• Energy Research
• 12. Responsible consumption close
• 1. No poverty close
• GB close
• Royal Institute of Technology close

The dominance of operational energy and related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of most existing buildings is decreasing in new construction, when primary fossil energy of building operation decreas ...

AbstractHerein a big Fe-C-Ca cycle, clarifying the basic element flows and energy flows in modern carbon-intensive industries including the metallurgical industry and the cement industry, was proposed for the first time in the contexts of emission reduction and iron ore degradation nowadays. This big cycle was focused on three industrial elements of Fe, C and Ca and thus it mainly comprised three interdependent loops, i.e., a C-cycle, a Fe-cycle and a Ca-path. As exemplified, we started from the integrated disposal of hot steel slags, a man-made iron resource via char gasification and the employment of hematite, a natural iron resource greatly extended the application area of this idea. Accordingly, based on this concept, the theoretical potentials for energy saving, emission reduction and Fe resource recovery achieved in modern industry are estimated up to 7.66 Mt of standard coal, 63.9 Mt of CO2 and 25.2 Mt of pig iron, respectively.

Here we discuss how personal carbon allowances (PCAs) could play a role in achieving ambitious climate mitigation targets. We argue that recent advances in AI for sustainable development, together with the need for a low-carbon recovery from the COVID-19 crisis, open a new window of opportunity for PCAs. Furthermore, we present design principles based on the Sustainable Development Goals for the future adoption of PCAs. We conclude that PCAs could be trialled in selected climate-conscious technologically advanced countries, mindful of potential issues around integration into the current policy mix, privacy concerns and distributional impacts. Personal carbon allowances (PCAs) could support climate mitigation efforts but would need to be carefully designed to avoid impacts on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This Perspective discusses why the time is ripe for reconsidering PCAs and provides a set of SDG-based design principles for the future adoption of PCAs.

Energy plays a crucial role in economic development. The article presents a framework for the analysis of alternative energy technology mixes in agricultural production and applies it in the context of sisal production in the Tanga region, Tanzania. Through scenario analysis, the paper presents both case-specific and generalizable insights. Case-specific insights show the key role that modern uses of energy and modern agricultural technologies could play in increasing productivity and revenues, in minimizing environmental degradation, and in promoting local development. Generalizable insights demonstrate the value of using sector-specific micro-structural frameworks and scenario analysis for assessing different technologies mixes in the energy and agriculture planning process.

The current regulations to reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from buildings have focused on operational energy consumption. Thus legislation excludes measurement and reduction of the embodied energy and embodied GHG emissions over the building life cycle. Embodied impacts are a significant and growing proportion and it is increasingly recognized that the focus on reducing operational energy consumption needs to be accompanied by a parallel focus on reducing embodied impacts. Over the last six years the Annex 57 has addressed this issue, with researchers from 15 countries working together to develop a detailed understanding of the multiple calculation methods and the interpretation of their results. Based on an analysis of 80 case studies, Annex 57 showed various inconsistencies in current methodological approaches, which inhibit comparisons of results and difficult development of robust reduction strategies. Reinterpreting the studies through an understanding of the methodological differences enabled the cases to be used to demonstrate a number of important strategies for the reduction of embodied impacts. Annex 57 has also produced clear recommendations for uniform definitions and templates which improve the description of system boundaries, completeness of inventory and quality of data, and consequently the transparency of embodied impact assessments.

AbstractGovernments and civil society are increasingly aware that the decarbonization of energy systems needs to be aligned with justice principles of recognition, distribution, and process. This paper establishes a conceptual linkage between “sustainable development”, “low‐carbon energy transitions” and “energy justice” and examines social priorities to address peoples' competing priorities associated with low‐carbon energy interventions. By analyzing a renewable energy project in Vietnam as a case study, the paper shows that linking social priorities to energy justice provides a useful contribution for energy policy makers toward a better understanding of the multidimensional and complex aspects of low‐carbon energy transitions, and how different segments of society prioritize and perceive them for the achievement of socially just energy decisions.

We briefly consider the tensions between climate change and energy security policy imperatives, and highlight some concepts that may bring additional clarity to decision-making at the nexus of the two areas. We focus on developing countries and use the case of the Medupi supercritical coal plant in South Africa. The justification for the plant's construction stemmed from an Integrated Resource Planning process informed by South Africa's national utility. Often, as in the case of South Africa, there are tensions not easily captured in quantitative algorithms between, inter alia, a lack of access to electricity by millions of people (and associated welfare losses) and greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generation. It is difficult to identify any formal processes that have prioritised climate change considerations over those of energy access. Thus, it becomes imperative to have a clear understanding of the consequences of this reality when considering power system expansion. We find that the processes often employed do not provide an entirely satisfactory precedent for future planning analyses, and the justifications do not adequately reflect the complexity of the decision space. Finally, we highlight some options by which these tools might be enhanced in areas including explicit and formal consideration of risk.

The international community has committed to combat climate change and achieve 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Here we explore (dis)connections in evidence and governance between these commitments. Our structured evidence review suggests that climate change can undermine 16 SDGs, while combatting climate change can reinforce all 17 SDGs but undermine efforts to achieve 12. Understanding these relationships requires wider and deeper interdisciplinary collaboration. Climate change and sustainable development governance should be better connected to maximize the effectiveness of action in both domains. The emergence around the world of new coordinating institutions and sustainable development planning represents promising progress.

Abstract Universal electrification by 2030 is an important goal of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 7. Electricity provision no longer relies only on centralized grid expansion, but also on off-grid and mini-grid systems. Although this technological diversity holds promise, the technologies differ both physically and institutionally in electricity delivery. These differences raise equity and justice concerns around how they are implemented. For example, how can electricity be kept affordable for all consumers when access is provided by various technologies operated under different business models? This paper addresses this aspect of affordability and sheds light on how the SDG7 target could be met more equitably and fairly. We use a novel analytical methodology to apply two different principles of justice – equality and equity – to incorporate affordability into electricity pricing. Using a geospatial electrification model and Tanzania as a case study, we first arrive at price levels based on the principle(s) of justice. Then, we produce location-specific recommendations for subsidy levels needed to ensure those price levels. We find that the equity approach benefits a bigger section of the population than the equality approach. Moreover, the former costs significantly less per capita than the latter. Having said that, the equity approach is complex and therefore harder to implement. The methodological framework proposed in this study acts as a proof-of-concept for examining concerns around distributive justice using quantitative energy modelling tools and drawing policy relevant insights for energy planning in developing countries. Additionally, by focusing on the spatial aspects of energy access and the issue of fairness, the study also contributes to the growing conceptualizations of energy justice.

Transformations toward sustainability have recently gained traction, triggered in part by a growing recognition of the dramatic socio-cultural, political, economic, and technological changes required to move societies toward more desirable futures in the Anthropocene. However, there is a dearth of literature that emphasizes the crucial aspects of sustainability transformations in the diverse contexts of the Global South. Contributors to this Special Feature aim to address this gap by weaving together a series of case studies that together form an important navigational tool on the “how to” as well as the “what” and the “where to” of sustainability transformations across diverse challenges, sectors, and geographies. They propose the term “transformative space” as a “safe-enough” collaborative process whereby actors invested in sustainability transformations can experiment with new mental models, ideas, and practices that can help shift social-ecological systems onto more desirable pathways. The authors also highlight the challenges posed to researchers as they become “transformative space-makers,” navigating the power dynamics inherent in these processes. Because researchers and practitioners alike are challenged to provide answers to complex and often ambiguous or incomplete questions around sustainability, the ideas, reflections and learning gathered in this Special Feature provide some guidance on new ways of engaging with the world.