nach oben

Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change

Erschienen in:

01.01.2008 | Original Paper

Political commitment to CO₂ capture and storage: evidence from government RD&D budgets

verfasst von: Andreas Tjernshaugen

Erschienen in: Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change | Ausgabe 1/2008

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

For CO₂ capture and storage (CCS) to succeed as a mitigation strategy, political commitment is one of several prerequisites. This article offers an appraisal of political commitment to a CCS strategy among high-income countries in Europe and North America: Which governments are committed, and what particular interests and concerns do they seek to accommodate by supporting CCS? In order to answer these questions, new data are reported on government CCS research, development and demonstration (RD&D) budgets. RD&D budgets divided by GDP is used as an indicator of political commitment, and explanations are sought for cross-national differences. The analysis shows that fossil fuels reserves and extraction within a country has a very strong bearing on funding levels. Likely explanations include the potential for combining CCS with enhanced resource recovery. All large economies (population >50 million) have a funding program. The smaller states that provide funding (Norway, Canada, the Netherlands) have the highest funding levels relative to GDP. These findings suggest that high-income petroleum producing countries are likely to be leaders in promoting CCS and a favorable regulatory environment. The fact that all large, high-income countries in the two regions now display some interest in CCS further improves its political outlook.

Nächster Artikel CDM potential of SPV lighting systems in India

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Where the project period started or ended during 2005, a share of average annual funding corresponding to the number of months that the project was active during 2005 was used.

In an additional regression not reported here, EC RD&D budgets were distributed on all member states according to GDP (and without the EU as a separate unit of observation). Running models 2a–c, Table 3, with this setup yielded somewhat different coefficients, but did not change the overall conclusions. I consider this approach inferior because it relies on an arbitrarily chosen distribution key that does not reflect the underlying political process. Neither of the two other obvious alternatives—treating the EU countries as a bloc only, or excluding EC funding from the analysis—would reflect the actual situation where both individual member states and the EC make important funding decisions.

Aguilar S, Conrad A et al (2005). Summary of the 11th Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC, 28 Nov–10 Dec 2005. Earth Negotiation Bulletin. 12

Alberta Energy (2004) Information letter 2003–2017. Subject: CO₂ Projects Royalty Credits Program

Aldy JE, Barret S (2003) Thirteen plus one: a comparison of global climate policy architectures. Climate Policy 2(4):373–397CrossRef

Bang G, Tjernshaugen A, Andresen S (2005) Future U.S. Climate Policy: international re-engagement? Int Stud Perspect 6(2):285–303CrossRef

BMBF (2005) Online project catalog, Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Germany, www.foerderkatalog.de, accessed 23.01.2005

BMWA (2003) Summary of COORETEC. Report 527, December 2003, Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour (BMWA)

BMWA (2005) Carbon Capture and Storage Activities in Germany. Document prepared for CSLF meeting, Berlin, September 2005. (BMWA) FMoEaL

Bode S, Jung M (2004) On the integration of carbon capture and storage into the international climate regime. Hamburg Institute of International Economics, Hamburg

BP (2005) BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2005

Chakma A (1992) CO₂ separation and recycling—a route to zero net production of CO₂ in the alberta energy industry. Energy Convers Manage 33(5–8):795–802CrossRef

Cohen LR, Noll RG et al (1991) The technology pork barrel. The Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC

Cohen WM, Nelson RR, Walsh JP (2002) Links and impacts: the influence of public research on industrial R&D. Manage Sci 48(1):1–23CrossRef

Curry T, Reiner DM et al (2004) How aware is the public of carbon capture and storage? Proceedings of the international conference on greenhouse gas control technologies (7th), 5–9 September 2004, Vancouver, Canada. IEA Greenhouse Gas Programme, Cheltenham

Curry T, Reiner DM et al (2005) A survey of public attitudes towards energy and environment in great. Laboratory for energy and environment, Britain, MIT

David PA, Hall BH, Toole AA (2000) Is public R&D a complement or substitute for private R&D? A review of the econometric evidence. Res Policy 29(4–5):497–529CrossRef

Dixon T, Zakkour P (2006) UK work on market mechanisms to encourage CCS, including the EU ETS. GHGT8. Trondheim

Dooley JJ, Runci PJ (1999) Adopting a Long View to Energy R&D and Global Climate Change, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

European Commission (2004) European CO₂ Capture and Storage projects. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities

Freund P, Kaya Y, Lior N (2004) Special edition. 6th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, Kyoto, Japan, 1–4 October 2002. Energy 29(9–10):1237–1657CrossRef

GHGT7 (2004) Papers and posters available online. 7th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, Vancouver Convention Center, Canada

Gielen D, Podkanski J (2004) Prospects for CO₂ capture and storage. OECD/IEA, Paris

Grubb M (1996) Technologies, energy systems and the timing of emissions abatement: an overview of the economic issues. Climate Change: Integrating Science, Economics and Policy. Nakicenovic N, Nordhaus WD, Richels Ret al. Laxenburg, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

Hart DM (2002) Private technological capabilities as products of national innovation systems: four ways of looking at the state. Sci Public Policy 29(3):181–188CrossRef

Huijts N (2003). Public Perception of Carbon Dioxide Storage. Eindhoven University of Technology Master’s Thesis, available at www.climatepolicy.info/technologies/

IEA (1991–2005) Greenhouse Issues newsletter, issue no 1–80

IEA GHG (2005) CO₂ Capture and Storage R&D Project Database, IEA Greenhouse Gas Programme, www.co2captureandstorage.info, accessed January 2005

Ihlen Ø (2004) Rhetoric and resources in public relations strategies. A rhetorical and sociological analysis of two conflicts over energy and the environment. Faculty of Arts, University of Oslo, Oslo

IPCC (2005) Special report on carbon dioxide capture and storage. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva

Kasa S (2005) Review essay: the domestic politics bias in analyses of CO₂ taxation in the nordic countries. Scand Polit Stud 28(1):91–102CrossRef

Legg JF (1992) Overview of carbon-dioxide removal and disposal in Canada. Energy Convers Manage 33(5–8):787–794CrossRef

Martin S, Scott JT (2000) The nature of innovation market failure and the design of public support for private innovation. Res Policy 29(4–5):437–447CrossRef

Morris B et al (2006) UK policy for the development and implementation of carbon dioxide capture and storage. GHGT8. Trondheim, Norway

Natural Resources Canada (2004) A new incentive for industry to capture and store carbon dioxide. Government of Canada news release March 1, 2004

Nilsen YS (2001) En felles plattform? Norsk oljeindustri og klimadebatten i Norge fram til 1998. Senter for teknologi innovasjon og kultur Universitetet i Oslo: Unipub, Oslo

Novem (2005) Clean Fuels Internet Site, Netherlands Agency for Energy and the Environment, www.cleanfuels.novem.nl, accessed January 2005

Philibert U (2005) The role of technological development and policies in a post-Kyoto climate regime. Clim Policy 5(3):291–308

Purdy R, Macrory R (2004) Geological carbon sequestration: critical legal issues, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research

Quiviger G, Herzog HJ (2001). A Case Study from Norway on Gas-Fired Power Plants,” Carbon Sequestration, and Politics, presented at the First National Conference on Carbon Sequestration, Washington, DC, May 14–17

Ragin C (1987) The comparative method. Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA

Ragin C (2000) Fuzzy-set social science. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

Reiner DM, Herzog HJ (2004) Developing a set of regulatory analogs for carbon sequestration. Energy 29(9–10):1561–1570CrossRef

Sagar AD, Holdren JP (2002) Assessing the global energy innovation system: some key issues. Energy Policy 30(6):465CrossRef

Shackley S, McLachlan C, Gough C (2005) The public perception of carbon dioxide capture and storage in the UK: results from focus groups and a survey. Clim Policy 4(4):377–398CrossRef

Shalev M (2006). Limits and Alternatives to Multiple Regression in Comparative Research. Forthcoming in Comparative Social Research 25

Solli J (2004) Kalkylenes retorikk. Økonomiske argumenter i utvikling av nye energiteknologier. Inst. for tverrfaglige kulturstudier, NTNU, Trondheim

Sprinz D, Vaahtoranta T (1994) The interest-based explanation of international environmental-policy. Int Organ 48(1):77–105CrossRef

Stortinget (2004) B.innst.S.nr.9 (2004–2005). Energi- og miljøkomiteen. [Norwegian Parliament, Standing Committee on Energy and Environment, Recommendation on the 2005 budget]

Sæverud IA, Moe A (2005) Carbon Storage and Climate Change—The Case of Norway. Governing Climate. The Struggle for a Global Framework Beyond Kyoto. Sugiyama T. Winnipeg, Manitoba, IISD, pp 76–86

Torvanger A, Rypdal K, Kallbekken S (2005) Geological CO₂ Storage as a Climate Change Mitigation Option. Mitigation Adaptation Strategies Global Change 10(4):693–715CrossRef

U.S. Congress (2004) Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005. H. R. 4818

U.S. White House (2002) Addendum to the global climate change policy book. Washington, DC, 14 February. Available at http://www.whitehouse.govwww.whitehouse.gov

U.S. DOE (2004) Clean Coal Technology & The President’s Clean Coal Power Initiative. Retrieved 3 December, 2004, from www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/cleancoal/

UK DTI (2005) A Strategy for Developing Carbon Abatement Technologies for Fossil Fuel Use, Department of Trade and Industry

Underdal A, Hanf K (2000) International Environmental Agreements and Domestic Politics. The case of acid rain. Aldershot, Ashgate

UNFCCC (2005) Key GHG Data. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Data for 1990–2003 submitted to the UNFCCC, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

ZEFFPP (2006) Strategic Research Agenda. European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants

Titel: Political commitment to CO2 capture and storage: evidence from government RD&D budgets
verfasst von: Andreas Tjernshaugen
Publikationsdatum: 01.01.2008
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change / Ausgabe 1/2008
Print ISSN: 1381-2386
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-1596
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-006-9077-y

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2008

Integrating Joint Implementation Projects for Energy Efficiency on the Built Environment with White Certificates in The Netherlands

Vulnerability assessment and adaptation to the impacts of sea level rise on the Kingdom of Bahrain

Accounting for risk and uncertainty in determining preferred strategies for adapting to future climate change

CDM potential of SPV lighting systems in India