Global Climate Change Digest: Main Page | Introduction | Archives | Calendar | Copy Policy | Abbreviations | Guide to Publishers

GCRIO Home ->arrow Library ->arrow Archives of the Global Climate Change Digest ->arrow September 1995 ->arrow PROFESSIONAL PUBLICATIONS... MITIGATION POLICY AND ANALYSIS Search

U.S. Global Change Research Information Office logo and link to home

Last Updated:
February 28, 2007

GCRIO Program Overview



Our extensive collection of documents.


Get Acrobat Reader

Privacy Policy

Global Climate Change DigestArchives of the
Global Climate Change Digest

A Guide to Information on Greenhouse Gases and Ozone Depletion
Published July 1988 through June 1999



Item #d95sep56

"Mobilizing Rural People in Tanzania to Tree Planting: Why and How," A.J. Ahlbäck (UNDP/FAO Project VIE /92/022, For. Serv., 132 Ong Ich Khiem, Danang, Vietnam), Ambio, 24(5), 304-310, Aug. 1995.

Although Tanzania has the technology, human resources and supporting institutions needed to reforest, motivation and mobilization are lacking. Suggests a combination of encouragement, coercion and trust to initiate action. Tree planting would be compulsory, but the people would be trusted to decide where, what and how to plant.

Item #d95sep57

"Greenhouse Gas Decision Tools," T. Wilson (Elect. Power Res. Inst., POB 10412, Palo Alto CA 94303), EPRI J., 40-42, May-June 1995.

Although no mandatory greenhouse gas emissions control programs exist, many utilities participate in voluntary emissions reduction and reporting efforts under the Department of Energy's Climate Challenge program and the Energy Policy Act of 1992. EPRI is developing a set of decision tools to help utilities, and plans to release a greenhouse gas accounting framework this year.

Item #d95sep58

Four items from Resour. & Energy Econ., 17(1), May 1995:

"Induced Technical Change and International Agreements Under Greenhouse Warming," A. Xepapadeas (Dept. Econ., Univ. Crete, Perivolia 74100 Rethymnon, Crete, Greece), 1-23. Examines the effects of technical change on global problems related to the greenhouse effect and analyzes the problems in a differential games framework. Discusses the policies of countries agreeing to contribute resources to global research and development on international tax/subsidy schemes.

"Efficient Incomplete International Climate Agreements," R. Golombek, C. Hagem, M. Hoel (Dept. Econ., Univ. Oslo, POB 1095, Blindern, N-0317 Oslo, Norway), 25-46. The optimal design of a carbon tax exists when both production and consumption of internationally traded fossil fuels are taxed. The sum of the consumer tax and producer tax should be equal across all fossil fuels per unit of carbon. If cooperating countries use a tax on consumption or production only, the tax per unit of carbon should in general be differentiated across fossil fuels.

"The Welfare Cost of a Global Carbon Tax when Tax Revenues are Recycled," W.K. Jaeger (Dept. Econ., Williams Coll., Williamstown MA 01267), 47-67. A revenue-neutral carbon tax policy, where carbon tax revenues finance reductions in other revenue-raising taxes, has a positive net welfare effect in the range required to aggressively slow climate change. Based on tax efficiency considerations alone, the optimal reduction in emissions is 37%. When benefits from avoiding greenhouse damages are included in the model, the optimal reduction is 40%.

"Emissions, Concentrations and Disappearing CO2," C. Price (School Agric. & For. Sci., Univ. Coll. N. Wales, Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2UW, UK), 87-97. The costs of CO2 emissions may be seriously underestimated if land-use sources and missing sinks are excluded or underestimated, and if oceanic uptake is modeled as a simple exponential.

Item #d95sep59

"Automobiles and Global Warming: Alternative Fuels and Other Options for Carbon Dioxide Emissions Reduction," A.D. Sagar (A-11, Pushpanjarli, Vikas Marg, Delhi 110092, India), Environ. Impact Assess. Rev., 15(3), 241-276, May 1995.

Discusses the feasibility and desirability of large-scale production and use of alternative fuels. Greater vehicle efficiency and more efficient modes of passenger transportation are more effective and immediate ways to tackle the problem of pollutant emissions, especially given the limitations of currently available alternative fuels and the potential for future alternatives.

Item #d95sep60

"Economic Approaches to Cost Estimates for Limiting Emissions of Carbon Dioxide," Z.-X. Zhang (Dept. General Econ., Landbouw Univ., POB 8130, 6700 EW Wageningen, Neth.), Intl. J. Environ. & Pollut., 5(2-3), 194-203, 1995.

Dynamic optimization models are useful for focusing on technological solutions, and input-output models are useful for focusing on impacts of a carbon tax on the economic structure. Macroeconomic models best capture the transitional impacts of a carbon tax on inflation and unemployment. The computable general equilibrium approach is best for analyzing the economic effects of large changes in the demand/supply structure, and for long-run studies.

