Electrochemical Energy and Carbon Cycle: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor:
Jie Shi
,
Yuanqing Zhu
,
Yongming Feng
,
Jun Yang
,
Chong Xia

Green hydrogen, green ammonia, and green methanol are being widely discussed for shipping. Because green methanol and ammonia have higher energy densities and are relatively easier to transport and store on ships, they have become the most promising near-zero-emission marine fuel. In addition, since most of the production pathways for green fuel require green power, the production methods for green power are analyzed in detail.

  • green hydrogen
  • green ammonia
  • green methanol
  • green power

1. Introduction

Marine engines mainly use low-quality fuel with high sulfur content, high viscosity, and heavy metals, such as cadmium, vanadium, and lead. The complexity of low-quality fuel components leads to more exhaust pollutants from ships. The substances represented by nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), particulate matter (PM), and carbon dioxide (CO2) have a great impact on human health, the environment, and the climate [1]. After-treatment technology is often used to purify exhaust gas, such as selective catalytic reduction (SCR) technology or exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) technology to purify NOx [2][3][4][5], exhaust gas cleaning (EGC) technology to purify SOx [6], and carbon capture technology to purify CO2 [7].
From the perspective of energy technology, since fossil fuel are used, internal combustion engines inevitably emit a large amount of CO2. It is difficult to achieve carbon emission reduction development strategies and goals by relying solely on existing energy efficiency improvement methods [8]. The maritime industry is paying increasing attention to the development and application of low-carbon marine fuel. But little attention has been paid to the green fuel pathway from renewable energy to shipping. The main green fuel production processes are based on green power technology.  Therefore, analyze green power production technologies with the intent to gain a better understanding of green fuel production technologies.

