IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i6p2018-d152541.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon Footprint Assessment of Four Normal Size Hydropower Stations in China

Author

Listed:
  • Ting Jiang

    (State Key Laboratory of Hydrology-Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China
    College of Water Conservancy and Hydropower Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China
    National Engineering Research Center of Water Resources Efficient Utilization and Engineering Safety, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China)

  • Zhenzhong Shen

    (State Key Laboratory of Hydrology-Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China
    College of Water Conservancy and Hydropower Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China
    National Engineering Research Center of Water Resources Efficient Utilization and Engineering Safety, Hohai University, Nanjing 210098, China)

  • Yang Liu

    (Key Laboratory of Land Surface Pattern and Simulation, Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
    Department of Geological Sciences, Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA)

  • Yiyang Hou

    (Beijing No. 4 High School, Beijing 100034, China)

Abstract

The emission of Greenhouse gases (GHG) during the life cycle of four hydropower stations with installed capacity from 95 MW to 500 MW are assessed by the integrated GHG reservoir tool developed by International Hydropower Association. Model inputs are extracted from multi-source geographic datasets and construction planning documents. Three main conclusions are summarized: (1) In pre- and post-impoundment stages, areal GHG emission balance in reservoir area depends on the climate background, humid subtropical regions are more active than arid temperate regions. In the construction stage, emissions from fill, concrete and equipment account for more than 70% of the total. (2) GHG intensity falls rapidly when lifetime increases from 10 to 40 years and then drops slightly when lifetime becomes longer, which is 13.60 tCO 2 e/GWh for 50 years and 8.13 tCO 2 e/GWh for 100 years on average. The emission rates of hydropower stations with lower installed capacity are obviously large if they work for less than 30 years and differ less with stations possessing a higher installed capacity when their lifetime approaches 100 years. (3) Comparing with electricity generated by coal in China whose GHG intensity is 822 tCO 2 e/GWh, hydroelectricity is almost 100 times more efficient and clean. Thus, hydropower station plays an important role in dealing with the global warming issue as a substitution for a fossil fuel power source.

Suggested Citation

  • Ting Jiang & Zhenzhong Shen & Yang Liu & Yiyang Hou, 2018. "Carbon Footprint Assessment of Four Normal Size Hydropower Stations in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-14, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:6:p:2018-:d:152541
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/6/2018/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/6/2018/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Varun, & Prakash, Ravi & Bhat, I.K., 2012. "Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions estimation for small hydropower schemes in India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 498-508.
    2. Li, Zhe & Du, Hailong & Xiao, Yan & Guo, Jinsong, 2017. "Carbon footprints of two large hydro-projects in China: Life-cycle assessment according to ISO/TS 14067," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(PB), pages 534-546.
    3. Robert B. Jackson & Josep G. Canadell & Corinne Le Quéré & Robbie M. Andrew & Jan Ivar Korsbakken & Glen P. Peters & Nebojsa Nakicenovic, 2016. "Reaching peak emissions," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(1), pages 7-10, January.
    4. Zhifu Mi & Jing Meng & Dabo Guan & Yuli Shan & Malin Song & Yi-Ming Wei & Zhu Liu & Klaus Hubacek, 2017. "Chinese CO2 emission flows have reversed since the global financial crisis," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 8(1), pages 1-10, December.
    5. Yang Liu & Fang Wang & Jingyun Zheng, 2017. "Estimation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the EU, US, China, and India up to 2060 in Comparison with Their Pledges under the Paris Agreement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-10, September.
    6. Varun & Bhat, I.K. & Prakash, Ravi, 2009. "LCA of renewable energy for electricity generation systems--A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 1067-1073, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chen, Xiuzhi & Liu, Chang & van Oel, Pieter & Mergia Mekonnen, Mesfin & Thorp, Kelly R. & Yin, Tuo & Wang, Jinyan & Muhammad, Tahir & Li, Yunkai, 2022. "Water and carbon risks within hydropower development on national scale," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 325(C).
    2. Lei Yu & Benyou Jia & Shiqiang Wu & Xiufeng Wu & Peng Xu & Jiangyu Dai & Fangfang Wang & Liming Ma, 2019. "Cumulative Environmental Effects of Hydropower Stations Based on the Water Footprint Method—Yalong River Basin, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-12, October.
    3. Taitiya Kenneth Yuguda & Yi Li & Bobby Shekarau Luka & Goziya William Dzarma, 2020. "Incorporating Reservoir Greenhouse Gas Emissions into Carbon Footprint of Sugar Produced from Irrigated Sugarcane in Northeastern Nigeria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-24, December.
    4. Lechón, Yolanda & Lago, Carmen & Herrera, Israel & Gamarra, Ana Rosa & Pérula, Alberto, 2023. "Carbon benefits of different energy storage alternative end uses. Application to the Spanish case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    5. Ion V. Ion & Antoaneta Ene, 2021. "Evaluation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Reservoirs: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-14, October.
    6. Guangliang Feng & Guoqing Xia & Bingrui Chen & Yaxun Xiao & Ruichen Zhou, 2019. "A Method for Rockburst Prediction in the Deep Tunnels of Hydropower Stations Based on the Monitored Microseismicity and an Optimized Probabilistic Neural Network Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, June.
    7. Muhammad Nasir Khurshid & Ammad Hassan Khan & Zia ur Rehman & Tahir Sultan Chaudhary, 2022. "The Evaluation of Rock Mass Characteristics against Seepage for Sustainable Infrastructure Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-19, August.
    8. Chenxi Zhang & Diyuan Li & Shunchuan Wu & Long Chen & Jun Peng, 2021. "Study on Evolution Mechanism of Structure-Type Rockburst: Insights from Discrete Element Modeling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-26, July.

