Social Cost of Carbon: final big questions (with help from the birds)

Photo by Francesco Veronesi on Flickr cc by 2.0

by Bronwyn Bruce-Brand, Research Analyst at Motu Economic and Public Policy Research

This is the final in a series of three posts answering key questions about the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC). To help keep you interested, I have inserted some egg-cellent ideas about how we might get SCC to soar.

Ma ngā huruhuru ka rere te manu: It is the feathers that enable the bird to fly.

Social Cost of Carbon: two further questions (with more help from New Zealand’s native wildlife)

Photo by Department of Conservation on Flickr cc by 2.0

by Bronwyn Bruce-Brand, Research Analyst at Motu Economic and Public Policy Research

This is post two in a series of three posts answering key questions about the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC). In the interests of getting you to the end of this article, I have included some bird breaks (hopefully these won't get too squawkward).

Social Cost of Carbon: Two of six big questions (with a little help from New Zealand’s native wildlife)

by Bronwyn Bruce-Brand, Research Analyst at Motu Economic and Public Policy Research

Nobel Prize Laureate and environmental economist William Nordhaus calls the social cost of carbon (SCC) “the most important single economic concept in the economics of climate change” and it’s a requirement for all US federal environmental regulation analysis.1 So, what is the SCC and how does it work?

Photo by southstar on flickr cc by 2.0

This series of posts answers the first two in a series of six key questions about the SCC with the help of some of New Zealand’s most beautiful native birdlife. As an economist who works with climate change policy, I still find the technicalities of the SCC and how it fits with regulation, environmental science and predictions of the future fly over my head sometimes. So, in the interests of getting you to the end of this article without rage-quitting or falling asleep, I have included some bird breaks, with fun facts and a few puns about some of our most loveable feathery friends. Other than that, I’ll just wing it (not sorry).

How emissions trading schemes work and they can help us shift to a zero carbon future

by Catherine Leining, Policy Fellow, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research

Would you please explain how the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) works in simple terms? Who pays and where does the money go?

Every tonne of emissions causes damages and a cost to society. In traditional market transactions, these costs are ignored. Putting a price on emissions forces us to face at least some of the cost of the emissions associated with what we produce and consume, and it influences us to choose lower-emission options.

An emissions trading scheme (ETS) is a tool that puts a quantity limit and a price on emissions. Its “currency” is emission units issued by the government. Each unit is like a voucher that allows the holder to emit one tonne of greenhouse gases.

The New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (NZ ETS) is the government’s main tool to meet our target under the Paris Agreement. In a typical ETS, the government caps the number of units in line with its emissions target and the trading market sets the corresponding emission price.

Commentary on Tranche Two Decisions on the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme

by Catherine Leining, Policy Fellow, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research. 

Reforming New Zealand’s climate change legislation is a complex tango. Where the Zero Carbon Amendment Bill leads, NZ ETS amendments must follow. The government’s latest NZ ETS policy decisions will help ensure future emission prices rise in step with our targets. Check out our “Top Ten” list of alterations to watch for as we outfit the NZ ETS for the important job ahead or read on for comments on yesterday's announcements.

PCE report on “Farms, forests and fossil fuels”: One lump or two?

by Catherine Leining, Policy Fellow, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research

On 26 March 2019, the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment (PCE) released a report on “Farms, forests and fossil fuels: The next great landscape transformation?” It looks at the challenges in decarbonising New Zealand’s economy and asks whether a fundamental restructure of the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (NZ ETS) will be needed. 

The PCE usefully reinforces three important points: targets and policies should reflect differences across greenhouse gases (GHGs), fossil carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions need to reach zero during this century, and management of New Zealand’s land sector would be enhanced by a landscape approach that integrates climate change and other considerations.

Greenhouse gas recommendations from the Government’s Tax Working Group

by Catherine Leining, Policy Fellow at Motu Economic and Public Policy Research

On 21 February 2019, the Government’s Tax Working Group (TWG) issued a report with advice on using environmental taxes to manage greenhouse gas emissions. It recommended retaining the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (NZ ETS) with reforms to provide greater guidance on price, generate revenue through auctioning, and enable periodic review. It also recommended extending emission pricing to biological emissions from the agriculture sector, whether through the NZ ETS or a complementary system. It suggested those changes can help drive behaviour change to reduce emissions, generate revenue supporting the transition to a more sustainable economy, and, in the longer term, broaden the overall tax base.

