According to the World Resources Institute 1), global energy production accounts for 76% of carbon dioxide emissions from human activities. They include production of electricity for industrial and domestic use (30.4% of global emissions), combustion of fuel in transport (15.9%), industrial production (12.4%), construction and maintenance of buildings (5.5%) and other areas. At the end of 2021, CO2 emissions from the electricity sector increased by almost 7%, reaching a record high level.
According to the Bloomberg New Energy Fund (BNEF) report 2 “Energy Transition Trends in 2022”, global electricity consumption will increase globally in 2021 as the global economy recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic.
According to the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Electricity Market Report, global electricity generation from renewables grew by 6% at the end of 2021, even though growth was limited by adverse weather conditions (particularly for hydropower). Wind and solar power produced more than 10% of the global electricity mix for the first time.
Gas generation increased by 2% and nuclear by 3.5%, almost reaching 2019 levels.
At the same time, generation and emissions from coal-fired power plants rose to new highs, with use increasing by 8.5% between 2020 and 2021. This is due to the need for many countries to compensate for losses due to drought and extremely high gas prices as soon as possible.
The BNEF report states that, for the first time since 2013, coal-fired power plants have made a major contribution to electricity generation growth. Coal continues to account for the largest share of global electricity generation, at 27%, and this share will continue to grow in the near term. The leaders in coal-fired generation are China, India and the US, which account for 63% of all coal burned globally.
China leads in coal-fired power generation, accounting for 52% of the world’s coal use. India accounts for 11% and the US burns about 9% of coal. The remaining seven countries (Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, South Africa, Germany, Russia, Australia), are responsible for 15% of coal-fired electricity.
The IEA forecasts an average annual growth of 2.7% in electricity demand going forward. The expected increase in renewable energy generation, averaging 8% per year, should account for more than 90% of demand growth. Global nuclear and gas power generation is also expected to grow by an estimated 1% annually.
Coal remains one of the world’s main fuels for power generation (production has doubled over the past 20 years to 8 billion tonnes), primarily due to its relatively low cost and relative evenness in global distribution. Growth is planned to continue at least until 2050.
As for the outlook for the coal industry, it mainly depends on China’s policies, as the country accounts for more than half of global coal consumption. According to China’s 2021–2025 energy development plan, the share of non-fossil fuels in total energy consumption will increase to 20%. Under the nationwide coal-fired power plant modernisation plan, it is planned that the Celestial Empire will strictly control coal-fired power generation projects, limit the growth of coal consumption during the 14th Five-Year Plan (2021–2025) and gradually reduce it during the 15th Five-Year Plan (2026–2030).
Despite plans for an energy transition, most European countries are re-commissioning coal-fired power plants in the face of emerging electricity shortages. In China, India and Vietnam, more than a thousand coal-fired generation facilities are planned.
At the same time, modern nuclear, gas and coal-fired generation technologies have significant competitive cost advantages over renewables in terms of heat and electricity generation; they are many times more cost-effective than wind and solar generation.
For this reason, the goal of a sustainable energy future should be seen in relation to the real problems of socio-economic development of different countries, taking into account that any energy production technology is not completely green or “green” (Table 1).
Table 1
Advantages and disadvantages of different types of energy
|
Type of resource for energy production |
*Average life cycle, years |
*Specific greenhouse gas emissions, g CO2-eq/kWh |
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
||
|
in the environmental field |
in the economic sphere |
in the environmental field |
in the economic sphere |
|||
|
Coal |
40 |
Coal-fired CHP plants 751-1095
Coal-fired CHP plants with greenhouse gas capture and storage technologies 147-469 |
1. modern technologies are available to reduce the environmental impact at every stage of the life cycle; 2.broad perspectives are available for the use of mining and combustion waste as secondary resources |
1.high stocks; 2.stable prices; 3. wide range of applications; 4.comparatively low cost; 5.low capital costs for the construction of energy facilities |
1. a non-renewable resource; 2. high pressure on the environment during extraction, transportation, energy production (air and water pollution, high waste generation); 3. large amounts of waste generation from fuel extraction and combustion processes; 4. land disturbance |
1.complexity of mining; 2.high risk to the health and life of coal industry workers; 3.low calorific value of fuel combustion; 4.fire hazard |
|
Gas |
30 |
Gas fired combined cycle power plants 403-513
Gas-fired power plants with greenhouse gas capture and sequestration technologies 49-220 |
1.the environmental friendliness of the combustion process compared to other fossil fuels; 2.low noise level during operation of energy generation facilities |
