楼主: 利益输送628
366 0

[英文文献] Carbon Abatement in the Fuel Market with Biofuels: Implications for Second-... [推广有奖]

  • 0关注
  • 0粉丝

等待验证会员

学前班

0%

还不是VIP/贵宾

-

威望
0
论坛币
0 个
通用积分
0
学术水平
0 点
热心指数
0 点
信用等级
0 点
经验
10 点
帖子
0
精华
0
在线时间
0 小时
注册时间
2020-9-21
最后登录
2020-9-21

楼主
利益输送628 发表于 2006-1-22 16:22:50 |AI写论文

+2 论坛币
k人 参与回答

经管之家送您一份

应届毕业生专属福利!

求职就业群
赵安豆老师微信:zhaoandou666

经管之家联合CDA

送您一个全额奖学金名额~ !

感谢您参与论坛问题回答

经管之家送您两个论坛币!

+2 论坛币
英文文献:Carbon Abatement in the Fuel Market with Biofuels: Implications for Second-Best Policies
英文文献作者:Crago, Christine Lasco,Khanna, Madhu
英文文献摘要:
A carbon tax would penalize carbon intensive fuels like gasoline and shift fuel consumption to less carbon intensive alternatives like biofuels. Since biofuel production competes for land with agriculture, a carbon tax could raise land rents, divert land towards fuel production, and raise agricultural prices. This paper analyzes the welfare effect of a carbon tax on fuel with gasoline and biofuel as available fuel choices, in the presence of a labor tax and biofuel subsidy. The second-best optimal carbon tax is also quantified. Findings show that when biofuels is part of the fuel mix, the carbon tax has a commodity price effect which arises from tax-induced changes in land rent. The commodity price effect could exacerbate or attenuate the tax interaction effect caused by higher fuel prices, depending on the elasticity of substitution between gasoline and biofuel, the price elasticity of miles demand, and the relative emissions intensity of gasoline and biofuel. Numerical results show that the commodity price effect affects the value of the second-best optimal carbon tax, and that the effect is greater if the elasticity of substitution between gasoline and biofuel is high, miles is more price inelastic, and the GHG intensity of biofuel is lower compared to gasoline. In addition the existence of a fixed biofuel subsidy leads to a greater divergence between the value of the second-best optimal carbon tax with or without biofuels. A carbon tax policy decreases GHG emissions and increases welfare, in contrast to a biofuel subsidy, which also decreases GHG emissions but at a net welfare loss.
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝


您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 我要注册

本版微信群
扫码
拉您进交流群
GMT+8, 2026-1-29 03:03