Nuclear Engineering and Technology

Korean Nuclear Society (한국원자력학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The effect of nuclear energy on the environment in the context of globalization: Consumption vs production-based CO2 emissions

  • Danish, Danish (School of Economics and Trade, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies) ;
  • Ulucak, Recep (Erciyes University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Department of Economics) ;
  • Erdogan, Seyfettin (Istanbul Medeniyet University, Deepartment of Economics)
  • Received : 2021.03.30
  • Accepted : 2021.10.18
  • Published : 2022.04.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The earlier studies have analyzed theoretical links between nuclear energy and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions concerning territorial (or production-based) emissions. Here using the latest available dataset, this study explores the impacts of nuclear energy on production-based and consumption-based CO2 emission in the era of globalization for the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. The Driscoll-Kraay regression method reveals that nuclear energy is beneficial for the reduction of production-based CO2 emissions. However, it is revealed that nuclear energy does not reduce consumption-based CO2 emissions that are traded internationally and hence not comprised in conventional production-based emissions (territory) inventories. Globalization tends to reduce both production-based and demand-based carbon emissions. Finally, Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) is validated for both kinds of CO2 emissions. The findings may deliver practical policy implications related to nuclear energy and CO2 emissions for selected countries.

Keywords

References

  1. F.F. Adedoyin, N. Nwulu, F.V. Bekun, Environmental degradation, energy consumption and sustainable development: accounting for the role of economic complexities with evidence from World Bank income clusters, Bus. Strat. Environ. 30 (2021) 2727-2740, https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2774.
  2. S.J. Davis, K. Caldeira, Consumption-based accounting of CO2 emissions, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A 107 (2010) 5687-5692, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0906974107.
  3. A. Franzen, S. Mader, Consumption-based versus production-based accounting of CO2 emissions: is there evidence for carbon leakage? Environ. Sci. Pol. 84 (2018) 34-40, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.02.009.
  4. P.H. Leal, A.C. Marques, The environmental impacts of globalisation and corruption : evidence from a set of African countries, Environ. Sci. Pol. 115 (2021) 116-124, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.10.013.
  5. E.E. Michaelides, D.N. Michaelides, Impact of nuclear energy on fossil fuel substitution, Nucl. Eng. Des. 366 (2020), 110742, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2020.110742.
  6. K. Saidi, A. Omri, Reducing CO2 emissions in OECD countries: do renewable and nuclear energy matter? Prog. Nucl. Energy 126 (2020), 103425 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2020.103425.
  7. IPCC, Global Warming of 1.5 C, An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5 C above Pre-industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in: The Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, 2018. Geneva, Switzerland.
  8. L.S. Lau, C.K. 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 (2019) 12-20, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2018.09.015.
  9. 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.
  10. R. Danish, B. Ozcan Ulucak, An empirical investigation of nuclear energy consumption and carbon dioxide (CO2) emission in India: bridging IPAT and EKC hypotheses, Nucl. Eng. Technol. (2020), 104743, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2020.12.008.
  11. 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.
  12. M. Ben Mbarek, R. Khairallah, R. Feki, Causality relationships between renewable energy, nuclear energy and economic growth in France, Environ. Syst. Decis. 35 (2015) 133-142, https://doi.org/10.1007/S10669-015-9537-6.
  13. D. Evensen, Renewable energy policy: enumerating costs reduces support, Nat. Energy. 2 (2017) 1-2, https://doi.org/10.1038/nenergy.2017.106.
  14. F.F. Adedoyin, I. Ozturk, F.V. Bekun, P.O. Agboola, M.O. Agboola, Renewable and non-renewable energy policy simulations for abating emissions in a complex economy: evidence from the novel dynamic ARDL, Renew. Energy 177 (2021) 1408-1420, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.06.018.
  15. A.O. Acheampong, J. Dzator, D.A. Savage, Renewable energy, CO2 emissions and economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa: does institutional quality matter? J. Pol. Model. (2021) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2021.03.011.
  16. R. Ulucak Danish, The pathway toward pollution mitigation : does institutional quality make a difference, Business. Abstract I (2020) 1-13, https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2597.