1.high calorific value; 2.low operating costs; 3. reliability; 4. high efficiency and durability; 5. Shorter terms of construction and putting into operation of energy objects; 6.compactness
|
1.depletability of reserves; 2.disturbance of natural topography during exploration, gas production, pipeline construction and operation; 3. Greenhouse gas emissions during gas production, pipeline construction and operation; 4. spoilage and complete destruction of vegetation crops; 5. the generation of significant amounts of waste during field development, gas extraction, construction and operation of the pipeline |
1.leakage, price stability; 2.risk of accidents |
|
Oil |
25 |
720 |
1.modern technologies are available to reduce the environmental impact at every stage of the life cycle; 2.broad perspectives are available for the use of mining and combustion waste as secondary resources |
1.high energy content per unit volume; 2. high stocks; 3. stable prices; 4. wide range of applications; 5.comparatively low cost; 6.low capital costs for construction of energy facilities |
1. a non-renewable resource; 2. high pressure on the environment during extraction, transportation, energy production (air pollution, water pollution, waste generation); 3. Generation of significant amounts of waste from fuel extraction processes; 4. land disturbance; 5. damage to fauna and flora |
1.risk of leaks, accidents; 2.fire risk |
|
Atom |
60-75 |
5,1-6,4 |
1.environmental friendliness compared to fossil fuels; 2.application of new closed-cycle technologies for the utilisation of plutonium waste stockpiles for energy generation |
1.high energy density; 2.cheaper than fossil fuels; 3.affordable compared to fossil fuels; 4.small footprint for the construction of nuclear power facilities |
1.a non-renewable resource; 2.cannot fully replace fossil fuels; 3.uranium mining has significant environmental damage; 4. Waste persistence for recycling
|
1.small reserves; 2.territorial distribution of reserves; 3.dependence on fossil fuels (uranium) |
|
Water |
80-100 |
6-147 |
1.practically complete renewability of the energy source; 2.no toxic emissions into the atmosphere and no waste |
1.no need for extraction, processing, transport of fuel; 2.high reliability; 3.long-term operation (more than 100 years); 4. low cost of energy generation; 5. improved conditions for irrigation and navigation
|
1.emissions of water vapour into the atmosphere, which is the second (after CO2) greenhouse gas in terms of its impact on global warming; 2.deterioration of water quality; 3.waterlogging of land; 4.erosion of coastlines; 5.change in fauna, migration of animals in flooded areas; 6. blockage of rivers for fish spawning 7. alteration of riverbeds; 8.impact on climate (becoming more temperate) |
1.Danger of disasters with large numbers of casualties; 2.flooding of large areas of land, including fertile land; 3.substantial capital costs for the construction of hydropower facilities; 4. deterioration of water quality |
|
Wind |
25 |
Onshore wind power plants 12-23
Offshore wind farms 7,8-16 |
1. no need for fossil fuels; 2.no emission of pollutants into the ambient air during wind turbine operation |
1. no need for fuel; 2.inexhaustibility of resources; 3.rapid erection of installations; 4.high maintainability; 5.low operating costs; |
1.the operation of wind turbines leads to the mass extermination of birds and mammals; 2. the infrasound emitted has a negative impact on human and animal health; 3. vibration has a negative impact on animal health, which leads to breeding of pests; 4. migration routes of animals and birds are disturbed; 5. visual pollution has a negative impact on human and animal health; 6. the manufacture of wind turbines uses large amounts of minerals (nickel, copper, lithium, graphite, etc.) and rare earth minerals (neodymium and dysprosium), the extraction of which disturbs landscapes and emits toxic substances 7. light and strong composites are difficult to recycle; 8. the disposal of difficult-to-degrade wastes occupies large areas |
1. high one-time costs; 2. instability of energy supply due to dependence on weather conditions and geographical location, resulting in having to share energy with other sources; 3. Large area of land withdrawal; 4. Low utilisation efficiency (not more than 30%); 5. expensive methods of disposal of waste parts of wind turbines |
|
Sun |
25 |
Solar power plants (STPP, CSP) 27-122 Solar power plants (photovoltaics, PV) 8-83 |
1. no need for fossil fuels; 2.no emissions of pollutants into the ambient air during the operation of solar plants; 3.no noise pollution; |
1. no need for fuel; 2.inexhaustibility of resources; 3.no need to build power transmission lines, fuel storage facilities; 4.low operating costs;
|
1.the manufacturing processes of solar panels are accompanied by emissions of greenhouse gases, nitrogen trifluoride, sulphur hexafluoride, etc.; 2.the production process generates by-products that are harmful to the environment; 3. lack of technologies for processing hazardous production waste |
1. high capital costs; 2.large amounts of energy are required to produce solar panels; 3.dependence on time of year, time of day, weather conditions and geographical location; 4. large areas of land are required for installation; 5. low efficiency; 6. low energy density; 7.use of rare and expensive components in production; 8.high cost of energy storage; 9. lack of widespread technologies for processing hazardous industrial waste |
Source: *Information published at the 26th United Nations Climate Change Conference (Glasgow, Scotland, 2021) COP26 on the results of an international study of greenhouse gas emissions at different generation facilities in 2019 and 2020. The assessment takes into account emissions over the entire energy production cycle.
