Nuclear Engineering and Technology

Korean Nuclear Society (한국원자력학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Is nuclear energy a better alternative for mitigating CO2 emissions in BRICS countries? An empirical analysis

  • Hassan, Syed Tauseef (School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology) ;
  • Danish, Danish (School of Economics and Trade, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies) ;
  • khan, Salah-Ud-Din (Sustainable Energy Technologies (SET) Center, College of Engineering, King Saud University) ;
  • Baloch, Muhammad Awais (School of Economics and Management, Baoji University of Arts and Sciences) ;
  • Tarar, Zahid Hassan (Soil and Water Testing Laboratory Mandi Bahauddin)
  • Received : 2020.03.10
  • Accepted : 2020.05.14
  • Published : 2020.12.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Looking at the recent studies, nuclear energy and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions nexus shows inconclusive result. To further explain nuclear energy-pollution nexuses this study is an attempt to analyze the impact of nuclear energy on pollution reduction for BRICS countries covering data for the period from 1993 to 2017. This study conducts advanced panel techniques such as Continuously-Updated Fully-Modified (CUP-FM) and Continuously-Updated Bias-Corrected (CUP-BC) for long run estimation. Our results support the notion that nuclear energy reduce CO2 emissions. Also, renewable energy corrects environmental pollution in BRICS countries. The magnitude of the coefficient of nuclear energy is less as compared to renewable energy, implying that nuclear is less effective in reducing environmental pollution. The findings offer significant policy understandings and suggestions not only for BRICS economies but for developing countries as well in designing suitable nuclear energy-growth-carbon policies.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The author would like to sincerely appreciate funding from Researchers Supporting Project number (RSP-2020/58), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

