Abstract
A wide array of alternatives has been proposed as the common metrics
with which to compare the climate impacts of different emission types.
Different physical and economic metrics and their parameterizations give
diverse weights between e.g. CH4 and CO2, and
fixing the metric from one perspective makes it sub-optimal from
another. As the aims of global climate policy involve some degree of
ambiguity, it is not possible to determine a metric that would be
optimal and consistent with all policy aims. This paper evaluates the
cost implications of using predetermined metrics in cost-efficient
mitigation scenarios. Three formulations of the 2 °C target, including both deterministic and stochastic approaches, shared a wide range of metric values for CH4
with which the mitigation costs are only slightly above the
cost-optimal levels. Therefore, although ambiguity in current policy
might prevent us from selecting an optimal metric, it can be possible to
select robust metric values that perform well with multiple policy
targets.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 44-52 |
Number of pages | 9 |
Journal | Environmental Science and Policy |
Volume | 31 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2013 |
MoE publication type | A1 Journal article-refereed |
Keywords
- climate economics
- climate metric
- climate policy