03.01.2014 Views

sectoral economic costs and benefits of ghg mitigation - IPCC

sectoral economic costs and benefits of ghg mitigation - IPCC

sectoral economic costs and benefits of ghg mitigation - IPCC

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Davoud Ghasemzadeh <strong>and</strong> Faten Alawadhi<br />

According to OWEM scenarios through restructuring, the most dramatic price increases would<br />

be for coal, with increases by between 108% <strong>and</strong> 270% (see Figure 2).<br />

This will translate into lower coal use in electricity generation, falling by between 63% <strong>and</strong> 92%<br />

compared to the reference case (replaced largely by gas). The main reduction therefore in<br />

dem<strong>and</strong> will be on coal, while oil dem<strong>and</strong> will be reduced by only 0.5 mb/d.<br />

Figure 2<br />

OECD Fossil Fuel Dem<strong>and</strong> Following Restructuring <strong>of</strong> Taxes, mtoe<br />

2400<br />

2200<br />

2000<br />

Oil<br />

1800<br />

1600<br />

1400<br />

Gas<br />

1200<br />

1000<br />

Coal<br />

800<br />

600<br />

1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020<br />

It has, nevertheless, been argued that the current high level <strong>of</strong> taxes in the transport sector already<br />

internalises the externalities <strong>of</strong> air pollution, accidents, noise <strong>and</strong> congestion, that they are<br />

already <strong>economic</strong>ally efficient, <strong>and</strong> that they should not be a part <strong>of</strong> any reform <strong>of</strong> the energy tax<br />

system. But it is clear that the taxes have not been structured for this objectives.<br />

In addition to the restructuring <strong>of</strong> energy taxes, there are other alternatives to minimise the<br />

impacts <strong>of</strong> response measures. The list includes call for fiscal reforms such as removal <strong>of</strong><br />

subsidies on fossil fuel production in OECD countries, as well as execution <strong>of</strong> different projects<br />

in OPEC countries <strong>and</strong> establishment <strong>of</strong> funding to diversify the economies <strong>of</strong> oil exporting<br />

developing countries towards non-oil sectors. Some <strong>of</strong> these options are summarised, as follows:<br />

• Establishment <strong>of</strong> funding is embodied in Article 3.14 <strong>of</strong> the Kyoto Protocol to<br />

minimise the impact. Montreal Multilateral Fund might be seen as the prototype for a<br />

funding mechanism, although the Montreal Multilateral Fund is on a much smaller<br />

scale.<br />

• Broader investment funds are needed to help oil exporting developing countries to<br />

diversify their economies towards non-oil sectors including transfer <strong>of</strong> technology,<br />

investment in vital sectors. Note that non-oil sectors are <strong>of</strong>ten closely dependent<br />

upon oil income.<br />

• Enhancing the role <strong>of</strong> natural gas, e.g. NG power generation for export.<br />

• Reducing GHG emissions associated with flaring <strong>and</strong> venting <strong>of</strong> natural gas in oil<br />

producing countries.<br />

67

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!