A Forward Looking Version of the MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) Model

Abstract and PDF report are also available on the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change website (http://globalchange.mit.edu/).This paper documents a forward looking multi-regional general equilibrium model developed from the latest version of the recursive-dynamic MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) model. The model represents full inter-temporal optimization (perfect foresight), which makes it possible to better address economic and policy issues such as borrowing and banking of GHG allowances, efficiency implications of environmental tax recycling, endogenous depletion of fossil resources, international capital flows, and optimal emissions abatement paths among others. It was designed with the flexibility to represent different aggregations of countries and regions, different horizon lengths, as well as the ability to accommodate different assumptions about the economy, in terms of economic growth, foreign trade closure, labor leisure choice, taxes on primary factors, vintaging of capital and data calibration. The forward-looking dynamic model provides a complementary tool for policy analyses, to assess the robustness of results from the recursive EPPA model, and to illustrate important differences in results that are driven by the perfect foresight behavior. We present some applications of the model that include the reference case and its comparison with the recursive EPPA version, as well as some greenhouse gas mitigation cases where we explore economic impacts with and without inter-temporal trade of permits.This research was supported by the U.S Department of Energy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. National Science Foundation, U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, U.S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration; and the Industry and Foundation Sponsors of the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change: Alstom Power (USA), American Electric Power (USA), A.P. Møller-Maersk (Denmark), Cargill (USA), Chevron Corporation (USA), CONCAWE & EUROPIA (EU), DaimlerChrysler AG (USA), Duke Energy (USA), Electric Power Research Institute (USA), Electricité de France, Enel (Italy), Eni (Italy), Exelon Power (USA), ExxonMobil Corporation (USA), Ford Motor Company (USA), General Motors (USA), Iberdrola Generacion (Spain), J-Power (Japan), Merril Lynch (USA), Murphy Oil Corporation (USA), Norway Ministry of Petroleum and Energy, Oglethorpe Power Corporation (USA), RWE Power (Germany), Schlumberger (USA),Shell Petroleum (Netherlands/UK), Southern Company (USA), StatoilHydro (Norway), Tennessee Valley Authority (USA), Tokyo Electric Power Company (Japan), Total (France), G. Unger Vetlesen Foundation (USA)

U.S. Greenhouse Gas Cap-and-Trade Proposals: Application of a Forward-Looking Computable General Equilibrium Model

Abstract in HTML and technical report in PDF available on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change website (http://mit.edu/globalchange/www/).We develop a forward-looking version of the MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) model, and apply it to examine the economic implications of proposals in the U.S. Congress to limit greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. We find that the abatement path and CO2-equivalent (CO2-e) price in the forward-looking model are quite similar to that of the recursive model, implying that the simulation of banking behavior in the recursive model by forcing the CO2-e price to rise at the discount rate approximates fairly well the banking result obtained with the forward-looking model. We find, however, that shocks in consumption path are smoothed out in the forward-looking model and that the lifetime welfare cost of GHG policy is lower than in the recursive model, results we would expect to find given that the forward-looking model can fully optimize over time. The forward-looking model allows us to explore issues for which it is uniquely well-suited, including revenue-recycling, early action crediting, and the role of a technology backstop. We find (1) capital tax recycling to be more welfare-cost reducing than labor tax recycling because of its long term effect on economic growth, (2) potentially substantial incentives for early action credits relative to emission levels in years after a policy is announced but before it is implemented that, however, when spread over the full horizon of the policy do not have a substantial effect on lifetime welfare cost or the CO2-e price, and (3) strong effects on estimates of near-term welfare costs depending on exactly how a backstop technology is represented, indicating the problematic aspects of focusing on short-term welfare costs in a forward-looking model unless there is some confidence that the backstop technology is realistically represented.This study received support from the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, which is funded by a consortium of government, industry and foundation sponsors

Assessment of U.S. Cap-and-Trade Proposals

The MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis model is applied to synthetic policies that match key attributes of a set of cap-and-trade proposals being considered by the U.S. Congress in spring 2007. The bills fall into two groups: one specifies emissions reductions of 50% to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050; the other establishes a tightening target for emissions intensity and stipulates a time-path for a "safety valve" limit on the emission price that approximately stabilizes U.S. emissions at the 2008 level. Initial period prices are estimated between $7 and$50 per ton CO2-e with these prices rising by a factor of four by 2050. Welfare costs vary from near zero to less than 0.5% at the start, rising in the most stringent case to near 2% in 2050. If allowances were auctioned these proposals could produce revenue between $100 billion and$500 billion per year depending on the case. Outcomes from U.S. policies depend on mitigation effort abroads, and simulations are provided to illuminate terms-of-trade effects that influence the emissions prices and welfare effects, and even the environmental effectiveness, of U.S. actions. Sensitivity tests also are provided of several of key design features. Finally, the U.S. proposals, and the assumptions about effort elsewhere, are extended to 2100 to allow exploration of the potential role of these bills in the longer-term challenge of reducing climate change risk. Simulations show that the 50% to 80% targets are consistent with global goals of atmospheric stabilization at 450 to 550 ppmv CO2 but only if other nations, including the developing countries, follow suit.

