Nuclear Engineering and Technology

Korean Nuclear Society (한국원자력학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The role of nuclear energy in the correction of environmental pollution: Evidence from Pakistan

  • Mahmood, Nasir (School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology) ;
  • Danish, Danish (School of Economics and Trade, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies) ;
  • Wang, Zhaohua (School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology) ;
  • Zhang, Bin (School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology)
  • Received : 2019.09.25
  • Accepted : 2019.11.21
  • Published : 2020.06.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The global warming phenomenon emerges from the issue of climate change, which attracts the attention of intellectuals towards clean energy sources from dirty energy sources. Among clean sources, nuclear energy is getting immense attention among policymakers. However, the role of nuclear energy in pollution emissions reduction has remained inconclusive and demand for further investigation. Therefore, the current study contributes to extend knowledge by investigating the nexus between nuclear energy, economic growth, and CO2 emissions in a developing country context such as Pakistan for the period between 1973 and 2017. The auto-regressive distributive lag model summarizes the nuclear energy has negative effect on environmental pollution as it releases carbon emission in the environment. Moreover, vector error correction Granger causality provides evidence for bidirectional causality between nuclear energy and carbon emissions. These interesting findings provide new insight, and policy guidelines provided based on these results.

Keywords

References

  1. IPCC, An IPCC special report: global warming of 1.5 C. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324, 2018.
  2. Danish, B. Zhang, B. Wang, Z. Wang, Role of renewable energy and non-renewable energy consumption on EKC: evidence from Pakistan, J. Clean. Prod. 156 (2017) 855-864, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.203.
  3. K. Dong, R. Sun, H. Jiang, X. Zeng, CO2emissions, economic growth, and the environmental Kuznets curve in China: what roles can nuclear energy and renewable energy play? J. Clean. Prod. 196 (2018) 51-63, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.271.
  4. IAEA, Nuclear Power for Sustainable Development, 2017. https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/np-sustainable-development.pdf. (Accessed 8 February 2019).
  5. IAEA, International atomic energy agency $\mid$ atoms for peace and development. https://www.iaea.org/, 2019. (Accessed 12 February 2019).
  6. NEI, NEI,Statistics. https://www.nei.org/resources/statistics, 2018. (Accessed 15 December 2018).
  7. BP, BP Statistical Review of World Energy, 2018. https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/en/corporate/pdf/energy-economics/statistical-review/bpstats-review-2018-full-report.pdf.
  8. IAEA, Climate change and nuclear power 2018. https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/CCNAP-2018_web.pdf, 2019. (Accessed 8 February 2019).
  9. S. Lee, M. Kim, J. Lee, Analyzing the Impact of Nuclear Power on CO 2 Emissions, 2017, pp. 1-13, https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081428.
  10. Y. Xu, J. Kang, J. Yuan, The prospective of nuclear power in China, Sustainability 10 (2018), https://doi.org/10.3390/su10062086.
  11. M.G. Morgan, A. Abdulla, M.J. Ford, M. Rath, US nuclear power: the vanishing low-carbon wedge, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 115 (2018) 7184-7189, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1804655115.
  12. T. Jin, J. Kim, What is better for mitigating carbon emissions - renewable energy or nuclear energy ? A panel data analysis, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 91 (2018) 464-471, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.04.022.
  13. J. Portugal-Pereira, P. Ferreira, J. Cunha, A. Szklo, R. Schaeffer, M. Araujo, Better late than never, but never late is better: risk assessment of nuclear power construction projects, Energy Policy 120 (2018) 158-166, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.05.041.
  14. Z. Wang, Danish, B. Zhang, B. Wang, Renewable energy consumption, economic growth and human development index in Pakistan: evidence form simultaneous equation model, J. Clean. Prod. 184 (2018) 1081-1090, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.260.
  15. F. Zhang, In the dark how much do power sector distortions cost South asia?. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/30923/9781464811548.pdf?sequence=8, 2018.
  16. N. Mahmood, Z. Wang, N. Yasmin, W. Manzoor, A. Rahman, How to bend down the environmental Kuznets curve : the significance of biomass energy, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 26 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05442-1.
  17. N. Mahmood, Z. Wang, S.T. Hassan, Renewable energy, economic growth, human capital, and CO2 emission: an empirical analysis, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 26 (2019) 20619-20630, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05387-5.
  18. Danish, B. Wang, Z. Wang, Imported technology and CO2emission in China: collecting evidence through bound testing and VECM approach, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 82 (2018) 4204-4214, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.11.002.
  19. F.V. Bekun, A.A. Alola, S.A. Sarkodie, Toward a sustainable environment: nexus between CO2 emissions, resource rent, renewable and nonrenewable energy in 16-EU countries, Sci. Total Environ. 657 (2019) 1023-1029, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.104.
