The model has 8 regions and 8 commodities.

  • 8 regions: USA, EU, Eastern Europe and FSU, Japan, other annex 1 countries, net energy exporters, China and India, and Rest of the World.

  • Sectors are agriculture, coal, oil, gas, oil products, electricity, other energy intensive, and other industries and services.


3 scenarios

3 scenarios

  • 1 No emission trading

    • Total emission constraints applied to Annex 1 countries. Targeted reductions: US 36%, EU 22%, Japan 32%, Other annex 1 countries 36%

  • 2 Trade among Annex 1 countries only

    • Emissions trading permitted among annex 1 countries

  • 3 Worldwide emission trading


Closure no trade

Closure no trade

  • exogenous

  • RCTAX

  • MARKCTAX

  • dcwfd(NEGYCOM3,PROD_COMM,REG)

  • .

  • .

  • dcwfi(NEGYCOM3,PROD_COMM,REG)

  • .

  • .

  • dcwpd(NEGYCOM3,REG)

  • dcwpi(NEGYCOM3,REG)

  • dcwgd(NEGYCOM3,REG)

  • dcwgi(NEGYCOM3,REG)

  • c_CTAXBAS(REG,NEGYCOM3B)

  • ! DTBAL exogenous for all regions except one,

  • ! and cgdslack exogenous for that one region (which can be any one).

  • dtbal("USA")

  • dtbal("EU")

  • dtbal("EEFSU")

  • dtbal("JPN")

  • dtbal("RoA1")

  • dtbal("EEx")

  • dtbal("CHIND")

  • cgdslack("RoW") ;

  • Rest Endogenous ;

  • swap gco2t("USA")=RCTAX("USA");

  • swap gco2t("EU")=RCTAX("EU");

  • swap gco2t("JPN")=RCTAX("JPN");

  • swap gco2t("RoA1")=RCTAX("RoA1");


No trade scenario

No trade scenario

  • Carbon taxes in $/ton that were required to achieve the desired reductions were $126 US, $147 EU, $230 Japan, $178 other annex 1 countries

  • The largest reduction in world output: US coal sector, the EU coal sector, Japanese gas sector

  • Net reductions in total output ocurred in all regions.

  • EEFSU, Oil exporters, China-India, and RoW increased production of oil products, electricity, and energy intensive industries

  • Total Changes in output of Annex 1 countries ranged from -126 in the US to + 4 EEFSU

  • Energy exporters’ output declined;

  • Other Annex 1 countries had only very small changes.


Trading among annex 1 countries

Trading among Annex 1 Countries

  • Trading among annex 1 countries targeted carbon emissions in individual countries

  • Emission reduction target 22% overall and same regional targets

  • Emissions EEFSU allowed to increase 13 percent

  • Results: carbon tax $78/ton all trading regions

  • Percent changes: USA -27, EU -14, EEFSU -27, JPN-15, RoA1 -21 EEx2, CHIND -1, RoW 4

  • Overall changes in output quantities to achieve reductions smaller than in no trading scenario

  • Overall reduction was largest in coal sector. US coal sector declines 38%

  • Energy exporters and China-India registered small increases in oil products, electricity and oil intensive industries, but reductions in total output (Oil exporters, China-India)


Worldwide emission trading

Worldwide emission trading

  • Trading worldwide targeted similar carbon emissions as the previous scenario

  • However, now overall emission reduction target 14%

  • Results: carbon tax $30/ton all trading regions

  • Percent changes: USA -13, EU -6, EEFSU -13, JPN -6, RoA1 -9, EEx -7, CHIND -32, RoW -9

  • Overall changes in output quantities to achieve reductions smallest in this scenario

  • Largest overall % reduction now in Chinese coal sector (-38%). US coal sector declines 21%

  • Total output declined in each region.


Terms of trade effects

Terms of trade effects


Utility changes

Utility changes


Worldwide co 2 trade without us

Worldwide CO2 Trade without US

  • In scenario 3 all of the world except the US trades (US has no quota)

  • Total emission target remains the same


Technology change and us participation in kyoto protocol

Technology Change and US Participation in Kyoto Protocol

  • Trading in Annex 1 countries only with and without US participation

  • Coal-saving technological change in electricity production is introduced


Updating gdp and population growth rates

Updating GDP and Population Growth Rates

  • In the first (no trade) scenario, updated GDP and population grow rates are incorporated into the model

  • Emission targets are changed to reflect the altered relative importance of countries


  • Login