IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v49y2012icp597-607.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The economically acceptable scenarios for investments in desulphurization and denitrification on existing coal-fired units in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Author

Listed:
  • Dimitrijević, Zinaida
  • Tatić, Kasim

Abstract

After the recent war (1992–1995) the country BH includes the two entities, the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBiH) and the Republic Srpska (RS). Given these two entities the country is politically divided. The country is in transition and determined on accession to the European Union (EU). Coal-fired plants exist in both entities, two in FBiH and two in RS. Significant investment is needed to ensure that existing coal-fired units comply with EU Directive on large combustion plant by 2017. BH (like some EU countries) has chance to negotiate the position of country with the EU with possible outcome to receive delay in fulfilling requirements for some coal-fired plants or even some exceptions. Also, there is a lack of reliable and harmonised energy data in BH—over all data collection on air pollutant emissions is not yet established. So, some data collection is done for the needs of this paper and by using the specific external cost, annual emissions of pollutants and cost-benefit analyses the most acceptable scenarios for investments in desulphurisation and denitrification on the existing coal-fired units in BH on the economic and environmental base, not political, is presented in the paper.

Suggested Citation

  • Dimitrijević, Zinaida & Tatić, Kasim, 2012. "The economically acceptable scenarios for investments in desulphurization and denitrification on existing coal-fired units in Bosnia and Herzegovina," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 597-607.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:49:y:2012:i:c:p:597-607
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.064
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421512005745
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.064?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
    ---><---

    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. Krewitt, Wolfram, 2002. "External costs of energy--do the answers match the questions?: Looking back at 10 years of ExternE," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(10), pages 839-848, August.
    2. Ari Rabl & Mike Holland, 2008. "Environmental Assessment Framework for Policy Applications: Life Cycle Assessment, External Costs and Multi-criteria Analysis," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(1), pages 81-105.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Dimitrijevic, Zinaida & Salihbegovic, Iris, 2012. "Sustainability assessment of increasing renewable energy sources penetration – JP Elektroprivreda B&H case study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 205-212.
    2. Ostojic, Gordana & Stankovski, Stevan & Ratkovic, Zeljko & Miladinovic, Ljubomir & Maksimovic, Rado, 2013. "Development of hydro potential in Republic Srpska," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 196-203.
    3. Meyer, Andrew & Pac, Grzegorz, 2017. "Analyzing the characteristics of plants choosing to opt-out of the Large Combustion Plant Directive," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 61-68.
    4. Kudełko, Mariusz, 2021. "Modeling of Polish energy sector – tool specification and results," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 215(PA).

    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. Brand, Christian, 2016. "Beyond ‘Dieselgate’: Implications of unaccounted and future air pollutant emissions and energy use for cars in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 1-12.
    2. Bachmann, Till M. & van der Kamp, Jonathan, 2014. "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," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 125-139.
    3. Jochem, Patrick & Doll, Claus & Fichtner, Wolf, 2016. "External costs of electric vehicles," MPRA Paper 91602, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Gulli, Francesco, 2006. "Small distributed generation versus centralised supply: a social cost-benefit analysis in the residential and service sectors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 804-832, May.
    5. Markus Zimmer & Jana Lippelt, 2011. "Kurz zum Klima: 25 Jahre nach Tschernobyl," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 64(09), pages 56-59, May.
    6. Bouckaert, Stéphanie & Assoumou, Edi & Selosse, Sandrine & Maïzi, Nadia, 2014. "A prospective analysis of waste heat management at power plants and water conservation issues using a global TIMES model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 80-91.
    7. Jenniches, Simon & Worrell, Ernst & Fumagalli, Elena, 2019. "Regional economic and environmental impacts of wind power developments: A case study of a German region," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 499-514.
    8. Chernyavs'ka, Liliya & Gullì, Francesco, 2010. "Measuring the environmental benefits of hydrogen transportation fuel cycles under uncertainty about external costs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5335-5345, October.
    9. Ericsson, Karin, 2007. "Co-firing—A strategy for bioenergy in Poland?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1838-1847.
    10. Fouquet, Roger, 2011. "Long run trends in energy-related external costs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2380-2389.
    11. Steffen Kallbekken & Håkon Sælen & Erlend Hermansen, 2013. "Bridging the Energy Efficiency Gap: A Field Experiment on Lifetime Energy Costs and Household Appliances," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 1-16, March.
    12. Neves, Lui­s Pires & Martins, António Gomes & Antunes, Carlos Henggeler & Dias, Lui­s Cândido, 2008. "A multi-criteria decision approach to sorting actions for promoting energy efficiency," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 2351-2363, July.
    13. Fahlén, E. & Ahlgren, E.O., 2010. "Accounting for external costs in a study of a Swedish district-heating system - An assessment of environmental policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 4909-4920, September.
    14. Soderholm, Patrik & Sundqvist, Thomas, 2003. "Pricing environmental externalities in the power sector: ethical limits and implications for social choice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 333-350, October.
    15. Heendeniya, Charitha Buddhika & Sumper, Andreas & Eicker, Ursula, 2020. "The multi-energy system co-planning of nearly zero-energy districts – Status-quo and future research potential," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 267(C).
    16. Frame, Bob & Cavanagh, Jo, 2009. "Experiences of sustainability assessment: An awkward adolescence," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 195-208.
    17. Brand, Bernhard & Missaoui, Rafik, 2014. "Multi-criteria analysis of electricity generation mix scenarios in Tunisia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 251-261.
    18. Verbruggen, Aviel, 2008. "Renewable and nuclear power: A common future?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4036-4047, November.
    19. Eto, R. & Murata, A. & Uchiyama, Y. & Okajima, K., 2013. "Co-benefits of including CCS projects in the CDM in India's power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 260-268.
    20. Badcock, Jeremy & Lenzen, Manfred, 2010. "Subsidies for electricity-generating technologies: A review," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5038-5047, September.

    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:enepol:v:49:y:2012:i:c:p:597-607. 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/enpol .

    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.