  20. S. Asumadu-Sarkodie, P.A. Owusu, A multivariate analysis of carbon dioxide emissions, electricity consumption, economic growth, financial development, industrialization, and urbanization in Senegal, Energy Sources, Part B Econ, Planning, Policy. 12 (2017) 77-84, https://doi.org/10.1080/15567249.2016.1227886.
  21. S.A. Sarkodie, V. Strezov, Effect of foreign direct investments, economic development and energy consumption on greenhouse gas emissions in developing countries, Sci. Total Environ. 646 (2019) 862-871, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.365.
  22. Danish, M.A. Baloch, N. Mahmood, J.W. Zhang, Effect of natural resources, renewable energy and economic development on CO 2 emissions in BRICS countries, Sci. Total Environ. 678 (2019) 632-638, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.028.
  23. Danish, J. Zhang, S.T. Hassan, K. Iqbal, Toward achieving environmental sustainability target in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries : the role of real income , research and development , and transport infrastructure, Sustain. Dev. (2019) 1-8, https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1973.
  24. S.R. Paramati, D. Mo, R. Gupta, The effects of stock market growth and renewable energy use on CO2 emissions: evidence from G20 countries, Energy Econ. 66 (2017) 360-371, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENECO.2017.06.025.
  25. F. Belaid, M. Youssef, Environmental degradation, renewable and non-renewable electricity consumption, and economic growth: assessing the evidence from Algeria, Energy Policy 102 (2017) 277-287, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.12.012.
  26. L. Zhi-Guo, H. Cheng, W. Dong-Ming, Empirical research on the relationship between natural gas consumption and economic growth in the Northeast Asia, Energy Environ. 29 (2018) 216-231, https://doi.org/10.1177/0958305X17745273.
  27. Danish, W. Zhaohua, Does biomass energy consumption help to control environmental pollution? Evidence from BRICS countries, Sci. Total Environ. 670 (2019) 1075-1083, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.03.268.
  28. K. Dong, R. Sun, X. Dong, CO2emissions, natural gas and renewables, economic growth: assessing the evidence from China, Sci. Total Environ. 640-641 (2018) 293-302, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.05.322.
  29. U. Bulut, The impacts of non-renewable and renewable energy on CO 2 emissions in Turkey, Environtal Sci Ence Pollut. Res. 24 (2017) 15416-15426, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-9175-2.
  30. M. Mert, G. Boluk, Do foreign direct investment and renewable energy consumption affect the CO2emissions? New evidence from a panel ARDL approach to Kyoto Annex countries, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 23 (2016) 21669-21681, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-7413-7.
  31. F. Bilgili, E. Kocak, U. Bulut, The dynamic impact of renewable energy consumption on CO2 emissions: a revisited Environmental Kuznets Curve approach, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 54 (2016) 838-845, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2015.10.080.
  32. M. Ben Jebli, S. Ben Youssef, I. Ozturk, Testing environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: the role of renewable and non-renewable energy consumption and trade in OECD countries, Ecol. Indicat. 60 (2016) 824-831, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.08.031.
  33. J.P. Cerdeira Bento, V. Moutinho, CO2 emissions, non-renewable and renewable electricity production, economic growth, and international trade in Italy, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 55 (2016) 142-155, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2015.10.151.
  34. S. Lee, M. Kim, J. Lee, Analyzing the impact of nuclear power on CO2 emissions, Sustain. Times 9 (2017) 1-13, https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081428.
  35. L.-S. Lau, C. Choong, C.-F. Ng, F.-M. Liew, S.-L. Ching, Is nuclear energy clean? Revisit of Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis in OECD countries, Econ. Modell. 77 (2018) 12-20, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2018.09.015.
  36. J. Baek, D. Pride, On the income-nuclear energy-CO2 emissions nexus revisited, Energy Econ. 43 (2014) 6-10, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2014.01.015.
  37. K. Saidi, M. Ben Mbarek, Progress in Nuclear Energy Nuclear energy , renewable energy , CO 2 emissions , and economic growth for nine developed countries : evidence from panel Granger causality tests, Prog. Nucl. Energy 88 (2016) 364-374, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2016.01.018.
  38. U. Al-mulali, Progress in Nuclear Energy Investigating the impact of nuclear energy consumption on GDP growth and CO 2 emission : a panel data analysis, Prog. Nucl. Energy 73 (2014) 172-178, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2014.02.002.
  39. H. Iwata, K. Okada, S. Samreth, Empirical study on the determinants of CO2 emissions: evidence from OECD countries, Appl. Econ. 44 (2012) 3513-3519, https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2011.577023.
  40. A. Alam, Nuclear energy , CO 2 emissions and economic growth the case of developing and developed, J. Econ. Stud. 40 (2013) 822-834, https://doi.org/10.1108/JES-04-2012-0044.
  41. M. Jaforullah, A. King, Does the use of renewable energy sources mitigate CO2 emissions? A reassessment of the US evidence, Energy Econ. 49 (2015) 711-717, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENECO.2015.04.006.
