碳定价和1.5°C目标:近期脱碳和工具组合的重要性

Q3 Social Sciences Carbon and Climate Law Review Pub Date : 2018-03-16 DOI:10.21552/CCLR/2018/1/9
M. Mehling, E. Tvinnereim
{"title":"碳定价和1.5°C目标:近期脱碳和工具组合的重要性","authors":"M. Mehling, E. Tvinnereim","doi":"10.21552/CCLR/2018/1/9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Carbon pricing is routinely presented as the most efficient way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and therefore as an indispensable pillar of ambitious climate policy. For incremental emission reductions on the margin, this static perspective may be correct, expressing the ability of carbon pricing to identify and spur abatement options with the lowest cost. At the same time, meeting the 1.5°C target requires achievement of zero net emissions in the relatively near term, implying a need for full decarbonisation rather than marginal abatement. To date, there is only limited empirical evidence suggesting that carbon pricing has produced deep emission cuts. Emission reductions triggered by carbon taxes and emissions trading systems are typically modest or relate to a baseline rather than absolute levels, even in cases where price levels are relatively high. Consequently, we posit that deep decarbonisation in line with the 1.5°C target can only be ensured by drawing on a portfolio approach, in which carbon pricing operates alongside other instruments including regulation and legal mandates.","PeriodicalId":52307,"journal":{"name":"Carbon and Climate Law Review","volume":"12 1","pages":"50-61"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Carbon pricing and the 1.5°C target : near-term decarbonisation and the importance of an instrument mix\",\"authors\":\"M. Mehling, E. Tvinnereim\",\"doi\":\"10.21552/CCLR/2018/1/9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Carbon pricing is routinely presented as the most efficient way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and therefore as an indispensable pillar of ambitious climate policy. For incremental emission reductions on the margin, this static perspective may be correct, expressing the ability of carbon pricing to identify and spur abatement options with the lowest cost. At the same time, meeting the 1.5°C target requires achievement of zero net emissions in the relatively near term, implying a need for full decarbonisation rather than marginal abatement. To date, there is only limited empirical evidence suggesting that carbon pricing has produced deep emission cuts. Emission reductions triggered by carbon taxes and emissions trading systems are typically modest or relate to a baseline rather than absolute levels, even in cases where price levels are relatively high. Consequently, we posit that deep decarbonisation in line with the 1.5°C target can only be ensured by drawing on a portfolio approach, in which carbon pricing operates alongside other instruments including regulation and legal mandates.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52307,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Carbon and Climate Law Review\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"50-61\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-03-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Carbon and Climate Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21552/CCLR/2018/1/9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Carbon and Climate Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21552/CCLR/2018/1/9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

碳定价通常被认为是减少温室气体排放的最有效方式,因此也是雄心勃勃的气候政策不可或缺的支柱。对于边际上的增量减排,这种静态观点可能是正确的,它表达了碳定价识别和刺激成本最低的减排方案的能力。与此同时,要实现1.5°C的目标,需要在相对较短的时间内实现零净排放,这意味着需要完全脱碳,而不是边际减排。迄今为止,只有有限的经验证据表明,碳定价已经产生了大幅减排。即使在价格水平相对较高的情况下,碳税和排放交易制度引发的排放量减少通常是适度的,或与基线有关,而不是与绝对水平有关。因此,我们认为,只有采用组合方法才能确保与1.5°C目标一致的深度脱碳,其中碳定价与监管和法律授权等其他工具一起运作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Carbon pricing and the 1.5°C target : near-term decarbonisation and the importance of an instrument mix
Carbon pricing is routinely presented as the most efficient way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and therefore as an indispensable pillar of ambitious climate policy. For incremental emission reductions on the margin, this static perspective may be correct, expressing the ability of carbon pricing to identify and spur abatement options with the lowest cost. At the same time, meeting the 1.5°C target requires achievement of zero net emissions in the relatively near term, implying a need for full decarbonisation rather than marginal abatement. To date, there is only limited empirical evidence suggesting that carbon pricing has produced deep emission cuts. Emission reductions triggered by carbon taxes and emissions trading systems are typically modest or relate to a baseline rather than absolute levels, even in cases where price levels are relatively high. Consequently, we posit that deep decarbonisation in line with the 1.5°C target can only be ensured by drawing on a portfolio approach, in which carbon pricing operates alongside other instruments including regulation and legal mandates.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Carbon and Climate Law Review
Carbon and Climate Law Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊最新文献
European Union ∙ European Climate Policy: One Step Forward, Two Steps Back Reparations For Climate Harm and The Role of The Loss and Damage Mechanism: Lessons from Other Areas of Law Bringing the Ocean into National Systemic Climate Litigation – Is Due Diligence a Bridge? Regulatory Approaches to Carbon Dioxide Usage and Storage in the European Union Indonesia ∙ The Voluntary Carbon Market and Indonesian Publicly Listed Companies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1