The current status of carbon capture and storage development in Japan: potency, policy, demonstration projects, implication, and scenario model in emission reduction

References

• Abas, N., A. Kalair, and N. Khan. 2015. Review of fossil fuels and future energy technologies. Futures 69:31–26. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2015.03.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdul Quader, M., S. Ahmed, S. Z. Dawal, and Y. Nukman. 2016. Present needs, recent progress and future trends of energy-efficient Ultra-Low Carbon Dioxide (CO) steelmaking (ULCOS) program. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 55:537–49. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abe, M., S. Saito, D. Tanase, Y. Sawada, Y. Hirama, and Y. Motoyama. 2013. CCS large-scale demonstration in Japan. Energy Procedia 37:6326–34. doi:10.1016/J.EGYPRO.2013.06.561.
   Google Scholar
• Adu, E., Y. Zhang, and D. Liu. 2019. Current situation of carbon dioxide capture, storage, and enhanced oil recovery in the oil and gas industry. The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 97 (5):1048–76. doi:10.1002/cjce.23393.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alcalde, J., N. Heinemann, L. Mabon, R. H. Worden, H. de Coninck, H. Robertson, M. Maver, S. Ghanbari, F. Swennenhuis, I. Mann, et al. 2019. Acorn: Developing full-chain industrial carbon capture and storage in a resource- and infrastructure-rich hydrocarbon province. Journal of Cleaner Production 233:963–71. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.087.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aoun, M.-C., and S. Cornot-Gandolphe. 2015. The European gas market looking for its golden age? (issue October). IRFI. http://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:48018623.
   Google Scholar
• Arafah, W., L. Nugroho, R. Takaya, and S. Soekapdjo. 2018. Marketing strategy for renewable energy development in Indonesia context today. International Journal of Energy Economics & Policy 8 (5):181–86.
   Google Scholar
• Arnette, A. N. 2017. Renewable energy and carbon capture and sequestration for a reduced carbon energy plan: An optimization model. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 70:254–65. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asayama, S., and A. Ishii. 2017. Selling stories of techno-optimism? The role of narratives on discursive construction of carbon capture and storage in the Japanese media. Energy Research & Social Science 31:50–59. doi:10.1016/J.ERSS.2017.06.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banks, F. E. 2015. Energy and economic theory. Vol. 9. WORLD SCIENTIFIC. doi:10.1142/8240.
   Google Scholar
• Bataille, C., D. Sawyer, N. Melton, and R. Adamson. 2015. PATHWAYS to DEEP DECARBONIZATION in CANADA phase 2 report: Draft final for comment. https://cmcghg.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Final-Canada-DDPP-Country-Report-July-14.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bhat, A. A., and P. P. Mishra. 2020. Evaluating the performance of carbon tax on green technology: Evidence from India. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 27 (2):2226–37. doi:10.1007/s11356-019-06666-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolton, R., T. J. Foxon, and S. Hall. 2016. Energy transitions and uncertainty: Creating low carbon investment opportunities in the UK electricity sector. Environment & Planning. C, Government & Policy 34 (8):1387–403. doi:10.1177/0263774X15619628.
   Google Scholar
• Buckley, T., and S. Nicholas. 2017. Japan: Greater energy security through renewables - electricity transformation in a post-nuclear economy. Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. http://ieefa.org/ieefa-report-renewables-path-japanese-energy-security-post-nuclear-era/
   Google Scholar
• Bui, M., C. S. Adjiman, A. Bardow, E. J. Anthony, A. Boston, S. Brown, P. S. Fennell, S. Fuss, A. Galindo, L. A. Hackett, et al. 2018. Carbon capture and storage (CCS): The way forward. Energy & Environmental Science 11 (5):1062–176. doi:10.1039/C7EE02342A.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calderón, S., A. C. Alvarez, A. M. Loboguerrero, S. Arango, K. Calvin, T. Kober, K. Daenzer, and K. Fisher-Vanden. 2016. Achieving CO2 reductions in Colombia: Effects of carbon taxes and abatement targets. Energy Economics 56:575–86. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2015.05.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Celia, M. A. 2017. Geological storage of captured carbon dioxide as a large-scale carbon mitigation option. Water Resources Research 53 (5):3527–33. doi:10.1002/2017WR020841.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chapman, A., B. McLellan, L. Mabon, J. Yap, S. C. Karmaker, and K. K. Sen. 2023. The just transition in Japan: Awareness and desires for the future. Energy Research & Social Science 103:103228. doi:10.1016/j.erss.2023.103228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, W., J. Chen, and Y. Ma. 2021. Renewable energy investment and carbon emissions under cap-and-trade mechanisms. Journal of Cleaner Production 278:123341. doi:10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2020.123341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng, Y., A. Sinha, V. Ghosh, T. Sengupta, and H. Luo. 2021. Carbon tax and energy innovation at crossroads of carbon neutrality: Designing a sustainable decarbonization policy. Journal of Environmental Management 294:112957. doi:10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2021.112957.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, X., X. Wang, and Y. Xia. 2021. Low-carbon technology transfer between rival firms under cap-and-trade policies. IISE Transactions 54 (2):1–17. doi:10.1080/24725854.2021.1925786.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coady, D., I. Parry, L. Sears, and B. Shang. 2017. How Large Are Global Fossil Fuel Subsidies? World Development 91:11–27. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.10.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dagoumas, A. S., and N. E. Koltsaklis. 2019. Review of models for integrating renewable energy in the generation expansion planning. Applied Energy 242:1573–87. doi:10.1016/J.APENERGY.2019.03.194.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denning, A. S. 2018. Combustion to concentration to warming: What do climate targets mean for emissions? Climate change and the global carbon cycle. In Encyclopedia of the anthropocene, 443–52. Elsevier. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-809665-9.09743-3.
