• Energy Research
• Closed Access close

While studies have theoretically discussed the impact of carbon pricing on renewable energy, the practical implementation and effectiveness of these policies remain uncertain. This study empirically examines the role of carbon emissions trading and carbon tax in global renewable energy development using panel data from 196 countries and regions and employing the staggered difference-in-differences (DID) model and Bacon decomposition method. The results suggest that: (1) From the perspective of policy shocks, carbon trading has increased non-hydro renewable electricity generation by 73.32%, while carbon tax has increased it by 31.79%. This indicates that the overall impact of carbon trading on renewable energy is greater than that of carbon tax. However, the elasticity coefficients of renewable energy to carbon trading prices and carbon tax rates are 0.1801 and 0.1845, respectively, suggesting a slightly greater marginal effect of carbon tax on renewable energy compared to carbon trading. (2) Both carbon tax and carbon trading have mitigated the growth of fossil electricity and encouraged public investment in renewable energy, thereby fostering its development. (3) The influence of carbon pricing on renewable energy varies by income level; notably, the implementation of these policies in high-income countries has diminished their promotional effect on renewable energy. (4) The contribution of technological innovation to renewable energy development is smaller than that of policies including carbon trading and carbon tax, indicating that renewable energy development during the sample period was predominantly driven by policy measures. The findings indicate that the application of carbon pricing policies should be further promoted to accelerate the energy mix transition.

In occasione del semestre italiano di presidenza dell’Unione europea, l’Università di Bologna ha promosso un’inedita ricognizione delle scelte operate da ciascun sistema impositivo statale in punto di fiscalità ambientale. L'Autore dello scritto ha ricevuto l'incarico di approfondire e comparare le esperienze di ciascun Paese, muovendo dalle informazioni raccolte dagli accademici di differenti nazionalità. L'indagine, di cui il saggio reca la sintesi ed una prima elaborazione, ha da subito posto in evidenza differenti sensibilità e approcci eterogenei nella declinazione della fiscalità in senso etico-ambientale. Essa ha svelato, su tutto, la disomogeneità delle categorie giuridiche di riferimento e la ridondante prevalenza delle esigenze di gettito sulle concrete potenzialità della leva fiscale nell'influenza dei comportamenti dei cittadini e delle imprese.

We investigate the classical single-period (newsvendor) problem under carbon emissions policies including the mandatory carbon emissions capacity, the carbon emissions tax, and the cap-and-trade system. Specifically, under each policy, we find a firm’s optimal production quantity and corresponding expected profit, and draw analytic managerial insights. We show that, in order to reduce carbon emissions by a certain percentage, the tax rate imposed on the high-margin firm should be less than that on the low-margin firm for the high-profit perishable products, whereas the high-margin firm should absorb a high tax than the low-margin firm for the low-profit products. Under the cap-and-trade policy, the emissions capacity should be set to a level such that the marginal profit of the firm is less than the carbon credit purchasing price. We also derive the specific (closed-form) conditions under which, as a result of implementing the cap-and-trade policy, the firm’s expected profit is increased and carbon emissions are reduced.

Pricing greenhouse gas emissions is a burgeoning and possibly lucrative financial means for climate change mitigation. Emissions pricing is being used to fund emissions-abatement technologies and to modify land management to improve carbon sequestration and retention. Here we discuss the principal land-management options under existing and realistic future emissions-price legislation in Australia, and examine them with respect to their anticipated direct and indirect effects on biodiversity. The main ways in which emissions price-driven changes to land management can affect biodiversity are through policies and practices for (1) environmental plantings for carbon sequestration, (2) native regrowth, (3) fire management, (4) forestry, (5) agricultural practices (including cropping and grazing), and (6) feral animal control. While most land-management options available to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions offer clear advantages to increase the viability of native biodiversity, we describe several caveats regarding potentially negative outcomes, and outline components that need to be considered if biodiversity is also to benefit from the new carbon economy. Carbon plantings will only have real biodiversity value if they comprise appropriate native tree species and provide suitable habitats and resources for valued fauna. Such plantings also risk severely altering local hydrology and reducing water availability. Management of regrowth post-agricultural abandonment requires setting appropriate baselines and allowing for thinning in certain circumstances, and improvements to forestry rotation lengths would likely increase carbon-retention capacity and biodiversity value. Prescribed burning to reduce the frequency of high-intensity wildfires in northern Australia is being used as a tool to increase carbon retention. Fire management in southern Australia is not readily amenable for maximising carbon storage potential, but will become increasingly important for biodiversity conservation as the climate warms. Carbon price-based modifications to agriculture that would benefit biodiversity include reductions in tillage frequency and livestock densities, reductions in fertiliser use, and retention and regeneration of native shrubs; however, anticipated shifts to exotic perennial grass species such as buffel grass and kikuyu could have net negative implications for native biodiversity. Finally, it is unlikely that major reductions in greenhouse gas emissions arising from feral animal control are possible, even though reduced densities of feral herbivores will benefit Australian biodiversity greatly.

Both carbon and emission taxes popularly exist all over the world. Therefore, it is important to compare carbon with emission tax. Under monopolization, this article establishes game theory model to compare carbon with emission tax. On one hand, both carbon and emission taxes reduce energy inputs, outputs, profits, and emission. On the other hand, under optimal taxes, two types of taxes affect identically. Under incomplete information carbon taxes seem more efficient than emission taxes. Based on these conclusions, we suggest to launch environmental tax based on emission function. Or the selection of taxes should consider the emission properties in production.