References

  1. M. Awais Danish, B. Wang, Analyzing the role of governance in CO 2 emissions mitigation : the BRICS experience, Struct. Change Econ. Dynam. 51 (2019) 119-125, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2019.08.007.
  2. S.A. Solarin, M.O. Bello, Energy innovations and environmental sustainability in the U . S .: the roles of immigration and economic expansion using a maximum likelihood method, Energy Innovat. Environ. Sustain. U.S. Roles Immigr. Econ. Expans. Using a Maximum Likelihood Method (2019) 135594, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135594.
  3. BP, 67 th edition Contents is one of the most widely respected, Stat. Rev. World Energy (2018) 1-56.
  4. IPCC, Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Economic Sector, Contrib. Work. Gr. III to fifth assess, Rep. Intergov. Panel Clim. Chang. (2014) 1-7.
  5. M.A. Baloch, N. Mahmood, J.W. Zhang Danish, 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.
  6. D.B. Lorente, A. Alvarez-Herranz, An approach to the effect of energy innovation on environmental kuznets curve: an introduction to inflection point, Bull. Energy Econ. 4 (2016) 224-233.
  7. M.M. Alam, M.W. Murad, A.H.M. Noman, I. Ozturk, Relationships among carbon emissions, economic growth, energy consumption and population growth: testing Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis for Brazil, China, India and Indonesia, Ecol. Indicat. 70 (2016) 466-479, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.06.043.
  8. U. Al-Mulali, S.A. Solarin, I. Ozturk, Biofuel energy consumption- economic growth relationship: an empirical investigation of Brazil, Biofuels, Bioprod. Biorefin. 6 (2012) 246-256, https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.
  9. S. Adebola Solarin, U. Al-Mulali, I. Ozturk, Validating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis in India and China: the role of hydroelectricity consumption, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 80 (2017) 1578-1587, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.07.028.
  10. R. Ulucak, F. Bilgili, A reinvestigation of EKC model by ecological footprint measurement for high, middle and low income countries, J. Clean. Prod. 188 (2018) 144-157, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.191.
  11. A. Alvarez-herranz, D. Balsalobre-lorente, M. Shahbaz, Energy innovation and renewable energy consumption in the correction of air pollution levels, Energy Pol. 105 (2017) 386-397, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.03.009.
  12. Z. Wang, Danish, B. Zhang, B. Wang, The moderating role of corruption between economic growth and CO2 emissions: evidence from BRICS economies, Energy 148 (2018) 506-513, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.01.167.
  13. 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.
  14. L. Lau, C. Choong, C. Ng, F. Liew, S. Ching, Is nuclear energy clean ? Revisit of Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis in OECD countries, Econ. Modell. 77 (2020) 12-20, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2018.09.015.
  15. N. Mahmood, K. Danish, Z. Wang, B. Zhang, The role of nuclear energy in the correction of environmental pollution: evidence from Pakistan, Nucl. Eng. Technol. (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2019.11.027.
  16. G. Bandoc, R. Pr, Nuclear energy : between global electricity demand , worldwide decarbonisation imperativeness, and planetary environmental implications v a 209 (2018) 81-92.
  17. T. Jin, J. Kim, What is better for mitigating carbon emissions e 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.
  18. C. Iskender, Nuclear Energy Debate in Turkey : Stakeholders , Policy Alternatives , and Governance Issues, 2020, p. 136.
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. K. Saidi, M. Ben Mbarek, Nuclear energy, renewable energy, CO2 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.
  22. 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.
  23. IAEA, No Title, (2019) 12354.
  24. S. Sha, R.A. Salim, Non-renewable and renewable energy consumption and CO2 emissions in OECD countries : a comparative analysis, Energy Pol. 66 (2014) 547-556, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.10.064.
  25. M.A. Destek, Renewable energy consumption and economic growth in newly industrialized countries : evidence from asymmetric causality test, Renew. Energy 95 (2016) 478-484, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.04.049.
  26. M.A. Destek, A. Aslan, Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption and economic growth in emerging economies: evidence from bootstrap panel causality, Renew. Energy 111 (2017) 757-763, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.008.
  27. K. Dong, R. Sun, H. Jiang, X. Zeng, CO2 emissions, 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.
  28. R.E. Mckie, The Extractive Industries and Society an Environmental Harm Perspective to Examine Our Understanding of UK Nuclear Energy Expansion *, 2019.
  29. F. Gralla, B. John, D.J. Abson, A.P. Moller, M. Bickel, D.J. Lang, H. Von Wehrden, Energy Research & Social Science the role of sustainability in nuclear energy plans - what do national energy strategies tell us ? 22 (2016) 94-106.
  30. K. Ito, CO2 emissions, renewable and non-renewable energy consumption, and economic growth: evidence from panel data for developing countries, Int. Econ. 151 (2017) 1-6, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inteco.2017.02.001.
  31. C. Tansel, I. Ozturk, A. Aslan, Renewable and non-renewable energy consumption and economic growth relationship revisited : evidence from G7 countries, Energy Econ. 34 (2012) 1942-1950, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2012.08.021.
  32. S.K. Panigrahi, M.I. Soomro, N.H. Mirjat, Investigating the Dynamic Impact of CO2 Emissions and Economic Growth on Renewable Energy Production : Evidence from FMOLS and DOLS Tests Investigating the Dynamic Impact of CO 2 Emissions and Economic Growth on Renewable Energy Production : Evidence from, 2019, https://doi.org/10.3390/pr7080496.