   Google Scholar
• Ding, S., M. Zhang, and Y. Song. 2019. Exploring China’s carbon emissions peak for different carbon tax scenarios. Energy Policy 129:1245–52. doi:10.1016/J.ENPOL.2019.03.037.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Sbroiavacca, N., G. Nadal, F. Lallana, J. Falzon, and K. Calvin. 2016. Emissions reduction scenarios in the Argentinean energy sector. Energy Economics 56:552–63. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2015.03.021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, G., L. Tian, M. Fu, M. Sun, R. Du, and M. Liu. 2017. Investigating carbon tax pilot in YRD urban agglomerations—analysis of a novel ESER system with carbon tax constraints and its application. Applied Energy 194:635–47. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.02.041.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fan, J.-L., S. Shen, M. Xu, Y. Yang, L. Yang, and X. Zhang. 2020. Cost-benefit comparison of carbon capture, utilization, and storage retrofitted to different thermal power plants in China based on real options approach. Advances in Climate Change Research 11 (4):415–28. doi:10.1016/j.accre.2020.11.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farajzadeh, R., A. A. Eftekhari, G. Dafnomilis, L. W. Lake, and J. Bruining. 2020. On the sustainability of CO2 storage through CO2 – enhanced oil recovery. Applied Energy 261:114467. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farhat, K., J. Koplin, D. Lewis, S. Peterlin, and R. Simms. 2013. Financial assessment of CO2 capture and storage with electricity trading in the U.S.: Role of interim storage and enhanced oil recovery. Energy Procedia 37:7512–25. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2013.06.695.
   Google Scholar
• Fiévet, L., Z. Forró, P. Cauwels, and D. Sornette. 2015. A general improved methodology to forecasting future oil production: Application to the UK and Norway. Energy 79:288–97. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2014.11.014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fujimori, S., N. Hanasaki, and T. Masui. 2017. Projections of industrial water withdrawal under shared socioeconomic pathways and climate mitigation scenarios. Sustainability Science 12 (2):275–92. doi:10.1007/s11625-016-0392-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gabrielli, P., A. Wegner, M. R. Sierra-Hernández, E. Beaudon, M. Davis, J. D. Barker, and L. G. Thompson. 2020. Early atmospheric contamination on the top of the Himalayas since the onset of the European industrial revolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117 (8):3967–73. doi:10.1073/pnas.1910485117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Global CCS Institute. 2016. “Japan’s legal and regulatory framework for CCS.” https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/news-media/insights/japans-legal-and-regulatory-framework-for-ccs/.
   Google Scholar
• Goldthorpe, W., and L. Avignon. 2021. A systems approach to business models and public-private risk sharing for large scale CCS deployment. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/SSRN.3816435.
