Published February 2018 | Version v1
Journal article

Getting ready for future carbon abatement under uncertainty – Key factors driving investment with policy implications

  • 1. Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, London School of Economics, London WC2A 2AE (United Kingdom)
  • 2. Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research, Institutes of Science and Development, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing (China)
  • 3. Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, Blacksburg, VA (United States)
  • 4. Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research Karlsruhe (Germany)
  • 5. Grenoble Ecole de Management, Grenoble (France)
  • 6. School of Economics & Management, Beihang University, Beijing 100191 (China)

Description

Highlights: • A novel three-stage carbon capture ready (CCR) investment evaluation model under uncertainty was developed. • CCR plays a key role to promote future carbon capture and storage (CCS) retrofit and carbon abatement. • Allowing for operating flexibility of CCS may actually reduce current CCR investment. • Learning effects of CCS technology may be detrimental to current CCR investment. • Higher electricity prices may be disincentive for current CCR investment. - Abstract: Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is considered a key technology option for abating CO2 emissions in carbon-intensive sectors, e.g. the power sector. However, high investment costs and risk hinder the diffusion of CCS. To avoid stranded assets or high future costs for retrofitting, new plants can be made carbon capture ready (CCR) to enable them to accommodate future CCS retrofitting at low additional costs. Current CCR investment decisions are closely related to future CCS retrofitting and CCS operation decisions in subsequent stages, all of which would be affected by uncertainties. We develop a three-stage CCR investment decision model under multiple uncertainties which allows for investment and especially operating flexibilities. Applying this model to China shows that CCS operating flexibility under the carbon-pricing scheme may actually lower the probability of investing in a CCR plant, and neglecting it may overestimate the propensity for investing in CCR. Moreover, learning effects, which reduce the costs of future CCS retrofitting, may be detrimental to CCR investment, indicating that the policy support for research on, development of, and deployment of CCS to reduce CCS costs should be coordinated with CCR investments. Although higher electricity prices can increase the value of an investment opportunity, it may restrain CCR investment. Finally, CCR investment does not appear to be economically viable under current conditions in China because of low carbon prices, high carbon price risks, high CCR investment costs and the high opportunity costs of CCS operation.

Availability note (English)

Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2018.01.026

Additional details

Identifiers

DOI
10.1016/j.eneco.2018.01.026;
PII
S0140988318300343;

Publishing Information

Journal Title
Energy Economics
Journal Volume
70
Journal Page Range
p. 453-464
ISSN
0140-9883
CODEN
EECODR

INIS

Country of Publication
United Kingdom
Country of Input or Organization
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
INIS RN
50070505
Subject category
S29: ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY;
Descriptors DEI
CARBON; CARBON DIOXIDE; CHINA; COST; ECONOMICS; ELECTRICITY; ENERGY POLICY; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; PRICES; RETROFITTING
Descriptors DEC
ASIA; CARBON COMPOUNDS; CARBON OXIDES; CHALCOGENIDES; ELEMENTS; GOVERNMENT POLICIES; NONMETALS; OXIDES; OXYGEN COMPOUNDS

Optional Information

Copyright
Copyright (c) 2017 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.