Item #d95sep61

"MERGE: A Model for Evaluating Regional and Global Effects of GHG Reduction Policies," A. Manne (Dept. Operations Res., Stanford Univ., Stanford CA 94305), R. Mendelsohn, R. Richels, Energy Policy, 23(1), 17-34, Jan. 1995.

Models such as MERGE are capable of showing which factors in the climate debate (e.g. costs, damages, valuation and discounting) are most important. They are sufficiently flexible to explore all views, and can help focus the discussion and identify the areas where additional research may have the highest payoff.

Item #d95sep62

"Avoiding Excessive Greenhouse Effect by Delayed Emission of Carbon Dioxide from the Fossil-Fuel Cycle," W. Seifritz (Chapfstr. 4, CH-52 Windisch, Switz.), Appl. Energy, 51(1), 39-49, 1995.

Discusses a proposal to sequester CO2 in the form of dry ice in thermally insulated, leaky repositories to delay CO2 emission into the atmosphere. Estimates that the recovery time of the atmosphere from surplus anthropogenic CO2 is shorter than the time for sublimation, and that the atmospheric CO2 peak responsible for the greenhouse effect would be delayed and damped.

Item #d95sep63

"Analysis of the Chinese Energy System: Implications for Future CO2 Emissions," Z.-X. Zhang (Dept. General Econ., Landbouw Univ. Wageningen, POB 8130, 6700 EW Wageningen, Neth.), Intl. J. Environ. & Pollut., 4(3-4), 181-198, 1994.

China is expected to rely mainly on coal to fuel the development of its economy and improve its standard of living. Therefore efforts to combat air pollution must be directed at more efficient use of coal. Outlines several policy measures that have been or will be implemented and concludes that their implementation is expected to accelerate when curbing global CO2 emissions requires special action on China's part.

Item #d95sep64

Three related items from Clim. Change, 30(3), July 1995:

"Valuation of Global Afforestation Programs for Carbon Mitigation," S. Nilsson (IIASA, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria), 249-257. An editorial that reviews some aspects of the application of traditional cost-benefit analysis to long-term environmental problems. Because good analyses can yield results that differ by more than an order of magnitude, asks if the discipline is advanced enough to give meaningful results on long-term environmental problems.

"On 'Valuation of Global Afforestation. . .by Sten Nilsson," H.F. Hoen (Norwegian For. Res. Inst., European Forest Inst., POB 5044, N-1432 ?S, Norway), B. Solberg, 259-266. Comments on the preceding editorial, reaching a more optimistic conclusion regarding the role of cost-benefit analysis in evaluating alternative forest-related projects, programs or strategies connected to climate change issues.

"The Carbon Sequestration Potential of a Global Afforestation Program," S. Nilsson (address above), W. Schopfhauser, 267-293. Analyzes the changes in the carbon cycle that could be achieved with a global, large-scale afforestation program that is economically, politically, and technically feasible. Only about 345 million hectares would actually be available for the sole purpose of sequestering carbon, and the maximum rate of carbon fixation would only be achieved 60 years after the establishment of the plantations. Over the period 1995 to 2095, the amount of carbon sequestered would be substantially lower than that required to offset current carbon emissions.

Item #d95sep65

"The Evolution of International Policies and Mechanisms to Advance Sustainable Forest Management and Mitigate Global Climate Change," J. Bologna (Intl. For. Policy, USDA For. Service, POB 96538, Washington DC 20090), J. Lyke, K. Theophile, World Resour. Rev., 7(2), 169-189, June 1995.

Reviews international attention to deforestation since 1985, through institutions like the Tropical Forestry Action Program, the International Tropical Timber Organization, the World Bank, and through innovative financial arrangements between developed and developing countries. The next few years will see a proactive set of multilateral programs to address deforestation, an increasing link between trade and the environment, and more uses of financial incentives to encourage sustainable forest development.

Item #d95sep66

"Setting Targets and the Choice of Policy Instruments for Limiting CO2 Emissions," Z.X. Zhang (Dept. Gen. Econ., Landbouw Univ., POB 8130, 6700 EW Wageningen, Neth.), Energy & Environ., 5(4), 327-341, 1994.

Gives an overview and comparison of policy options including the command-and-control approach, energy taxes, carbon taxes, and tradeable carbon permits, with special attention paid to the economic instruments. Synthesizes findings from studies on carbon taxes, and concludes that carbon taxes appear to be the superior and more flexible instrument for controlling emissions and avoiding large and unexpected costs.

  • Guide to Publishers
  • Index of Abbreviations

  • Hosted by U.S. Global Change Research Information Office. Copyright by Center for Environmental Information, Inc. For more information contact U.S. Global Change Research Information Office, Suite 250, 1717 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20006. Tel: +1 202 223 6262. Fax: +1 202 223 3065. Email: Web: Webmaster:
    U.S. Climate Change Technology Program Intranet Logo and link to Home