Decentralised energy futures: The changing emissions reduction landscape

© 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. The world is witnessing an energy revolution as renewables become more competitive and energy security becomes a high priority for an increasing number of countries. This development is changing the point along the supply chain ripe for reducing emissions. Whereas carbon capture and storage (CCS) coupled to coal or gas power production offers the potential to decarbonise the current centralised power systems, this relies on a significant increase in electrification to achieve deep emission reductions beyond the power sector, including industrial emissions and transportation. At the same time there is a trend towards decentralised industrial processes, e.g., driven by cost reductions in decentralised production systems and miniature processing plant. New strategies for reducing emissions from decentralised industrial and energy emission point sources will be increasingly important. This paper evaluates different emission reduction strategies that may be relevant to a decentralised energy and manufacturing future, including increased electrification, energy storage, renewable energy and renewable feedstock. Systemic opportunities or barriers and considerations of policy and decentralised decision-making are examined

American exceptionalism? Similarities and differences in national attitudes toward energy policy and global warming

Despite sharp differences in government policy, the views of the U.S. public on energy and global warming are remarkably similar to those in Sweden, Britain, and Japan. Americans do exhibit some differences, placing lower priority on the environment and global warming, and with fewer believing that "global warming has been established as a serious problem and immediate action is necessary". There also remains a small hard core of skeptics

The Effect of Risk Characteristics on the Willingness to Pay for Mortality Risk Reductions from Electric Power Generation

The objective of this study is to estimate willingness to pay (WTP) for the reduction of mortality risks caused by fossil fuel (natural gas, coal and oil) versus nuclear electric power generation systems and to examine the influence of risk characteristics involved with electric power generation on WTP. A choice experiment was conducted to achieve these objectives. The attributes for nuclear risks in the experiment included the probability of disasters and the expected losses if a disaster occurs. We find evidence of (i) a baseline effect (where WTP is sensitive to hypothetical versus actual baseline expected mortality); (ii) a ‘labeling effect,’ where, surprisingly, the term ‘nuclear’ has no effect on WTP, but the term ‘fossil-fueled power generation’ results in lower WTP; and (iii) disaster aversion, meaning that people focus on the conditional loss from a nuclear disaster, not the probability. We also find that the WTP for reducing deaths from a nuclear disaster is about 60 times the WTP for routine reducing fossil-fuel generation-related deaths. Copyright Springer 2006choice experiment, coal-fired generation, mortality, nuclear power, risk characteristics, willingness to pay,