Unintended Environmental Consequences of a Global Biofuels Program

Abstract and PDF report are also available on the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change website (http://globalchange.mit.edu/).Biofuels are being promoted as an important part of the global energy mix to meet the climate change challenge. The environmental costs of biofuels produced with current technologies at small scales have been studied, but little research has been done on the consequences of an aggressive global biofuels program with advanced technologies using cellulosic feedstocks. Here, with simulation modeling, we explore two scenarios for cellulosic biofuels production and find that both could contribute substantially to future global-scale energy needs, but with significant unintended environmental consequences. As the land supply is squeezed to make way for vast areas of biofuels crops, the global landscape is defined by either the clearing of large swathes of natural forest, or the intensification of agricultural operations worldwide. The greenhouse gas implications of land-use conversion differ substantially between the two scenarios, but in both, numerous biodiversity hotspots suffer from serious habitat loss. Cellulosic biofuels may yet serve as a crucial wedge in the solution to the climate change problem, but must be deployed with caution so as not to jeopardize biodiversity, compromise ecosystems services, or undermine climate policy.This study received funding from the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, which is supported by a onsortium of government, industry and foundation sponsors

Assessment of U.S. Cap-and-Trade Proposals

Abstract in HTML and technical report in PDF available on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change website (http://mit.edu/globalchange/www/).The MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis model is applied to an assessment of a set of cap-and-trade proposals being considered by the U.S. Congress in spring 2007. The bills specify emissions reductions to be achieved through 2050 for the standard six-gas basket of greenhouse gases. They fall into two groups: one specifies emissions reductions of 50% to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050; the other establishes a tightening target for emissions intensity and stipulates a time-path for a “safety valve” limit on the emission price that approximately stabilizes U.S. emissions at the 2008 level. A set of three synthetic emissions paths are defined that span the range of stringency of these proposals, and these “core” cases are analyzed for their consequences in terms of emissions prices, effects on energy markets, welfare cost, the potential revenue generation if allowances are auctioned and the gains if permit revenue were used to reduce capital or labor taxes. Initial period prices for the first group of proposals, in carbon dioxide equivalents, are estimated between $30 and$50 per ton CO2-e depending on where each falls in the 50% to 80% range, with these prices rising by a factor of four by 2050. Welfare costs are less than 0.5% at the start, rising in the most stringent case to near 2% in 2050. If allowances were auctioned these proposals could produce revenue between $100 billion and$500 billion per year depending on the case. Emissions prices for the second group, which result from the specified safety-valve path, rise from $7 to$40 over the study period, with welfare effects rising from near zero to approximately a 0.5% loss in 2050. Revenue in these proposals depends on how many allowances are freely distributed. To analyze these proposals assumptions must be made about mitigation effort abroad, and simulations are provided to illuminate terms-of-trade effects that influence the emissions prices and welfare effects, and even the environmental effectiveness, of U.S. actions. Sensitivity tests also are provided of several of the design features imposed in the “core” scenarios including the role of banking, the specification of less than complete coverage of economic sectors, and the development of international permit trading. Also, the effects of alternative assumptions about nuclear power development are explored. Of particular importance in these simulations is the role of biofuels, and analysis is provided of the implications of these proposals for land use and agriculture. Finally, the U.S. proposals, and the assumptions about effort elsewhere, are extended to 2100 to allow exploration of the potential role of these bills in the longer-term challenge of reducing climate change risk. Simulations using the MIT Integrated System Model show that the 50% to 80% targets are consistent with global goals of atmospheric stabilization at 450 to 550 ppmv CO2 but only if other nations, including the developing countries, follow.Development of the underlying analysis models and other research-based tools used in this study was supported separately by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Biological and Environmental Research [BER] (DE-FG02-94ER61937), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (XA-83042801-0), the Electric Power Research Institute, and by a consortium of industry and foundation sponsors

Natural Climate Solutions must embrace multiple perspectives to ensure synergy with sustainable development

To limit global warming to well below 2°C, immediate emissions reductions must be coupled with active removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. “Natural Climate Solutions” (NCS) achieve atmospheric CO2 reduction through the conservation, restoration, or altered management of natural ecosystems, with enormous potential to deliver “win-win-win” outcomes for climate, nature and society. Yet the supply of high-quality NCS projects does not meet market demand, and projects already underway often fail to deliver their promised benefits, due to a complex set of interacting ecological, social, and financial constraints. How can these cross-sectoral challenges be surmounted? Here we draw from expert elicitation surveys and workshops with professionals across the ecological, sociological, and economic sciences, evaluating differing perspectives on NCS, and suggesting how these might be integrated to address urgent environmental challenges. We demonstrate that funders” perceptions of operational, political, and regulatory risk strongly shape the kinds of NCS projects that are implemented, and the locations where they occur. Because of this, greenhouse gas removal through NCS may fall far short of technical potential. Moreover, socioecological co-benefits of NCS are unlikely to be realized unless the local communities engaged with these projects are granted ownership over implementation and outcomes

