Evaluating the Key Drivers of the US Government's Social Cost of Carbon: A Model Diagnostic and Inter-Comparison Study of Climate Impacts in DICE, FUND, and PAGE

Delavane Diaz
{"title":"Evaluating the Key Drivers of the US Government's Social Cost of Carbon: A Model Diagnostic and Inter-Comparison Study of Climate Impacts in DICE, FUND, and PAGE","authors":"Delavane Diaz","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2655889","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The social cost of carbon (SCC) is a monetary estimate of the climate change damages to society from an additional emission of carbon dioxide (CO2). US agencies are now required to apply the SCC to assess the potential benefits of CO2 reductions in federal regulations, including rules and proposals affecting appliances, transportation, industry, and power generation. This paper presents the first in-depth model diagnostic and inter-comparison examination of the three integrated assessment models used to estimate the SCC – DICE, FUND, and PAGE – to reveal how they uniquely determine damages from climate change. Specifically, we reviewed the source code, published documentation, and underlying literature of each of the three models, and then performed controlled experiments to diagnose the contribution of particular sectors, regions, and other model assumptions (parametric and structural) to the resulting cost. We find that DICE and PAGE project substantially higher climate damages, and therefore higher SCC values, than FUND, which includes the potential for net benefits in the near-term. Despite the fact that FUND is highly-disaggregated sectorally and regionally, 95% of its SCC can be explained by a few damage function parameters related to cooling, agriculture, avoided heating, and water resources, particularly those for China. The DICE SCC can only be decomposed into sea level rise damages and an aggregation of all other damages, with the latter category being the dominant SCC driver. The PAGE SCC is mostly driven by non-economic damages, with all costs distributed globally though greatest in the US and least in the former Soviet Union. In all three models, impacts from sea level rise contribute less than one-tenth of the SCC. This study's diagnostic analysis improves public understanding of the SCC, informs future SCC estimation, and sets research priorities for climate impacts modeling.","PeriodicalId":237010,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Carbon Trading (Politics) (Topic)","volume":"191 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SRPN: Carbon Trading (Politics) (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2655889","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

The social cost of carbon (SCC) is a monetary estimate of the climate change damages to society from an additional emission of carbon dioxide (CO2). US agencies are now required to apply the SCC to assess the potential benefits of CO2 reductions in federal regulations, including rules and proposals affecting appliances, transportation, industry, and power generation. This paper presents the first in-depth model diagnostic and inter-comparison examination of the three integrated assessment models used to estimate the SCC – DICE, FUND, and PAGE – to reveal how they uniquely determine damages from climate change. Specifically, we reviewed the source code, published documentation, and underlying literature of each of the three models, and then performed controlled experiments to diagnose the contribution of particular sectors, regions, and other model assumptions (parametric and structural) to the resulting cost. We find that DICE and PAGE project substantially higher climate damages, and therefore higher SCC values, than FUND, which includes the potential for net benefits in the near-term. Despite the fact that FUND is highly-disaggregated sectorally and regionally, 95% of its SCC can be explained by a few damage function parameters related to cooling, agriculture, avoided heating, and water resources, particularly those for China. The DICE SCC can only be decomposed into sea level rise damages and an aggregation of all other damages, with the latter category being the dominant SCC driver. The PAGE SCC is mostly driven by non-economic damages, with all costs distributed globally though greatest in the US and least in the former Soviet Union. In all three models, impacts from sea level rise contribute less than one-tenth of the SCC. This study's diagnostic analysis improves public understanding of the SCC, informs future SCC estimation, and sets research priorities for climate impacts modeling.
评估美国政府碳社会成本的关键驱动因素:DICE、FUND和PAGE对气候影响的模型诊断和相互比较研究
碳的社会成本(social cost of carbon, SCC)是对额外排放的二氧化碳(CO2)对气候变化造成的社会损害的货币估计。美国各机构现在被要求应用SCC来评估联邦法规中二氧化碳减排的潜在效益,包括影响家电、交通、工业和发电的规则和提案。本文首次对用于估计SCC的三个综合评估模型(DICE、FUND和PAGE)进行了深入的模型诊断和相互比较,以揭示它们如何独特地确定气候变化造成的损害。具体来说,我们回顾了三个模型的源代码、已发表的文档和基础文献,然后进行了对照实验,以诊断特定部门、地区和其他模型假设(参数化和结构性)对最终成本的贡献。我们发现,DICE和PAGE预测的气候损害比FUND高得多,因此SCC值也比FUND高,后者包括短期内潜在的净效益。尽管FUND具有高度的部门和区域分类,但95%的SCC可以用与冷却、农业、避免加热和水资源相关的几个损害函数参数来解释,尤其是中国的损害函数参数。DICE SCC只能分解为海平面上升损害和所有其他损害的总和,后者是主要的SCC驱动因素。PAGE SCC主要是由非经济损失驱动的,所有成本都分布在全球,尽管美国最大,前苏联最小。在所有三种模式中,海平面上升的影响对SCC的贡献不到十分之一。本研究的诊断分析提高了公众对SCC的理解,为未来的SCC估计提供了信息,并为气候影响建模设定了研究重点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信