Environmental Policy

List Of The Committee Members Of Research Panel_List of the committee members_Reference 1

Reference 1: Model analysis concerning carbon tax optional plans (AIM/Japan)

The below table represents the simulation results of CO2 emission reduction effect by AIM model.
AIM model used here is the part of End-Use Model (model for final energy consumption) within the "Scenario Analysis of Global Warming Using the Asian Pacific Integrated Model / Japan" being developed by National Institute for Environment Studies and Nagoya University's project team. This model simulate the advancement of energy conservation by setting detailed conditions of energy service and its appliances.
Analysis scope and mechanical restraints did not allow all the results to be derived faithfully from the above-mentioned plans 1 to 4.

AIM/Japan simulation resultsPlan 1Plan 2Plan 3Plan 4Reference
(to compare with Plan 2)
Standard (non-taxed)3000 yen/tC + subsidy30000 yen/tC + industrial sectors untaxed1500 yen/tC + energy tax1500 yen/tC + energy tax (increased yearly)30000 yen/tC (without exceptions for industry)
Industry 1990 153.8 1990 153.8 1990 153.8 1990 153.8 1990 153.8 1990 153.8
2000 149.5
(-2.8%)
2000 144.8
(-5.9%)
2000 149.5
(-2.8%)
2000 146.4
(-4.8%)
2000 149.5
(-2.8%)
2000 145.6
(-5.3%)
2005 147.8
(-3.9%)
2005 143.1
(-6.9%)
2005 147.8
(-3.9%)
2005 143.2
(-6.9%)
2005 147.8
(-3.9%)
2005 141.2
(-8.2%)
2010 145.5
(-5.4%)
2010 139.1
(-9.5%)
2010 145.5
(-5.4%)
2010 141.0
(-8.3%)
2010 145.5
(-5.4%)
2010 139.0
(-9.6%)
Household 1990 38 1990 38 1990 38 1990 38 1990 38 1990 38
2000 44.6
(17.4%)
2000 42.6
(12.6%)
2000 42.0
(10.5%)
2000 43.3
(13.9%)
2000 43.4
(14.3%)
2000 42.0
(10.5%)
2005 47.0
(23.7%)
2005 42.8
(12.6%)
2005 41.8
(9,9%)
2005 45.5
(19.7)
2005 42.2
(11.1%)
2005 41.8
(9.9%)
2010 46.6
(22.6%)
2010 41.8
(10.1%)
2010 42.7
(12.4%)
2010 43.4
(14.2%)
2010 41.6
(9.4%)
2010 42.7
(12.4%)
Business 1990 33.6 1990 33.6 1990 33.6 1990 33.6 1990 33.6 1990 33.6
2000 37.0
(10.2%)
2000 36.2
(7.6%)
2000 36.2
(7.7%)
2000 36.2
(7.6%)
2000 36.2
(7.6%)
2000 36.2
(7.7%)
2005 37.0
(10.1%)
2005 36.1
(7.4%)
2005 36.1
(7.4%)
2005 36.1
(7.4%)
2005 36.1
(7.4%)
2005 36.1
(7.4%)
2010 36.0
(7.1%)
2010 35.1
(4.5%)
2010 35.1
(4.4%)
2010 35.1
(4.5%)
2010 35.1
(4.5%)
2010 35.1
(4.4%)
Transportation 1990 58.5 1990 58.5 1990 58.5 1990 58.5 1990 58.5 1990 58.5
2000 61.6
(5.4%)
2000 60.2
(2.9%)
2000 60.3
(3.0%)
2000 60.9
(4.1%)
2000 61.2
(4.7%)
2000 60.3
(3.0%)
2005 62.9
(7.6%)
2005 59.4
(1.6%)
2005 61.0
(4.3%)
2005 60.8
(3.9%)
2005 61.5
(5.1%)
2005 61.0
(4.3%)
2010 62.9
(7.5%)
2010 59.5
(1.7%)
2010 61.9
(5.9%)
2010 60.5
(3.3%)
2010 60.8
(3.9%)
2010 61.9
(5.9%)
Total 1990 320 1990 320 1990 320 1990 320 1990 320 1990 320
2000 328.9
(2.8%)
2000 319.8
(-0.1%)
2000 324.0
(1.3%)
2000 322.8
(0.9%)
2000 326.4
(2.0%)
2000 320.2
(0.1%)
2005 330.8
(3.4%)
2005 317.5
(-0.8%)
2005 322.8
(0.9%)
2005 321.7
(0.5%)
2005 323.7
(1.2%)
2005 316.1
(-1.2%)
2010 327.1
(2.2%)
2010 311.7
(-2.6%)
2010 321.4
(0.4%)
2010 316.0
(-1.2%)
2010 319.1
(-0.3%)
2010 314.8
(-1.6%)

Note)

  1. Plan 1 of "Carbon tax combining low tax rate with subsidy" can achieve the year 2000 goal and effects equal to or above the results recognized when only carbon tax of 30000 yen per 1 ton of carbon is implemented.
  2. Plan 2 exempts carbon tax from not only the sectors consuming large volume of energy but whole industry. Possibilities to contract CO2 emission reduction agreement are excluded.
  3. In Plan 3, subsidiary effects on new energy development are not considered, and CO2 emission reduction effects are small compared with Plan 1.
  4. In Plan 4, subsidiary effects in developing nations and tax-exemption for consumers of small volume of energy are not taken into consideration.
Page top