Showing posts with label Energy & Climate Change.   Show all posts

Climate Mitigation Policy in China: The Many Attractions of Carbon or Coal Taxes

A carbon or coal tax can effectively address domestic China’s environmental challenges,” according to an IMF report. “Given that sectors most dependent on coal and energy are heavy industries associated with the ‘old growth’ model, these taxes will support China’s effort to rebalance its economy towards high value-added services and consumption-led growth. Moreover, by contributing to coordinated efforts from the international community to slow global warming, these taxes will also reduce the negative impacts climate change will have in China, such as higher occurrence of natural disasters to which coastal areas are particularly vulnerable. Although the government is committed to introducing an Emissions Trading System in 2017, this should not preclude the simultaneous introduction of an upstream carbon or coal tax. This could be facilitated by providing some tax rebates for firms required to obtain emissions allowances to ensure all emitters pay the same unit price of carbon. Given the very large domestic benefits from these policies, China can move ahead unilaterally on its pledges for Paris and make itself better off, without waiting for others to act.”

“A carbon or coal tax can effectively address domestic China’s environmental challenges,” according to an IMF report. “Given that sectors most dependent on coal and energy are heavy industries associated with the ‘old growth’ model, these taxes will support China’s effort to rebalance its economy towards high value-added services and consumption-led growth. Moreover, by contributing to coordinated efforts from the international community to slow global warming, these taxes will also reduce the negative impacts climate change will have in China,

Read the full article…

Posted by at 9:33 AM

Labels: Energy & Climate Change

OPEC’s Strategic Actions and the 2014 Oil Price Crash

A new IMF working paper notes: “In November 2014, OPEC announced a new strategy geared towards improving its market share. Oil-market analysts interpreted this as an attempt to squeeze higher-cost producers including US shale oil out of the market. Over the next year, crude oil prices crashed, with large repercussions for the global economy. We present a simple equilibrium model that explains the fundamental market factors that can rationalize such a “regime switch” by OPEC. These include: (i) the growth of US shale oil production; (ii) the slowdown of global oil demand; (iii) reduced cohesiveness of the OPEC cartel; (iv) production ramp-ups in other non-OPEC countries. We show that these qualitative predictions are broadly consistent with oil market developments during 2014-15. The model is calibrated to oil market data; it predicts accommodation up to 2014 and a market-share strategy thereafter, and explains large oil-price swings as well as realistically high levels of OPEC output.”

A new IMF working paper notes: “In November 2014, OPEC announced a new strategy geared towards improving its market share. Oil-market analysts interpreted this as an attempt to squeeze higher-cost producers including US shale oil out of the market. Over the next year, crude oil prices crashed, with large repercussions for the global economy. We present a simple equilibrium model that explains the fundamental market factors that can rationalize such a “regime switch”

Read the full article…

Posted by at 6:06 AM

Labels: Energy & Climate Change

Norway: The Transition from Oil and Gas

By IMF colleague: Giang Ho

“As offshore investment drops from its peak and oil prices retreat from their high in 2014, the Norwegian economy is going through a transition away from oil dependence,” according to an IMF report. “The transition from oil and gas is a gradual process, and more time would be required before a credible assessment can be made of its progress. The preliminary data show an ongoing marked decline in oil-related production and investment, whereas activity in the traditional goods sector is holding up but not sufficiently to pick up the slack. The divergent performance is perhaps most pronounced within manufacturing between oil-related industries (i.e. machinery and equipment, ships, boats and oil platforms) and nonoil industries. Overall, although the real value added share of the oil-related sector has shrunk from over 36 percent on average during 2000–13 to about 29 percent during 2014–15, much of this appears to have been picked up by the business services sector. The traditional goods producing sector remains a relatively small part of the economy, with value added share at a little over 7 percent and hours worked share declining to 11 percent.”

a1fig1

By IMF colleague: Giang Ho

“As offshore investment drops from its peak and oil prices retreat from their high in 2014, the Norwegian economy is going through a transition away from oil dependence,” according to an IMF report. “The transition from oil and gas is a gradual process, and more time would be required before a credible assessment can be made of its progress. The preliminary data show an ongoing marked decline in oil-related production and investment,

Read the full article…

Posted by at 9:02 AM

Labels: Energy & Climate Change

Oil Prices and the Global Economy: It’s Complicated

Below is an iMFdirect post by Maurice Obstfeld, Gian Maria Milesi-Ferretti, and Rabah Arezki: 

Oil prices have been persistently low for well over a year and a half now, but as the April 2016 World Economic Outlook will document, the widely anticipated “shot in the arm” for the global economy has yet to materialize. We argue that, paradoxically, global benefits from low prices will likely appear only after prices have recovered somewhat, and advanced economies have made more progress surmounting the current low interest rate environment.

