Epistemological dominance and ignorance of the comparative advantages of China's shale gas: Evidence from international scientific journals

Zhongbing Zhou and Quande Qin

Energy Policy, 2020, vol. 138, issue C

Abstract: This paper reports on a critical discourse analysis on a collection of international scientific journal articles, which are a critical edge of social epistemology. At the textual surface, the analysis finds that China's shale gas (SG) is compared most frequently with coal and energy imports but rarely with conventional natural gas (CNG) and coalbed methane (CBM), representing a prominent structure of epistemological dominance and ignorance. Situated in this structure there are four prevailing, albeit defective, reasoning forms. The prevalence of those forms suggests that there is a “knowledge deficit” on the comparative advantage of China's SG. This deficit concretely refers to that, the attention paid to the comparative advantage of China's SG toward CNG and CBM, the number of lifecycle-comparisons between energies, and the knowledge about the US shale gas boom, are significantly insufficient. China's energy mix, air quality and energy dependence, the conspicuousness of energy burning, and the nature of human thinking are interwoven factors of this deficit. The epistemological structure and thus the “knowledge deficit” are unfavorable for optimizing China's SG strategy and may delay natural gas' penetration into China's energy mix. This paper, especially its mental model representation, is awareness/introspection provoking to researchers and policy makers.

Keywords: Shale gas; Comparative advantage; Epistemology; Biases; Conventional natural gas (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421519307918
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:enepol:v:138:y:2020:i:c:s0301421519307918

DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2019.111209

Access Statistics for this article

Energy Policy is currently edited by N. France

More articles in Energy Policy from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().