2. Electrochemical Energy and Carbon Cycle

2.1. Carbon Capture and Carbon Cycling

Undisturbed, carbon moves between each reservoir in an exchange known as the carbon cycle, which maintains relatively stable carbon concentrations in the atmosphere, on land, in plants, and in oceans. This balance helps to keep the Earth’s temperature relatively stable [9]. However, today, due to the continuous intensive use of fossil fuel, land-use change, and other human activities, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is rising at an unprecedented rate; the carbon cycle is disrupted, and a large amount of CO2 enters the atmosphere, causing the Earth’s temperature to rise [10]. In general, there are two ways to remove CO2. One is to attempt to accelerate the absorption of atmospheric CO2 by enhancing natural sinks, such as afforestation to increase carbon storage in biomass [11]. Another way is to reduce CO2 through artificial methods, such as carbon capture technology [12][13], which is currently popular. As a result, it is increasingly necessary to remove the CO2 emitted by humans to achieve net-zero CO2 emission.
Carbon capture technologies include carbon capture and storage (CCS) and carbon capture and utilization (CCU). The captured CO2 can be stored in geological formations as well as in the oceans. In addition to storage, CO2 can be used directly in different industrial sectors, including the food, beverage, and pharmaceutical industries. It can also be converted into high-demand products such as urea, methanol, and biofuels. Although both CCS and CCU technologies seek to mitigate climate change, they can only be seen as temporary solutions, as they merely delay CO2 emissions rather than permanently eliminate them [14]. Compared to CCS, CCU may play a small role in mitigating climate change. However, CCU may offer a very cost-effective option for CO2 abatement, and even generate profits in some cases. One option that could be deployed on a large scale is the conversion of CO2 into fuel. However, this would require significant progress in catalysis and process design. In addition, this route will not store CO2 for a long time but will provide carbon-neutral fuel under the best conditions [15]. CO2 utilization focuses on the reduction of CO2 emissions, which is the end problem of today’s industry. Artz et al. [16] provided a detailed review of the methods and processes of CO2 conversion, which sought to identify opportunities, through the development of new feedstocks, to avoid the use of fossil resources in the transition to a more sustainable future of production. Furthermore, the current rate of CO2 emissions and the variable nature of point sources suggest that capture at the point of emission alone is not sufficient to mitigate the increasing greenhouse effect of CO2. Large-scale deployment of technologies involving the direct capture of CO2 from the atmosphere is essential [17]. Electrochemical CO2 capture technology is interesting due to its flexibility and its ability to address dispersed emissions (e.g., atmospheric). Although electrochemical CO2 capture technology is costly compared to amine-based capture, it could be particularly interesting if cheaper renewable electricity and materials (e.g., electrodes and membranes) become widely available. In addition, electrochemical methods can convert captured CO2 into value-added chemicals and fuel, thus preparing the way for a fully electrified circular carbon economy [18]. Galimova et al. [19] analyzed the global demand for CO2 as a feedstock for fuel and chemical production during the global energy transition to 100% renewable energy. The CO2 capture and utilization potential of key industrial point sources, including cement plants, pulp and paper mills, and waste incinerators, were assessed. According to the study’s estimates, the demand for carbon dioxide will increase from 0.6 million tons in 2030 to 6.1 billion tons in 2050. Key industrial point sources are likely to supply 2.1 billion tons of CO2 to meet most demand in the 2030s. By 2050, however, direct air capture is expected to meet most of the demand, producing 3.8 billion tons of CO2 a year.
The application of carbon capture on board ships could be a transitional solution to reducing CO2 emissions from the maritime industry in the short term, providing the time necessary to fully develop and implement zero-emission technologies. There are three main types of carbon capture technologies available: pre-combustion carbon capture, post-combustion carbon capture, and O2 fuel combustion capture. Post-combustion carbon capture, which captures CO2 from the exhaust of the ship, has gained widespread interest. This process is suitable for ships sailing on conventional carbon-containing fuel and is expected to mature and be commercialized earlier than alternative fuel because it is based on proven technology and does not require as much research and development as alternative fuel. Luo et al. [20] explored how a solvent-based carbon capture process could be applied to capture CO2 from a typical cargo ship’s energy system, with a capture cost of EUR 77.50/tonne CO2 at a carbon capture rate of 73%. Feenstra et al. [21] evaluated a 3000 kW LNG carrier-based carbon capture. The cost of using 30 wt % aqueous monoethanolamine was EUR 120/tonne CO2, and the cost of using aqueous piperazine was EUR 98/tonne CO2, both of which had 90% capture efficiency. The implementation of amine-based carbon capture systems on board ships was evaluated by Stec et al. [22], with total CO2 recovery rates ranging from 31.4% to 56.5%. Long et al. [23] developed an efficient sea-based CO2 capture, CO2 compression, and liquefaction technology for a 3000 kW diesel engine, with a CO2 removal rate of 94.7%. Ros et al. [24] discussed advances in marine carbon capture technology for LNG ships, based on the results of the DerisCO2 project. Oh et al. [25] presented a membrane carbon capture and liquefaction system for LNG ships with much smaller dimensions compared to conventional amine-based processes.
Carbon capture technology on board ships shows great potential for carbon reduction; however, the cost is one of the barriers to the development of carbon capture on board. As emissions regulations become more stringent, conventional ships need to install not only after-treatment units to remove pollutants such as NOx and SOx, but also carbon capture units to remove CO2, which inevitably takes up valuable space on board, and the physical operating conditions on board are becoming a barrier to the application of carbon capture [26].