    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. Zhang, Xiaoyue & Huang, Guohe & Liu, Lirong & Li, Kailong, 2022. "Development of a stochastic multistage lifecycle programming model for electric power system planning – A case study for the Province of Saskatchewan, Canada," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    2. Song, Cuihong & Gardner, Kevin H. & Klein, Sharon J.W. & Souza, Simone Pereira & Mo, Weiwei, 2018. "Cradle-to-grave greenhouse gas emissions from dams in the United States of America," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 945-956.
    3. Alsaleh, Mohd & Abdul-Rahim, A.S., 2022. "The pathway toward pollution mitigation in EU28 region: Does hydropower growth make a difference?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 291-301.
    4. Mahmud, M.A. Parvez & Huda, Nazmul & Farjana, Shahjadi Hisan & Lang, Candace, 2020. "Life-cycle impact assessment of renewable electricity generation systems in the United States," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 1028-1045.
    5. Jiang, Jingjing & Ye, Bin & Liu, Junguo, 2019. "Research on the peak of CO2 emissions in the developing world: Current progress and future prospect," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C), pages 186-203.
    6. Mahmud, M.A. Parvez & Farjana, Shahjadi Hisan, 2022. "Comparative life cycle environmental impact assessment of renewable electricity generation systems: A practical approach towards Europe, North America and Oceania," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 1106-1120.
    7. Wang, Jie & Xiong, Yiling & Tian, Xin & Liu, Shangwei & Li, Jiashuo & Tanikawa, Hiroki, 2018. "Stagnating CO2 emissions with in-depth socioeconomic transition in Beijing," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 1714-1725.
    8. Gemechu, Eskinder & Kumar, Amit, 2022. "A review of how life cycle assessment has been used to assess the environmental impacts of hydropower energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    9. Adamantia Zoi Vougioukli & Eleni Didaskalou & Dimitrios Georgakellos, 2017. "Financial Appraisal of Small Hydro-Power Considering the Cradle-to-Grave Environmental Cost: A Case from Greece," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-20, March.
    10. Zhang, Yan & Li, Yaoguang & Hubacek, Klaus & Tian, Xin & Lu, Zhongming, 2019. "Analysis of CO2 transfer processes involved in global trade based on ecological network analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 233, pages 576-583.
    11. Li, Zhe & Du, Hailong & Xiao, Yan & Guo, Jinsong, 2017. "Carbon footprints of two large hydro-projects in China: Life-cycle assessment according to ISO/TS 14067," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(PB), pages 534-546.
    12. Xuerong Li & Faliang Gui & Qingpeng Li, 2019. "Can Hydropower Still Be Considered a Clean Energy Source? Compelling Evidence from a Middle-Sized Hydropower Station in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-13, August.
    13. Busola D. Akintayo & Oluwafemi E. Ige & Olubayo M. Babatunde & Oludolapo A. Olanrewaju, 2023. "Evaluation and Prioritization of Power-Generating Systems Using a Life Cycle Assessment and a Multicriteria Decision-Making Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-18, September.
    14. Li, Yilin & Chen, Bin & Li, Chaohui & Li, Zhi & Chen, Guoqian, 2020. "Energy perspective of Sino-US trade imbalance in global supply chains," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    15. Carnevale, E. & Lombardi, L. & Zanchi, L., 2014. "Life Cycle Assessment of solar energy systems: Comparison of photovoltaic and water thermal heater at domestic scale," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 434-446.
    16. Emblemsvåg, Jan, 2022. "Wind energy is not sustainable when balanced by fossil energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    17. Li, Li & Shan, Yuli & Lei, Yalin & Wu, Sanmang & Yu, Xiang & Lin, Xiyan & Chen, Yupei, 2019. "Decoupling of economic growth and emissions in China’s cities: A case study of the Central Plains urban agglomeration," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 244(C), pages 36-45.
    18. Ge, Zewen & Geng, Yong & Wei, Wendong & Jiang, Mingkun & Chen, Bin & Li, Jiashuo, 2023. "Embodied carbon emissions induced by the construction of hydropower infrastructure in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    19. Zheng, Jiali & Mi, Zhifu & Coffman, D'Maris & Milcheva, Stanimira & Shan, Yuli & Guan, Dabo & Wang, Shouyang, 2019. "Regional development and carbon emissions in China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 25-36.
    20. Tang, Miaohan & Hong, Jingke & Liu, Guiwen & Shen, Geoffrey Qiping, 2019. "Exploring energy flows embodied in China's economy from the regional and sectoral perspectives via combination of multi-regional input–output analysis and a complex network approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 1191-1201.

    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:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:6:p:2018-:d:152541. 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.