分类发电对碳中和的时间、频率和分位数影响:来自欧盟主要国家的证据

IF 6.5 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Mustafa Tevfik Kartal, Ugur Korkut Pata, Serpil Kılıç Depren, Sinan Erdogan
{"title":"分类发电对碳中和的时间、频率和分位数影响:来自欧盟主要国家的证据","authors":"Mustafa Tevfik Kartal, Ugur Korkut Pata, Serpil Kılıç Depren, Sinan Erdogan","doi":"10.1080/13504509.2023.2256693","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACTDue to increasing geopolitical tensions and disruption of gas supplies, European countries have been looking for alternatives for electricity generation (EG). As part of this process, one of the most important goals for long-term sustainability is to ensure carbon neutrality. Therefore, this study analyzes time, frequency, and quantile-based impacts of EG from different electricity generation sources (i.e., renewable, nuclear, and fossil fuels) on carbon neutrality, focusing on four leading European countries. The study applies the wavelet transform coherence (WC), quantile-on-quantile regression (QQ), and Granger causality in quantiles (GQ) to high-frequency daily data between January 2, 2019 and March 10, 2023. Results show that (i) there is a strong time and frequency dependence between EG and CO2 emissions across countries, while results vary by EG sources and countries; (ii) renewable EG dampens CO2 emissions. At higher quantiles, a higher share of renewable EG lowers CO2 emissions in Germany and Spain, while they increase in France; (iii) nuclear EG is beneficial only for the United Kingdom. (iv) Fossil EG increases CO2 emissions in all countries. Excessive fossil EG leads to more CO2 emissions at higher quantiles; (v) the impacts of EG on CO2 emissions have a time-, frequency-, quantile-, country-, and EG source-dependent structure. The outcomes of the study demonstrates that the ideal EG source for countries is mainly renewable EG, while in the case of the United Kingdom, nuclear EG could be an alternative for improving the environment while reducing fossil fuels.KEYWORDS: ElectricityCO2 emissionsEuropean Union countriesDisaggregated Analysisnonlinear methodsJEL CLASSIFICATION: C32N50O13 Highlights The study examines impacts of electricity generation (EG) on carbon neutrality.The study focuses on leading four European countries.The study applies nonlinear approaches by using high-frequency daily data.The ideal EG source is generally renewable and partially nuclear.EG has a time, frequency, quantile, and country-varying impact.The results are consistent and robust based on alternative method.Acronyms BDS=Broock, Scheinkman, Dechert, and LeBaronBRICS=Brazil, Russia, India, China, South AfricaCO2=Carbon DioxideEG=Electricity GenerationEU=European UnionGQ=Granger Causality-in-QuantilesGWh=Gigawatt-HourIEA=International Energy AgencyJB=Jarque BeraOECD=Organization for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentQQ=Quantile-on-Quantile RegressionQR=Quantile RegressionSDGs=Sustainable Development GoalsTWh=terawatt-hoursUN=United NationsUSD=United States DollarsWC=Wavelet CoherenceDependent Variable=CO2=Total CO2 EmissionsIndependent Variables=REG=Renewable EGNEG=Nuclear EGFEG=Fossil EGAnalysis Scope=DEU=GermanyESP=SpainFRA=FranceGBR=United KingdomDisclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Authors’ contributionsThe authors have contributed equally to this work. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.Availability of data and materialsData will be made available on request.Consent for publicationThe authors are willing to permit the Journal to publish the article.Additional informationFundingThis research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.","PeriodicalId":50287,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Time, frequency, and quantile-based impacts of disaggregated electricity generation on carbon neutrality: evidence from leading European Union countries\",\"authors\":\"Mustafa Tevfik Kartal, Ugur Korkut Pata, Serpil Kılıç Depren, Sinan Erdogan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13504509.2023.2256693\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACTDue to increasing geopolitical tensions and disruption of gas supplies, European countries have been looking for alternatives for