  17. Y.A. Solangi, C. Longsheng, S.A.A. Shah, Assessing and overcoming the renewable energy barriers for sustainable development in Pakistan: an integrated AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS approach, Renew. Energy 173 (2021) 209-222, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RENENE.2021.03.141.
  18. J. Lu, L. Ren, S. Yao, D. Rong, M. Skare, J. Streimikis, Renewable energy barriers and coping strategies: evidence from the Baltic States, Sustain. Dev. 28 (2020) 352-367, https://doi.org/10.1002/SD.2030.
  19. 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.
  20. T. Goh, B.W. Ang, Quantifying CO2 emission reductions from renewables and nuclear energy e some paradoxes, Energy Pol. 113 (2018) 651-662, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.11.019.
  21. E. Santoyo-Castelazo, L. Stamford, A. Azapagic, Environmental implications of decarbonising electricity supply in large economies: the case of Mexico, Energy Convers. Manag. 85 (2014) 272-291, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2014.05.051.
  22. T. Balezentis, G. Liobikiene, D. Streimikiene, K. Sun, The impact of income inequality on consumption-based greenhouse gas emissions at the global level: a partially linear approach, J. Environ. Manag. 267 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110635.
  23. X. Tian, M. Chang, C. Lin, H. Tanikawa, China's carbon footprint: a regional perspective on the effect of transitions in consumption and production patterns, Appl. Energy 123 (2014) 19-28, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.02.016.
  24. A.K. Jorgenson, S. Fiske, K. Hubacek, J. Li, T. McGovern, T. Rick, J.B. Schor, W. Solecki, R. York, A. Zycherman, Social science perspectives on drivers of and responses to global climate change, Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Chang. 10 (2019) 1-17, https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.554.
  25. R. Ulucak Danish, 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.
  26. C. Li, J. Zuo, Z. Wang, X. Zhang, Production- and consumption-based convergence analyses of global CO2 emissions, J. Clean. Prod. 264 (2020), 121723, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121723.
  27. S. Wu, S. Li, Y. Lei, L. Li, Temporal changes in China's production and consumption-based CO2 emissions and the factors contributing to changes, Energy Econ. 89 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104770.
  28. Y. Cai, C. Yan, T. Chang, Nexus between clean energy consumption , economic growth and CO2 emissions, J. Clean. Prod. 182 (2018) 1001-1011, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.035.
  29. S. Nazlioglu, F. Lebe, S. Kayhan, Nuclear energy consumption and economic growth in OECD countries: cross-sectionally dependent heterogeneous panel causality analysis, Energy Pol. 39 (2011) 6615-6621, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.08.007.
  30. A.O. Acheampong, S. Adams, E. Boateng, Do globalization and renewable energy contribute to carbon emissions mitigation in Sub-Saharan Africa? Sci. Total Environ. 677 (2019) 436-446, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.04.353.
  31. M.A. Baloch, I. Ozturk, F.V. Bekun, D. Khan, Modeling the dynamic linkage between financial development, energy innovation, and environmental quality: does globalization matter? Bus. Strat. Environ. (2020) https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2615 bse.2615.
  32. S.C. Ilkay, V. Yilanci, R. Ulucak, K. Jones, Technology spillovers and sustainable environment: evidence from time-series analyses with Fourier extension, J. Environ. Manag. 294 (2021), 113033, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2021.113033.
  33. U.K. Pata, Linking renewable energy, globalization, agriculture, CO2 emissions and ecological footprint in BRIC countries: a sustainability perspective, Renew. Energy 173 (2021) 197-208, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.03.125.
  34. K. Menyah, Y. Wolde-Rufael, CO2emissions, nuclear energy, renewable energy and economic growth in the US, Energy Pol. 38 (2010) 2911-2915, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.01.024.
  35. N. Apergis, J.E. Payne, K. Menyah, Y. Wolde-Rufael, On the causal dynamics between emissions, nuclear energy, renewable energy, and economic growth, Ecol. Econ. 69 (2010) 2255-2260, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.06.014.
