Does Carbon Pricing Displace Crypto-Mining Emissions? Quantile Evidence on Carbon Leakage from EU27, Russian and Rest-of-World Power Grids
炭素価格は暗号通貨マイニング排出を転換するか？EU27・ロシア・世界の電力グリッドからの炭素漏出に関する分位点証拠 (AI 翻訳)
Toan PN, Hieu LTT, Nguyen NVT
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
炭素価格が規制域外への排出漏出を引き起こすかを、電力集約的で地理的に移動しやすい暗号通貨マイニングを用いて検証。2019年1月から2026年1月の日次データで分位点回帰を推定し、ロシアではビットコイン収益とEU炭素価格の相互作用が排出増と有意に関連するが、EU27やその他地域では明確な効果なし。中国のマイニング禁止とEU排出権価格高騰後の2020年以降に限定される。グリーンボンド指数は負で有意であり、グリーンパラドックスは支持されない。
English
This paper tests whether carbon pricing causes carbon leakage using crypto-mining, an electricity-intensive and footloose industry. Quantile regressions on daily data (2019-2026) show that in Russia, the interaction of Bitcoin returns and EU carbon allowance returns significantly raises power-sector CO2 emissions, especially post-2020, while no robust effect appears in EU27 or rest of world. Green bond index is negatively significant, rejecting a green paradox. The authors argue that emissions-trading instruments cannot govern mobile electricity loads.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本のGX政策では、カーボンプライシング導入検討が進む中、排出漏出リスクの実証は示唆に富む。特に、エネルギー集約型産業の国際競争力や、海外への生産移転による排出増加の可能性を考慮する際に参考になる。
In the global GX context
This paper provides empirical evidence on carbon leakage, a key concern for global carbon pricing mechanisms like the EU ETS and CBAM. It highlights the limitations of emissions trading in addressing mobile, electricity-intensive loads, informing policy design for border carbon adjustments and international cooperation.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Quantile regression approach to carbon leakage with crypto-mining as a natural experiment offers a novel methodology.
🏢実務担当者:Highlights risks for energy-intensive industries facing carbon costs, informing location and hedging strategies.
🏛政策担当者:Evidence that carbon pricing may displace emissions abroad, supporting the need for border carbon adjustments or international coordination.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Carbon pricing raises the cost of fossil-fired electricity inside the regulated jurisdiction but cannot price emissions beyond the regulator's border. Proof-of-work cryptocurrency mining is an unusually clean setting in which to test whether this asymmetry produces carbon leakage: mining is electricity-intensive, geographically footloose, and reallocates across grids far faster than conventional heavy industry. Using daily data from January 2019 to January 2026 (N = 2,550), we estimate quantile regressions of power-sector CO2 emission growth in the EU27, the Russian Federation and the rest of the world on the interaction between Bitcoin returns and European carbon-allowance returns. In Russia the interaction is positive and significant in the lower tail (beta = 0.066, p = 0.001) and survives ordinary least squares with robust standard errors (p = 0.012) and a dynamic specification controlling for emission persistence (p = 0.010); Russia is the only region whose model is jointly significant. In the EU27 and the rest of the world the interaction is not robustly distinguishable from zero at any quantile. The Russian effect is entirely a post-2020 phenomenon, coinciding with the Chinese mining prohibition and the tenfold rise in European allowance prices, while neither other region shifts across the same break. We find no support for a green-paradox reading of green finance: the Green Bond index enters negatively and significantly across specifications. Instruments confined to the emissions-trading perimeter are structurally unable to govern a mobile, electricity-intensive load.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- Research Square https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202607.2339.v1first seen 2026-08-07 04:37:12
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。