For example, the oil and gas sector accounts for more than half of methane emissions, and the coal sector for about a third. Among the environmental problems of the nuclear power sector is the use of uranium extraction methods. The development of renewable energy sources (RES) requires the additional use of non-renewable resources, energy-intensive industries and the introduction of non-standard methods of processing RES elements. In solar energy in particular, the risks are associated with the use of toxic and explosive components in the manufacture and disposal of solar panels. Among the environmental difficulties typical of wind energy projects and the operation of wind power plants are the negative impact on living organisms due to changes in the living environment (noise, light pollution, electromagnetic radiation, etc.). In addition, the disposal of non-recyclable wind turbine blades leads to the degradation of large areas.
Consideration of environmental impacts at all stages shows that the transition to renewable energy does not always lead to a reduction in pollution of the natural environment, including greenhouse gas emissions.
Studies on the spillover effects (including environmental effects) of renewable energy in the complex have a relatively recent history, and more recently this has been more widely discussed with the decommissioning of the first generation of solar and wind power facilities.
One notable work in this field is the publication “The unintended consequences of renewable energy” by Otto Andersen, a Norwegian researcher, researcher and project manager at the Western Norway Research Institute (WNRI). Problems to be solved“. His work draws on information previously collected by various researchers on specific types of energy and regions, from which a generalised picture of the environmental risks of renewable energy is constructed.
The key approaches are related to life cycle analysis and the assessment of so-called “counter effects” or “feedback effects”.
The focus of life cycle analysis and counter effects is on bioenergy (growing energy crops for biofuel production), solar photovoltaics, some aspects of hydrogen power and the use of electric vehicles.
The reasons why greenhouse gas emissions can reach high values for the life cycles of hydro, solar, bioenergy and geothermal plants are different. In the case of hydropower plants, this is primarily the formation of reservoirs which can create a stagnant regime with microbiological decomposition of organic material, causing an increase in greenhouse gas emissions. Similar processes are possible in the areas of tidal power plants.
Even if bioenergy is used, greenhouse gas emissions are generated at all stages. First and foremost in the cultivation of energy crops. Intensive cultivation requires large quantities of nitrogen fertilisers, leading to increased emissions of nitrogen dioxide, a potent greenhouse gas and ozone layer destroyer.
It is undisputed that greenhouse gas emissions in the renewable energy life cycle remain underestimated. Therefore, a further increase in renewable energy production requires complete production cycles where renewable energy is produced from renewable sources.
It is therefore clear that reducing the carbon intensity of the energy sector can only be achieved by taking into account a comprehensive assessment of the benefits and risks of each resource used.
At the same time, nuclear power with the introduction of new generation technologies based on a line of small capacity NPPs and fast neutron reactors with a closed fuel cycle, as well as hydropower, including through the implementation of pumped-storage power plants and development of small hydropower, is of great importance in decarbonization of the fuel-energy complex.
On the road to a low-carbon future, natural gas — as the cleanest fuel — retains its importance as a transitional fuel, displacing carbon-intensive resources. Increasing the share of LNG in global trade, subject to low-carbon constraints in logistics systems and production processes, would also reduce the carbon intensity of the industry.
Reducing the environmental footprint of coal-fired generation can be achieved by shifting to lower-sulphur coal grades (Russia mines this cleaner coal compared with coal from Indonesia and Australia), which emit significantly less pollutants than raw coal.
Also significant is the modernisation of coal-fired cogeneration plants with a transition to the best available technology. In coal extraction processes, priority is given to measures for preliminary degassing of coal deposits with efficient use of coal bed methane. In the processes of electricity and heat generation — modern technologies with low consumption of coal, a significant reduction of emissions and greater energy efficiency — raising the temperature and pressure of steam by “supercritical pressure boilers”, etc. All this makes it possible to significantly reduce the carbon intensity of the coal industry without worsening economic performance.
The main measures to decarbonise oil production are related to improving the energy efficiency of production and transportation technologies.
It is indisputable that achieving a balance of energy-environmental security and access to energy for all segments of the population using all types of generation is possible only with the introduction of the principles of a closed-cycle economy and transition to the best available technologies.
1 A global research non-profit organisation established in 1982 with funding from the MacArthur Foundation under the leadership of James Gustav Speth. WRI focuses on seven areas: food, forests, water, energy, cities, climate and the ocean.
2 Bloomberg New Energy Fund (BNEF) — Agency for Industrial Research.
Cover photo: Karsten Würth / Unsplash
Comments