Last Updated:
February 28, 2007

GCRIO Program Overview

Library 
Our extensive collection of documents.

Privacy Policy

Archives of the
Global Climate Change Digest
A Guide to Information on Greenhouse Gases and Ozone Depletion
Published July 1988 through June 1999

FROM VOLUME 6, NUMBER 6, JUNE 1993

PROFESSIONAL PUBLICATIONS...
SPECIAL ISSUE: POLICY MODELING FOR GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE

Item #d93jun25

Energy Policy, 21(3), Mar. 1993 (Pergamon Press) contains the following 12 papers. Single issues available from Dawson & Sons Ltd., Cannon House, Folkestone, Kent CT19 5EE, UK (tel: 0303-850101; fax: 0303-850440).

"Policy Modelling for Climate Change: The Missing Models," M. Grubb (Royal Inst. of Intl. Affairs, 10 St. James's Square, London SW1 4LE, UK), 203-208. At the present stage of modeling, expert judgement is a better guide to policy than any particular model result, but models and related sensitivity studies are already an important source of understanding and are rapidly improving.

"A Model Framework for Integrated Studies of the Climate Problem," H. Dowlatabadi (Dept. Engin., Carnegie Mellon Univ., Pittsburgh PA 15213), M.G. Morgan, 209-221. Describes a computer model framework suitable for accommodating various alternative results and submodels, and applies it, together with expert judgement, to setting research priorities.

"CO₂ Emissions Control: Comparing Policy Instruments," S.C. Peck Elec. Power Res. Inst., 3412 Hillview Ave., Palo Alto CA 94303), T.J. Teisberg, 222-230. Use of a global model shows that the relative merits of three alternative policy instruments--period-specific emission limits, period-specific taxes, and a cumulative emissions limit--depend on assumptions regarding how well we know costs and benefits.

"World Energy to 2050: Outline Scenarios for Energy and Electricity," R.J. Eden (Cavendish Lab., Cambridge Univ., Cambridge CB3 0HE, UK), 231-237. Of the two scenarios explored, the one with lower environmental impact involves a targeted efficiency future in which per capita energy use in the industrialized countries is halved by the year 2050, while in the developing countries it is doubled.

"Structural Comparison of the Models in EMF 12," R. Beaver (Strategic Decisions Group, 2440 Sand Hill Rd., Menlo Pk. CA 94025), 238-248. Analyzes the structure of the 14 energy and economic models represented in the recently completed Stanford University Energy Modeling Forum study, Economic Impacts of Policies to Reduce Energy-Sector Carbon Dioxide Emissions. Focuses on the representation of capital stock dynamics and of market penetration of carbon-free energy sources.

"Exploring the Gap: Top-Down Versus Bottom-Up Analyses of the Cost of Mitigating Global Warming," D. Wilson (Energy Sys. Studies, Lund Univ., Gerdagatan 13, S-223 62 Lund, Sweden), J. Swisher, 249-263. Analyzes the differences between the two types of models, which were conceived and designed through different disciplines for different purposes, and which lead to different conclusions.

"Using Scenarios to Explore Future Energy Demand in Industrialized Countries," L. Schipper (Lawrence Berkeley Lab., Berkeley CA 94720), S. Meyers, 264-275. With a mixture of pricing and other policies, OECD primary energy use in 2010 could be 20-25% less than currently seems likely if fairly determined efforts are made. It would be very challenging but not impossible to increase that reduction to 40-45%.

"An Analytical Model to Compare Energy-Efficiency Indices and CO₂ Emissions in Developed and Developing Countries," L. Pinguelli Rosa (COPPE/Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Centro de Tecnologia--Bloco C, 21949-900 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil), M. Tiomno Tolmasquim, 276-283. Conventional definitions of efficiency and energy intensity, which are based on the technological and economic framework of developed countries, can mask the situation in developing countries. Points out how deregulation and free market international forces are pushing Brazil towards increased use of fossil fuels.

"The Cost of Reducing CO₂ Emissions: A Comparison of the German and UK Power Sectors," M.B. Morrison (Caminus Energy Ltd., Caminus Hse., Castle Pk., Cambridge CB3 0RA, UK), P. ten Brink, 284-295. This economic comparison determines the value of cooperation in reaching a 20% CO₂ reduction target.

"A UK Carbon/Energy Tax: The Macroeconomic Effects," T. Barker (Dept. Appl. Econ., Univ. Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 9DE, UK), S. Baylis, P. Madsen, 296-308. Presents an extensive analysis made using a large-scale energy-environment-economy model. The effects on the energy intensive industries are expected to be small in all the scenarios examined, but 14% of tax revenues are lost if the industries are exempt.

"Modelling Long-Run Scenarios: Methodology Lessons from a Prospective Study on a Low CO₂ Intensive Country," J.-C. Hourcade (Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sci. Sociales, 1 rue du 11 Nov. 92120, Montrouge, France), 309-326. Draws generally applicable conclusions from a long-term study of CO₂ emissions in France, and discusses new research priorities. Proposes a more encompassing definition of "no regrets" policy.

"Policy Analysis of the Greenhouse Effect: An Application of the PAGE Model," C. Hope (Judge Inst. Mgmt. Studies, Univ. Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1RX, UK), J. Anderson, P. Wenman, 327-338. Model results confirm that it is difficult to overcome the problem of global warming by taking preventive action alone; the argument for introducing an aggressive adaptive policy is very strong. Sources of uncertainty have a great influence on the costs and impacts of the combined strategy.