Economic evaluation of environmental externalities in China's coal-fired power generation

被引:39
作者
Zhao, Xiaoli [1 ]
Cai, Qiong [2 ]
Ma, Chunbo [3 ]
Hu, Yanan [4 ]
Luo, Kaiyan [2 ]
Li, William [5 ]
机构
[1] China Univ Petr, Sch Business Adm, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] North China Elect Power Univ, Sch Econ & Management, Beijing, Peoples R China
[3] Univ Western Australia, Sch Agr & Resource Econ, Ctr Environm Econ & Policy, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia
[4] Kunshan China Resources City Gas Co Ltd, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
[5] Swarthmore Coll, 500 Coll Ave, Swarthmore, PA 19081 USA
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Coal-fired power industry; Environmental externalities; Willingness to pay; China; WILLINGNESS-TO-PAY; COST-BENEFIT-ANALYSIS; CONTINGENT VALUATION; RENEWABLE ENERGY; CHEAP TALK; PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS; CHOICE EXPERIMENT; ELECTRICITY; DESIGN; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1016/j.enpol.2016.12.030
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Serious environmental externalities exist in China's power industry. Environmental economics theory suggests that the evaluation of environmental externality is the basis of designing an efficient regulation. The purposes of this study are: (1) to identify Chinese respondents' preferences for green development of electric power industry and the socio-economic characteristics behind them; (2) to investigate the different attitudes of the respondents towards pollution and CO2 reduction; (3) to quantitatively evaluate the environmental cost of China's coal-fired power generation. Based on the method of choice experiments (CE) and the 411 questionnaires with 2466 data points, we found that Chinese respondents prefer PM2.5, SO2 and NOx reduction to CO2 reduction and that the environment cost of coal-fired power plants in China is 0.30 yuan per kWh. In addition, we found that the socioeconomic characteristics of income, education, gender, and environmental awareness have significant impacts on respondents' choices. These findings indicate that the environmental cost of coal-fired power generation is a significant factor that requires great consideration in the formulation of electric power development policies. In addition, importance should also be attached to the implementation of green power price policy and enhancement of environmental protection awareness.
引用
收藏
页码:307 / 317
页数:11
相关论文
共 62 条
[1]   Cheap talk reconsidered: New evidence from CVM [J].
Aadland, David ;
Caplan, Arthur J. .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR & ORGANIZATION, 2006, 60 (04) :562-578
[2]   Environmental pricing of externalities from different sources of electricity generation in Chile [J].
Aravena, Claudia ;
Hutchinson, W. George ;
Longo, Alberto .
ENERGY ECONOMICS, 2012, 34 (04) :1214-1225
[3]   Environmental cost-benefit analysis and the EU (European Union) Industrial Emissions Directive: Exploring the societal efficiency of a DeNOx retrofit at a coal-fired power plant [J].
Bachmann, Till M. ;
van der Kamp, Jonathan .
ENERGY, 2014, 68 :125-139
[4]  
Bennett J., 2001, The Choice Modelling Approach to Environmental Valuation
[5]   Does willingness to pay for green energy differ by source? [J].
Borchers, Allison M. ;
Duke, Joshua M. ;
Parsons, George R. .
ENERGY POLICY, 2007, 35 (06) :3327-3334
[6]   Reliability of individual valuations of public and private goods: Choice consistency, response time, and preference refinement [J].
Brown, Thomas C. ;
Kingsley, David ;
Peterson, George L. ;
Flores, Nicholas E. ;
Clarke, Andrea ;
Birjulin, Andrej .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 2008, 92 (07) :1595-1606
[7]   The effect of varying the causes of environmental problems on stated WTP values: evidence from a field study [J].
Bulte, E ;
Gerking, S ;
List, JA ;
de Zeeuw, A .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 2005, 49 (02) :330-342
[8]   Using cheap talk as a test of validity in choice experiments [J].
Carlsson, F ;
Frykblom, P ;
Lagerkvist, CJ .
ECONOMICS LETTERS, 2005, 89 (02) :147-152
[9]  
Colombo S., 2008, 200828 SER COL STIRL
[10]   Unbiased value estimates for environmental goods: A cheap talk design for the contingent valuation method [J].
Cummings, RG ;
Taylor, LO .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 1999, 89 (03) :649-665