IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/resene/v20y1998i4p327-343.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Empirical evidence of advances in scrubber technology

Author

Listed:
  • Bellas, Allen S.

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Bellas, Allen S., 1998. "Empirical evidence of advances in scrubber technology," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 327-343, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:resene:v:20:y:1998:i:4:p:327-343
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928-7655(97)00039-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Downing, Paul B. & White, Lawrence J., 1986. "Innovation in pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 18-29, March.
    2. Heyes, Anthony G, 1996. "Towards an Efficiency Interpretation of Regulatory Implementation Lags," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 81-98, July.
    3. Milliman, Scott R. & Prince, Raymond, 1989. "Firm incentives to promote technological change in pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 247-265, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rabah Amir & Adriana Gama & Katarzyna Werner, 2018. "On Environmental Regulation of Oligopoly Markets: Emission versus Performance Standards," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(1), pages 147-167, May.
    2. Stavins, Robert, 2001. "Lessons From the American Experiment With Market-Based Environmental Policies," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-53, Resources for the Future.
    3. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    4. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-54, Resources for the Future.
    5. Requate, Till, 1998. "Incentives to innovate under emission taxes and tradeable permits," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 139-165, February.
    6. Daigee Shaw & Ming-Feng Hung, 2001. "Evolution and evaluation of air pollution control policy in Taiwan," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 4(3), pages 141-166, September.
    7. Cristian Sima & Gheorghe Marinescu, 2012. "Scarcity Natural Resources and the History of their Exploitation," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 2(Special 1), pages 259-266, May.
    8. Heindl, Peter, 2012. "Transaction costs and tradable permits: Empirical evidence from the EU emissions trading scheme," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-021, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. Carmen Arguedas & Eva Camacho & José Zofío, 2010. "Environmental Policy Instruments: Technology Adoption Incentives with Imperfect Compliance," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(2), pages 261-274, October.
    10. Parry, Ian W H, 1998. "Pollution Regulation and the Efficiency Gains from Technological Innovation," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 229-254, November.
    11. K. Conrad, 2000. "Energy Tax and Competition in Energy Efficiency: The Case of Consumer Durables," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 15(2), pages 159-177, February.
    12. Susse Georg & Inge Røpke & Ulrik Jørgensen, 1992. "Clean technology — Innovation and environmental regulation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(6), pages 533-550, November.
    13. Frans P. de Vries, 2007. "Market Structure and Technology Diffusion Incentives under Emission Taxes and Emission Reduction Subsidies," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 163(2), pages 256-268, June.
    14. Khanna, Madhu & Zilberman, David, 2001. "Adoption of energy efficient technologies and carbon abatement: the electricity generating sector in India," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 637-658, November.
    15. Dalia Patino-Echeverri & Dallas Burtraw & Karen Palmer, 2013. "Flexible mandates for investment in new technology," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 121-155, October.
    16. Spyros Arvanitis & Michael Peneder & Christian Rammer & Tobias Stucki & Martin Wörter, 2016. "The adoption of green energy technologies: The role of policies in an international comparison," KOF Working papers 16-411, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    17. Parry, Ian W H & Pizer, William A & Fischer, Carolyn, 2003. "How Large Are the Welfare Gains from Technological Innovation Induced by Environmental Policies?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 237-255, May.
    18. Frondel, Manuel & Horbach, Jens & Rennings, Klaus, 2008. "What triggers environmental management and innovation? Empirical evidence for Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 153-160, May.
    19. Fischer, Carolyn & Newell, Richard G., 2005. "Environmental and Technology Policies for Climate Change and Renewable Energy," Discussion Papers 10789, Resources for the Future.
    20. Suzi Kerr & Richard G. Newell, 2003. "Policy‐Induced Technology Adoption: Evidence from the U.S. Lead Phasedown," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 317-343, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:resene:v:20:y:1998:i:4:p:327-343. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505569 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.