Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Building the Agenda for Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage: Limits of EU-Activism

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Energy Policy Making in the EU

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Energy ((LNEN,volume 28))

Abstract

This chapter analyses the agenda-setting processes for the Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS) technology by referring to the theory of strategic action fields. CCS is a technology aiming to reduce CO2 emissions from power plants using fossil fuels, especially coal. The origins of the CCS debate can be traced back to sustainability-oriented Norwegian policy and was catapulted on the European Union’s (EU) agenda around 2005. A sudden wave of hectic activity followed within the EU. However, the technology is presently largely off the official EU agenda again. The reasons are changing conditions in the environment of the field and failed framing processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The data sources are expert statements solicited in the course of the project “Die Bedeutung des Standortes Deutschland für den Kraftwerksbau vor dem Hintergrund einer zunehmenden Internationalisierung von Innovationsprozessen” funded by the Volkswagen Foundation, (cp. Weimer-Jehle et al. 2009) during 2007–2009, document analysis and 12 additional expert interviews conducted in 2010–2012.

  2. 2.

    Shortly after the Fukushima catastrophe, the German federal government in 2011 decided to shut down 8 of the 17 German nuclear power plants immediately with the rest following until 2022. This decision is usually referred to as the “Energiewende”-decision.

  3. 3.

    The biggest proportion of CCS-related Community documents is related to discussions with China.

References

  • AG Energiebilanzen. (2013). Bilanzen 1990–2012. http://www.ag-energiebilanzen.de/7-0-Bilanzen-1990-2012.html

  • Barrett, S. (2009). The coming global climate-technology revolution. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(2), 53–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boasson, E. L., & Wettestad, J. (2013). EU climate policy. Industry, policy interaction and external environment. Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, F. (2011). Carbon capture and storage as a corporate technology strategy challenge. Energy Policy, 39(5), 2256–2264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (1988). The greenhouse effect and the community. COM (88) 656, 16 November.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2000). Green paper: Towards a European strategy for the security of energy supply. COM (2000) 769 final, 29 November.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2005). Communication from the commission to the council and the European parliament. Winning the battle against global climate change. COM (2005) 35, 9 February.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2006). Communication from the commission to the council and the European parliament. Sustainable power generation from fossil fuels: Aiming for near-zero emissions from coal after 2020. COM (2006) 843 final.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2007). Commission staff working document. Accompanying document to the communication from the commission to the council and the European parliament. Sustainable power generation from fossil fuels: Aiming for near-zero emissions from coal after 2020. Impact Assessment. SEC (2006) 1722, 10 January 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2011). Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions. Energy roadmap 2050. COM (2011) 885 final, 15 December.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2013). Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions on the future of carbon capture and storage in Europe. COM (2013) 180 final, 27 March.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, C., & Newell, R. G. (2008). Environmental and technology policies for climate mitigation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 55(2), 142–162.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Fligstein, N., & McAdam, D. (2012). A theory of fields. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Geels, F. (2013). Politics and power in low-carbon electricity transitions: A multi-level analysis of green niche-innovations and resilient regimes. Ms prepared for Theory, Culture & Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Energy Agency. (2013). Tracking clean energy progress 2013. Paris: International Energy Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, O. M., & Ruud, A. (2005). Coherence of environmental and innovation policies. A green innovation policy in Norway. ProSus Report 05/04. Oslo: University of Oslo, ProSus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood, M. (2008). After the coal rush: Assessing the policy options for coal-fired power generation. London: Institute for Public Policy Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pahle, M. (2010). Germany’s dash for coal: Exploring drivers and factors. Energy Policy, 38, 3431–3442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Praetorius, B., & von Stechow, C. (2009). Electricity gap versus climate change: electricity politics and the potential role of CCS in Germany. In J. Meadowcroft & O. Langhelle (Eds.), Caching the carbon: The politics and policy of carbon capture and storage (pp. 125–157). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricci, E., Bosetti, V., Baker, E., & Jenni K. (2014). From expert elicitations to integrated assessment: Future prospects of carbon capture technologies. Nota Di Lavoro 44.2014. Milan: Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogge, K., & Hoffmann, V. (2009). The impact of the EU ETS on the sectoral innovation system for power generation technologies—findings for Germany. Paper submitted to DIME workshop on “environmental innovation, industrial dynamics and entrepreneurship”, 10–12 May 2009, Utrecht, Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, M., Scheer, D., & Wassermann, S. (2010). Neue Technik, alte Pfade? Zur Akzeptanz der CO2- Speicherung in Deutschland. GAIA, 19(4), 287–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stangeland, A. (2007). A model for the CO2 capture potential. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 1, 418–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tjernshaugen, A. (2008). Political commitment to CO2 capture and storage: Evidence from government RD&D budgets. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 13(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tjernshaugen, A. (2011). The growth of political support for CO2 capture and storage in Norway. Environmental Politics, 20(2), 227–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tjernshaugen, A., & Lee, H. (2004). Shaming and framing: Norwegian nongovernmental organizations in the climate change negotiations. CICERO Working Paper 2004:09, Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tosun, J. (2013). How the EU handles uncertain risks: Understanding the role of the precautionary principle. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(10), 1517–1528.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Markussen, N. et al. (2012) A socio-technical framework for assessing the viability of carbon capture and storage technology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(5), 903–918.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unruh, G. C. (2000). Understanding carbon lock-in. Energy Policy, 28(12), 817–830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Unruh, G. C. (2002). Escaping carbon lock-in. Energy Policy, 30(4), 317–325.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • van Alphen, C., van Ruijven, J., Kasa, S., Hekkert, M., & Turkenburg, W. (2009). The performance of the Norwegian carbon dioxide, capture and storage innovation system. Energy Policy, 37, 43–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbong, G. P. J., & Loorbach, D. (2012). Governing the energy transition: Reality, illusion or necessity? New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weimer-Jehle, W., Wassermann, S., & Fuchs, G. (2009). Erstellung von Energie- und Innovationsszenarien mit der Cross-Impact-Bilanzanalyse: Internationalisierung von Innovationstrategien im Bereich der Kohlekraftwerkstechnologie. Ms. 11. Symposium Energieinnovation Graz/Austria.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Social Sciences, Sowi VI, University of Stuttgart, Seidenstr. 36/II, 70174, Stuttgart, Germany

    Gerhard Fuchs

Authors
  1. Gerhard Fuchs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gerhard Fuchs .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Political Science, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany

    Jale Tosun

  2. Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance (iFQ), Berlin, Germany

    Sophie Biesenbender

  3. Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany

    Kai Schulze

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fuchs, G. (2015). Building the Agenda for Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage: Limits of EU-Activism. In: Tosun, J., Biesenbender, S., Schulze, K. (eds) Energy Policy Making in the EU. Lecture Notes in Energy, vol 28. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6645-0_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6645-0_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-6644-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-6645-0

  • eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation