IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aiy/jnjaer/v23y2024i3p696-720.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comprehensive Environmental and Economic Assessment of Low-Carbon Energy Sources

Author

Listed:
  • Dmitry Y. Dvinin
  • Alexey Y. Davankov

Abstract

The article presents the results of a study of various low-carbon energy sources based on a multi-criteria analysis for the purpose of a comprehensive environmental and economic assessment of the effectiveness of their use. The peculiarity of the study is that it analyzed both renewable energy sources and traditional fossil fuel based ones using innovative technologies for carbon dioxide capture and storage, as well as nuclear energy. The purpose of this work is to conduct a comprehensive assessment based on three criteria: normalized cost of electricity LCOE (Levelized Cost of Energy)/LEC (Levelized Energy Cost), specific value of carbon dioxide emissions and material intensity expressed in total MI (Material Input) numbers. The hypothesis of the study is as follows: the introduction of the criterion of material intensity in MI numbers into a comprehensive assessment will allow one to identify low-carbon energy sources with the greatest ecological and economic effect. As a result, it was found that in 2023, the global energy capacity of low-carbon energy sources reached 51.8%, but the share of energy produced by them is significantly lower, amounting to only 39.4%. The multi-criteria analysis made it possible to identify low-carbon energy sources that, at the lowest cost, provide the greatest reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, and at the same time reduce the overall environmental impact by reducing the disturbance of biospheric material flows. Wind farms have high ecological and economic efficiency, while solar energy sources and bioelectric power plants – slightly less so. Geothermal and hydroelectric power plants have a low normalized cost of electricity, but they have relatively high values of material intensity. The environmental and economic efficiency of nuclear power is higher than that of gas and coal-fired power plants using carbon dioxide capture technologies; it occupies an intermediate position between renewable and traditional energy sources. An unexpected established fact is that gas and coal-fired power plants with carbon dioxide capture technologies have the same environmental and economic efficiency. The results obtained can be useful in making decisions about the possibility of prioritizing the development of individual low-carbon energy sources.