2.2. Renewable Energy and Green Power

Renewable energy sources are naturally replenished and never depleted on Earth; they include bioenergy, hydropower, geothermal, solar, wind, and ocean (tidal and wave) energy [27]. To harness wind energy on modern ships, a range of wind-assisted ship propulsion (WASP) products have been developed and tested [28]: rotors, towing kites, suction wings, rigid sails/wing sails, soft sails, wind turbines, and hull sails. Wang et al. [29] proposed an integrated collaborative decision-making approach to optimizing the energy consumption of sail-assisted ship, which can make full use of wind energy while keeping the hybrid system operating at optimal conditions under various operating conditions and can reduce energy consumption and CO2 emissions by approximately 8.9% during a single voyage. However, the high-cost investment in research into WASP and the uncertainty about reducing fuel consumption have limited WASP in the maritime industry. Ships harness solar energy by using photovoltaic installations: sunlight is converted into electricity by photovoltaic systems installed on board; this electricity is temporarily stored in batteries and then used for propulsion or to supply electrical equipment. Solar energy on ships is very promising, but the question remains as to how to install more PV panels in the limited area on the ship’s deck to increase the installed capacity of the PV system. Even in areas with sufficient solar radiation, it is not feasible to connect the PV system directly to the ship’s main grid due to the low conversion efficiency of the PV panels [30]. Waves can damage coastal structures and affect the stability of a ship, increasing the resistance of a ship underway and even leading to capsizing. If used properly, wave energy can be converted into propulsion for the ship, reducing the interference of waves with the ship’s stability, but this requires devices capable of extracting wave energy [31]. However, in general, if wave energy is used while the ship is sailing, the wave energy device needs to be in direct contact with the water surface, which undoubtedly increases the contact area between the ship and the water surface, causing additional resistance to the ship’s navigation. This may also affect the stability of the ship due to the weight of the device. Wind and solar energy are undoubtedly the most promising renewable energy sources for ships. However, they are hardly used as the main power source for ships and are generally used as auxiliary power sources to reduce CO2 emissions. For the above reasons, alternative ways of applying renewable energy to ships are needed.
Green fuel produced from renewable energy can be used as the main power for ships, so this research is concerned with methods of producing green fuel for ships from renewable energy. The main green fuel production processes are based on green power technology. Green power [32] refers to electricity supplied from more readily renewable energy sources than traditional electrical power sources. 

2.2.1. Hydropower

Hydropower [33] is a renewable energy source where power is derived from the energy of water moving from higher to lower elevations. It is a proven, mature, predictable, and price-competitive technology. Hydropower has among the best conversion efficiencies of all known energy sources (about 90% efficiency). Hydropower projects are usually classified into four major types: run of river, storage (reservoir)-based, pumped storage, and instream technologies (hydrokinetic). Kougias et al. [34] reviewed recent research and development activities in the field of hydropower technology, including the following topics: (1) techniques supporting the wide-range operation of hydraulic turbines; (2) instabilities in Francis turbines of pumped hydro energy storage stations; (3) the digitalization of hydropower operation; (4) hydro generators with current-controlled rotors; (5) variable speed hydropower generation; (6) innovative concepts in hydroelectric energy storage; (7) novel technologies in small-scale hydropower; and (8) fish-friendly hydropower technologies. With rapid economic development and the global need to reduce carbon emissions, hydropower is playing a greater role than ever before as an important source of clean energy. For examples, hydropower plays an important role in stabilizing Poland’s power generation system [35] and is the best option for meeting Southeast Asia’s energy needs [36]. However, the environmental impact of hydropower is controversial. Developed countries have stopped building dams because the best sites for them have been developed and because environmental and social issues make the costs unacceptable. Today, more dams are being removed than are being built in North America and Europe. The hydropower industry began building dams in developing countries and, since the 1970s, has begun building larger hydropower dams in the Mekong, Amazon, and Congo river basins. The same problems are being repeated [37]: destruction of river ecology, deforestation, loss of aquatic and terrestrial biodiversity, release of large amounts of greenhouse gases, displacement of thousands of people, change of livelihoods, and impact on nearby food systems, water quality, and agriculture. The widespread perception that a small run-of-river hydropower plant is a renewable energy source with little or no environmental impact has led to a global spread [38]. However, it may alter natural flow regimes and damage river ecosystems. Pata et al. [39] investigated the relationship between hydropower energy consumption, ecological footprint, and economic growth in the top six hydropower-consuming countries (China, Canada, Brazil, the US, Norway, and India, as of 2016). In terms of policies’ impact, policies to encourage the use of hydropower energy can be implemented in China and Brazil, which saw the fastest growth in hydropower energy consumption over a 52-year period (1965–2016). From an economic perspective, the efficient use of hydropower and the increase of investment in hydropower energy in China and Brazil were appropriate policies to support economic growth. Concerning the relationship between the environmental and ecological footprints, the environment should be taken into account when implementing economic policies in the USA and Norway. In Canada and India, the causal relationship between the environmental footprint and the ecological footprint showed that environmental issues affected the ecological footprint. Environmental pollution in these countries could provide direction for economic policy. From an environmental perspective, hydropower energy consumption had not been used effectively to reduce the ecological footprint. A better understanding of environmental issues, ecological issues, and the continued development of new technologies and a sound planning system, as shown in Figure 1, is therefore essential for future hydropower development.
Atmosphere 14 00584 g001
Figure 1. Planning system of hydropower [40].