   Google Scholar
• Guo, Z. Q., and H. B. Liu. 2016. The impact of carbon tax policy on energy consumption and CO 2 emission in China. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, & Policy 11 (8):725–31. doi:10.1080/15567249.2012.715723.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hájek, M., J. Zimmermannová, K. Helman, and L. Rozenský. 2019. Analysis of carbon tax efficiency in energy industries of selected EU countries. Energy Policy 134:110955. doi:10.1016/J.ENPOL.2019.110955.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haszeldine, R. S., S. Flude, G. Johnson, and V. Scott. 2018. Negative emissions technologies and carbon capture and storage to achieve the Paris Agreement commitments. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 376 (2119):20160447. doi:10.1098/RSTA.2016.0447.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He, K., and L. Wang. 2017. A review of energy use and energy-efficient technologies for the iron and steel industry. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 70:1022–39. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.12.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holz, F., T. Scherwath, P. Crespo Del Granado, C. Skar, L. Olmos, Q. Ploussard, A. Ramos, and A. Herbst. 2021. A 2050 perspective on the role for carbon capture and storage in the European power system and industry sector. Energy Economics 104:105631. doi:10.1016/J.ENECO.2021.105631.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong, J. H., C. Kim, and H. Shin. 2014. Power sector in developing Asia: Current status and policy issues. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2510908.
   Google Scholar
• Huang, J., and K. Nagasaka. 2011. The trend of greenhouse gas emission for Japan large emitting industries under Kyoto protocol. The 2nd International Conference on Environmental Engineering and Applications, Shanghai, China, August 19–21, pp. 84–88.
   Google Scholar
• Hussain, M., A. R. Butt, F. Uzma, R. Ahmed, T. Islam, and B. Yousaf. 2019. A comprehensive review of sectorial contribution towards greenhouse gas emissions and progress in carbon capture and storage in Pakistan. Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology 9 (4):617–36. doi:10.1002/ghg.1890.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Idowu, S., S. Saguna, C. Åhlund, and O. Schelén. 2016. Applied machine learning: Forecasting heat load in district heating system. Energy and Buildings 133:478–88. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.09.068.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Energy Agency. 2021. Japan 2021 energy policy review. Iea.
   Google Scholar
• JAEA. 2019. Future vision JAEA 2050+. https://www.jaea.go.jp/english/about/future_vision/future_vision.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Kåberger, T. 2018. Progress of renewable electricity replacing fossil fuels. Global Energy Interconnection 1 (1):48–52. doi:10.14171/j.2096-5117.gei.2018.01.006.
   Google Scholar
• Kaddoura, S., and S. El Khatib. 2017. Review of water-energy-food nexus tools to improve the nexus modelling approach for integrated policy making. Environmental Science & Policy 77:114–21. doi:10.1016/J.ENVSCI.2017.07.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kannan, R. 2011. The development and application of a temporal MARKAL energy system model using flexible time slicing. Applied Energy 88 (6):2261–72. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.12.066.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kato, E., and A. Kurosawa. 2019. Evaluation of Japanese energy system toward 2050 with TIMES-Japan – deep decarbonization pathways. Energy Procedia 158:4141–46. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2019.01.818.
   Google Scholar
• Kato, H., H. Shiroyama, and Y. Nakagawa. 2014. Public policy structuring incorporating reciprocal expectation analysis. European Journal of Operational Research 233 (1):171–83. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2013.08.019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaushik, H., M. Mathew, and J. Hossain. 2019. Comparative analysis of green house gas emission from different vehicular fuels. 2018 International Conference on Power Energy, Environment and Intelligent Control, PEEIC 2018, 702–06. 10.1109/PEEIC.2018.8665618
   Google Scholar
• Kawai, E., A. Ozawa, and B. D. Leibowicz. 2022. Role of carbon capture and utilization (CCU) for decarbonization of industrial sector: A case study of Japan. Applied Energy 328:120183. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.120183.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kazakevicius, E., Z. Korac, O. Khalaim, M. Edwards, R. De Miglio, A. Chiodi, N. Duic, G. Krajacic, and N. Matak. 2018. Local action planning towards energy security and sustainability manual. The Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe (REC). M. Edwards (ed.); Issue September manual final_mali fajl.pdf http://link-ukraine.rec.org/uploads/documents/LAP.
   Google Scholar
• Keith, D. W., G. Holmes, D. St. Angelo, and K. Heidel. 2018. A process for capturing CO2 from the atmosphere. Joule 2 (8):1573–94. doi:10.1016/j.joule.2018.05.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan, M. I. 2017. Falling oil prices: Causes, consequences and policy implications. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 149:409–27. doi:10.1016/j.petrol.2016.10.048.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kijewska, A., and A. Bluszcz. 2016. Analysis of greenhouse gas emissions in the European Union member states with the use of an agglomeration algorithm. Journal of Sustainable Mining 15 (4):133–42. doi:10.1016/j.jsm.2017.02.001.