Assessing compounding risks across multiple systems and sectors: a socio-environmental systems risk-triage approach

Physical and societal risks across the natural, managed, and built environments are becoming increasingly complex, multi-faceted, and compounding. Such risks stem from socio-economic and environmental stresses that co-evolve and force tipping points and instabilities. Robust decision-making necessitates extensive analyses and model assessments for insights toward solutions. However, these exercises are consumptive in terms of computational and investigative resources. In practical terms, such exercises cannot be performed extensively—but selectively in terms of priority and scale. Therefore, an efficient analysis platform is needed through which the variety of multi-systems/sector observational and simulated data can be readily incorporated, combined, diagnosed, visualized, and in doing so, identifies “hotspots” of salient compounding threats. In view of this, we have constructed a “triage-based” visualization and data-sharing platform—the System for the Triage of Risks from Environmental and Socio-Economic Stressors (STRESS)—that brings together data across socio-environmental systems, economics, demographics, health, biodiversity, and infrastructure. Through the STRESS website, users can display risk indices that result from weighted combinations of risk metrics they can select. Currently, these risk metrics include land-, water-, and energy systems, biodiversity, as well as demographics, environmental equity, and transportation networks. We highlight the utility of the STRESS platform through several demonstrative analyses over the United States from the national to county level. The STRESS is an open-science tool and available to the community-at-large. We will continue to develop it with an open, accessible, and interactive approach, including academics, researchers, industry, and the general public

Mortality from gastrointestinal congenital anomalies at 264 hospitals in 74 low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries: a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study

Summary Background Congenital anomalies are the fifth leading cause of mortality in children younger than 5 years globally. Many gastrointestinal congenital anomalies are fatal without timely access to neonatal surgical care, but few studies have been done on these conditions in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared outcomes of the seven most common gastrointestinal congenital anomalies in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries globally, and identified factors associated with mortality. Methods We did a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of patients younger than 16 years, presenting to hospital for the first time with oesophageal atresia, congenital diaphragmatic hernia, intestinal atresia, gastroschisis, exomphalos, anorectal malformation, and Hirschsprung’s disease. Recruitment was of consecutive patients for a minimum of 1 month between October, 2018, and April, 2019. We collected data on patient demographics, clinical status, interventions, and outcomes using the REDCap platform. Patients were followed up for 30 days after primary intervention, or 30 days after admission if they did not receive an intervention. The primary outcome was all-cause, in-hospital mortality for all conditions combined and each condition individually, stratified by country income status. We did a complete case analysis. Findings We included 3849 patients with 3975 study conditions (560 with oesophageal atresia, 448 with congenital diaphragmatic hernia, 681 with intestinal atresia, 453 with gastroschisis, 325 with exomphalos, 991 with anorectal malformation, and 517 with Hirschsprung’s disease) from 264 hospitals (89 in high-income countries, 166 in middleincome countries, and nine in low-income countries) in 74 countries. Of the 3849 patients, 2231 (58·0%) were male. Median gestational age at birth was 38 weeks (IQR 36–39) and median bodyweight at presentation was 2·8 kg (2·3–3·3). Mortality among all patients was 37 (39·8%) of 93 in low-income countries, 583 (20·4%) of 2860 in middle-income countries, and 50 (5·6%) of 896 in high-income countries (p<0·0001 between all country income groups). Gastroschisis had the greatest difference in mortality between country income strata (nine [90·0%] of ten in lowincome countries, 97 [31·9%] of 304 in middle-income countries, and two [1·4%] of 139 in high-income countries; p≤0·0001 between all country income groups). Factors significantly associated with higher mortality for all patients combined included country income status (low-income vs high-income countries, risk ratio 2·78 [95% CI 1·88–4·11], p<0·0001; middle-income vs high-income countries, 2·11 [1·59–2·79], p<0·0001), sepsis at presentation (1·20 [1·04–1·40], p=0·016), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score at primary intervention (ASA 4–5 vs ASA 1–2, 1·82 [1·40–2·35], p<0·0001; ASA 3 vs ASA 1–2, 1·58, [1·30–1·92], p<0·0001]), surgical safety checklist not used (1·39 [1·02–1·90], p=0·035), and ventilation or parenteral nutrition unavailable when needed (ventilation 1·96, [1·41–2·71], p=0·0001; parenteral nutrition 1·35, [1·05–1·74], p=0·018). Administration of parenteral nutrition (0·61, [0·47–0·79], p=0·0002) and use of a peripherally inserted central catheter (0·65 [0·50–0·86], p=0·0024) or percutaneous central line (0·69 [0·48–1·00], p=0·049) were associated with lower mortality. Interpretation Unacceptable differences in mortality exist for gastrointestinal congenital anomalies between lowincome, middle-income, and high-income countries. Improving access to quality neonatal surgical care in LMICs will be vital to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 3.2 of ending preventable deaths in neonates and children younger than 5 years by 2030