2.2.2. Wind Power

As a high-storage-capacity, non-polluting, clean energy source using proven technology, the main applications of wind energy are large turbines, onshore or offshore, used to generate electricity [41]. Wind turbines can be classified into four basic categories based on the means of speed control [42]: fixed-speed wind turbines, limited-variable-speed-controlled wind turbines, doubly-fed-induction-generator-based wind turbines, and full-variable-speed-controlled wind turbines. López-Manrique et al. [43] reviewed the criteria and wind turbine standards used for wind power evaluation and outlined the technologies needed to make reliable wind power grid penetration more efficient. In 2021, wind electricity generation increased by a record 273 TWh (up 17%). This was 55% higher growth than that achieved in 2020 and was the highest among all renewable power technologies [44]. China has become a global leader in wind power, and its wind power development has contributed significantly to the global wind power growth rate [45][46]. As wind power accounts for an increasing share of the electricity supply, the challenges posed by the intermittent nature of wind power are becoming more prominent. Wind power is inherently intermittent [47][48][49]. It cannot be controlled and dispatched in the same way as a conventional power plant. As a result, the intermittent nature of large-scale wind power integration leads to low system reliability, high reverse capacity, and high costs. Many countries are seeking to harness wind energy and see it as a promising energy, and continued expansion of wind power requires a good understanding of its intermittency to reduce the uncertainties associated with wind power output. In recent years, there have been several studies aimed at assessing the wind power potential of target sites, the most commonly used methods being Measure-Correlate-Predict models and artificial neural network methods [50].

2.2.3. Solar Power

There are two types of solar power generation: direct photovoltaic (PV) [51] and indirect concentrated solar power (CSP) [52][53]. Solar PV generation increased by a record 179 TWh (up 22%) in 2021 to exceed 1000 TWh. It showed the second-largest absolute generation growth of all renewable technologies in 2021, after wind [54]. Solar PV systems on a global scale of 8519 GW would reduce 4.9 Gt of greenhouse gas emissions and fulfill 25% of global electricity demand by 2050 [55]. Interest in deploying solar power systems is growing around the world. In China, it is predicted that a 14-fold increase in PV facilities would be required to meet the 2060 carbon neutrality target. For PV development in China [56]: (1) cost is still a major obstacle currently facing the PV industry; (2) national economic performance and policy incentives have a limited impact on the development of solar PV; and (3) technological innovation and grid absorption capacity are key factors influencing the path of solar PV development. China’s 1.7% increase in solar power generation in 2020, due to air pollution controls and stricter air quality targets, could reduce the need for installed PV capacity needed to meet the 2060 carbon neutrality target [57]. The Indian government planned to invest over USD 237 billion in the solar sector and has announced incentives, including funding for up to 70% of project costs and public tax breaks. Renewable energy generation is expected to account for 35% of total electricity generation by 2022, with a solar share of 100 GW [58]. However, solar power still receives little attention in some countries, where they face socio-economic, policy, and technical barriers related to solar electrification [59]. For example, the price of 1 kWh of carbon-fueled electricity generation in Azerbaijan is several times cheaper than the price of 1 kWh of solar power, making it difficult to attract investment in developing solar energy [60]. The current development of solar energy in Vietnam is not commensurate with its potential, and the barriers and challenges to its development are institutional, technical, financial, and economic [61]. In the future, the deployment of advanced optimization technologies in the field of solar power will help to achieve sustainable development in terms of clean energy, emissions reduction, and economic development [62].