   Google Scholar
• Kiko Network. 2008. Greenhouse gas emissions in Japan analysis of first data reported (FY2006) from emissions accounting, reporting and disclosure system for large emitters under Japan’s “the law concerning the protection of the measures to cope with global warming.” http://www.kikonet.org/english/publication/archive/japansGHGemission_E.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Komiyama, R., and Y. Fujii. 2015. Long-term scenario analysis of nuclear energy and variable renewables in Japan’s power generation mix considering flexible power resources. Energy Policy 83:169–84. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2015.04.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krzemień, J. 2013. Application of markal model generator in optimizing energy systems. Journal of Sustainable Mining 12 (2):35–39. doi:10.7424/JSM130205.
   Google Scholar
• Kubota, H., and A. Shimota. 2017. How should information about CCS be shared with the Japanese public? Energy Procedia 114:7205–11. doi:10.1016/J.EGYPRO.2017.03.1827.
   Google Scholar
• Kuramochi, T. 2015. Review of energy and climate policy developments in Japan before and after Fukushima. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 43:1320–32. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.12.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuriyama, A., K. Tamura, and T. Kuramochi. 2019. Can Japan enhance its 2030 greenhouse gas emission reduction targets? Assessment of economic and energy-related assumptions in Japan’s NDC. Energy Policy 130:328–40. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2019.03.055.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurosawa, A., and N. Hagiwara. 2011. Long term energy system analysis of Japan after. Japan (IEEJ): The Institute of Energy Economics.
   Google Scholar
• Kuzemko, C., M. Bradshaw, G. Bridge, A. Goldthau, J. Jewell, I. Overland, D. Scholten, T. Van de Graaf, and K. Westphal. 2020. Covid-19 and the politics of sustainable energy transitions. Energy Research & Social Science 68:101685. doi:10.1016/j.erss.2020.101685.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larkin, P., W. Leiss, and D. Krewski. 2019. Risk assessment and management frameworks for carbon capture and geological storage: a global perspective. International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management 22 (3/4):254. doi:10.1504/IJRAM.2019.103332.
   Google Scholar
• Lau, H. C. 2021. The role of fossil fuels in a hydrogen economy. doi:10.2523/IPTC-21162-MS.
   Google Scholar
• Le Billon, P., and B. Kristoffersen. 2020. Just cuts for fossil fuels? Supply-side carbon constraints and energy transition. Environment & Planning A: Economy & Space 52 (6):1072–92. doi:10.1177/0308518X18816702.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lelieveld, J., K. Klingmüller, A. Pozzer, R. T. Burnett, A. Haines, and V. Ramanathan. 2019. Effects of fossil fuel and total anthropogenic emission removal on public health and climate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116 (15):7192–97. doi:10.1073/pnas.1819989116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, S. L., C. E. Wheeler, E. T. A. Mitchard, and A. Koch. 2019. Restoring natural forests is the best way to remove atmospheric carbon. Nature 568 (7750):25–28. doi:10.1038/d41586-019-01026-8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Li, K. W., Z. Liu, X. Li, K. Xue, and G. Sun. 2022. Impacts of supply chain competition on firms’ carbon emission reduction and social welfare under cap-and-trade regulation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19 (6):3226. doi:10.3390/IJERPH19063226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linghu, D., X. Wu, K. H. Lai, F. Ye, A. Kumar, and K. H. Tan. 2022. Implementation strategy and emission reduction effectiveness of carbon cap-and-trade in heterogeneous enterprises. International Journal of Production Economics 248:108501. doi:10.1016/J.IJPE.2022.108501.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, B., and Z. Jia. 2019. How does tax system on energy industries affect energy demand, CO2 emissions, and economy in China? Energy Economics 84:104496. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2019.104496.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longden, T., F. J. Beck, F. Jotzo, R. Andrews, and M. Prasad. 2022. ‘Clean’ hydrogen? – comparing the emissions and costs of fossil fuel versus renewable electricity based hydrogen. Applied Energy 306:118145. doi:10.1016/J.APENERGY.2021.118145.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lopion, P., P. Markewitz, M. Robinius, and D. Stolten. 2018. A review of current challenges and trends in energy systems modeling. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 96:156–66. doi:10.1016/J.RSER.2018.07.045.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loulou, R., E. Wright, G. Giannakidis, and K. Noble. 2016. Documentation for the TIMES model PART I. http://www.iea-etsap.org/web/Documentation.asp.
