기후변화영향분석모델 Ⅲ

Title
기후변화영향분석모델 Ⅲ
Other Titles
환경편익을 고려한 온실가스 저감에 따른 경제성 분석
Authors
조승헌
Co-Author
김석철; Dellink; Rub; 장현정; 전해원
Issue Date
2002-12-30
Publisher
한국환경정책·평가연구원
Series/Report No.
연구보고서 : 2002-13
Page
134p.
URI
http://repository.kei.re.kr/handle/2017.oak/19098
Language
한국어
Keywords
Greenhouse effects, atmospheric
Abstract
The goal of this study is two fold: 1)To estimate economic burden, changes in premature mortality and morbidity, and their corresponding monetary values associated with introduction of carbon taxes and/or fuel taxes, such that the costs and benefits are compared for tax variations. The methodology applied to the study is of integrated model of top-down and bottom-up regional model. For the study the region includes Seoul, Inchon, and Kyonggi, the pollutants are carbon, PM10, SO2, and NO2, the periods in concern is 2000-2030, and tax scenarios are US$ 21/TOC in 2010 the increase by $1 yearly while fuel tax rates gradually increase: kerosene: annual 3% increase from 2004 to 2019(48%), thereafter 48%; diesel: annual 5% increase from 2004 to 2019(80%), thereafter 80%; Bunker-C: annual 0.5% increase from 2004 to 2019(7.5%),thereafter 7.5%; LPG: annual 4% increase from 2004 to 2019(60%), thereafter 60%. The costs are estimated employed by top-down, forward-looking dynamic computable general equilibrium model in order to analyze national economic burden of taxes implemented for the purpose of mitigating greenhouse gases and/or local air pollutants. The national level of economic costs is allocated to three regions according to gross regional domestic products(GRDP) exogenously given. The bottom-up impact pathway approach is utilized to calibrate environmental health benefits. The sequential modules for the part include taxes ?emission ?air pollutant concentration ?health effects ?monetary values. Box-model approach is used to estimate regional level of air pollutants and for the changes in occurrences of mortality and morbidity concentration-response function is used. The opportunity cost is used for morbidity and willingness to pay is used to estimate value of statistical life. The primary findings of the study are as follows. When implementing fuel taxes, the reduced amounts for instance for Seoul in 2015 are 650,585TOC for greenhouse gas, 1,650,743kg for PM10,, and 17.530 ug/m3 for PM10 concentration, respectively. The corresponding reduced occurrences of asthma and respiratory disease are 735 and 354, respectively and premature mortality reduced is 626. The monetary value associated with the health effects is equivalent to US$613million. The economic burden calibrated with GRDP is US$1,353million, net cost subtracting health benefits and revenues from GHG in emission trading amounts to US$723million such that the benefit-cost ratio is 0.466. The ratios for each region for benefits of health-only(Air) and health plus GHG(Air+GHG) is shown on Table 1. In case of carbon tax is implemented, the reduced amounts for instance for Seoul in 2015 are 132,849TOC for greenhouse gas, 189,071kg for PM10, and 2.014ug/m3 for PM10 concentration. The corresponding reduced occurrences of asthma and respiratory disease are 109 and 46, respectively and premature mortality reduced is 81. The monetary value associated with the health effects is equivalent to US$79million. The GRDP reduced is US$473million, and the benefit-cost ratio is 0.174. The ratios for each region for benefits of health-only(Air) and health plus GHG(Air+GHG) is shown on Table 2. Benefit-cost ratio in case of fuel tax Region 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025Air Seoul 0.547 0.468 0.453 0.461 0.376 Inchon 0.379 0.264 0.209 0.180 0.163 KG 0.553 0.488 0.466 0.443 0.426Air+GHG Seoul 0.547 0.481 0.466 0.474 0.387 Inchon 0.379 0.296 0.238 0.208 0.189 KG 0.553 0.510 0.486 0.463 0.444 Benefit-cost ratio in case of carbon tax Region 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025Air Seoul 0.069 0.173 0.167 0.173 0.143 Inchon 0.051 0.182 0.147 0.132 0.123 KG 0.086 0.364 0.351 0.342 0.336Air+GHG Seoul 0.069 0.180 0.174 0.180 0.150 Inchon 0.051 0.206 0.170 0.154 0.145 KG 0.086 0.384 0.369 0.361 0.355

Table Of Contents

1장 서론 1

2장 이론적 배경과 한국 현황 5
1. 이론적 배경 5
2. 대기 오염 저감의 환경편익 분석 사례 7
3. 한국의 기후 변화와 대기 오염 문제 9
가. 한국의 기후 변화 9
나. 한국의 대기 오염 11

3장 방법론 17
1. 경제모듈 20
2. 대기모듈 22
가. 박스모델의 필요성 22
나. 박스모델의 유도과정 23
다. 배출량에 대한 회귀방정식의 유도 28
라. 가중함수 유도를 위한 민감도 분석 28
마. 회의방정식 및 해법 30
바. 박스모델의 적용결과 31
사. 대기혼합고 인자 35
아. 오염배출량과 연계한 박스모델의 적용결과 .36
자. 상위모델 연계를 위한 최종 박스모델 요약 43
3. 건강 47
4. 화폐가치화 48
5. 분석에 사용된 데이터 51
가. 연료 소비량 데이터 51
1) LNG 지역별 월별 데이터(도시가스용과 발전용) 52
2) 무연탄 54
3) 유연탄 56
4) 석유 58
나. 배출 계수 산출 58
1) 분류체계 58
2) 대기오염물질 배출계수의 산출과정 I ? 기본 60
3) 대기오염물질 배출계수의 산출과정 II ? 수송부문의 세분화 64
가) 도로교통 64
나) 철도 66
다) 기타 67
4) 온실가스 배출계수 67
다. 연료분류와 산업연관표분류의 일치 69
라. 추계인구데이터 69
마. 대기오염데이터 69
바. 기상데이터 69

4장 분석 결과 71
1. 대기 오염세 부과시 영향 74
2. 탄소세 부과시 영향 76
3. 대기오염세+탄소세 부과시 영향 78
4. 민감도 분석 결과 81
가. 농도감소(연평균) 81
나. 건강효과(연평균) 83
다. 저감편익비율 84
5. 정책의 시너지 효과 85

5장 결 론 87

참고문헌 91

부록 1 <2001 모델 요약> 95
부록 2 <2000년 보고서 요약> 105
부록 3 < ICAP 요약 (Joh et al., 2001b)> 108

Appears in Collections:
Reports(보고서) > Research Report(연구보고서)
Files in This Item:
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse