Journal
FRONTIERS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE
Volume 10, Issue -, Pages -Publisher
FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.924509
Keywords
industrial community energy system; energy transition; financial incentive; industrial collaboration; community energy systems
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
With the industrial sector consuming almost one-third of global energy demand, it is crucial to reduce carbon footprints in this sector. Transitioning to renewable electricity and implementing collective power generation within communities can effectively reduce carbon footprints and enhance energy security of industries. This research investigates the initiation and continuation of industrial community energy systems and suggests that the TAX incentive performs best in mobilizing investments and promoting the establishment of these systems, despite being the most expensive option for governments.
Considering that the industrial sector consumes almost one-third of the energy demand globally, it is an urgent call to reduce the carbon footprints in this sector. Among different approaches to meet this goal, such as the employment of carbon capture technologies and increasing energy efficiency within industries, transitioning to renewable electricity (RE) would be another outlook to reduce the carbon footprints and increase the energy security of the industries. Collective power generation within communities has shown to be feasible and promising in the industrial sector, where groups of industries collaborate to generate energy and meet their energy demand. In this research, we investigated how the initiation and continuation of industrial community energy systems (InCES) among companies can take place and which financial incentives the government can introduce to support these initiatives. We built an agent-based model that incorporates cost-benefit analysis and cultural factors in the decision making process of industries, to assess the feasibility of initiating/joining an InCES by industries. This study shows that the FIT mechanism had the worst performance in incentivizing the establishment of an InCES among industries. In contrast, the TAX incentive showed the best performance in mobilizing the investments towards InCES. Similarly, the TAX incentive showed relatively superior performance in electricity generation, the number of established InCESs, and the number of companies joining each InCES. Despite the better performance of the TAX incentive, it was also the most expensive option for the governments as a significant share of the establishment costs of an InCES was put on the shoulders of the governments.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available