Building back better: Granular energy technologies in green recovery funding programs

被引:1
|
作者
Wilson, Charlie [1 ,2 ]
De Stercke, Simon [2 ,3 ]
Zimm, Caroline [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oxford, Environm Change Inst ECI, Oxford OX1 3QY, England
[2] Int Inst Appl Syst Anal IIASA, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria
[3] Imperial Coll London, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, London SW7 2AZ, England
基金
欧洲研究理事会;
关键词
RENEWABLE ENERGY; EMPLOYMENT; MEGAPROJECTS; EFFICIENCY; POWER;
D O I
10.1016/j.joule.2023.05.012
中图分类号
O64 [物理化学(理论化学)、化学物理学];
学科分类号
070304 ; 081704 ;
摘要
Granular energy technologies with smaller unit sizes and costs deploy faster, create more jobs, and distribute benefits more widely than lumpy large-scale alternatives. These characteristics of granu-larity align with the aims of fiscal stimulus in response to COVID-19. We analyze the technological granularity of 93 green recovery funding programs in France, Germany, South Korea, and the UK that target & POUND;72.9 billion for low-carbon energy technologies and in-frastructures across five emissions-intensive sectors. We find that South Korea's "New Deal"program is the most technologically granular with strong weighting toward distributed renewables, smart technologies, electric vehicle charge points, and other rela-tively low unit cost technologies that are quick to deploy. The UK has the least granular portfolio, concentrating large amounts of public money on small numbers of mega-scale energy projects with high implementation risks. We demonstrate how technological granularity has multiple desirable characteristics of green recovery: jobs, speed, and distributed benefits.
引用
收藏
页码:1206 / 1226
页数:22
相关论文
共 36 条
  • [1] Recovery from Catastrophe and Building Back Better
    Takeuchi, Kuniyoshi
    Tanaka, Shigenobu
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DISASTER RESEARCH, 2016, 11 (06) : 1190 - 1201
  • [2] Building back better with people centered housing recovery
    Maly, Elizabeth
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DISASTER RISK REDUCTION, 2018, 29 : 84 - 93
  • [3] Building back better in Latin America: examining the sustainability of COVID-19 recovery and development programs
    O'Ryan, Raul
    Villavicencio, Andrea
    Gajardo, Joaquin
    Ulloa, Andres
    Ibarra, Cecilia
    Rojas, Maisa
    [J]. GLOBAL SUSTAINABILITY, 2023, 6
  • [4] Building back better: How big are green spending multipliers?
    Batini, Nicoletta
    Di Serio, Mario
    Fragetta, Matteo
    Melina, Giovanni
    Waldron, Anthony
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2022, 193
  • [5] Funding mechanisms for disaster recovery: can we afford to build back better?
    Macaskill, Kristen
    Guthrie, Peter
    [J]. 7TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON BUILDING RESILIENCE: USING SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE TO INFORM POLICY AND PRACTICE IN DISASTER RISK REDUCTION, 2018, 212 : 451 - 458
  • [6] A green roof model for building energy simulation programs
    Sailor, D. J.
    [J]. ENERGY AND BUILDINGS, 2008, 40 (08) : 1466 - 1478
  • [7] Building back better? Rethinking gender and recovery in the time of COVID-19
    Alburo-Canete, Kaira Zoe
    [J]. GLOBAL SOCIAL POLICY, 2022, 22 (01) : 180 - 183
  • [8] Key Energy Saving Technologies and Cost Control of Green Building
    Li, Guowen
    Yin, Lixin
    Qian, Xueming
    Yan, Jing
    [J]. 2011 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SOCIAL SCIENCES AND SOCIETY (ICSSS 2011), VOL 4, 2011, : 178 - +
  • [9] Recovery of Critical Rare Earth Elements for Green Energy Technologies
    Kumar, Jyothi Rajesh
    Lee, Jin-Young
    [J]. RARE METAL TECHNOLOGY 2017, 2017, : 19 - 29
  • [10] Re-conceptualising "Building Back Better" to improve post-disaster recovery
    Mannakkara, Sandeeka
    Wilkinson, Suzanne
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGING PROJECTS IN BUSINESS, 2014, 7 (03) : 327 - 341