IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/feemdp/55327.html

Nuclear versus Coal plus CCS: A Comparison of Two Competitive Base-load Climate Control Options

Author

Listed:
  • Tavoni, Massimo
  • van der Zwaan, Bob

Abstract

In this paper we analyze the relative importance and mutual behavior of two competing base-load electricity generation options that each are capable of contributing significantly to the abatement of global CO2 emissions: nuclear energy and coal-based power production complemented with CO2 capture and storage (CCS). We also investigate how, in scenarios from an integrated assessment model that simulates the economics of a climate-constrained world, the prospects for nuclear energy would change if exogenous limitations on the spread of nuclear technology were relaxed. Using the climate change economics model WITCH we find that until 2050 the resulting growth rates of nuclear electricity generation capacity become comparable to historical rates observed during the 1980s. Given that nuclear energy continues to face serious challenges and contention, we inspect how extensive the improvements of coal-based power equipped with CCS technology would need to be if our model is to significantly scale down the construction of new nuclear power plants.

Suggested Citation

  • Tavoni, Massimo & van der Zwaan, Bob, 2009. "Nuclear versus Coal plus CCS: A Comparison of Two Competitive Base-load Climate Control Options," Sustainable Development Papers 55327, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:feemdp:55327
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.55327
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/55327/files/100-09.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.55327?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Enrica Cian & Samuel Carrara & Massimo Tavoni, 2014. "Innovation benefits from nuclear phase-out: can they compensate the costs?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 637-650, April.
    2. Berumen, Sergio A. & Pérez-Megino, Luis P., 2016. "Ranking Socioeconómico para el Desarrollo de las Regiones Carboníferas en Europa || Socioeconomic Ranking for the Development of coal-mining regions in Europe," Revista de Métodos Cuantitativos para la Economía y la Empresa = Journal of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, vol. 21(1), pages 39-57, June.
    3. BERUMEN, Sergio A. & LLAMAZARES-REDONDO, Francisco, 2014. "Economic Development and Viability Firms in European Mining Regions," Regional and Sectoral Economic Studies, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 14(1), pages 33-46.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • D9 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics
    • H0 - Public Economics - - General
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights
    • O4 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity
    • Q4 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics

    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:ags:feemdp:55327. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.html .

    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.