How I learned to stop worrying and love the RET
John Quiggin ()
No 152099, Risk and Sustainable Management Group Working Papers from University of Queensland, School of Economics
In this chapter, it is argued on the contrary that the RET is not merely complementary to the carbon market, but is a welfare-improving policy, even after the introduction of the carbon price. The central argument is that, because of political resistance to carbon pricing, the price has been set at a level that is below that of the optimal path, and must increase more rapidly than would be consistent with a Hotelling rule (Hotelling 1931). The relevant criterion for assessing the RET is not the cost of mitigation relative to the current carbon price but the cost relative to the true shadow price of CO2 emissions, which must be assessed in relation to abatement costs that must be incurred in the future if emissions are to be reduced in line with the government’s stated targets.
Keywords: Renewable Energy Target; Carbon pricing; Environmental Economics and Policy; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy; Q52; Q42; Q48 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-ene, nep-env and nep-pke
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:uqsers:152099
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Risk and Sustainable Management Group Working Papers from University of Queensland, School of Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Series data maintained by AgEcon Search ().