2.2.4. Bioenergy Power

Bioenergy is a renewable energy source derived from biological resources. Biomass energy resources can be obtained from agricultural, forestry and municipal waste, including wood, crop residues, sawdust, straw, manure, paper waste, household waste, and wastewater [63]. It can be used to produce biofuels, bioelectricity, and heat [64]. The advantage of using biomass for energy is that biomass contains carbon that plants absorb through photosynthesis. When biomass is used to generate energy, the carbon is released during combustion and simply returned to the atmosphere, making modern bioenergy a promising near-zero-emission fuel. Modern bioenergy is the largest source of renewable energy globally, accounting for 55% of renewable energy and over 6% of the global energy supply [65]. Liu et al. [66] reviewed the common technologies used for biomass power generation, including the steam turbine generator, the high-temperature biomass fuel cell, the microbial fuel cell, and the concept of the low-temperature biomass flow fuel cell. Chen et al. [67] discussed the process flow and characteristics of four biomass power generation technologies: biomass direct combustion power generation, biomass gasification power generation, biomass mixed combustion power generation, and biomass biogas power generation. It was also pointed out that biomass gasification power generation had the best environmental benefits, with an emission reduction rate of 97.69% compared to coal-fired power generation. The use of biomass for power generation has huge potential for carbon reduction. The analysis by Ardebili et al. [68] found that Iran had considerable potential for biopower, with a total potential of about 62,808 × 106 kWh year−1, which represented 27% of the country’s total electricity consumption. The GHG emissions reduction from bio-based electricity generation were approximately 4.096 Mt CO2-eq/year, which represented 0.6% of Iran’s annual GHG emissions. The annual biomass power potential of Rajasthan in India was assessed to be 3056 MW, where crop residues contributed 2496 MW, and livestock manure contributed 560 MW [69]. However, the total potential could vary from 2445 MW to 6045 MW depending upon the biomass collection and energy conversion efficiency. Annual emission-saving potential of 11.4 Mt CO2eq could be achieved by utilizing the locally available biomass in place of coal for power. This emission-saving potential could vary from 8.7 Mt to 22.7 Mt CO2eq based on biomass power generation capacity. Sagani et al. [70] assessed the potential benefits of using tree pruning biomass for electricity generation in Greece from a techno-economic and environmental perspective. Tree pruning biomass power plants can have a positive impact by not only generating significant annual net electricity production, thereby saving fossil fuel and reducing CO2 emissions, but also by providing new jobs and income opportunities. Woody biomass helps to reduce fossil emissions from heat and electricity generation in Northern Europe [71], and the use of woody biomass could reduce direct emissions from the electricity and heat sectors in Northern Europe by 4–27% if the carbon price in 2030 is in the range of EUR 5–103/tonne CO2eq, compared to a scenario where woody biomass cannot be used for electricity and heat generation.

2.2.5. The Importance of Green Power in Carbon Emission Reduction

Global renewable electricity capacity is expected to grow by more than 60% between 2020 and 2026, reaching more than 4800 GW [72]. This is equivalent to the current global fossil fuel and nuclear power generation capacity combined. Green power from renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, is essential in the low-carbon transition of the entire energy system [73]. Renewable electricity production has negative effects, whereas non-renewable electricity production has a positive effect, on CO2 emissions [74][75]. This means that the more green power a country uses, the lower its carbon emissions. Electrification is therefore a viable solution for achieving deep decarbonization [76], based on the production of green electricity from renewable sources, and the contribution of electrification to the reduction of energy-related CO2 emissions would be significantly enhanced, with an increase of 0.038–0.66% in CO2 emission efficiency for every 1% increase in the share of renewable energy in total electricity generation [77]. Yet without green power, electrification will still bring a continued increase in carbon emissions [78]. In addition to renewable energy power generation, nuclear power is also a focus of carbon emission reduction.