  33. S.R. Paramati, A. Sinha, E. Dogan, The significance of renewable energy use for economic output and environmental protection: evidence from the Next 11 developing economies, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 24 (2017) 13546-13560, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-8985-6.
  34. M. Luqman, N. Ahmad, K. Bakhsh, Nuclear Energy , Renewable Energy and Economic Growth in Pakistan : Evidence from Non-linear Autoregressive Distributed Lag Model, vol. 139, 2019.
  35. E. Park, Positive or negative ? Publ. Percept. Nucl. Energy South Kor.?: Evid. Big Data 51 (2019) 626-630.
  36. N. Apergis, J.E. Payne, Renewable and non-renewable energy consumptiongrowth nexus: evidence from a panel error correction model, Energy Econ. 34 (2012) 733-738, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2011.04.007.
  37. B. Danish, B. Zhang, Z. Wang, B. Wang, B. Zhang, Z. Wang, 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.
  38. R. Ulucak Danish, S.U.-D. Khan, Determinants of the ecological footprint: role of renewable energy, natural resources, and urbanization, Sustain. Cities Soc. 54 (2020), 101996, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101996.
  39. Z. Danish, wang, Investigation of the ecological footprint's driving factors: what we learn from the experience of emerging economies, Sustain. Cities Soc. 49 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101626.
  40. R. Danish, Ulucak, How do environmental technologies affect green growth? Evidence from BRICS economies, Sci. Total Environ. 712 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136504.
  41. M. Aydin, The effect of biomass energy consumption on economic growth in BRICS countries: a country-specific panel data analysis, Renew. Energy 138 (2019) 620-627, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.02.001.
  42. Z. Wang, Q. Bui, B. Zhang, The Relationship between Biomass Energy Consumption and Human Development : Empirical Evidence from BRICS Countries, 2020, p. 194.
  43. M.H. Pesaran, A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross sectional dependence, J. Appl. Econom. 22 (2007) 265-312, https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951.
  44. J. Westerlund, D.L. Edgerton, A panel bootstrap cointegration test, Econ. Lett. 97 (2007) 185-190, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECONLET.2007.03.003.
  45. J. Bai, C. Kao, S. Ng, Panel cointegration with global stochastic trends, J. Econom. 149 (2009) 82-99, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2008.10.012.
  46. R. Ulucak, Danish, S.U.D. Khan, Does information and communication technology affect CO2 mitigation under the pathway of sustainable development during the mode of globalization? Sustain. Dev. (2020) 1-11, https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2041.
  47. E. Kocak, R. Ulucak, Z.S. Ulucak, The impact of tourism developments on CO2 emissions: an advanced panel data estimation, Tour. Manag. Perspect. 33 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2019.100611.
  48. BP, BP Statistics, 2019, 2019.
  49. World Bank, World Development Indicators: World Bank. https://databank.worldbank.org/reports.aspx?source=world-development-indicators, 2019.
  50. I. Ozturk, Measuring the impact of alternative and nuclear energy consumption, carbon dioxide emissions and oil rents on specific growth factors in the panel of Latin American countries, Prog. Nucl. Energy 100 (2017) 71-81, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2017.05.030.
  51. E. Dogan, Analyzing the linkage between renewable and non-renewable energy consumption and economic growth by considering structural break in time-series data, Renew. Energy 99 (2016) 1126-1136, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.07.078.
  52. M.A. Destek, A. Sinha, Renewable, non-renewable energy consumption, economic growth, trade openness and ecological footprint: evidence from organisation for economic Co-operation and development countries, J. Clean. Prod. 242 (2020), 118537, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118537.
  53. D. Balsalobre-Lorente, M. Shahbaz, D. Roubaud, S. Farhani, How economic growth, renewable electricity and natural resources contribute to CO2 emissions? Energy Pol. 113 (2018) 356-367, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.10.050.
  54. D.B. Lorente, A. Alvarez-Herranz, Economic growth and energy regulation in the environmental Kuznets curve, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 23 (2016) 16478-16494, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-6773-3.
  55. A. Alvarez-herranz, D. Balsalobre-lorente, M. Shahbaz, Energy innovation and renewable energy consumption in the correction of air pollution levels, Energy Pol. 105 (2017) 386-397, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.03.009.
  56. A. Sinha, M. Shahbaz, D. Balsalobre, Exploring the relationship between energy usage segregation and environmental degradation in N-11 countries, J. Clean. Prod. 168 (2017) 1217-1229, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.071.
  57. V. Hajko, M. Sebri, M. Al-saidi, D. Balsalobre-lorente, Development , and New Challenges, Elsevier Inc., 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-812746-9/00001-8.

Cited by

  1. Lattice Boltzmann Method Applied to Nuclear Reactors-A Systematic Literature Review vol.12, pp.18, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187835
  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. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. Dynamic Nexus between Technological Innovation and Building Sector Carbon Emissions in the BRICS Countries vol.293, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112780
  7. An empirical investigation of nuclear energy and environmental pollution nexus in India: fresh evidence using NARDL approach vol.28, pp.39, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-14365-9