Suggested Citation

  • Dmitry Y. Dvinin & Alexey Y. Davankov, 2024. "Comprehensive Environmental and Economic Assessment of Low-Carbon Energy Sources," Journal of Applied Economic Research, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Ural Federal University, vol. 23(3), pages 696-720.
    • Handle: RePEc:aiy:jnjaer:v:23:y:2024:i:3:p:696-720
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.15826/vestnik.2024.23.3.028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journalaer.ru//fileadmin/user_upload/site_15934/2024/06_Dvinin_Davankov.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/https://doi.org/10.15826/vestnik.2024.23.3.028?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christa Liedtke & Katrin Bienge & Klaus Wiesen & Jens Teubler & Kathrin Greiff & Michael Lettenmeier & Holger Rohn, 2014. "Resource Use in the Production and Consumption System—The MIPS Approach," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-31, August.
    2. Fan, Jing-Li & Wei, Shijie & Yang, Lin & Wang, Hang & Zhong, Ping & Zhang, Xian, 2019. "Comparison of the LCOE between coal-fired power plants with CCS and main low-carbon generation technologies: Evidence from China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 143-155.
    3. Jiandong Chen & Ming Gao & Shulei Cheng & Yiyin Xu & Malin Song & Yu Liu & Wenxuan Hou & Shuhong Wang, 2022. "Evaluation and drivers of global low-carbon economies based on satellite data," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    4. Boccard, Nicolas, 2014. "The cost of nuclear electricity: France after Fukushima," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 450-461.
    5. Korhonen, Jouni & Honkasalo, Antero & Seppälä, Jyri, 2018. "Circular Economy: The Concept and its Limitations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 37-46.
    6. Elena R. Magaril & Leonid D. Gitelman & Anzhelika P. Karaeva & Andrey V. Kiselev & Mikhail V. Kozhevnikov, 2022. "Methodological Approach to the Environmental and Economic Assessment of Biogas Energy Projects," Journal of Applied Economic Research, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Ural Federal University, vol. 21(2), pages 217-256.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Grouiez, Pascal & Debref, Romain & Vivien, Franck-Dominique & Befort, Nicolas, 2023. "The complex relationships between non-food agriculture and the sustainable bioeconomy: The French case," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    2. Maria Bałazińska & Paul Bardos & Grzegorz Gzyl & Vojtech Antos & Anna Skalny & Tomas Lederer, 2024. "Life Cycle Assessment of an Innovative Combined Treatment and Constructed Wetland Technology for the Treatment of Hexachlorocyclohexane-Contaminated Drainage Water in Hajek in the Czech Republic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-20, June.
    3. Mohajan, Haradhan, 2021. "Cradle to Cradle is a Sustainable Economic Policy for the Better Future," MPRA Paper 111334, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 10 Oct 2021.
    4. Eftychia Ntostoglou & Dilip Khatiwada & Viktoria Martin, 2021. "The Potential Contribution of Decentralized Anaerobic Digestion towards Urban Biowaste Recovery Systems: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-21, December.
    5. Bruno Michel Roman Pais Seles & Janaina Mascarenhas & Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour & Adriana Hoffman Trevisan, 2022. "Smoothing the circular economy transition: The role of resources and capabilities enablers," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1814-1837, May.
    6. Simon Gwara & Edilegnaw Wale & Alfred Odindo & Chris Buckley, 2020. "Why do We Know So Much and Yet So Little? A Scoping Review of Willingness to Pay for Human Excreta Derived Material in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-25, August.
    7. Davide Bruno & Marinella Ferrara & Felice D’Alessandro & Alberto Mandelli, 2022. "The Role of Design in the CE Transition of the Furniture Industry—The Case of the Italian Company Cassina," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-20, July.
    8. Monia Niero & Charlotte L. Jensen & Chiara Farné Fratini & Jens Dorland & Michael S. Jørgensen & Susse Georg, 2021. "Is life cycle assessment enough to address unintended side effects from Circular Economy initiatives?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(5), pages 1111-1120, October.
    9. Sandrine Mathy & Patrick Criqui & Katharina Knoop & Manfred Fischedick & Sascha Samadi, 2016. "Uncertainty management and the dynamic adjustment of deep decarbonization pathways," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(sup1), pages 47-62, June.
    10. Owais Khan & Tiberio Daddi & Fabio Iraldo, 2020. "The role of dynamic capabilities in circular economy implementation and performance of companies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(6), pages 3018-3033, November.
    11. Francesca Gennari, 2023. "The transition towards a circular economy. A framework for SMEs," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(4), pages 1423-1457, December.
    12. Dinda, Soumyananda, 2016. "A Circular Economy Approach for Sustainable Economic Growth," MPRA Paper 89587, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Feb 2017.
    13. Lucio Laureti & Alessandro Massaro & Alberto Costantiello & Angelo Leogrande, 2023. "The Impact of Renewable Electricity Output on Sustainability in the Context of Circular Economy: A Global Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-29, January.
    14. Csereklyei, Zsuzsanna & Thurner, Paul W. & Bauer, Alexander & Küchenhoff, Helmut, 2016. "The effect of economic growth, oil prices, and the benefits of reactor standardization: Duration of nuclear power plant construction revisited," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 49-59.
    15. Jaroslaw Golebiewski & Josu Takala & Oskar Juszczyk & Nina Drejerska, 2019. "Local contribution to circular economy. A case study of a Polish rural municipality," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 21(3), pages 771-791.
    16. Gutberlet, Melissa & Preuss, Lutz & Thorpe, Andrea Stevenson, 2023. "Macro level matters: Advancing circular economy in different business systems within Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    17. Peterson K. Ozili, 2022. "Circular Economy and Central Bank Digital Currency," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 1501-1516, December.
    18. Millar, Neal & McLaughlin, Eoin & Börger, Tobias, 2019. "The Circular Economy: Swings and Roundabouts?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 11-19.
    19. Figge, Frank & Thorpe, Andrea Stevenson & Givry, Philippe & Canning, Louise & Franklin-Johnson, Elizabeth, 2018. "Longevity and Circularity as Indicators of Eco-Efficient Resource Use in the Circular Economy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 297-306.
    20. Piotr F. Borowski, 2021. "Innovation strategy on the example of companies using bamboo," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 1-17, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    low-carbon energy sources; levelised cost of energy; specific carbon dioxide emission; material intensity; integrated environmental and economic efficiency;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C18 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Methodolical Issues: General
    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources
    • Q43 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Energy and the Macroeconomy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aiy:jnjaer:v:23:y:2024:i:3:p:696-720. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Natalia Starodubets (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/seurfru.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.