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/atmos14030584

References

  1. Mueller, N.; Westerby, M.; Nieuwenhuijsen, M. Health impact assessments of shipping and port-sourced air pollution on a global scale: A scoping literature review. Environ. Res. 2023, 212, 114460.
  2. Zhu, Y.; Zhou, W.; Xia, C.; Hou, Q. Application and Development of Selective Catalytic Reduction Technology for Marine Low-Speed Diesel Engine: Trade-Off among High Sulfur Fuel, High Thermal Efficiency, and Low Pollution Emission. Atmosphere 2022, 13, 731.
  3. Xia, C.; Zhu, Y.; Zhou, S.; Peng, H.; Feng, Y.; Zhou, W.; Shi, J.; Zhang, J. Simulation study on transient performance of a marine engine matched with high-pressure SCR system. Int. J. Engine Res. 2022, 14680874221084052.
  4. Zhang, Y.; Xia, C.; Liu, D.; Zhu, Y.; Feng, Y. Experimental investigation of the high-pressure SCR reactor impact on a marine two-stroke diesel engine. Fuel 2023, 335, 127064.
  5. Qu, J.; Feng, Y.; Xu, G.; Zhang, M.; Zhu, Y.; Zhou, S. Design and thermodynamics analysis of marine dual fuel low speed engine with methane reforming integrated high pressure exhaust gas recirculation system. Fuel 2022, 319, 123747.
  6. Vasilescu, M.-V.; Dinu, D.; Panaitescu, M.; Panaitescu, F.-V. Research on Exhaust Gas Cleaning System (EGCS) used in shipping industry for reducing SOx emissions. E3S Web Conf. 2021, 286, 04002.
  7. Negri, V.; Charalambous, M.A.; Medrano-García, J.D.; Guillén-Gosálbez, G. Navigating within the Safe Operating Space with Carbon Capture On-Board. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2022, 10, 17134–17142.
  8. Barreiro, J.; Zaragoza, S.; Diaz-Casas, V. Review of ship energy efficiency. Ocean Eng. 2022, 257, 111594.
  9. Riebeek, H. The Carbon Cycle. NASA Earth Observatory 16. Available online: https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/CarbonCycle/page1.php. (accessed on 20 January 2023).
  10. Reichstein, M.; Bahn, M.; Ciais, P.; Frank, D.; Mahecha, M.D.; Seneviratne, S.I.; Zscheischler, J.; Beer, C.; Buchmann, N.; Frank, D.C.; et al. Climate extremes and the carbon cycle. Nature 2013, 500, 287–295.
  11. Sonntag, S.; Pongratz, J.; Reick, C.H.; Schmidt, H. Reforestation in a high-CO2 world-Higher mitigation potential than expected, lower adaptation potential than hoped for. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2016, 43, 6546–6553.
  12. Madejski, P.; Chmiel, K.; Subramanian, N.; Kuś, T. Methods and Techniques for CO2 Capture: Review of Potential Solutions and Applications in Modern Energy Technologies. Energies 2022, 15, 887.
  13. Reimer, J.A. A molecular perspective on carbon capture. Matter 2022, 5, 1330–1333.
  14. Cuéllar-Franca, R.M.; Azapagic, A. Carbon capture, storage and utilisation technologies: A critical analysis and comparison of their life cycle environmental impacts. J. CO2 Util. 2015, 9, 82–102.
  15. Bui, M.; Adjiman, C.S.; Bardow, A.; Anthony, E.J.; Boston, A.; Brown, S.; Fennell, P.S.; Fuss, S.; Galindo, A.; Hackett, L.A.; et al. Carbon capture and storage (CCS): The way forward. Energy Environ. Sci. 2018, 11, 1062–1176.
  16. Artz, J.; Müller, T.E.; Thenert, K.M.; Kleinekorte, J.; Meys, R.; Sternberg, A.; Bardow, A.; Leitner, W. Sustainable Conversion of Carbon Dioxide: An Integrated Review of Catalysis and Life Cycle Assessment. Chem. Rev. 2018, 118, 434–504.