  42. J. Baek, Do nuclear and renewable energy improve the environment ? Empirical evidence from the United States, Ecol. Indicat. 66 (2016) 352-356, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.01.059.
  43. H. Ishida, Can nuclear energy contribute to the transition toward a low-carbon Economy ? The Japanese case, Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 8 (2018) 62-68. http://www.econjournals.com/index.php/ijeep/article/view/5750. (Accessed 10 February 2019).
  44. H. Iwata, K. Okada, S. Samreth, Empirical study on the environmental Kuznets curve for CO2in France: the role of nuclear energy, Energy Policy 38 (2010) 4057-4063, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.031.
  45. S.A. Sarkodie, S. Adams, Renewable energy, nuclear energy, and environmental pollution: accounting for political institutional quality in South Africa, Sci. Total Environ. 643 (2018) 1590-1601, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.06.320.
  46. World Bank, World bank, World Dev. Indic. (2018). http://databank.worldbank.org/data/reports.aspx?Source=World%20Development%20Indicators#23.
  47. J. Baek, A panel cointegration analysis of CO2 emissions, nuclear energy and income in major nuclear generating countries, Appl. Energy 145 (2015) 133-138, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.074.
  48. M.H. Pesaran, Y. Shin, R.J. Smith, Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships, J. Appl. Econom. 16 (2001) 289-326, https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.616.
  49. P.K. Narayan, The saving and investment nexus for China: evidence from cointegration tests, Appl. Econ. 37 (2005) 1979-1990, https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840500278103.
  50. C. Bayer, C. Hanck, Combining non-cointegration tests, J. Time Ser. Anal. 34 (2013) 83-95, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9892.2012.00814.x.
  51. S. Johansen, Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors, J. Econ. Dyn. Control 12 (1988) 231-254, https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-1889(88)90041-3.
  52. H.P. Boswijk, Efficient inference on cointegration parameters in structural error correction models, J. Econom. 69 (1995) 133-158, https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01665-M.
  53. A. Banerjee, J. Dolado, R. Mestre, Error-correction mechanism tests for cointegration in a single-equation framework, J. Time Ser. Anal. 19 (1998) 267-283, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9892.00091.
  54. P.C.B. Phillips, S. Ouliaris, Asymptotic properties of residual based tests for cointegration, Econometrica (2006), https://doi.org/10.2307/2938339.
  55. R.F. Engle, C.W.J. Granger, Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing, Econometrica 55 (1987) 251, https://doi.org/10.2307/1913236.
  56. S.S. Johansen, Estimation and hypothesis testing OF cointegration vectors IN Gaussian vector autoregressive models, Econometrica 59 (1991) 1551-1580, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsanm.8b00125.
  57. H. Peter Boswijk, Testing for an unstable root in conditional and structural error correction models, J. Econom. 63 (1994) 37-60, https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(93)01560-9.
  58. Y. Wolde-Rufael, K. Menyah, Nuclear energy consumption and economic growth in nine developed countries, Energy Econ. 32 (2010) 550-556, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENECO.2010.01.004.
  59. A. Sinha, M. Shahbaz, Estimation of environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 emission: role of renewable energy generation in India, Renew. Energy 119 (2018) 703-711, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.12.058.
  60. IEA, Iea, Int. Energy Agency. (2019). https://www.iea.org/statistics/kwes/supply/.
  61. N. Apergis, J.E. Payne, A panel study of nuclear energy consumption and economic growth, Energy Econ. 32 (2010) 545-549. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800910002399. (Accessed 23 December 2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2009.09.015
  62. J. Baek, D. Pride, On the income-nuclear energy-CO2emissions nexus revisited, Energy Econ. 43 (2014) 6-10, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2014.01.015.
  63. NEPRA, State of industry report 2017, netional electr. Power regul. Authority, Pakistan. https://nepra.org.pk/Publications/State of Industry Reports/State of industry report 2017.pdf, 2018.
  64. G. Gozgor, E. Demir, Evaluating the efficiency of nuclear energy policies: an empirical examination for 26 countries, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 24 (2017) 18596-18604, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-9486-3.
  65. Z. Khalilzad, Pakistan: the making of a nuclear power, Asian Surv. 16 (1976) 580-592, https://doi.org/10.2307/2643521.
  66. Z. Mian, A.H. Nayyar, Pakistan's Chashma Nuclear Power Plant: a preliminary study of some safety issues and estimates of the consequences of a severe accident. http://www.princeton.edu/sgs/publications/center-reports/CEES-321 revised.pdf, 1999.
  67. PNRA, Pakistan Nuclear Regulatory Authority, Annual Report 2016, 2017.
  68. PNRA, Pakistan nuclear regulatory authority annual report 2017, (c) Pakistan NUCLEAR REGULATORY AUTHORITY. https://www.pnra.org/upload/pnrarpt/PNRA%20Report%202017.pdf, 2018.
  69. K. Menyah, Y. Wolde-Rufael, CO2 emissions, nuclear energy, renewable energy and economic growth in the US, Energy Policy 38 (2010) 2911-2915, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.01.024.