electricity generation (EG). As part of this process, one of the most important goals for long-term sustainability is to ensure carbon neutrality. Therefore, this study analyzes time, frequency, and quantile-based impacts of EG from different electricity generation sources (i.e., renewable, nuclear, and fossil fuels) on carbon neutrality, focusing on four leading European countries. The study applies the wavelet transform coherence (WC), quantile-on-quantile regression (QQ), and Granger causality in quantiles (GQ) to high-frequency daily data between January 2, 2019 and March 10, 2023. Results show that (i) there is a strong time and frequency dependence between EG and CO2 emissions across countries, while results vary by EG sources and countries; (ii) renewable EG dampens CO2 emissions. At higher quantiles, a higher share of renewable EG lowers CO2 emissions in Germany and Spain, while they increase in France; (iii) nuclear EG is beneficial only for the United Kingdom. (iv) Fossil EG increases CO2 emissions in all countries. Excessive fossil EG leads to more CO2 emissions at higher quantiles; (v) the impacts of EG on CO2 emissions have a time-, frequency-, quantile-, country-, and EG source-dependent structure. The outcomes of the study demonstrates that the ideal EG source for countries is mainly renewable EG, while in the case of the United Kingdom, nuclear EG could be an alternative for improving the environment while reducing fossil fuels.KEYWORDS: ElectricityCO2 emissionsEuropean Union countriesDisaggregated Analysisnonlinear methodsJEL CLASSIFICATION: C32N50O13 Highlights The study examines impacts of electricity generation (EG) on carbon neutrality.The study focuses on leading four European countries.The study applies nonlinear approaches by using high-frequency daily data.The ideal EG source is generally renewable and partially nuclear.EG has a time, frequency, quantile, and country-varying impact.The results are consistent and robust based on alternative method.Acronyms BDS=Broock, Scheinkman, Dechert, and LeBaronBRICS=Brazil, Russia, India, China, South AfricaCO2=Carbon DioxideEG=Electricity GenerationEU=European UnionGQ=Granger Causality-in-QuantilesGWh=Gigawatt-HourIEA=International Energy AgencyJB=Jarque BeraOECD=Organization for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentQQ=Quantile-on-Quantile RegressionQR=Quantile RegressionSDGs=Sustainable Development GoalsTWh=terawatt-hoursUN=United NationsUSD=United States DollarsWC=Wavelet CoherenceDependent Variable=CO2=Total CO2 EmissionsIndependent Variables=REG=Renewable EGNEG=Nuclear EGFEG=Fossil EGAnalysis Scope=DEU=GermanyESP=SpainFRA=FranceGBR=United KingdomDisclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Authors’ contributionsThe authors have contributed equally to this work. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.Availability of data and materialsData will be made available on request.Consent for publicationThe authors are willing to permit the Journal to publish the article.Additional informationFundingThis research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50287,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2023.2256693\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2023.2256693","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

【摘要】由于地缘政治紧张局势加剧和天然气供应中断,欧洲国家一直在寻找发电(EG)的替代方案。作为这一过程的一部分,长期可持续发展的最重要目标之一是确保碳中和。因此,本研究分析了不同发电来源(即可再生能源、核能和化石燃料)的EG对碳中和的时间、频率和分位数影响,重点研究了四个主要的欧洲国家。该研究将小波变换相干性(WC)、分位数对分位数回归(QQ)和分位数格兰杰因果关系(GQ)应用于2019年1月2日至2023年3月10日的高频日数据。结果表明:(1)各国温室气体排放与二氧化碳排放之间存在较强的时间和频率依赖性,但结果因温室气体来源和国家而异;(ii)可再生EG减少二氧化碳排放。在较高的分位数下,德国和西班牙的可再生能源比例较高,二氧化碳排放量降低,而法国则增加;(iii)核能EG只对英国有利。化石EG增加了所有国家的二氧化碳排放量。过量的化石EG导致高分位数下更多的二氧化碳排放;(5)气候变化对CO2排放的影响具有时间、频率、分位数、国别和气候变化源相关的结构。研究结果表明,各国理想的EG来源主要是可再生EG,而在英国的情况下,核EG可能是在减少化石燃料的同时改善环境的一种选择。关键词:电力;二氧化碳排放;欧盟国家;分类分析;这项研究的重点是四个主要的欧洲国家。该研究通过使用高频日常数据应用非线性方法。理想的EG来源通常是可再生和部分核。EG具有时间、频率、分位数和国家不同的影响。基于替代方法的结果具有一致性和鲁棒性。首字母缩略词BDS=Broock, Scheinkman, Dechert和lebaronons。brics =巴西,俄罗斯,印度,中国,南非o2 =二氧化碳eg =发电eu =欧盟q =格兰杰因果关系-分位数gwh =千兆瓦时ea =国际能源机构jb =Jarque BeraOECD=经济合作与发展组织qq =分位数对分位数回归qr =分位数回归sdgs =可持续发展目标wh =太瓦时sun =联合国susd =美国美元swc =小波相干因变量=CO2=二氧化碳总排放量自变量=REG=可再生能源EGNEG=核能EGFEG=化石分析范围=DEU=德国= esp =西班牙= fra =法国= egbr =英国披露声明作者未报告潜在利益冲突。作者的贡献作者对这项工作作出了同等的贡献。所有作者都阅读并批准了最终的手稿。数据和材料的可得性应要求,我们将提供数据。同意发表作者愿意允许杂志发表这篇文章。本研究没有从公共、商业或非营利部门的资助机构获得任何特定的资助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Time, frequency, and quantile-based impacts of disaggregated electricity generation on carbon neutrality: evidence from leading European Union countries