   Google Scholar
• Lucena, A. F. P., L. Clarke, R. Schaeffer, A. Szklo, P. R. R. Rochedo, L. P. P. Nogueira, K. Daenzer, A. Gurgel, A. Kitous, and T. Kober. 2016. Climate policy scenarios in Brazil: A multi-model comparison for energy. Energy Economics 56:564–74. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2015.02.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mabon, L., J. Kita, H. Onchi, M. Kawabe, T. Katano, H. Kohno, and Y. C. Huang. 2020. What natural and social scientists need from each other for effective marine environmental assessment: Insights from collaborative research on the Tomakomai CCS demonstration project. Marine Pollution Bulletin 159:111520. doi:10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2020.111520.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mabon, L., J. Kita, and Z. Xue. 2017. Challenges for social impact assessment in coastal regions: A case study of the Tomakomai CCS demonstration project. Marine Policy 83:243–51. doi:10.1016/J.MARPOL.2017.06.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makuch, Z., S. Georgieva, and B. Oraee-Mirzamani. 2020. Innovative Regulatory and Financial Parameters for Advancing Carbon Capture and Storage Technologies on JSTOR. Fordham Environmental Law Review 32 (1):1–45. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26984191.
   Google Scholar
• Ma, J., L. Li, H. Wang, Y. Du, J. Ma, X. Zhang, and Z. Wang. 2022. Carbon capture and storage: History and the road ahead. Engineering 14:33–43. doi:10.1016/J.ENG.2021.11.024.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martelli, E., M. Freschini, and M. Zatti. 2020. Optimization of renewable energy subsidy and carbon tax for multi energy systems using bilevel programming. Applied Energy 267:115089. doi:10.1016/J.APENERGY.2020.115089.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meckel, T. A., Y. E. Feng, R. H. Treviño, and D. Sava. 2019. High-resolution 3D marine seismic acquisition in the overburden at the Tomakomai CO2 storage project, offshore Hokkaido, Japan. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 88:124–33. doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.05.034.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• METI. 2019. Japan’s Energy 2019 10 Questions for Understanding the Current Energy Situation. https://www.enecho.meti.go.jp/en/category/brochures/
   Google Scholar
• METI. 2020. Report on large-scale CCS demonstration project compiled. https://www.meti.go.jp/english/press/2020/0515_004.html
   Google Scholar
• METI. n.d. 2019 – Understanding the Current Energy Situation in Japan (Part 1)/Special Contents -Energy Japan-/agency for Natural Resources and Energy. Retrieved April 12, 2023, from https://www.enecho.meti.go.jp/en/category/special/article/energyissue2019_01.html
   Google Scholar
• Middleton, R. S., and S. Yaw. 2018. The cost of getting CCS wrong: Uncertainty, infrastructure design, and stranded CO2. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 70:1–11. doi:10.1016/J.IJGGC.2017.12.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministry of the Environment Government of Japan. 2016. Statement by Kouichi Yamamoto, minister of the environment of Japan, at COP 22. https://www.env.go.jp/en/earth/cc/161116.html.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of the Environment, Japan Greenhouse Gas Inventory Office of Japan (GIO), CGER, NIES. 2019. National greenhouse gas inventory report of JAPAN 2019. https://www.cger.nies.go.jp/publications/report/i144/i144.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Mintz-Woo, K., F. Dennig, H. Liu, and T. Schinko. 2021. Carbon pricing and COVID-19. Climate Policy 21 (10):1272–80. doi:10.1080/14693062.2020.1831432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mito-Adachi, S., and Z. Xue. 2021. Use of existing wells for a geochemical assessment of groundwater near a CCS site: A case study in Japan. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/SSRN.3812830.
   Google Scholar
• MOFA Japan. 2018. Japan’s leading companies in climate change measures 1. https://www.mofa.go.jp/ic/ch/page25e_000147.html.
   Google Scholar
• Murugesan, M., L. Reedman, T. S. Brinsmead, W. Rifkin, J. Gordon, and M. Megharaj. 2023. Modelling least-cost technology pathways to decarbonise the New South Wales energy system by 2050. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Transition 3:100041. doi:10.1016/J.RSET.2022.100041.
