Change combines cutting-edge scientific research with independent policy analysis to provide a solid foundation for the public and private decisions needed to mitigate and adapt to unavoidable global environmental changes. Being data-driven, the Joint Program uses extensive Earth system and economic data and models to produce quantitative analysis and predictions of the risks of climate change and the challenges of limiting human influence on the environmentessential knowledge for the international dialogue toward a global response to climate change.To this end, the Joint Program brings together an interdisciplinary group from two established MIT research centers: the Center for Global Change Science (CGCS) and the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research (CEEPR). These two centers-along with collaborators from the Marine Biology Laboratory (MBL) at Woods Hole and short-and long-term visitors-provide the united vision needed to solve global challenges.At the heart of much of the program's work lies MIT's Integrated Global System Model. Through this integrated model, the program seeks to discover new interactions among natural and human climate system components; objectively assess uncertainty in economic and climate projections; critically and quantitatively analyze environmental management and policy proposals; understand complex connections among the many forces that will shape our future; and improve methods to model, monitor and verify greenhouse gas emissions and climatic impacts.This reprint is intended to communicate research results and improve public understanding of global environment and energy challenges, thereby contributing to informed debate about climate change and the economic and social implications of policy alternatives. Given uncertainty in long-term carbon reduction goals, how much non-carbon generation should be developed in the near-term? This research investigates the optimal balance between the risk of overinvesting in non-carbon sources that are ultimately not needed and the risk of underinvesting in non-carbon sources and subsequently needing to reduce carbon emissions dramatically. We employ a novel framework that incorporates a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model of the U.S. into a two-stage stochastic approximate dynamic program (ADP) focused on decisions in the electric power sector. We solve the model using an ADP algorithm that is computationally tractable while exploring the decisions and sampling the uncertain carbon limits from continuous distributions.The results of the model demonstrate that an optimal hedge is in the direction of more non-carbon investment in the near-term, in the range of 20-30% of new generation. We also demonstrate that the optimal share of non-carbon generation is increasing in the variance of the uncertainty about the long-term carbon targets, and that with greater uncertainty in the future policy regime, a balanced portfolio of non-carbon, natural gas, and coal generation is desirable.

We assess the human health and economic impacts of projected 2000-2050 changes in ozone pollution using the MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis -Health Effects (EPPA-HE) model, in combination with results from the GEOS-Chem global tropospheric chemistry model of climate and chemistry effects of projected future emissions. We use EPPA-HE to assess the human health damages (including mortality and morbidity) caused by ozone pollution, and quantify their economic impacts in sixteen world regions. We compare the costs of ozone pollution under scenarios with 2000 and 2050 ozone precursor and greenhouse gas emissions (using the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) A1B scenario). We estimate that health costs due to global ozone pollution above pre-industrial levels by 2050 will be $580 billion (year 2000$) and that mortalities from acute exposure will exceed 2 million. We find that previous methodologies underestimate costs of air pollution by more than a third because they do not take into account the long-term, compounding effects of health costs. The economic effects of emissions changes far exceed the influence of climate alone.

We demonstrate a method for integrating environmental effects into a computable general equilibrium model. This is a critical step forward toward the development of improved integrated assessment models of environmental change. We apply the method to examine the economic consequences of air pollution on human health for the US for the period from 1970 to 2000. The pollutants include tropospheric ozone, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter. We apply this method to the MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) model, a computable general equilibrium model of the economy that has been widely used to study climate change policy. The method makes use of traditional valuation studies, incorporating this information so that estimates of welfare change are consistent with welfare valuation of the consumption of market goods and services. We estimate the benefits of air pollution regulations in USA rose steadily from 1975 to 2000 from $50 billion to $400 billion (from 2.1% to 7.6% of market consumption). Our estimated benefits of regulation are somewhat lower than the original estimates made by the US Environmental Protection Agency, and we trace that result to our development of a stock model of pollutant exposure that predicts that the benefits from reduced chronic air pollution exposure will only be gradually realized. We also estimate the economic burden of uncontrolled levels of air pollution over that period. The uncertainties in these estimates are large which we show through simulations using 95% confidence limits on the epidemiological dose-response relationships Climatic Change (2008) 88:59-92