Since June 2014 oil prices have dropped about 65 percent in U.S. dollar terms (about $70) as growth has progressively slowed across a broad range of countries. Even taking into account the 20 percent dollar appreciation during this period (in nominal effective terms), the decline in oil prices in local currency has been on average over $60. This outcome has puzzled many observers including us at the Fund, who had believed that oil-price declines would be a net plus for the world economy, obviously hurting exporters but delivering more-than-offsetting gains to importers. The key assumption behind that belief is a specific difference in saving behavior between oil importers and oil exporters: consumers in oil importing regions such as Europe have a higher marginal propensity to consume out of income than those in exporters such as Saudi Arabia.

World equity markets have clearly not subscribed to this theory. Over the past six months or more, equity markets have tended to fall when oil prices fall—not what we would expect if lower oil prices help the world economy on balance. Indeed, since August 2015 the simple correlation between equity and oil prices has not only been positive (Chart 1), it has doubled in comparison to an earlier period starting in August 2014 (though not to an unprecedented level).

Past episodes of sharp changes in oil prices have tended to have visible countercyclical effects—for example, slower world growth after big increases. Is this time different? Several factors affect the relation between oil prices and growth, but we will argue that a big difference from previous episodes is that many advanced economies have nominal interest rates at or near zero.

Supply versus demand

One obvious problem in predicting the effects of oil-price movements is that a fall in the world price can result either from an increase in global supply or a decrease in global demand. But in the latter case, we would expect to see exactly the same pattern as in recent quarters—falling prices accompanied by slowing global growth, with lower oil prices cushioning, but likely not reversing, the growth slowdown.

Slowing demand is no doubt part of the story, but the evidence suggests that increased supply is at least as important. More generally, oil supply has been strong owing to record high output from members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) including, now, exports from Iran, as well as from some non-OPEC countries. In addition, the U.S. supply of shale oil initially proved surprisingly resilient in the face of lower prices. Chart 2 shows how OPEC output has recently continued to grow as prices have fallen, unlike in some previous cycles.

Continue reading here.

Below is an iMFdirect post by Maurice Obstfeld, Gian Maria Milesi-Ferretti, and Rabah Arezki: 

Oil prices have been persistently low for well over a year and a half now, but as the April 2016 World Economic Outlook will document, the widely anticipated “shot in the arm” for the global economy has yet to materialize. We argue that, paradoxically, global benefits from low prices will likely appear only after prices have recovered somewhat,

Read the full article…

Posted by at 12:07 PM

Labels: Energy & Climate Change

Sovereign wealth funds in the new era of oil

From Vox by Rabah Arezki, Adnan Mazarei, and Ananthakrishnan Prasad

As a result of the oil price plunge, the major oil-exporting countries are facing budget deficits for the first time in years. This column goes through the evidence, suggesting that the low price environment is likely to test the relationship between governments in oil-exporting countries and their sovereign wealth funds, at a time when spending is going up.

As a result of the oil price plunge, the major oil-exporting countries are facing budget deficits for the first time in years. The growth in the assets of their sovereign wealth funds, which were rising at a rapid rate until recently, is now slowing – and some have started drawing on their buffers.

Figure 1. Brent crude price, 2014-2015 (US dollars per barrel)

In the short run, this phenomenon is not cause for alarm. Most oil exporters have enough buffers to withstand a temporary drop in oil prices. But what will happen if low oil prices persist, and how will policymakers react? We explore here the fallout from low oil prices on sovereign wealth funds in oil-exporting countries and find that that they have important domestic implications. The impact on global asset prices will depend on the extent of unwinding of the sovereign wealth funds of oil exporters that will not be compensated by portfolio adjustment in other parts of the world that will in turn depend on their economic prospects.

Figure 2. World’s biggest sovereign wealth funds, 2015 estimates

The rise of sovereign wealth funds

In the early 2000s, high oil prices brought about a massive redistribution of income to oil exporters, resulting in current account surpluses and a rapid buildup of foreign assets. Governments established new sovereign wealth funds or increased the size of existing ones to help manage the larger pool of financial assets. The total assets of sovereign wealth funds are concentrated in a few countries. As of March 2015, it is estimated at $7.3 trillion, of which $4.2 trillion are oil and gas related. While there are large differences across sovereign wealth funds, available information on their asset allocation points to a significant share in equities and bonds.

Continue reading here. 

From Vox by Rabah Arezki, Adnan Mazarei, and Ananthakrishnan Prasad

As a result of the oil price plunge, the major oil-exporting countries are facing budget deficits for the first time in years. This column goes through the evidence, suggesting that the low price environment is likely to test the relationship between governments in oil-exporting countries and their sovereign wealth funds, at a time when spending is going up.

As a result of the oil price plunge,

Read the full article…

Posted by at 11:49 AM

Labels: Energy & Climate Change

Newer Posts Home Older Posts

Subscribe to: Posts