   Google Scholar
• Nagatomo, Y., A. Ozawa, Y. Kudoh, and H. Hondo. 2021. Impacts of employment in power generation on renewable-based energy systems in Japan— analysis using an energy system model. Energy 226:120350. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2021.120350.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naims, H. 2020. Economic aspirations connected to innovations in carbon capture and utilization value chains. Journal of Industrial Ecology 24 (5):1126–39. doi:10.1111/jiec.13003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neves, A., R. Godina, S. G. Azevedo, and J. C. O. Matias. 2020. A comprehensive review of industrial symbiosis. Journal of Cleaner Production 247:119113. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119113.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nikas, A., V. Stavrakas, A. Arsenopoulos, H. Doukas, M. Antosiewicz, J. Witajewski-Baltvilks, and A. Flamos. 2020. Barriers to and consequences of a solar-based energy transition in Greece. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 35:383–99. doi:10.1016/j.eist.2018.12.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niu, T., X. Yao, S. Shao, D. Li, and W. Wang. 2018. Environmental tax shocks and carbon emissions: An estimated DSGE model. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 47:9–17. doi:10.1016/j.strueco.2018.06.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nižetić, S., A. M. Papadopoulos, G. M. Tina, and M. Rosa-Clot. 2017. Hybrid energy scenarios for residential applications based on the heat pump split air-conditioning units for operation in the Mediterranean climate conditions. Energy and Buildings 140:110–20. doi:10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.01.064.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ojha, V. P., S. Pohit, and J. Ghosh. 2020. Recycling carbon tax for inclusive green growth: A CGE analysis of India. Energy Policy 144:111708. doi:10.1016/J.ENPOL.2020.111708.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouyang, X., and B. Lin. 2017. Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions during urbanization: A comparative study between China and Japan. Journal of Cleaner Production 143:356–68. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozawa, A., Y. Kudoh, A. Murata, T. Honda, I. Saita, and H. Takagi. 2018. Hydrogen in low-carbon energy systems in Japan by 2050: The uncertainties of technology development and implementation. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 43 (39):18083–94. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.08.098.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pambudi, N. A., K. Itaoka, A. Kurosawa, and N. Yamakawa. 2017. Impact of hydrogen fuel for CO 2 emission reduction in power generation sector in Japan. Energy Procedia 105:3075–82. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.642.
   Google Scholar
• Patricio, J., A. Angelis-Dimakis, A. Castillo-Castillo, Y. Kalmykova, and L. Rosado. 2017. Region prioritization for the development of carbon capture and utilization technologies. Journal of CO2 Utilization 17:50–59. doi:10.1016/j.jcou.2016.10.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pehlivan, O., and A. Demirbas. 2007. Energy economy, energy policy, and energy/carbon taxes of Turkey. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, & Policy 3 (1):26–40. doi:10.1080/15567240600814862.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravikumar, D., G. Keoleian, and S. Miller. 2020. The environmental opportunity cost of using renewable energy for carbon capture and utilization for methanol production. Applied Energy 279:115770. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115770.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryzhkov, A., T. Bogatova, and S. Gordeev. 2018. Technological solutions for an advanced IGCC plant. Fuel 214:63–72. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2017.10.099.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saito, A., K. Itaoka, and M. Akai. 2019. Those who care about CCS—results from a Japanese survey on public understanding of CCS-. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 84:121–30. doi:10.1016/J.IJGGC.2019.02.014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saito, H., M. Tsuchiya, and D. Tanase. 2016. Natural earthquake and micro-seismic monitoring in Tomakomai CCS demonstration test. Public Interest Incorporated Association Geophysical Exploration Society Academic Lecture Proceedings = Proceedings of the SEGJ Conference, 135, 178–81. https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1520853834168010880
   Google Scholar
• Sarkodie, S. A., E. B. Ntiamoah, and D. Li. 2019. Panel heterogeneous distribution analysis of trade and modernized agriculture on CO 2 emissions: The role of renewable and fossil fuel energy consumption. Natural Resources Forum 43 (3):135–53. doi:10.1111/1477-8947.12183.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sasaki, T., and Y. Sawada. 2021. Capture and compression process of the Tomakomai ccs demonstration project. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/SSRN.3815378.
   Google Scholar
• Sawada, Y., J. Tanaka, C. Suzuki, D. Tanase, and Y. Tanaka. 2018. Tomakomai CCS demonstration project of Japan, CO2 injection in progress. Energy Procedia 154:3–8. doi:10.1016/J.EGYPRO.2018.11.002.
   Google Scholar
• Sawada, Y., J. Tanaka, D. Tanase, T. Sasaki, and C. Suzuki. 2021a. Overall review of tomakomai CCS demonstration project ~Target of 300,000 tonnes CO2 injection achieved. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/SSRN.3812038.
   Google Scholar
• Sawada, Y., J. Tanaka, D. Tanase, T. Sasaki, and C. Suzuki. 2021b. Tomakomai ccs demonstration project-achievements and future outlook. TCCS–11. CO2 capture, transport and storage. Trondheim 22nd–23rd June 2021 Short Papers from the 11th International Trondheim CCS Conference, Trondheim, Norway, June 21–23.
