TY - JOUR
T1 - Socio-economic impacts of low-carbon power generation portfolios: Strategies with and without CCS for the Netherlands
AU - Koelbl, Barbara S.
AU - van den Broek, Machteld A.
AU - Wilting, Harry C.
AU - Sanders, Mark W.J.L.
AU - Bulavskaya, Tatyana
AU - Wood, Richard
AU - Faaij, André P.C.
AU - van Vuuren, Detlef P.
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) could be an interesting option to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in the Netherlands. This study compares a mitigation strategy for the Dutch power sector that includes CCS to one without on several socio-economic indicators. In particular, we calculate incremental gross value added (GVA), employment and import dependency impacts of two such low-carbon power production portfolios for the Netherlands. We combine technology specific techno-economic bottom-up data with a macro-economic multi-regional Input-Output-Table containing high sectoral detail. For the total economy, we find the differences between these scenarios to be small. Still, gross value added, and employment are lower under the CCS-inclusive strategy, while import dependency is higher. For the power sector, the differences between the scenarios are, however, considerable. Furthermore, our analysis shows that also for other sectors the differences between the scenarios could be large. For instance, a CCS-exclusive strategy leads to considerably higher GVA and employment in domestic construction services, while the CCS-inclusive strategy comes with considerably higher GVA and employment for natural gas mining and related upstream sectors. (c) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
AB - Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) could be an interesting option to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in the Netherlands. This study compares a mitigation strategy for the Dutch power sector that includes CCS to one without on several socio-economic indicators. In particular, we calculate incremental gross value added (GVA), employment and import dependency impacts of two such low-carbon power production portfolios for the Netherlands. We combine technology specific techno-economic bottom-up data with a macro-economic multi-regional Input-Output-Table containing high sectoral detail. For the total economy, we find the differences between these scenarios to be small. Still, gross value added, and employment are lower under the CCS-inclusive strategy, while import dependency is higher. For the power sector, the differences between the scenarios are, however, considerable. Furthermore, our analysis shows that also for other sectors the differences between the scenarios could be large. For instance, a CCS-exclusive strategy leads to considerably higher GVA and employment in domestic construction services, while the CCS-inclusive strategy comes with considerably higher GVA and employment for natural gas mining and related upstream sectors. (c) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
U2 - 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.08.068
DO - 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.08.068
M3 - Article
SN - 0306-2619
VL - 183
SP - 257
EP - 277
JO - Applied Energy
JF - Applied Energy
ER -