Zero Carbon Bill Submission

by Catherine Leining and Suzi Kerr.
The New Zealand government has recently consulted on its proposal for a Zero Carbon Bill. This would:

• set a new and more ambitious 2050 greenhouse gas emission reduction target
• establish interim five-year “emissions budgets” consistent with meeting those targets
• require the government to issue plans for achieving its emissions budgets
• require preparation of a national climate change risk assessment and national adaptation plan
• set up a new independent Climate Change Commission to advise the government and monitor its progress.

Our full submission on the Zero Caron Bill is available here. In this blog we highlight five key opportunities to improve the government’s proposal.

E-Mission Possible roundtable summaries

by Catherine Leining and Ceridwyn Roberts, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research

The road to a net-zero future is paved with challenging questions for which there are no definitive answers – just choices to be made under uncertainty and consequences to be faced under risk. In order to shed new light on particularly thorny questions for NZ's low-emission transition Motu, Productivity Commission, the Institute for Governance and Policy Studies at Victoria University of Wellington, and the Environmental Defence Society convened a series of roundtables.

We have now completed the summaries from all four E-Mission Possible Roundtables.  We received very positive feedback on all of the roundtables in the series, and want to thank everyone who contributed to their design, funding and implementation.

Budget 2018 and climate change

by Catherine Leining, Policy Fellow at Motu Research

When it comes to the climate change portfolio, Budget 2018 feels like the calm before the storm. It focuses more on policy processes for future action than catalysing action now. Budget allocations will support development of international carbon markets (key to helping New Zealand meet its 2030 target under the Paris Agreement), the Zero Carbon Act, the Climate Change Commission, and amendments to the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (NZ ETS).

Approaching a Low-Emission Future: Emission Trading Scheme vs. Command-and-Control Approaches in New Zealand

By Rosemary Irving and Rosa Hill, University of Canterbury 

Rosie and Rosa are undergraduate students. They won the Motu Environment Economics Essay prize in 2017. You can find out more information about Motu's proposal for the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and our wider ETS work.  

Rosie Irving and Rosa Hill

Achieving emission targets can be accomplished through numerous policies; however, some of these policies are more efficient and cost effective than others. Here in New Zealand, we currently run an ETS. Economic rationale supports an ETS policy as being more efficient as opposed to a command-and-control approach for a number of reasons which we will explore in depth below. 

Economic Rationale: How an Emissions Trading Scheme Works

Figure 1: Command-and-control (equal
misery) approach  

 Figure 2: Emissions trading scheme
approach  

The NZ ETS: Better equipped for the journey – but still unsure of the path

by Catherine Leining, Policy Fellow at Motu Economic and Public Policy Research

Every tramper knows the value of good gear. A well-designed backpack that distributes the weight to the areas of greatest strength can transform the experience of a challenging bushwalk.  

The changes to the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (NZ ETS) announced by the government last month will usefully equip the system for the journey to net-zero domestic emissions. Like a good backpack, they offer a sturdy framework for distributing mitigation responsibilities and costs across the economy. However, we still do not know what route lies ahead, what pace we will set, what provisions will sustain our efforts, and who will carry the heaviest weight.

The government has not altered our path through 2020. What longer-term changes can we expect to see in the NZ ETS?

Retooling the emissions trading scheme to ‘decarbonise’ NZ

There are practical ways to change the NZ ETS so it delivers clear and predictable emission price signals. This would ensure that New Zealand’s emitters reduce their greenhouse gases more quickly than is currently happening.  

A new paper released today by Motu Economic and Public Policy Research suggests a package of changes to improve the NZ ETS. The proposal emerged from discussions over the past year among diverse cross-sector experts involved in Motu’s ETS Dialogue. 

NZ government to restore a full unit obligation in the NZ ETS

By Suzi Kerr and Catherine Leining, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research

Under its Budget 2016 package, the New Zealand government announced today that it will progressively phase in a full unit obligation for non-forestry sectors in the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (NZ ETS) over a three-year period. 

According to the media release from Hon Paula Bennett, Minister for Climate Change Issues, “The current 50 per cent unit cost will increase to 67 per cent from 1 January, then 83 per cent from 1 January 2018, with all sectors in the ETS paying the full market price from 1 January 2019. The current price ceiling which caps units at $25 will remain.”

Restoring a full unit obligation in the NZ ETS represents an important step forward for incentivising domestic mitigation but future emission prices remain uncertain in the absence of broader decisions on future unit supply.

Finding the best cure for a "hot air" hangover

By Catherine Leining, Policy Fellow at Motu Economic and Public Policy Research

When it was introduced in 2008, the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (NZ ETS) pioneered many design features. Among these was replacing the conventional ETS cap on emission units and constraint on offset credits with an unconstrained buy-and-sell linkage to the global cap set by the Kyoto Protocol. This gave participants the option to increase their own emissions while contributing to global mitigation by buying overseas Kyoto units if that was the most efficient outcome.  The history of why this policy choice was made and how it has impacted on the system’s outcomes alongside other design features and historical events is detailed in Motu’s new working paper entitled Lessons Learned from the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme.

