ArticleNature communications2024
Cost-effectiveness uncertainty may bias the decision of coal power transitions in China.
Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the economic and social impact of coal mine phaseout in China.Fundamental research · 2026Article
- Unit-level assessment of mitigation pathways for mercury emissions from the global coal power fleet.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Bridging China's Climate Targets and Mitigation Capacity through Sectoral Policy Implementation.Environmental science & technology · 2026Article
- Ambitious climate targets can make the phaseout of India's coal-fired power plants cost-beneficial.Nature communications · 2025Article
- The social impacts on China's vulnerable cities in the transition away from coal power.iScience · 2025Article
- How does carbon pricing leverage emission reductions in the power sector? Evidence from China's national carbon market.Carbon balance and management · 2025Article
- Unveiling cost reduction potential of carbon capture and storage clusters in China under multiple uncertainties.iScience · 2025Article
- Repositioning coal power to accelerate net-zero transition of China's power system.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Evaluating socio-economic and subjective well-being impacts of coal power phaseout in China.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Reducing transition costs towards carbon neutrality of China's coal power plants.Nature communications · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A transition away from coal power always maintains a high level of complexity as there are several overlapping considerations such as technical feasibility, economic costs, and environmental and health impacts. Here, we explore the cost-effectiveness uncertainty brought by policy implementation disturbances of different coal power phaseout and new-built strategies (i.e., the disruption of phaseout priority) in China based on a developed unit-level uncertainty assessment framework. We reveal the opportunity and risk of coal transition decisions by employing preference analysis. We find that, the uncertainty of a policy implementation might lead to potential delays in yielding the initial positive annual net benefits. For example, a delay of six years might occur when implementing the prior phaseout practice. A certain level of risk remains in the implementation of the phaseout policy, as not all strategies can guarantee the cumulative positive net benefits from 2018-2060. Since the unit-level heterogeneities shape diverse orientation of the phaseout, the decision-making preferences would remarkably alter the selection of a coal power transition strategy. More strikingly, the cost-effectiveness uncertainty might lead to missed opportunities in identifying an optimal strategy. Our results highlight the importance of minimizing the policy implementation disturbance, which helps mitigate the risk of negative benefits and strengthen the practicality of phaseout decisions.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.