IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v16y2023i3p1357-d1048514.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Relationship between the Low-Carbon Industrial Model and Human Well-Being: A Case Study of the Electric Power Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Ying Zhang

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    College of Resources Science and Technology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Xiaobin Dong

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    College of Resources Science and Technology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Xuechao Wang

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    College of Resources Science and Technology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Peng Zhang

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    College of Resources Science and Technology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Mengxue Liu

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    College of Resources Science and Technology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Yufang Zhang

    (Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Water-Saving Agriculture in Southern Hill Area Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu 610066, China)

  • Ruiming Xiao

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    College of Resources Science and Technology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

Abstract

The electric power industry is one of the major industries in terms of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions, and it is necessary to explore low-carbon green power generation models. In recent years, more research has focused on the difference in carbon emissions in fossil energy versus renewable energy but ignored the impact of energy on human well-being. The life cycle assessment (LCA) method is a better method for assessing the impact of the low-carbon model on human well-being. In this paper, the carbon footprints of coal power plants and photovoltaic power (PV) plants generating 1 Kilowatt hour (kWh) of electricity are compared to analyze the degree of carbon emissions at different stages of the two models, and the environmental impact potential of the two models is analyzed using the LCA method. The differences between the two models in terms of human well-being were analyzed through questionnaires and quantified using the hierarchical analysis method. The impact of the different models on human well-being was compared using LCA method. The results of the study were as follows: the total CO 2 emissions from coal-fired power generation at the 1 kWh standard were 973.38 g, while the total CO 2 emissions from PV power generation were 91.95 g, and the carbon emission intensity of coal-fired power plants was higher than that of PV power plants. The global warming potential and eutrophication potential of coal-fired power plants were higher than those of PV power plants, and the rest of the indicators were lower than those of PV power plants. The composite human well-being index of PV power plants was 0.613 higher than that of coal-fired power plants at 0.561. The per capita income–global warming potential of PV power plants was higher than that of coal-fired power plants, indicating that PV power plants were a low carbon-emission and high well-being model. In conclusion, the PV power plant model is a low-carbon and high human well-being industrial model that is worthy of application in the Qilian Mountains region. The low-carbon industrial model proposed in this study can have a positive effect on regional ecological environmental protection and human well-being enhancement.