ABSTRACTDue to increasing geopolitical tensions and disruption of gas supplies, European countries have been looking for alternatives for electricity generation (EG). As part of this process, one of the most important goals for long-term sustainability is to ensure carbon neutrality. Therefore, this study analyzes time, frequency, and quantile-based impacts of EG from different electricity generation sources (i.e., renewable, nuclear, and fossil fuels) on carbon neutrality, focusing on four leading European countries. The study applies the wavelet transform coherence (WC), quantile-on-quantile regression (QQ), and Granger causality in quantiles (GQ) to high-frequency daily data between January 2, 2019 and March 10, 2023. Results show that (i) there is a strong time and frequency dependence between EG and CO2 emissions across countries, while results vary by EG sources and countries; (ii) renewable EG dampens CO2 emissions. At higher quantiles, a higher share of renewable EG lowers CO2 emissions in Germany and Spain, while they increase in France; (iii) nuclear EG is beneficial only for the United Kingdom. (iv) Fossil EG increases CO2 emissions in all countries. Excessive fossil EG leads to more CO2 emissions at higher quantiles; (v) the impacts of EG on CO2 emissions have a time-, frequency-, quantile-, country-, and EG source-dependent structure. The outcomes of the study demonstrates that the ideal EG source for countries is mainly renewable EG, while in the case of the United Kingdom, nuclear EG could be an alternative for improving the environment while reducing fossil fuels.KEYWORDS: ElectricityCO2 emissionsEuropean Union countriesDisaggregated Analysisnonlinear methodsJEL CLASSIFICATION: C32N50O13 Highlights The study examines impacts of electricity generation (EG) on carbon neutrality.The study focuses on leading four European countries.The study applies nonlinear approaches by using high-frequency daily data.The ideal EG source is generally renewable and partially nuclear.EG has a time, frequency, quantile, and country-varying impact.The results are consistent and robust based on alternative method.Acronyms BDS=Broock, Scheinkman, Dechert, and LeBaronBRICS=Brazil, Russia, India, China, South AfricaCO2=Carbon DioxideEG=Electricity GenerationEU=European UnionGQ=Granger Causality-in-QuantilesGWh=Gigawatt-HourIEA=International Energy AgencyJB=Jarque BeraOECD=Organization for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentQQ=Quantile-on-Quantile RegressionQR=Quantile RegressionSDGs=Sustainable Development GoalsTWh=terawatt-hoursUN=United NationsUSD=United States DollarsWC=Wavelet CoherenceDependent Variable=CO2=Total CO2 EmissionsIndependent Variables=REG=Renewable EGNEG=Nuclear EGFEG=Fossil EGAnalysis Scope=DEU=GermanyESP=SpainFRA=FranceGBR=United KingdomDisclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.Authors’ contributionsThe authors have contributed equally to this work. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.Availability of data and materialsData will be made available on request.Consent for publicationThe authors are willing to permit the Journal to publish the article.Additional informationFundingThis research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.10
自引率
3.60%
发文量
58
审稿时长
18-36 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology is now over fifteen years old and has proved to be an exciting forum for understanding and advancing our knowledge and implementation of sustainable development. Sustainable development is now of primary importance as the key to future use and management of finite world resources. It recognises the need for development opportunities while maintaining a balance between these and the environment. As stated by the UN Bruntland Commission in 1987, sustainable development should "meet the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信