Search

The challenge of creating a global low-carbon society is examined from the perspectives of a slow-growing but highly developed economy (Canada) and a fast-growing developing economy (China). Both countries' responses are compared to a similar carbon price schedule (US$10/tCO2e in 2013 rising exponentially to $100 by 2050) using a hybrid technologically explicit and behaviourally realistic model with macroeconomic feedbacks (CIMS). Then additional measures are imposed based on the national circumstances of each country; for Canada we simulate a 50% reduction by 2050, and stabilization for China. The scale of the challenge in all cases requires that every available option be vigorously pursued, including energy efficiency, fuel switching, carbon capture and storage, and accelerated development of renewables; to compensate, there are significant co-reductions of local air pollutants such as SOx and NOx. Finally, the abatement cost schedules of China and Canada are compared, and implications considered for carbon permit flows if the cost schedule of the rest of the developed world is assumed to be similar to that of Canada. We found that the developed world and China could collectively reduce emissions by 50% in 2050 at a price of $175/ tCO2e, with permits flowing from the developed countries to China; while abatement costs are lower in China up to $75/t, at higher prices reductions are less costly in the developed world. Our results indicate that a global low-carbon society is feasible, on condition that policy makers are willing and able to impose long-term, credible policy packages with carbon pricing policy as the core element, coupled with supplementary regulations to address market failures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explores the impact of environmental policies and human development on the CO 2 emissions for the period of 1995-2015 in the Group of Seven and BRICS economies in the long run through panel cointegration and causality tests. The causality analysis revealed a bilateral causality between environmental stringency policies and CO 2 emissions for Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America, and a unilateral causality from CO 2 emissions to the environmental stringency policies for Canada, China, and France. On the other hand, the analysis showed a bilateral causality between human development and CO 2 emissions for Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America, and unilateral causality from CO 2 emissions to human development in Brazil, Canada, China, and France. Furthermore, the cointegration analysis indicated that both environmental stringency policies and human development had a decreasing impact on the CO 2 emissions.