Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-kl2l2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-11T07:10:18.362Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

18 - Macroeconomic impacts of hydrogen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2010

By
Martin Wietschel ,
Sabine Jokisch ,
Stefan Boeters ,
Wolfgang Schade  and
Philipp Seydel
Edited by
Michael Ball  and
Martin Wietschel
Michael Ball
Affiliation:
Shell, The Netherlands
Martin Wietschel
Affiliation:
Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research, Karlsruhe, Germany
Get access

Summary

Often only technical aspects are considered when looking at hydrogen as an energy carrier. However, the introduction of hydrogen could have relevant implications for GDP, welfare and job developments in a nation or region. The competitiveness of a nation could be one major driver for hydrogen use as an energy carrier. These issues are discussed in the following. Among other things, possible economic effects are shown on the basis of a quantitative model analysis and assessed for relevant EU member states.

Introduction

A lot of research in the hydrogen and fuel-cell field has a strong technology focus (e.g., technology research, application of technologies, technology roadmap and infrastructure build-up). The analysis of economic impacts tends to concentrate on the necessary investments for hydrogen infrastructure build-up (see Chapters 14 and 15). Other very important impacts of hydrogen as an energy fuel, such as those on employment, gross domestic product (GDP), international competitiveness or welfare, are often mentioned as important benefits of a hydrogen use as an energy vector but they are usually not well analysed.

For such kinds of analysis, four different methodological approaches are normally used for analysis in the energy sector: input–output, general equilibrium, system dynamics and econometric models.

Such kinds of model, emphasising an aggregate description of the overall economy, are general economic models with a rather rudimentary treatment of the energy system. Following the top-down approach, they describe the energy system (similar to the other sectors) in a highly aggregated way.