Suggested Citation

  • Ying Zhang & Xiaobin Dong & Xuechao Wang & Peng Zhang & Mengxue Liu & Yufang Zhang & Ruiming Xiao, 2023. "The Relationship between the Low-Carbon Industrial Model and Human Well-Being: A Case Study of the Electric Power Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-19, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:3:p:1357-:d:1048514
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/3/1357/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/3/1357/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mengxue Liu & Hejie Wei & Xiaobin Dong & Xue-Chao Wang & Bingyu Zhao & Ying Zhang, 2022. "Integrating Land Use, Ecosystem Service, and Human Well-Being: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-31, June.
    2. Destek, Mehmet & Sinha, Avik, 2020. "Renewable, non-renewable energy consumption, economic growth, trade openness and ecological footprint: Evidence from organisation for economic Co-operation and development countries," MPRA Paper 104246, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2020.
    3. Li, Jinying & Li, Sisi & Wu, Fan, 2020. "Research on carbon emission reduction benefit of wind power project based on life cycle assessment theory," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 456-468.
    4. Izabela Piasecka & Patrycja Bałdowska-Witos & Katarzyna Piotrowska & Andrzej Tomporowski, 2020. "Eco-Energetical Life Cycle Assessment of Materials and Components of Photovoltaic Power Plant," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-24, March.
    5. Ying Zhang & Xiaobin Dong & Xue-Chao Wang & Mengxue Liu & Peng Zhang & Ranran Liu & Jiuming Huang & Shuheng Dong, 2022. "Study on the Relationship between Low-Carbon Circular Farming and Animal Husbandry Models and Human Well-Being: A Case Study of Yongchang County, Gansu Province," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-19, July.
    6. Wang, Ning & Ren, Yixin & Zhu, Tao & Meng, Fanxin & Wen, Zongguo & Liu, Gengyuan, 2018. "Life cycle carbon emission modelling of coal-fired power: Chinese case," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 841-852.
    7. Betul Can & Zahoor Ahmed & Mahmood Ahmad & Muhlis Can, 2022. "Do renewable energy consumption and green trade openness matter for human well-being? Empirical evidence from European Union countries," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 1043-1059, December.
    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. Zhongwei, Huang & Liu, Yishu, 2022. "The role of eco-innovations, trade openness, and human capital in sustainable renewable energy consumption: Evidence using CS-ARDL approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(P1), pages 131-140.
    2. Li, Yanfei & Taghizadeh-Hesary, Farhad, 2022. "The economic feasibility of green hydrogen and fuel cell electric vehicles for road transport in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    3. Fangyi Li & Zhaoyang Ye & Xilin Xiao & Dawei Ma, 2019. "Environmental Benefits of Stock Evolution of Coal-Fired Power Generators in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-17, October.
    4. Liu, Yaping & Sadiq, Farah & Ali, Wajahat & Kumail, Tafazal, 2022. "Does tourism development, energy consumption, trade openness and economic growth matters for ecological footprint: Testing the Environmental Kuznets Curve and pollution haven hypothesis for Pakistan," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    5. Riza Radmehr & Samira Shayanmehr & Ernest Baba Ali & Elvis Kwame Ofori & Elżbieta Jasińska & Michał Jasiński, 2022. "Exploring the Nexus of Renewable Energy, Ecological Footprint, and Economic Growth through Globalization and Human Capital in G7 Economics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-19, September.
    6. Yang, Lin & Lv, Haodong & Jiang, Dalin & Fan, Jingli & Zhang, Xian & He, Weijun & Zhou, Jinsheng & Wu, Wenjing, 2020. "Whether CCS technologies will exacerbate the water crisis in China? —A full life-cycle analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    7. Sharma, Rajesh & Shahbaz, Muhammad & Sinha, Avik & Vo, Xuan Vinh, 2021. "Examining the temporal impact of stock market development on carbon intensity: Evidence from South Asian countries," MPRA Paper 108925, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2021.
    8. Anna Barwińska Małajowicz & Miroslava Knapková & Krzysztof Szczotka & Miriam Martinkovičová & Radosław Pyrek, 2022. "Energy Efficiency Policies in Poland and Slovakia in the Context of Individual Well-Being," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-29, December.
    9. Özlem Karadağ Albayrak & Samet Topal & Serhat Çamkaya, 2022. "The Impact of Economic Growth, Renewable Energy, Non-renewable Energy and Trade Openness on the Ecological Footprint and Forecasting in Turkiye: an Case of the ARDL and NMGM Forecasting Model," Alphanumeric Journal, Bahadir Fatih Yildirim, vol. 10(2), pages 139-154, December.
    10. Yugang He, 2022. "Renewable and Non-Renewable Energy Consumption and Trade Policy: Do They Matter for Environmental Sustainability?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-17, May.
    11. Murshed, Muntasir & Saboori, Behnaz & Madaleno, Mara & Wang, Hong & Doğan, Buhari, 2022. "Exploring the nexuses between nuclear energy, renewable energy, and carbon dioxide emissions: The role of economic complexity in the G7 countries," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 664-674.
    12. Cui, Qi & He, Ling & Han, Guoyi & Chen, Hao & Cao, Juanjuan, 2020. "Review on climate and water resource implications of reducing renewable power curtailment in China: A nexus perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 267(C).
    13. Xiaonan Wang & Licheng Wang & Jianping Chen & Shouting Zhang & Paolo Tarolli, 2020. "Assessment of the External Costs of Life Cycle of Coal: The Case Study of Southwestern China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-26, August.
    14. Yana Us & Tetyana Pimonenko & Oleksii Lyulyov, 2023. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Renewable Energy Development for the Green Brand within SDGs: A Meta-Analytic Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-18, February.
    15. Jahanger, Atif & Hossain, Mohammad Razib & Usman, Muhammad & Chukwuma Onwe, Joshua, 2023. "Recent scenario and nexus between natural resource dependence, energy use and pollution cycles in BRICS region: Does the mediating role of human capital exist?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    16. Haiyang Shang & Fang Su & Serhat Yüksel & Hasan Dinçer, 2021. "Identifying the Strategic Priorities of the Technical Factors for the Sustainable Low Carbon Industry Based on Macroeconomic Conditions," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, May.
    17. Usman, Muhammad & Khalid, Khaizran & Mehdi, Muhammad Abuzar, 2021. "What determines environmental deficit in Asia? Embossing the role of renewable and non-renewable energy utilization," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 1165-1176.
    18. Jie, Huo & Khan, Irfan & Alharthi, Majed & Zafar, Muhammad Wasif & Saeed, Asif, 2023. "Sustainable energy policy, socio-economic development, and ecological footprint: The economic significance of natural resources, population growth, and industrial development," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    19. Ansari, Mohd Arshad, 2022. "Re-visiting the Environmental Kuznets curve for ASEAN: A comparison between ecological footprint and carbon dioxide emissions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    20. Muhammad Asif & Jian-Qiao Li & Muhammad Azam Zia & Muhammad Hashim & Uzair Aslam Bhatti & Mughair Aslam Bhatti & Ahmad Hasnain, 2024. "Environmental Sustainability in BRICS Economies: The Nexus of Technology Innovation, Economic Growth, Financial Development, and Renewable Energy Consumption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-29, August.

    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:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:3:p:1357-:d:1048514. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.