Cited by

  1. Overview of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Strategies and the Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Technologies in Taiwan vol.13, pp.11, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/en13112996
  2. Design of a mobile dissolved air flotation system with high rate for the treatment of liquid radioactive waste vol.144, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2020.07.016
  3. Nuclear Energy: Non-Electric Applications vol.5, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.29333/ejosdr/9305
  4. Energy Storage for Energy Security and Reliability through Renewable Energy Technologies: A New Paradigm for Energy Policies in Turkey and Pakistan vol.13, pp.5, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052823
  5. Irradiation-stable hydrous titanium oxide-immobilized collagen fibers for uranium removal from radioactive wastewater vol.283, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112001
  6. The Pahlev Reliability Index: A measurement for the resilience of power generation technologies versus climate change vol.53, pp.5, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2020.10.013
  7. An empirical investigation of nuclear energy consumption and carbon dioxide (CO2) emission in India: Bridging IPAT and EKC hypotheses vol.53, pp.6, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2020.12.008
  8. Testing the pollution haven hypothesis on the pathway of sustainable development: Accounting the role of nuclear energy consumption vol.53, pp.8, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2021.02.008
  9. The roles of nuclear energy, renewable energy, and economic growth in the abatement of carbon dioxide emissions in the G7 countries vol.28, pp.35, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13728-6
  10. A Cross-Sectoral Investigation of the Energy-Environment-Economy Causal Nexus in Pakistan: Policy Suggestions for Improved Energy Management vol.14, pp.17, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/en14175495
  11. Can nuclear energy fuel an environmentally sustainable economic growth? Revisiting the EKC hypothesis for India vol.28, pp.44, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-15220-7
  12. The Energy Mix Dilemma and Environmental Sustainability: Interaction among Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Nuclear Energy, Urban Agglomeration, and Economic Growth vol.14, pp.22, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/en14227703