ROLE OF CO2 GAS EMISSION TAX ON FOSSIL FUEL IN REDUCING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT “A PERSPECTIVE FOR INDONESIA”

Kemas Fachruddin, Akhmad Fauzi, Ahmad Bey, Surjono H Surtjahjo

Abstract


In the year 2001, Indonesia was ranked 21st in producing CO2 emissions. In 1990 the
total emission of CO2 from the burning of fossil fuel was estimated at 83.8 million tonnes
and by the end of the year 2020 the total emissions are estimated to be 368.3 million
tonnes. Currently, Indonesia has no specific regulation in place for controlling CO2 emissions
either in the form of an act or government regulation.
Some approaches in controlling such emissions are through “common and control”
and or “market based instrument” (sometimes this term is called “economic instrument”).
Based on experience from developed countries, economic instrument in the form of carbon
tax or emission tax is preferred due to it’s effectiveness compared with the common
and control instrument.
This empirical study is intended to analyze the role of economic instrument in the form
of a carbon or emission tax on the energy of fossil fuel through a modified DICE (Dynamic
Integrated Model of Climate Change and the Economy). The DICE model is also
called a “Three –Box Model” or “Two Folded Model”
By using some rate of social preference (R), the model outcome suggests that appropriate
optimal taxes for petrol and coal are if model using R value of 5%. Value of carbon tax
per ton in optimal condition for period of 1990-2019 is within the range $US3.90 – 40.35
or $US1.06 -11.00 USD CO2 per ton. The price is equivalent to $US 0.002 – 0.024 per
liter petrol and $US 1.95 -20.25 per ton coal.
Based on the model output it is indicated that carbon or emission tax with optimal
scenario has no significant impact on income per capita relative to “Base Case”. Should
the government apply tax instruments with optimal scenario, revenue of emission taxes will
fall between $US 457.6 – 2,362.8 million for period 1990-2019. The revenue consists of
$US 376.1 – 1,585.6 million generated from petrol and $US 81.4 – 777.2 million from
coal.


Keywords


Carbon/emission tax, abatement cost and common & control.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ackerman,Frank and Finlayson.,2005, The Economic

of Inaction on Climate Change: A Critique.

Global Development and Environment

Institute,Tufts University.

Baumert,A.Kevin,et.all.,2005, Navigating the

Numbers.Greenhouse Gas data and International

Climate Policy. World Resources Institute.

Behavioral Responses to Environmentally-Related

Taxes.,2000. Environment Directorate.

OECD. COM/ENV/EPOC/DAFFE/CFA(99)

/FINAL.

Babiker,Mustafa, et al.,1999, The Kyoto Protocol

and Developing Countries.MIT Joint Program

on the Science and Policy of Global Change.

Science Policy.

Beyond Kyoto.,2002, Energy Dynamics and Climate

Stabilization. International Energy

Agency.OECD/EIA.

Blades,Derek and Meyer,Jeroen.,1998, How to

Represent Capital in International Comparison

of Total Factor Productivity. OECD.Statistics

Directorate. Second Meeting of the Canberra

Group On Capital Stock Statistics.

Connor,David.,1996, OECD Development Centre

(Paris French). Applying Economic Instruments

in Developing Countries; From Theory

to Implementation.Special Report.

Fiddaman,Thomas.,1997, A System Dynamic Perspective

On an Influential Climate/Economiy

Model. MIT Sloan School of Management.

Nordhaus,William and Boyer,Joseph.,1999, Economics

Models of Global Warming. DICE and

RICE Model. Internet edition.

Nordhaus,William.,1992, Rolling the “DICE” : An

optimal transition path for controlling

greenhaouse gases. Resources and Energy Economics

,1993 27-50.North Holland.

Nordhaus,William and Boyer,G.Joseph.,1999,

Requiem for Kyoto: An Economic Analysis of

the Kyoto Protocol. KYOTO ECON

DOC.

Nordhaus,William.,2001, Global Warming Economics.

Science Compass, Vol 294.Policy

Forum:Cliamte Change.

OXERA report.,2002, A Social Time Preference

Rate for Use in Long-Term Discounting.

OXERA Consulting Ltd.Oxford OX1 4EH,UK.

Thomas.Charles., Tennant.Tessa and Rolls

Jon.,2000, The GHG Indicator: UNEP Guidelines

for Calculating Greenhouse Gas Emissions

for Business and Non Commercial Organizations.

Petroleum Report Indonesia. American Embassy

–Jakarta., 2003.

Petroleum Report Indonesia. American Embassy

–Jakarta.,2006.

The Green Book (printed 2004).Discount Rate,

Annex 6. http://greenbook.treasury.gov.uk/

annex06.htm.

Marland,Gregg,et.al. Oak Ridge National

Laboratory.University of North Dakota. Website:

http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/emis/top2000.tot.

printed 11/8/2004




DOI: https://doi.org/10.29017/SCOG.30.2.982

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.