  36. A. Alam, Nuclear energy, CO2 emissions and economic growth: the case of developing and developed countries, J. Econ. Stud. 40 (2013) 822-834, https://doi.org/10.1108/JES-04-2012-0044.
  37. H. Iwata, K. Okada, S. Samreth, Empirical study on the environmental Kuznets curve for CO 2 in France : the role of nuclear energy, Energy Pol. 38 (2010) 4057-4063, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.031.
  38. 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.
  39. H. Jamil, B. Abu-hijleh, The potential role of nuclear energy in mitigating CO 2 emissions in the United Arab Emirates, Energy Pol. 42 (2012) 272-285, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.11.084.
  40. 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.
  41. M. Pilatowska, A. Geise, A. Wlodarczyk, The effect of renewable and nuclear energy consumption on decoupling economic growth from CO2 emissions in Spain, Energies 13 (2020), https://doi.org/10.3390/en13092124.
  42. S.T. Hassan, Salah-Ud-Din khan Danish, M. Awais Baloch, Z.H. Tarar, Is nuclear energy a better alternative for mitigating CO2 emissions in BRICS countries? An empirical analysis, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 52 (2020) 2969-2974, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2020.05.016.
  43. G. Akhmat, K. Zaman, T. Shukui, F. Sajjad, M.A. Khan, M.Z. Khan, The challenges of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution through energy sources: evidence from a panel of developed countries, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 21 (2014) 7425-7435, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-2693-2.
  44. 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.
  45. S.U. Danish, A. Khan, Ahmad, Testing the pollution haven hypothesis on the pathway of sustainable development: accounting the role of nuclear energy consumption, Nucl. Eng. Technol. (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2021.02.008.
  46. 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.
  47. A. Azam, M. Rafiq, M. Shafique, H. Zhang, J. Yuan, Analyzing the effect of natural gas, nuclear energy and renewable energy on GDP and carbon emissions: a multi-variate panel data analysis, Energy 219 (2021), 119592, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119592.
  48. M. Mbarek, K. Saidi, M. Amamri, The relationship between pollutant emissions, renewable energy, nuclear energy and GDP: empirical evidence from 18 developed and developing countries, Int. J. Sustain. Energy 37 (2018) 597-615, https://doi.org/10.1080/14786451.2017.1332060.
  49. U. Al-Mulali, Investigating the impact of nuclear energy consumption on GDP growth and CO2 emission: a panel data analysis, Prog. Nucl. Energy 73 (2014) 172-178, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2014.02.002.
  50. 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.
  51. U.K. Pata, A.E. Caglar, Investigating the EKC hypothesis with renewable energy consumption, human capital, globalization and trade openness for China: evidence from augmented ARDL approach with a structural break, Energy (2020), 119220, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119220.
  52. M.U. Etokakpan, S.A. Solarin, V. Yorucu, F.V. Bekun, S.A. Sarkodie, Modeling natural gas consumption, capital formation, globalization, CO2 emissions and economic growth nexus in Malaysia: fresh evidence from combined cointegration and causality analysis, Energy Strateg. Rev. 31 (2020), 100526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2020.100526.
  53. B. Aslam, J. Hu, M. Hafeez, D. Ma, T.S. AlGarni, M. Saeed, M.A. Abdullah, S. Hussain, Applying environmental Kuznets curve framework to assess the nexus of industry, globalization, and CO2 emission, Environ. Technol. Innov. 21 (2021), 101377, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2021.101377.
  54. P. Hipolito Leal, A. Cardoso Marques, Are de jure and de facto globalization undermining the environment? Evidence from high and low globalized EU countries, J. Environ. Manag. 250 (2019), 109460, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109460.
  55. L. Wang, X. Vinh, M. Shahbaz, A. Ak, Globalization and carbon emissions : is there any role of agriculture value-added , financial development , and natural resource rent in the aftermath of COP21, J. Environ. Manag. 268 (2020), 110712, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110712.
  56. S. Saint Akadiri, M.M. Alkawfi, S. Ugural, A.C. Akadiri, Towards achieving environmental sustainability target in Italy. The role of energy, real income and globalization, Sci. Total Environ. 671 (2019) 1293-1301, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2019.03.448.
  57. S. Saint Akadiri, A. Adewale Alola, G. Olasehinde-Williams, M. Udom Etokakpan, The role of electricity consumption, globalization and economic growth in carbon dioxide emissions and its implications for environmental sustainability targets, Sci. Total Environ. 708 (2020), 134653, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134653.
  58. M. Salahuddin, J. Gow, M.I. Ali, M.R. Hossain, K.S. Al-Azami, D. Akbar, A. Gedikli, Urbanization-globalization-CO2 emissions nexus revisited: empirical evidence from South Africa, Heliyon 5 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01974.
  59. S. Saint Akadiri, A.A. Alola, A.C. Akadiri, The role of globalization, real income, tourism in environmental sustainability target. Evidence from Turkey, Sci. Total Environ. 687 (2019) 423-432, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.06.139.
  60. F.F. Adedoyin, A.A. Alola, F.V. Bekun, The alternative energy utilization and common regional trade outlook in EU-27: evidence from common correlated effects, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 145 (2021), 111092, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111092.
  61. D.H. Vo, A.T. Vo, C.M. Ho, H.M. Nguyen, The role of renewable energy, alternative and nuclear energy in mitigating carbon emissions in the CPTPP countries, Renew. Energy 161 (2020) 278-292, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.07.093.
  62. OECD, Energy Technol, RDD Stat., 2019.
  63. BP, BP Statistical Review of World Energy, 2018, pp. 1-56.
  64. J.C. Driscoll, A.C. Kraay, Consistent covariance matrix estimation with spatially dependent panel data, Rev. Econ. Stat. 80 (1998) 549-560, https://doi.org/10.1162/003465398557825.
  65. 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.
  66. M.A. Baloch, S.U.-D. Khan Danish, Z.S, . Ulucak, A. Ahmad, Analyzing the relationship between poverty, income inequality, and CO2 emission in Sub-Saharan African countries, Sci. Total Environ. 740 (2020), 139867, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139867.
  67. M. Danish, B. Wang Awais, 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.
  68. G.M. Grossman, A.B. Krueger, Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement, 1991, https://doi.org/10.3386/w3914.
  69. G.M. Grossman, A.B. Krueger, Economic growth and the environment, Q. J. Econ. 110 (1995) 353-377. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118443
  70. F.F. Adedoyin, A.A. Alola, F.V. Bekun, The nexus of environmental sustainability and agro-economic performance of Sub-Saharan African countries, Heliyon 6 (2020), e04878, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04878.
  71. S. Erdogan, N.D. Cakar, R. Ulucak, Danish, Y. Kassouri, The role of natural re- sources abundance and dependence in achieving environmental sustainability: evidence from resource-based economies, Sustain. Dev. (2020), https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2137 sd.2137.
  72. R. Ulucak, Danish, N. Li, The nexus between economic globalization and human development in Asian countries: an empirical investigation, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. (2019), https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-07224-1.
  73. R. Ulucak, Danish, Y. Kassouri, An assessment of the environmental sustainability corridor: investigating the non-linear effects of environmental taxation on CO2 emissions, Sustain. Dev. 28 (2020) 1010-1018, https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2057.
  74. 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.
  75. M.W. Zafar, S. Saud, F. Hou, The impact of globalization and financial development on environmental quality: evidence from selected countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 26 (2019) 13246-13262, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04761-7.
  76. Shujah-ur Rahman, S. Chen, S. Saud, S. Bano, A. Haseeb, The nexus between financial development, globalization, and environmental degradation: fresh evidence from Central and Eastern European Countries, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 26 (2019) 24733-24747, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05714-w.
  77. E.F. Fama, K.R. French, The cross-section of expected stock returns, J. Finance 47 (1992) 427, https://doi.org/10.2307/2329112.
  78. B. Sanchez, Low R Square in the Cross Section of Expected Returns, 2015.
  79. B. Liddle, Consumption-based accounting and the trade-carbon emissions nexus, Energy Econ. 69 (2018) 71-78, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2017.11.004.