Emissions Trading in Practice : A Handbook on Design and Implementation

As the world moves on from the climate agreement negotiated in Paris, attention is turning from the identification of emissions reduction trajectories—in the form of Nationally Determined Contributions — to crucial questions about how these emissions reductions are to be delivered and reported within the future international accounting framework. 

The experience to date shows that, if well designed, emissions trading systems (ETS) can be an effective, credible, and transparent tool for helping to achieve low-cost emissions reductions in ways that mobilize private sector actors, attract investment, and encourage international cooperation. However, to maximize effectiveness, any ETS needs to be designed in a way that is appropriate to its context. 

ETS Review Submission from Adrian Macey

Guest Post by Adrian Macey, Senior Associate, Institute for Governance and Policy Studies, Adjunct Professor, New Zealand Climate Change Research Centre, Victoria University of Wellington, Vice Chair then Chair, UN Kyoto Protocol negotiations 2010-2011, New Zealand Climate Change Ambassador 2006-2010, Chief Trade Negotiator 2000-2002.

This is a direct transcript of Adrian Macey's submission to the ETS Review. You can also check out Motu's submission and that of Z Energy.

General points

The discussion paper is a good overview and addresses some important longer term issues. The minister’s introduction correctly identifies the purpose of the ETS as the gradual transition to a low emissions economy.  

The Paris Agreement shifts the focus to domestic measures more than international compliance, and this needs to be reflected in the fundamental orientations of the ETS.

NZ ETS and manageable costs

by Suzi Kerr, Senior Fellow at Motu Economic and Public Policy Research Trust

In my last post I examined what we need to consider in setting an NZ ETS price consistent with an efficient long-term transition (at least in expectation). Given that price, are there any reasons to protect some sectors from the full price?

If we have chosen an NZ ETS price (or price corridor) we expect will lead to the most efficient adjustment path for the New Zealand economy, what arguments could there be to treat some sectors more leniently by, for example, extending a partial unit surrender obligation?

What ‘should’ the ETS price be?

by Suzi Kerr, Senior Fellow at Motu Economic and Public Policy Research Trust

The government is seeking input on whether all sectors in the New Zealand Emissions Trading System (NZ ETS) should move to full surrender obligations (i.e. all sectors must surrender one unit for each tonne of emissions) and how to manage the costs of moving to full surrender obligations. To address these questions, we need to consider what current NZ ETS price would be consistent with an efficient long term transition (at least in expectation) to a low-emission economy, and what is likely to happen to the NZ ETS price if full surrender is implemented.   

This blog follows on from Catherine Leining’s, which set the wider context for these decisions.

What ‘should’ the ETS price be?

The fundamental purpose of an ETS is to constrain emissions and hence set an emissions price path that facilitates a gradual, cost-effective transition to a low emissions economy. This is a long-term objective and the investments and behavioural changes that will drive the transition are long term, so the system has to be thought of over a long period – not just in terms of current issues.

The Five A’s of an Effective NZ ETS Review

by Catherine Leining, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research Trust

Public consultation is underway on the government’s 2015/2016 review of the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme. The first stage of submissions (due 19 February) focuses on whether non-forestry sectors should face the full unit obligation per tonne (compared to 50% under current rules) and invites comments on the scope of the review. The second (due 30 April) focuses on how the government should manage unit supply, emission prices and exposure to emission costs and invites comments on other issues.

Ministry for the Environment officials have been blunt about the system’s impact to date: “Research for this evaluation, and evidence from the interviews, found no sector other than forestry made emissions reductions over the Kyoto Protocol Commitment Period One (2008-12) (CP1) that were directly caused by NZ ETS obligations.” On the basis of participants' purchases of Kyoto units and some improvement in net forestry emissions, officials concluded that the system has delivered on its two-fold purpose to assist New Zealand in meeting its international climate change obligations and reducing net emissions below business-as-usual levels.

In this case, we are hitting the target but missing the point. Limiting temperature rises below 2 degrees C requires a transition to net zero global emissions by the end of the century, with peaking of global emissions in the near term. So far under the NZ ETS, the short-term emission price has been too low and the long-term emission price too uncertain to support the strategic decarbonisation of New Zealand’s economy.  Both gross and net emissions are projected to rise significantly through 2030 under current settings.

The government’s review would benefit from inviting stakeholder input on five “A’s” essential to reforming the NZ ETS: Ambition, Architecture, Alignment, Acceptance and Agriculture.