Optimal timing of phasing out producer subsidies towards carbon neutrality: Interaction between fossil energy extraction and environmental uncertainties

IF 7.9 2区 工程技术 Q1 ENERGY & FUELS
Xu Zhao , Zhi Li , Jianye Liu
{"title":"Optimal timing of phasing out producer subsidies towards carbon neutrality: Interaction between fossil energy extraction and environmental uncertainties","authors":"Xu Zhao ,&nbsp;Zhi Li ,&nbsp;Jianye Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.esr.2024.101598","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Since subsidies for fossil-fuel producers entail “carbon locked-in” risks, phasing out the subsidies is widely agreed to be critical for progress on climate change towards carbon neutrality. However, due to the uncertainties and irreversibilities associated with environmental degradation and economic losses, delaying removal efforts allows us to benefit from cheaper abatement options and less total abatements owning to self-regeneration of pollution stock. Therefore, whether the removal action should be taken currently or be delayed becomes vital for policy making. We develop a real option model of policy timing using a green social welfare as the objective, consisting of the standard Hotelling model of exhaustible resource extraction, and a stochastic state variable to capture uncertainties over the social costs of environmental damage. Analytic solutions are derived to show the implication of these uncertainties for policy adoption, and the results are presented: (i) a higher volatility of economic costs per emissions leads to a positive incentive for delaying removal in some bounds of uncertainties; (ii) amount of subsidies, pollution stocks, depletion of fossil fuel production and its marginal costs have negative impacts on the timing threshold, which implies that adopting currently is better than waiting; and (iii) discount rate increases the option value of delaying the policy. Our study provides a valuable framework to determine the energy and environmental policy timing with uncertainties for regulators.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11546,"journal":{"name":"Energy Strategy Reviews","volume":"56 ","pages":"Article 101598"},"PeriodicalIF":7.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Strategy Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211467X24003079","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since subsidies for fossil-fuel producers entail “carbon locked-in” risks, phasing out the subsidies is widely agreed to be critical for progress on climate change towards carbon neutrality. However, due to the uncertainties and irreversibilities associated with environmental degradation and economic losses, delaying removal efforts allows us to benefit from cheaper abatement options and less total abatements owning to self-regeneration of pollution stock. Therefore, whether the removal action should be taken currently or be delayed becomes vital for policy making. We develop a real option model of policy timing using a green social welfare as the objective, consisting of the standard Hotelling model of exhaustible resource extraction, and a stochastic state variable to capture uncertainties over the social costs of environmental damage. Analytic solutions are derived to show the implication of these uncertainties for policy adoption, and the results are presented: (i) a higher volatility of economic costs per emissions leads to a positive incentive for delaying removal in some bounds of uncertainties; (ii) amount of subsidies, pollution stocks, depletion of fossil fuel production and its marginal costs have negative impacts on the timing threshold, which implies that adopting currently is better than waiting; and (iii) discount rate increases the option value of delaying the policy. Our study provides a valuable framework to determine the energy and environmental policy timing with uncertainties for regulators.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Energy Strategy Reviews
Energy Strategy Reviews Energy-Energy (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
12.80
自引率
4.90%
发文量
167
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊介绍: Energy Strategy Reviews is a gold open access journal that provides authoritative content on strategic decision-making and vision-sharing related to society''s energy needs. Energy Strategy Reviews publishes: • Analyses • Methodologies • Case Studies • Reviews And by invitation: • Report Reviews • Viewpoints
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信