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
The Hydrogen Economy
Opportunities and Challenges
 , pp. 529 - 562
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Amorelli, T., Hernández, H., Lonza, L.et al. (2004). Assessing the International Position of EU's Research and Technological Development & Demonstration (RTD&D) on Hydrogen and Fuel Cells. ESTO Publications, Joint Research Centre. http://esto.jrc.c.europa.eu/publication/pub.cfm?id=1298.Google Scholar
Armington, P. S. (1969). A theory of demand for products distinguished by place of production. IMF Staff Papers, 16, 159–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arrow, K. J. and Debreu, G. (1954). Existence of an equilibrium for a competitive economy. Econometrica, 22, 265–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beise, M. (2004). Lead markets: country-specific drivers of the global diffusion of innovations. Research Policy, 33, 997–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beise, M. (2005). Lead markets, innovation differentials and growth. International Economics and Economic Policy, 1 (4), 305–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beise, M. and Rennings, K. (2005). Lead markets and regulation: a framework for analyzing the international diffusion of environmental innovations. Ecological Economics, 52 (1), 5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhattacharyya, S. C. (1996). Applied general equilibrium models for energy studies: a survey. Energy Economics, 18 (3), 145–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blind, K. and Jungmittag, A. (2005). Trade and the impact of innovations and standards: the case of Germany and the UK. Applied Economics, 37 (12), 1385–1398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blümle, G. (1994). The importance of environmental policy for international competitiveness. In Interactions between Economy and Ecology, ed. Matsugi, T. and Oberhauser, A.Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, pp. 35–57.Google Scholar
,CASCADE MINTS (2006). Summary and Objectives and Case Study Comparisons and Development of Energy Models for Integrated Technology Systems. NTUA (National Technical University of Athens). www.e3mlab.ntua.gr/cascade.html.
Christidis, P., Hernandez, H. and Lievonen, J. (eds.) (2002). Impact of Technological and Structural Change on Employment: Prospective Analysis 2020. Sevilla: IPTS (Institute for Prospective Technological Studies) (EUR 20258 EN).Google Scholar
Conrad, K. (2002). Computable general equilibrium models in environmental and resource economics. In The International Yearbook of Environmental and Resource Economics 2002/2003, ed. Tietenberg, T. and Folmer, H.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 66–114.Google Scholar
,DIW (Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung) (2002). Europäischer Vergleich der besonderen Steuer- und Abgabensysteme für den Erwerb, das Inverkehrbringen und die Nutzung von Kraftfahrzeugen. Endbericht. Berlin: DIW.
Dosi, G., Pavitt, K. and Soete, L. (1990). The Economics of Technical Change and International Trade. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Duchin, F. (1994). Input–output analysis and industrial ecology, In The Greening of Industrial Ecosystems, ed. Allenby, B. R. and Richards, D. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, pp. 61–68.Google Scholar
,European Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technology Platform (2005). Deployment Strategy Foundation Report and Strategic Research Agenda Foundation Report. https://www.hfpeurope.org/hfp/keydocs.
,EUROSTAT (2004). Input Output Tables – Data. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu.
,EUROSTAT (2005). Themes (various) – Data. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu.
Fagerberg, J. (1995). Is there a large-country advantage in high-tech? Working Paper No. 526. Oslo: Norwegian Institute of International Affairs.Google Scholar
Fagerberg, J. (1996). Technology and competitiveness. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 12 (3), 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,FHIRST (2004): Fuel cells and hydrogen improved R&D strategy for Europe. www.ec.europa.eu/research/energy/pdf/efchp_hydrogen18.pdf.
Gately, D. (1970). Investment Planning for the Electric Power Industry: An Integer Programming Approach. Research Report 7035. University of Western Ontario, Department of Economics.Google Scholar
Geldermann, J. and Rentz, O. (2005). Multi-criteria analysis for the assessment of environmentally relevant installations. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 9 (3), 127–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez-Monroy, L. and Cordoba, A. (2002). Financial costs and environment impact optimisation of the energy supply systems. International Journal of Energy Research, 26 (1), 27–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gottfried, P., Stöß, E. and Wiegard, W. (1990). Applied general equilibrium tax models: prospects, examples, limits. In Simulation Models in Tax and Transfer Policy, ed. Petersen, H.-G. and Brunner, J. K.Frankfurt, pp. 205–344.Google Scholar
,GTAP (Global Trade, Assistance, and Production) (2002). The GTAP5 Data Base, Center for Global Trade Analysis. West Lafayette: Purdue University.
Gunning, J. W. and Keyzer, M. A. (1995). Applied general equilibrium models for policy analysis. In Handbook of Development Economics, vol. 3A, pp. 2025–2107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilkert, M. (2003). Pathways for a transition to a sustainable hydrogen transportation fuel infrastructure in California. Diploma Thesis at the University of Karlsruhe with support of the University of California, Davis.Google Scholar
,HySociety (2004). Promoting a hydrogen-based society. www.ec.europa.eu/research/energy/pdf/efchp_hydrogen21.pdf.
HyWays, (2006a). HyWays – Hydrogen Energy in Europe. Integrated Project under the 6th Framework Programme of the European Commission, 2004–2007. www.hyways.de.Google Scholar
