Have a personal or library account? Click to login
The Cost-Benefit Relations of the Future Environmental Related Developments Strategies in the Hungarian Energy Sector Cover

The Cost-Benefit Relations of the Future Environmental Related Developments Strategies in the Hungarian Energy Sector

YBL Journal of Built Environment
Volume 4 (2016): Issue 1 (July 2016)
By: Csaba Fogarassy and  Attila Kovacs  
Open Access
|Aug 2016

References

  1. [1] Acaravci A.,Ozturk I. On the relationship between energy consumption, CO2emissions and economic growth in Europe. Elsevier, Energy, Volume 35 (2010), Issue 12, December 2010. pp. 5412-5420, DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2010.07.00910.1016/j.energy.2010.07.009
    Search in Google Scholar
  2. [2] IEA. Key World Energy Statistics. International Energy Agency, 2015, Paris
    Search in Google Scholar
  3. [3] IEA. World Energy Investment Outlook, Special Report. International Energy Agency, 2014, Paris
    Search in Google Scholar
  4. [4] Eurostat. Energy balance sheets, 2013 data. Eurostat statistical books, 2015 edition. Publication Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. DOI: 10.2785/388553
    Search in Google Scholar
  5. [5] Moreno B., López A., Álvarez M. The electricity prices in the European Union. The role of renewable energies and regulatory electric market reforms. Elsevier, Energy, Volume 48 (2012), Issue 1, pp. 307-313 DOI:10.1016/j.energy.2012.06.05910.1016/j.energy.2012.06.059
    Search in Google Scholar
  6. [6] NDA . Magyarország Megújuló Energia Hasznosítási Cselekvési Terve 2010-2020. Nemzeti Fejlesztési Minisztérium, Budapest, 2011
    Search in Google Scholar
  7. [7] Payne J.E., Taylor J.P. Nuclear Energy Consumption and Economic Growthinthe U.S.: An Empirical Note. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, Volume 5 (2010), Issue 3, pp. 301-307. DOI: 10.1080/1556724080253395
    Search in Google Scholar
  8. [8] Birol F., Argiri M. World energy prospects to 2020. Elsevier, Energy, Volume 24 (1999), Issue 11, November 1999. pp. 905-918, DOI:10.1016/S0360-5442(99)00045-610.1016/S0360-5442(99)00045-6
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. [9] Jewell J. Ready for nuclear energy?: An assessment of capacities and motivations for launching new national nuclear power programs. Elsevier, Energy Policy, Volume 39 (2011), Issue 3, pp. 1041-1055. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.10.04110.1016/j.enpol.2010.10.041
    Search in Google Scholar
  10. [10] NDA. Nemzeti Energiastratégia 2030. Nemzeti Fejlesztési Minisztérium, Budapest, 2012
    Search in Google Scholar
  11. [11] Lind R. C. Intergenerational equity, discounting, and the role of cost-benefit analysis in evaluation global climate policy. Elsevier, Energy Policy, Volume 23 (1995), Issues 4-5, pp. 379-389. DOI: 10.1016/0301-4215(95)90162-Z10.1016/0301-4215(95)90162-Z
    Search in Google Scholar
  12. [12] Pigou, A.C. The Economics of Welfare, MacMillan, 1920 Part II., London
    Search in Google Scholar
  13. [13] Gohar L.K., Shine K.P. Equivalent CO2 and its use in understanding the climate effects of increased greenhouse gas concentrations. Weather, Volumes 62 (2007), pp. 307-311. DOI: 10.1002/wea.10310.1002/wea.103
    Search in Google Scholar
  14. [14] Bardford M. B., Salling K. B., Leleur S. Composite decision support by combining cost-benefit and multi-criteria decision analysis. Decision Support Systems, Volume 51 (2011), Issue 1, April 2011, pp. 167-175. DOI: 10.1016/j.dss.2010.12.00510.1016/j.dss.2010.12.005
    Search in Google Scholar
  15. [15] Fogarassy, Cs., Horvath B., Kovacs A. The cost benefit analysis of low-carbon transportation development opportunities for the 2020-2030 EU programming period. Hungarian Agricultural Engineering, Volume 28 (2015), pp. 25-29. DOI: 10.17676/HAE.2015.28.2510.17676/HAE.2015.28.25
    Search in Google Scholar
  16. [16] Peters G.L., Marland G.,Quéré C.L., Boden T., Canadell J.G.,Raupach M.R. Rapid growthin CO2emissionsafterthe 2008-2009 global financial crisis. Nature Climate Change, Volume 2 (2012), pp. 2-4 DOI: 10.1038/nclimate133210.1038/nclimate1332
    Search in Google Scholar
  17. [17] Forsberg C.W. Sustainability by combining nuclear, fossil, and renewable energy sources. Elsevier, Progressin Nuclear Energy, Volume 51 (2009), Issue 1, pp. 192-200. DOI: 10.1016/j.pnucene.2008.04.00210.1016/j.pnucene.2008.04.002
    Search in Google Scholar
  18. [18] Borocz M., Szoke L., Horvath B. Possible climate friendly innovation ways and technical solutions in the agricultural sector for 2030. Hungarian Agricultural Engineering, Volume 29 (2016), Issue 1. pp. 55-59. DOI: 10.17676/HAE.2016.29.5510.17676/HAE.2016.29.55
    Search in Google Scholar
  19. [19] Dittmar M. Nuclear energy: Status and future limitations. Elsevier, Energy, Volume (2012) 37, Issue 1, pp. 35-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2011.05.04010.1016/j.energy.2011.05.040
    Search in Google Scholar
  20. [20] De Groot J.,Steg L., Poortinga W. Values, Perceived Risks and Benefits, and Acceptability of Nuclear Energy. Risk Analysis, Volume 33 (2012), Issue 2. pp. 307-317. DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01845.x10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01845.x22642255
    Search in Google Scholar
  21. [21] Fogarassy, Cs. Low-carbon economy. Monográfia. L’Harmattan Publisher, Budapest, 2012, ISBN: 978-963-236-541-1
    Search in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jbe-2016-0004 | Journal eISSN: 2064-2520 | Journal ISSN: 2063-997X
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 33 - 48
Published on: Aug 10, 2016
Published by: Sciendo
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year
Keywords:
energy strategy,
nuclear energy,
green energy,
cost-benefit analysis,
climate policy
Related subjects:
Engineering,
Introductions and overviews,
Engineering, other,
Electrical engineering,
Automation,
Control engineering, metrology and testing

© 2016 Csaba Fogarassy, Attila Kovacs, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 4 (2016): Issue 1 (July 2016)Next article