Change combines cutting-edge scientific research with independent policy analysis to provide a solid foundation for the public and private decisions needed to mitigate and adapt to unavoidable global environmental changes. Being data-driven, the Joint Program uses extensive Earth system and economic data and models to produce quantitative analysis and predictions of the risks of climate change and the challenges of limiting human influence on the environmentessential knowledge for the international dialogue toward a global response to climate change.To this end, the Joint Program brings together an interdisciplinary group from two established MIT research centers: the Center for Global Change Science (CGCS) and the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research (CEEPR). These two centers-along with collaborators from the Marine Biology Laboratory (MBL) at Woods Hole and short-and long-term visitors-provide the united vision needed to solve global challenges.At the heart of much of the program's work lies MIT's Integrated Global System Model. Through this integrated model, the program seeks to discover new interactions among natural and human climate system components; objectively assess uncertainty in economic and climate projections; critically and quantitatively analyze environmental management and policy proposals; understand complex connections among the many forces that will shape our future; and improve methods to model, monitor and verify greenhouse gas emissions and climatic impacts.This reprint is intended to communicate research results and improve public understanding of global environment and energy challenges, thereby contributing to informed debate about climate change and the economic and social implications of policy alternatives. Given uncertainty in long-term carbon reduction goals, how much non-carbon generation should be developed in the near-term? This research investigates the optimal balance between the risk of overinvesting in non-carbon sources that are ultimately not needed and the risk of underinvesting in non-carbon sources and subsequently needing to reduce carbon emissions dramatically. We employ a novel framework that incorporates a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model of the U.S. into a two-stage stochastic approximate dynamic program (ADP) focused on decisions in the electric power sector. We solve the model using an ADP algorithm that is computationally tractable while exploring the decisions and sampling the uncertain carbon limits from continuous distributions.The results of the model demonstrate that an optimal hedge is in the direction of more non-carbon investment in the near-term, in the range of 20-30% of new generation. We also demonstrate that the optimal share of non-carbon generation is increasing in the variance of the uncertainty about the long-term carbon targets, and that with greater uncertainty in the future policy regime, a balanced portfolio of non-carbon, natural gas, and coal generation is desirable.

No abstract

We estimate the potential synergy between pollution and climate control in the U.S. and China, summarizing the results as emissions cross-elasticities of control. In both countries, ancillary carbon reductions resulting from SO 2 and NO x control tend to rise with the increased stringency of control targets, reflecting the eventual need for wholesale change toward non-fossil technologies when large reductions are required. Under stringent pollution targets, the non-target effects tend to be higher in China than in the U.S., due to China's heavy reliance on coal. This result suggests that China may have greater incentives to reduce SO 2 and NO x with locally apparent pollution benefits, but related efforts would at the same time reduce CO 2 emissions significantly. We also find strong non-target effects of CO 2 abatement in both countries, but the cross effects in this direction depend less on the stringency of control and are stronger in the U.S. than in China.

This study explores why international joint ventures (IJVs) based in the global South may meet with only partial success in nurturing local technological capability. The experience of China's passenger-vehicle sector demonstrates that in the existence of a substantial technologicalcapability gap between alliance partners, the IJV arrangement is likely to create a "passive" learning mode, and learners using this IJV arrangement may be able to strengthen their production capability but leaving their project-execution and innovation capabilities largely undeveloped.

The MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change is an organization for research, independent policy analysis, and public education in global environmental change. It seeks to provide leadership in understanding scientific, economic, and ecological aspects of this difficult issue, and combining them into policy assessments that serve the needs of ongoing national and international discussions. To this end, the Program brings together an interdisciplinary group from two established research centers at MIT: the Center for Global Change Science (CGCS) and the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research (CEEPR). These two centers bridge many key areas of the needed intellectual work, and additional essential areas are covered by other MIT departments, by collaboration with the Ecosystems Center of the Marine Biology Laboratory (MBL) at Woods Hole, and by short-and long-term visitors to the Program. The Program involves sponsorship and active participation by industry, government, and non-profit organizations. To inform processes of policy development and implementation, climate change research needs to focus on improving the prediction of those variables that are most relevant to economic, social, and environmental effects. In turn, the greenhouse gas and atmospheric aerosol assumptions underlying climate analysis need to be related to the economic, technological, and political forces that drive emissions, and to the results of international agreements and mitigation. Further, assessments of possible societal and ecosystem impacts, and analysis of mitigation strategies, need to be based on realistic evaluation of the uncertainties of climate science. This report is one of a series intended to communicate research results and improve public understanding of climate issues, thereby contributing to informed debate about the climate issue, the uncertainties, and the economic and social implications of policy alternatives. Titles in the Report Series to date are listed on the inside back cover.