   Google Scholar
• Shirmohammadi, R., A. Aslani, and R. Ghasempour. 2020. Challenges of carbon capture technologies deployment in developing countries. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments 42:100837. doi:10.1016/j.seta.2020.100837.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soeder, D. J. 2021. Fossil Fuels and Climate Change. In Fracking and the environment, 155–85. Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-59121-2_9.
   Google Scholar
• Subramanian, A., T. Gundersen, and T. A. Adams. 2018. Modeling and simulation of energy systems: A review. Processes 6 (12):238. doi:10.3390/PR6120238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suzuki, H., K. Sasaki, and Y. Sugai. 2013. An evaluation study on CCS System against geological uncertainty and troubles. Procedia Earth and Planetary Science 6:219–25. doi:10.1016/j.proeps.2013.01.030.
   Google Scholar
• Suzuki, C., J. Tanaka, and M. Fuji. 2021. Public engagement activities of the Tomakomai CCS demonstration project. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/SSRN.3811978.
   Google Scholar
• Tanaka, Y., M. Abe, Y. Sawada, D. Tanase, T. Ito, and T. Kasukawa. 2014. Tomakomai CCS Demonstration Project in Japan, 2014 Update. Energy Procedia 63:6111–19. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.643.
   Google Scholar
• Tanaka, Y., Y. Sawada, D. Tanase, J. Tanaka, S. Shiomi, and T. Kasukawa. 2017. Tomakomai CCS demonstration project of Japan, CO2 injection in process. Energy Procedia 114:5836–46. doi:10.1016/J.EGYPRO.2017.03.1721.
   Google Scholar
• Tanaka, Y., and A. Takahashi. 2021. Geophysical technologies and geological sequestration for carbon neutral transition. Global Meeting Abstracts 232–35. doi:10.1190/ICEG2021-060.1.
   Google Scholar
• Tanase, D., and J. Tanaka. 2021a. Progress of CO2 injection and monitoring of the Tomakomai CCS demonstration project. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/SSRN.3817073.
   Google Scholar
• Tanase, D., and J. Tanaka. 2021b. Progress of CO2 injection and monitoring of the Tomakomai CCS demonstration project. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/SSRN.3817073.
   Google Scholar
• Thonig, R., P. Del Río, C. Kiefer, L. Lázaro Touza, G. Escribano, Y. Lechón, L. Späth, I. Wolf, and J. Lilliestam. 2021. Does ideology influence the ambition level of climate and renewable energy policy? Insights from four European countries. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, & Policy 16 (1):4–22. doi:10.1080/15567249.2020.1811806.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai, W. H. 2020. Carbon emission reduction—carbon tax, carbon trading, and carbon offset. Energies 13 (22):6128. doi:10.3390/EN13226128.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Loos, H. Z. A., S. O. Negro, and M. P. Hekkert. 2020. Low-carbon lock-in? Exploring transformative innovation policy and offshore wind energy pathways in the Netherlands. Energy Research & Social Science 69:101640. doi:10.1016/J.ERSS.2020.101640.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Ruijven, B. J., D. P. van Vuuren, W. Boskaljon, M. L. Neelis, D. Saygin, and M. K. Patel. 2016. Long-term model-based projections of energy use and CO2 emissions from the global steel and cement industries. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 112:15–36. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.04.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waite, M., E. Cohen, H. Torbey, M. Piccirilli, Y. Tian, and V. Modi. 2017. Global trends in urban electricity demands for cooling and heating. Energy 127:786–802. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2017.03.095.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wakiyama, T., M. Lenzen, A. Geschke, R. Bamba, and K. Nansai. 2020. A flexible multiregional input–output database for city-level sustainability footprint analysis in Japan. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 154:104588. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104588.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang-Helmreich, H., and N. Kreibich. 2019. The potential impacts of a domestic offset component in a carbon tax on mitigation of national emissions. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 101:453–60. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2018.11.026.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, B., Z. Yang, J. Xuan, and K. Jiao. 2020. Crises and opportunities in terms of energy and AI technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Energy and AI 1:100013. doi:10.1016/j.egyai.2020.100013.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, X., and H. Zhang. 2018. Optimal design of carbon tax to stimulate CCS investment in China’s coal-fired power plants: A real options analysis. Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology 8 (5):863–75. doi:10.1002/GHG.1814.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb, R. M., and M. B. Gerrard. 2019. Overcoming impediments to offshore CO2 storage: Legal issues in the United States and Canada. Environmental Law Reporter News & Analysis 49. https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/elrna49&id=662&div=&collection=.