HyWays, (2006b). HyWays A European Roadmap: Assumptions, Visions and Robust Conclusions from Project Phase I. Germany: L-B-Systemtechnik GmbH, Ottobrunn. www.hyways.de.Google Scholar
HyWays, (2006c). HyWays D3.13 Report on the HyWays Scenario Assumptions. Ottobrunn, Germany: L-B-Systemtechnik GmbH. www.hyways.de.Google Scholar
Kaldor, N. (1978). The effect of devaluation on trade in manufacture. In Further Essays on Applied Economics. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Keeney, R. L. and Raiffa, R. (1976). Decisions with Multiple Objectives; Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Leontief, W. (1956). Factor proportions and the structure of American trade: further theoretical and empirical analysis. Review of Economics and Statistics, XXVIII.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leontief, W. (1986). Input Output Economics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Linder, S. B. (1961). An Essay on Trade and Transformation. Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksell.Google Scholar
,ME&P (2000). SCENES European Transport Forecasting Model and Appended Module: Technical Description. Deliverable D4 of SCENES (Modelling and methodology for analysing the interrelationship between external developments and European transport). Project funded by the European Commission 4th RTD framework.
Meadows, D. H. (1980). The unavoidable a priori. In Elements of the System Dynamics Method, ed. Randers, J. Cambridge: Productivity Press.Google Scholar
Meyer-Krahmer, F (1999). Innovation als Beitrag zur Lösung von Beschäftigungsproblemen?Mitt Arbeitsmarkt-Berufsforsch, 32 (4), 402–541.Google Scholar
Meyer-Krahmer, F. (2003). Lead-Märkte und Innovationsstandorte. In Kunststück Innovation: Praxisbeispiele aus der Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft, ed. Warnecke, H.-J.et al. Berlin: Springer, pp. 23–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer-Krahmer, F. (2004). Vorreiter-Märkte und Innovation. In Made in Germany '21, ed. Steinmeier, F. W. and Machnig, M.Hamburg: Hoffmann und Campe – Verlag, pp. 96–110.Google Scholar
Morrison, P. D., Roberts, J. H. and Midgley, D. F. (2004). The nature of lead users and measurement of leading edge status. Research Policy, 33, 351–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,MWV (Mineralölwirtschaftsverband) (2005). Mineralöl-Zahlen 2004. Hamburg: MWV.
,Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (2005). Statistics Subjects (various). http://www.oecd.org/statsportal.
Ohlin, B. (1933). Interregional and International Trade. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Petit, P. (1995). Employment and technological change. In Handbook of the economics of innovation and technological change, ed. Stoneman, P.Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: Free Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, M. V. (1961). International trade and technical change. Oxford Economics Papers, 30, 323–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robson, P. (1987). The Economics of International Integration, 3rd edn. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Rutherford, T. F. (1998). GTAPinGAMS: The Dataset and Static Model. Working Paper. University of Colorado.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P. (1948). International trade and the equalisation of factor prices. Economic Journal, 58, 163–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schade, B., Rothengatter, W. and Schade, W. (2002). Strategien, Maßnahmen und ökonomische Bewertung einer dauerhaft umweltgerechten Verkehrsentwicklung. Final Report. On behalf of the German Federal Environmental Agency. Berlin: Erich-Schmidt-Verlag.Google Scholar
Schade, W. (2005). Strategic Sustainability Analysis: Concept and Application for the Assessment of European Transport Policy. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlag.Google Scholar
Schade, W. (2006). Input to Study on RES-ETH 2020: ASTRA Results. Working Paper (Draft). Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer ISI.Google Scholar
Seebregts, A. J., Smekens, K. E. L. and Goldstein, G. A. (2001). Energy/environmental modelling with the MARKAL family models. OR2001 Conference, Energy and Environment Session, 3–5 September, Duisburg, Germany.Google Scholar
Sell, H. (2001). Einführung in die internationalen Wirtschaftsbeziehungen, 2nd edn. Munich: Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
Shoven, J. B. and Whalley, J. (1984). Applied general-equilibrium models of taxation and international trade: an introduction and survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 22, 1007–1051.Google Scholar
Soete, L. G. (1981). A general test of technological gap trade theory. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 117 (4), 638–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, Y. H. (ed.) (1999). Modern Optimisation Techniques in Power Systems. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRef
Vernon, R. (1966). International investment and international trade in the product cycle. Quarterly Review of Economics, 88, 190–207.Google Scholar
Hippel, E. (1988). Sources of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wakelin, K. (1997). Trade and Innovation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
,WETO (2006). World Energy Technology Outlook 2050 (WETO-H2) (EUR 22038). Brussels: European Commission.
Wietschel, M. (2000). Produktion und Energie: Planung und Steuerung industrieller Energie- und Stoffströme. Frankfurt a. M.: Lang.Google Scholar
Wietschel, M. (2005). Patents in fuel cells and hydrogen production. In Fuel Cell Today. www.fuelcelltoday.com.Google Scholar
Zhang, Z. and Folmer, H. (1998). Economic modelling approaches to cost estimates for the control of carbon dioxide emissions. Energy Economics, 20 (1), 101–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×