Affiliation:
1. Institute of Economics and Industrial Engineering, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Abstract
The climate change and deterioration of nature appear to be global problems, and the efficiency of solving them depends on the level of decarbonizing countries’ and regions’ economies. Siberia and Scandinavia are relevant megaregions with similar natural, climate, economic and energy characteristics, though demonstrating, in many cases, different patterns of decarbonizing. The accomplished comparative analysis has confirmed that the differences have been conditioned by different approaches to the process of decarbonization. Low-carbon vector of Siberia suggests counterbalance of total GHG, owing to CO2 reduction and its removal with purpose to achieve carbon-neutrality by 2060. In Scandinavia reaching net-zero emission by 2050 suggests the compensation of only residual emission of GHG and only thanks to reliable removal and sequestration technologies. Differences depend on prices and values that refer to the energy sector as a prime emitter in both megaregions. In Siberia the focus is on the evolutionary, gradual energy transition from coal to natural gas, considering that fossil fuels are cheap, available, subsidized by state, and supported by the modernization activities of energy companies, which are led by principals of security, stability and profitability. Scandinavia megaregion seems to prefer the approach to electrifying economy with renewables. Such choice has been determined not only by the price-fall of renewables, but also by the growth of their value on behalf of long-term, innovative activities of energy companies, active role of the states with the purpose of reaching the common good.
Subject
Economics and Econometrics,Finance,General Economics, Econometrics and Finance,History
Reference56 articles.
1. Analytical Center under the Government of the Russian Federation (2019). In focus: Scandinavia — welfare states. Bulletin on Current Trends in the World Economy, No. 45, pp. 4—23. (In Russian).
2. Antyushina N. M., Bazhan A. I., Belov V. B. (eds.). (2014). Greater Europe. Ideas, reality, prospects. Moscow: Institute of Europe RAS. (In Russian).
3. Barabanov O., Maslova E. (2022). International decarbonization regime as a tool for implementing values of the risk society. World Eсonomy and International Relations, Vol. 66, No. 5, pp. 112—119. (In Russian).https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2022-66-5-112-119
4. Bashmakov I. A. (2022). Projections of the global energy system, evolution 30 years later: Сhecking the lessons of the future by the past experience. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 5, pp. 51—78. (In Russian).https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2022-5-51-78
5. Burkova E. I. (2019). Ecological modernization in an age of globalization: Тhe role of environmental NGOs. World Eсonomy and International Relations, Vol. 63, No. 8, pp. 64—71. (In Russian).https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2019-63-8-64-71
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献