   Google Scholar
• Wei, N., X. Li, R. T. Dahowski, C. L. Davidson, S. Liu, and Y. Zha. 2015. Economic evaluation on CO2-EOR of onshore oil fields in China. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 37:170–81. doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2015.01.014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wei, N., X. Li, S. Liu, R. T. Dahowski, and C. L. Davidson. 2014. Early opportunities of CO2 geological storage deployment in coal chemical industry in China. Energy Procedia 63:7307–14. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.767.
   Google Scholar
• Wennersten, R., Q. Sun, and H. Li. 2015. The future potential for carbon capture and storage in climate change mitigation – an overview from perspectives of technology, economy and risk. Journal of Cleaner Production 103:724–36. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.023.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilberforce, T., A. G. Olabi, E. T. Sayed, K. Elsaid, and M. A. Abdelkareem. 2021. Progress in carbon capture technologies. Science of the Total Environment 761:143203. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143203.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xin-Gang, Z., W. Ling, and Z. Ying. 2020. How to achieve incentive regulation under renewable portfolio standards and carbon tax policy? A China’s power market perspective. Energy Policy 143:111576. doi:10.1016/J.ENPOL.2020.111576.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yanagi, K., and A. Nakamura. 2020. Towards a low/zero carbon society for the Asia-Pacific region: Policy and legal development for Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in Japan. In Sustainability and Law, 585–605. Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-42630-9_29.
   Google Scholar
• Yan, Y., M. Sun, and Z. Guo. 2022. How do carbon cap-and-trade mechanisms and renewable portfolio standards affect renewable energy investment? Energy Policy 165:112938. doi:10.1016/J.ENPOL.2022.112938.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yao, X., Y. Fan, Y. Xu, X. Zhang, L. Zhu, and L. Feng. 2019. Is it worth to invest? -an evaluation of CTL-CCS project in China based on real options. Energy 182:920–31. doi:10.1016/J.ENERGY.2019.06.100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yao, X., P. Zhong, X. Zhang, and L. Zhu. 2018. Business model design for the carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS) project in China. Energy Policy 121:519–33. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2018.06.019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yue, X., J. P. Deane, B. O’Gallachoir, and F. Rogan. 2020. Identifying decarbonisation opportunities using marginal abatement cost curves and energy system scenario ensembles. Applied Energy 276:115456. doi:10.1016/J.APENERGY.2020.115456.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, S., Q. Gao, J. Yang, and G. Feng. 2020. Introduction to the MARKAL energy modeling method for regional public institution energy planning—the Liaoning area. Environmental Science and Engineering 589–97. doi:10.1007/978-981-13-9528-4_60.
   Google Scholar
• Zeppini, P., and J. C. J. M. van den Bergh. 2020. Global competition dynamics of fossil fuels and renewable energy under climate policies and peak oil: A behavioural model. Energy Policy 136:110907. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2019.110907.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, G., P. Cheng, H. Sun, Y. Shi, G. Zhang, and A. Kadiane. 2021. Carbon reduction decisions under progressive carbon tax regulations: A new dual-channel supply chain network equilibrium model. Sustainable Production and Consumption 27:1077–92. doi:10.1016/j.spc.2021.02.029.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, Z., and D. Huisingh. 2017. Carbon dioxide storage schemes: Technology, assessment and deployment. Journal of Cleaner Production 142:1055–64. doi:10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2016.06.199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, S., Y. Zhuang, L. Liu, L. Zhang, and J. Du. 2019. Risk management optimization framework for the optimal deployment of carbon capture and storage system under uncertainty. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 113:109280. doi:10.1016/J.RSER.2019.109280.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao, X., J. Yao, C. Sun, and W. Pan. 2019. Impacts of carbon tax and tradable permits on wind power investment in China. Renewable Energy 135:1386–99. doi:10.1016/J.RENENE.2018.09.068.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou, Y., F. Hu, and Z. Zhou. 2018. Pricing decisions and social welfare in a supply chain with multiple competing retailers and carbon tax policy. Journal of Cleaner Production 190:752–77. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu, N., Y. Bu, M. Jin, and N. Mbroh. 2020. Green financial behavior and green development strategy of Chinese power companies in the context of carbon tax. Journal of Cleaner Production 245:118908. doi:10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2019.118908.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar