liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Pre- and post-Paris views on bioenergy with carbon capture and storage
Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Tema Environmental Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, CSPR.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1912-5538
2019 (English)In: Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage: Using Natural Resources for Sustainable Development / [ed] Jose Carlos Magalhaes Pires and Ana Luisa da Cunha Goncalves, London: Elsevier, 2019, 1, p. 47-62Chapter in book (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

The market potential of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) depends both on demand for and the cost of BECCS. In making investment decisions, capital as well as operational expenditure is weighed against potential revenues. As BECCS is providing no added value but mitigation, revenues are pending policy instruments capable of providing a market pull for BECCS or an ability to develop a premium market segment encouraging voluntary customer compensation. While the cost side of BECCS has been studied substantially, little is known of sociopolitical factors such as acceptance and political prioritization. This chapter explores questionnaire data from UN climate change conferences from before and after the conclusion of the Paris Agreement in 2015. A total of 2547 completed questionnaires are analyzed to explore if the views on BECCS as a mitigation technology has changed with increasing attention given to negative emission technologies following in the wake of the Paris Agreement. The chapter overall concludes that BECCS is prioritized low for investments both pre and post-Paris. Put in context of the lack of a global collective mitigation ambition, this is pointing toward a moral dilemma. The moral hazard of avoiding radical mitigation action today on the basis of trust in future deployment of BECCS is exacerbated if followed by a lack of interest in investing in BECCS.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
London: Elsevier, 2019, 1. p. 47-62
National Category
Social Sciences Social Sciences Interdisciplinary
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-159832DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-816229-3.00003-XISBN: 9780128162293 (print)ISBN: 9780128166000 (electronic)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-159832DiVA, id: diva2:1345167
Funder
Swedish Research Council Formas, 2016-00958Swedish Energy Agency, 42390-1Available from: 2019-08-23 Created: 2019-08-23 Last updated: 2019-08-23Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Fridahl, Mathias

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Fridahl, Mathias
By organisation
Tema Environmental ChangeFaculty of Arts and SciencesCentre for Climate Science and Policy Research, CSPR
Social SciencesSocial Sciences Interdisciplinary

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 57 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf