4.6 Article

Brick by brick: Governing industry decarbonization in the face of uncertainty and risk

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2021.07.002

关键词

Decarbonization; Basic industry; Harder-to-abate sectors; Barriers; Policy; Policy mixes

资金

  1. Formas
  2. Swedish Research Council for Sustainable Development [2020-00174]
  3. Mistra Carbon Exit research program (Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research)
  4. Swedish Energy Agency [44672-1]
  5. Formas [2020-00174] Funding Source: Formas

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Basic materials industries, such as steel and cement production, play a critical role in modern society, but are difficult to decarbonize due to high energy inputs and significant CO2 emissions. Addressing industrial emissions and developing technologies for deeper emissions cuts have been slow, with barriers in market, technology, regulatory, and coordination hindering progress. Policy measures that can facilitate the climate transition are crucial in addressing these challenges.
Basic materials such as steel and cement have been instrumental to modern society, but the production requires high energy inputs and is associated with significant CO2 emissions. Long investment cycles, slow turnover rate of the capital stock, and high capital intensity mean that basic materials industries are among the economic activities that will be the most difficult to decarbonize. Although the importance of addressing industrial emissions has been increasingly recognized, the development of measures and technologies that could deliver deeper emissions cuts has been relatively slow. In this paper, we present a conceptual framework focusing on four categories of barriers-market, technology, regulatory, and coordination-that hamper deep decarbonization in the basic materials industries. We use the Swedish basic materials industries and policy context to illustrate how the proposed framework can be understood and applied and broadly discuss policies that can facilitate the climate transition.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据