Search

Vehicle replacement schemes such as the "cash for clunkers" program in the U.S. and the "scrappage scheme" in the UK have featured prominently in the economic stimulation packages initiated by many governments to cope with the global economic crisis. While these schemes were designed as economic instruments to support the vehicle production industry, governments have also claimed that these programs have environmental benefits such as reducing CO2 emissions by bringing more fuel-efficient vehicles onto the roads. However, little evidence is available to support this claim as current energy and environmental accounting models are inadequate for comprehensively capturing the economic and environmental trade-offs associated with changes in product life and product use, We therefore developed a new dynamic model to quantify the carbon emissions due to changes in product life and consumer behavior related to product use. Based on a case study of Japanese vehicle use during the 1990-2000 period, we found that extending, not shortening, the lifetime of a vehicle helps to reduce life-cycle CO2 emissions throughout the supply chain. Empirical results also revealed that even if the fuel economy of less fuel-efficient ordinary passenger vehicles were improved to levels comparable with those of the best available technology, i.e. hybrid passenger cars currently being produced in Japan, total CO2 emissions would decrease by only 0.2%. On the other hand, we also find that extending the lifetime of a vehicle contributed to a moderate increase in emissions of health-relevant air pollutants (NOx HC, and CO) during the use phase. From the results, this study concludes that the effects of global warming and air pollution can be somewhat moderated and that these problems can be addressed through specific policy instruments directed at increasing the market for hybrid cars as well as extending lifetime of automobiles, which is contrary to the current wisdom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate policy will create both disincentives and incentives for tropical deforestation. Disincentives if the carbon emissions from forest clearing are priced, as is currently being discussed within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); incentives as a price on carbon will increase the demand for carbon-neutral energy sources, including bioenergy, making deforestation for biomass cultivation increasingly profitable. The question is whether the increased cost for forest clearing, through the price on carbon emissions, will be enough to counter-balance the increased profitability of deforestation through the escalating value of agricultural land. In an attempt to answer this question we analyze the profitability of tropical deforestation and subsequent bioenergy production, taking oil palm plantations an an illustrative example. We estimate that deforesting for palm oil bioenergy production is likely to remain highly profitable, even in the face of a price on the carbon emissions from forest clearing. Current efforts to include carbon emissions from tropical deforestation in a future international climate regime, while a step in the right direction, may therefore not suffice as protection for the world's tropical forests. Additional, and stronger, protection measures for the world's tropical forests will still be needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers the author's insights on the role of assessing the contribution of a community to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in climate change mitigation. The authors say that international organizations have developed protocol for measuring community-scale emissions. They state that communities consume and import materials and goods that are made elsewhere. They cite the significance of measuring emissions for the relevance and usability of GHG inventory. They add that local governments have focused on emissions that are related to in-boundary energy use.

The authors opine on China's role in controlling greenhouse gas emissions to address global climate change. Though the authors acknowledge that China appears to be willing to impose a ceiling on greenhouse gas emissions, they believe that the country owes more to the effort considering its national contribution of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. Instead of achieving a reduction in its energy intensity, China is said to have had an increase in same between 2005 and 2009.