06.04.2015 Views

PDF(2.7mb) - 國家政策研究基金會

PDF(2.7mb) - 國家政策研究基金會

PDF(2.7mb) - 國家政策研究基金會

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

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

A Synthesis of Energy Tax, Carbon Tax and Emission Trading in Taiwan 245<br />

Table 5 Comparison of Carbon Tax and Energy Prices in 1998<br />

NT/LOE<br />

Coal Gasoline Diesel Fuel LPG<br />

Natural<br />

Gas<br />

Electricity<br />

Price in 1998<br />

4.51 19.15 12.07 3.77 7.14 7.34 19.37<br />

(100) (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) (100)<br />

Dutch Carbon Tax<br />

Amount<br />

[U.S.$ 2.24/CO 2 (Ton)]<br />

0.261<br />

(5.787)<br />

0.214<br />

(1.117)<br />

0.214<br />

(1.773)<br />

0.214<br />

(5.676)<br />

0.214<br />

(2.997)<br />

0.154<br />

(2.098)<br />

0.174<br />

(0.898)<br />

Finnish Carbon Tax<br />

Amount<br />

[U.S.$ 3.93/CO 2 (Ton)]<br />

0.458<br />

(10.155)<br />

0.375<br />

(1.958)<br />

0.375<br />

(3.107)<br />

0.375<br />

(9.947)<br />

0.375<br />

(5.252)<br />

0.271<br />

(3.692)<br />

0.306<br />

(1.580)<br />

Danish Carbon Tax<br />

Amount<br />

[U.S.$ 14.88/ CO 2 (Ton)]<br />

1.733<br />

(38.426)<br />

1.419<br />

(7.410)<br />

1.419<br />

(11.756)<br />

1.419<br />

(37.639)<br />

1.419<br />

(19.874)<br />

1.026<br />

(13.978)<br />

1.159<br />

(5.983)<br />

Swedish Carbon Tax<br />

Amount<br />

[U.S.$ 22.2/ CO 2 (Ton)]<br />

2.586<br />

(57.339)<br />

2.117<br />

(11.055)<br />

2.117<br />

(17.539)<br />

2.117<br />

(56.154)<br />

2.117<br />

(29.650)<br />

1.531<br />

(20.858)<br />

1.729<br />

(8.926)<br />

Note 1:LOE stands for liter oil equivalent.<br />

Effect on Energy Demand and CO 2 Emissions<br />

By imposing the highest carbon tax<br />

(US$22.2/CO 2 (Ton)) on the 22-year progressive tax<br />

rate, CO 2 emissions will decline by 25.31 percent by<br />

2020. (See Table 5). This is almost the same as the rate<br />

of reduction when a one-step approach was employed<br />

for 1999.<br />

The energy demanded in relation to coal has the<br />

largest decrease, which is by –33.38 percent, followed<br />

by oil products by –25.08 percent, natural gas<br />

by –15.52 percent, and electricity by–14.82 percent.<br />

Effect on Prices<br />

We found that the progressive tax approach can<br />

effectively reduce the negative effect on the price level.<br />

For instance, at the same carbon tax rate of<br />

US$22.2/CO 2 (Ton), the one-step approach will increase<br />

the GDP deflator by 2.26 percent, while the increase is<br />

1.01 percent when the 22-year progressive approach is<br />

applied.<br />

If the 22-year progressive approach is applied, the<br />

water, electricity and gas sector (14.42%) will be affected<br />

the most in terms of a price increase among the<br />

seven one-digit sectors. It is followed by mining<br />

(11.88%), construction (1.79%), manufacturing<br />

(1.75%), transportation (1.12%) and agriculture<br />

(0.80%). The top five manufacturing sectors in terms of<br />

respective price increases are oil refining (35.58%),<br />

non-metallic minerals (3.72%), basic metals (3.39%),<br />

chemicals and plastics (2.57%) and paper & printing<br />

(2.08%).<br />

To sum up, sectoral ranking in terms of the impact<br />

of price increases as a result of imposing the 22-year<br />

progressive carbon tax rate is identical with the case<br />

where the one-step carbon tax approach is applied.<br />

(See Tables 6).

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!