中国、南非和美国煤制油工业发展的比较研究

Yiming Li, Changqing Li
{"title":"中国、南非和美国煤制油工业发展的比较研究","authors":"Yiming Li, Changqing Li","doi":"10.4236/GSC.2019.93006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many energy \nconsuming countries have carried out research, development, demonstration, \nplanning and deployment of coal-to-liquids (CTL) because of its ability to \nreplace oil imports by converting coal resources into fuel. Among them, China \nand South Africa successfully had their CTL technology industrialized, while \nthe United States did not. To understand the differences in the industrial development \nlevel, a comparative study is necessary. This paper compares the history, driver \nand policy of CTL industry in China, South Africa and United States, collates \nand discloses numbers of industry details for the first time. We figure out \nthat the motivation, top level planning and policy consistency are the key \nindicators of the difference on the industrial development level. Among them, \nthe key to the success of CTL industrialization in China and South Africa is \nthe government’s strong and stable determination to improve energy security, \nwhich provides a stable top-level planning and robust policy support. The \nfailure of CTL in United States is caused by the shift of policy attention after \nits energy security situation improved.","PeriodicalId":12770,"journal":{"name":"Green and Sustainable Chemistry","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Study for the Development of Coal-to-Liquids Industries in China, South Africa and United States\",\"authors\":\"Yiming Li, Changqing Li\",\"doi\":\"10.4236/GSC.2019.93006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Many energy \\nconsuming countries have carried out research, development, demonstration, \\nplanning and deployment of coal-to-liquids (CTL) because of its ability to \\nreplace oil imports by converting coal resources into fuel. Among them, China \\nand South Africa successfully had their CTL technology industrialized, while \\nthe United States did not. To understand the differences in the industrial development \\nlevel, a comparative study is necessary. This paper compares the history, driver \\nand policy of CTL industry in China, South Africa and United States, collates \\nand discloses numbers of industry details for the first time. We figure out \\nthat the motivation, top level planning and policy consistency are the key \\nindicators of the difference on the industrial development level. Among them, \\nthe key to the success of CTL industrialization in China and South Africa is \\nthe government’s strong and stable determination to improve energy security, \\nwhich provides a stable top-level planning and robust policy support. The \\nfailure of CTL in United States is caused by the shift of policy attention after \\nits energy security situation improved.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12770,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Green and Sustainable Chemistry\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Green and Sustainable Chemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4236/GSC.2019.93006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Green and Sustainable Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/GSC.2019.93006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

煤制油(CTL)能够通过将煤炭资源转化为燃料来替代石油进口,因此许多能源消费国进行了研究、开发、示范、规划和部署。其中,中国和南非成功实现了CTL技术产业化,而美国则没有。为了了解产业发展水平的差异,有必要进行比较研究。本文比较了中国、南非和美国CTL产业的发展历史、驱动力和政策,并首次整理和披露了一些行业细节。研究发现,动力、顶层规划和政策一致性是产业发展水平差异的关键指标。其中,中国和南非CTL产业化成功的关键是政府提高能源安全的坚定决心,提供了稳定的顶层规划和有力的政策支持。美国CTL的失败是由于其能源安全形势好转后政策重心的转移所致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparative Study for the Development of Coal-to-Liquids Industries in China, South Africa and United States
Many energy consuming countries have carried out research, development, demonstration, planning and deployment of coal-to-liquids (CTL) because of its ability to replace oil imports by converting coal resources into fuel. Among them, China and South Africa successfully had their CTL technology industrialized, while the United States did not. To understand the differences in the industrial development level, a comparative study is necessary. This paper compares the history, driver and policy of CTL industry in China, South Africa and United States, collates and discloses numbers of industry details for the first time. We figure out that the motivation, top level planning and policy consistency are the key indicators of the difference on the industrial development level. Among them, the key to the success of CTL industrialization in China and South Africa is the government’s strong and stable determination to improve energy security, which provides a stable top-level planning and robust policy support. The failure of CTL in United States is caused by the shift of policy attention after its energy security situation improved.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信