[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mee/wpaper/1115.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cleaning the Bathwater with the Baby: The Health Co-Benefits of Carbon Pricing in Transportation

Author

Listed:
  • Christopher R. Knittel
  • Ryan Sandle
Abstract
Efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the US have relied on Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards and Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS). Economists often argue that these policies are inefficient relative to carbon pricing because they ignore existing vehicles and do not adequately reduce the incentive to drive. This paper presents evidence that the net social costs of carbon pricing are significantly less than previous thought. The bias arises from the fact that the demand elasticity for miles travelled varies systematically with vehicle emissions; dirtier vehicles are more responsive to changes in gasoline prices. This is true for all four emissions for which we have data—nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbon, and greenhouse gases—as well as weight. This reduces the net social costs associated with carbon pricing through increasing the co-benefits. Accounting for this heterogeneity implies that the welfare losses from $1.00 gas tax, or a $110 per ton of CO2 tax, are negative over the period of 1998 to 2008 even when we ignore the climate change benefits from the tax. Co-benefits increase by over 60 percent relative to ignoring the heterogeneity that we document. In addition, accounting for this heterogeneity raises the optimal gas tax associated with local pollution, as calculated by Parry and Small (2005), by as much as 57 percent. While our empirical setting is California, we present evidence that the effects may be larger for the rest of the US.

Suggested Citation

  • Christopher R. Knittel & Ryan Sandle, 2011. "Cleaning the Bathwater with the Baby: The Health Co-Benefits of Carbon Pricing in Transportation," Working Papers 1115, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:mee:wpaper:1115
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://tisiphone.mit.edu/RePEc/mee/wpaper/2011-015.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen P. Holland & Jonathan E. Hughes & Christopher R. Knittel & Nathan C. Parker, 2015. "Some Inconvenient Truths about Climate Change Policy: The Distributional Impacts of Transportation Policies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(5), pages 1052-1069, December.
    2. Meghan R. Busse & Christopher R. Knittel & Florian Zettelmeyer, 2009. "Pain at the Pump: The Differential Effect of Gasoline Prices on New and Used Automobile Markets," NBER Working Papers 15590, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Jonathan E. Hughes & Christopher R. Knittel & Daniel Sperling, 2008. "Evidence of a Shift in the Short-Run Price Elasticity of Gasoline Demand," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 29(1), pages 113-134.
    4. Glazer, Amihai & Klein, Daniel B. & Lave, Charles, 1995. "Clean on Paper, Dirty on the Road: Troubles with California's Smog Check," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt5514s0hg, University of California Transportation Center.
    5. Nicholas Z. Muller & Robert Mendelsohn, 2009. "Efficient Pollution Regulation: Getting the Prices Right," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1714-1739, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jenkins, Jesse D., 2014. "Political economy constraints on carbon pricing policies: What are the implications for economic efficiency, environmental efficacy, and climate policy design?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 467-477.
    2. Mark Hoekstra & Steven L. Puller & Jeremy West, 2017. "Cash for Corollas: When Stimulus Reduces Spending," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 1-35, July.
    3. Achyuta Adhvaryu & Namrata Kala & Anant Nyshadham, 2020. "The Light and the Heat: Productivity Co-Benefits of Energy-Saving Technology," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(4), pages 779-792, October.
    4. Bento, Antonio M. & Hughes, Jonathan E. & Kaffine, Daniel, 2013. "Carpooling and driver responses to fuel price changes: Evidence from traffic flows in Los Angeles," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 41-56.
    5. Christopher R. Knittel, 2012. "Reducing Petroleum Consumption from Transportation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(1), pages 93-118, Winter.
    6. Michael L. Anderson, 2014. "Subways, Strikes, and Slowdowns: The Impacts of Public Transit on Traffic Congestion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(9), pages 2763-2796, September.
    7. Mérel, Pierre & Smith, Aaron & Williams, Jeffrey & Wimberger, Emily, 2014. "Cars on crutches: How much abatement do smog check repairs actually provide?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 371-395.
    8. Grant D. Jacobsen, 2016. "Improving Energy Codes," The Energy Journal, , vol. 37(2), pages 93-108, April.
    9. Sileci, Lorenzo, 2023. "Carbon pricing with regressive co-benefits: evidence from British Columbia’s carbon tax," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121047, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Christopher Hansman & Jonas Hjort & Gianmarco León, 2015. "Firm's response and unintended health consequences of industrial regulations," Economics Working Papers 1469, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    11. Lynn Riggs, 2022. "Carbon Policy Design and Distributional Impacts: What does the research tell us?," Working Papers 22_08, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    12. Klier, Thomas & Linn, Joshua, 2013. "Fuel prices and new vehicle fuel economy—Comparing the United States and Western Europe," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 280-300.
    13. Zhang, Wen-Wen & Zhao, Bin & Ding, Dian & Sharp, Basil & Gu, Yu & Xu, Shi-Chun & Xing, Jia & Wang, Shu-Xiao & Liou, Kuo-Nan & Rao, Lan-Lan, 2021. "Co-benefits of subnationally differentiated carbon pricing policies in China: Alleviation of heavy PM2.5 pollution and improvement in environmental equity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    14. West, Jeremy & Hoekstra, Mark & Meer, Jonathan & Puller, Steven L., 2017. "Vehicle miles (not) traveled: Fuel economy requirements, vehicle characteristics, and household driving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 65-81.
    15. Jeremy West & Mark Hoekstra & Jonathan Meer & Steven L. Puller, 2015. "Vehicle Miles (Not) Traveled: Why Fuel Economy Requirements Don't Increase Household Driving," NBER Working Papers 21194, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Justine Hastings & Jesse M. Shapiro, 2012. "Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice: Evidence from Commodity Price Shocks," NBER Working Papers 18248, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christopher R. Knittel & Ryan Sandler, 2011. "Carbon Prices and Automobile Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The Extensive and Intensive Margins," NBER Chapters, in: The Design and Implementation of US Climate Policy, pages 287-299, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Christopher R. Knittel, 2012. "Reducing Petroleum Consumption from Transportation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(1), pages 93-118, Winter.
    3. Huse, Cristian, 2014. "Fast and Furious (and Dirty): How Asymmetric Regulation May Hinder Environmental Policy," MPRA Paper 48909, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Shanjun Li & Joshua Linn & Erich Muehlegger, 2014. "Gasoline Taxes and Consumer Behavior," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 6(4), pages 302-342, November.
    5. Britt Groosman & Nicholas Muller & Erin O’Neill-Toy, 2011. "The Ancillary Benefits from Climate Policy in the United States," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(4), pages 585-603, December.
    6. Bento, Antonio M. & Hughes, Jonathan E. & Kaffine, Daniel, 2013. "Carpooling and driver responses to fuel price changes: Evidence from traffic flows in Los Angeles," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 41-56.
    7. Heutel, Garth, 2010. "Optimal Policy Instruments for Externality-Producing Durable Goods under Time Inconsistency," UNCG Economics Working Papers 10-5, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.
    8. Justine Hastings & Jesse M. Shapiro, 2012. "Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice: Evidence from Commodity Price Shocks," NBER Working Papers 18248, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Derek Lemoine, 2017. "Escape from Third-Best: Rating Emissions for Intensity Standards," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(4), pages 789-821, August.
    10. Christopher R. Knittel & Ryan Sandler, 2013. "The Welfare Impact of Indirect Pigouvian Taxation: Evidence from Transportation," NBER Working Papers 18849, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. GianCarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan & Hyunseok Kim, 2017. "The Renewable Fuel Standard in Competitive Equilibrium: Market and Welfare Effects," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1117-1142.
    12. Matthew J. Kotchen, 2011. "Comment on "Carbon Prices and Automobile Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The Extensive and Intensive Margins"," NBER Chapters, in: The Design and Implementation of US Climate Policy, pages 299-300, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Li, Shanjun & Linn, Joshua & Spiller, Elisheba, 2013. "Evaluating “Cash-for-Clunkers”: Program effects on auto sales and the environment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 175-193.
    14. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    15. Todd D. Gerarden & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "Assessing the Energy-Efficiency Gap," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1486-1525, December.
    16. LaPlue, Lawrence D., 2022. "Environmental consequences of natural gas wellhead pricing deregulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    17. Bergeaud, Antonin & Raimbault, Juste, 2020. "An empirical analysis of the spatial variability of fuel prices in the United States," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 131-143.
    18. Lucas W. Davis, Shaun Mcrae, and Enrique Seira Bejarano, 2019. "An Economic Perspective on Mexico's Nascent Deregulation of Retail Petroleum Markets," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
    19. Thibault Fally & James Sayre, 2018. "Commodity Trade Matters," 2018 Meeting Papers 172, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    20. Nicholas Z Muller & Akshaya Jha, 2017. "Does environmental policy affect scaling laws between population and pollution? Evidence from American metropolitan areas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-15, August.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities
    • H2 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • H3 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
    • L0 - Industrial Organization - - General
    • L9 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • R2 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Household Analysis
    • R4 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mee:wpaper:1115. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sharmila Ganguly (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cemitus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.