  17. Castro-Pardo, S.; Bhattacharyya, S.; Yadav, R.M.; Teixeira, A.P.D.C.; Mata, M.A.C.; Prasankumar, T.; Kabbani, M.A.; Kibria, G.; Xu, T.; Roy, S.; et al. A comprehensive overview of carbon dioxide capture: From materials, methods to industrial status. Mater. Today 2022, 60, 227–270.
  18. Sharifian, R.; Wagterveld, R.M.; Digdaya, I.A.; Xiang, C.; Vermaas, D.A. Electrochemical carbon dioxide capture to close the carbon cycle. Energy Environ. Sci. 2020, 14, 781–814.
  19. Galimova, T.; Ram, M.; Bogdanov, D.; Fasihi, M.; Khalili, S.; Gulagi, A.; Karjunen, H.; Mensah, T.N.O.; Breyer, C. Global demand analysis for carbon dioxide as raw material from key industrial sources and direct air capture to produce renewable electricity-based fuels and chemicals. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 373, 133920.
  20. Luo, X.; Wang, M. Study of solvent-based carbon capture for cargo ships through process modelling and simulation. Appl. Energy 2017, 195, 402–413.
  21. Feenstra, M.; Monteiro, J.; Akker, J.T.V.D.; Abu-Zahra, M.R.; Gilling, E.; Goetheer, E. Ship-based carbon capture onboard of diesel or LNG-fuelled ships. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control. 2019, 85, 1–10.
  22. Stec, M.; Tatarczuk, A.; Iluk, T.; Szul, M. Reducing the energy efficiency design index for ships through a post-combustion carbon capture process. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control. 2021, 108, 103333.
  23. Long, N.V.D.; Lee, D.Y.; Kwag, C.; Lee, Y.M.; Lee, S.W.; Hessel, V.; Lee, M. Improvement of marine carbon capture onboard diesel fueled ships. Chem. Eng. Process. - Process. Intensif. 2021, 168, 108535.
  24. Ros, J.A.; Skylogianni, E.; Doedée, V.; Akker, J.T.V.D.; Vredeveldt, A.W.; Linders, M.J.; Goetheer, E.L.; Monteiro, J.G.M.-S. Advancements in ship-based carbon capture technology on board of LNG-fuelled ships. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control. 2022, 114, 103575.
  25. Oh, J.; Anantharaman, R.; Zahid, U.; Lee, P.; Lim, Y. Process design of onboard membrane carbon capture and liquefaction systems for LNG-fueled ships. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021, 282, 120052.
  26. Fang, S.; Xu, Y.; Li, Z.; Ding, Z.; Liu, L.; Wang, H. Optimal Sizing of Shipboard Carbon Capture System for Maritime Greenhouse Emission Control. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2019, 55, 5543–5553.
  27. Owusu, P.A.; Asumadu-Sarkodie, S. A review of renewable energy sources, sustainability issues and climate change mitigation. Cogent Eng. 2016, 3, 1167990.
  28. Chou, T.; Kosmas, V.; Acciaro, M.; Renken, K. A Comeback of Wind Power in Shipping: An Economic and Operational Review on the Wind-Assisted Ship Propulsion Technology. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1880.
  29. Wang, K.; Guo, X.; Zhao, J.; Ma, R.; Huang, L.; Tian, F.; Dong, S.; Zhang, P.; Liu, C.; Wang, Z. An integrated collaborative decision-making method for optimizing energy consumption of sail-assisted ships towards low-carbon shipping. Ocean Eng. 2022, 266, 112810.
  30. Pan, P.; Sun, Y.; Yuan, C.; Yan, X.; Tang, X. Research progress on ship power systems integrated with new energy sources: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 144, 111048.
  31. Zhang, Y.; Xu, L.; Zhou, Y. A wave foil with passive angle of attack adjustment for wave energy extraction for ships. Ocean Eng. 2022, 246, 110627.
  32. Demirbaş, A. Electrical Power Production Facilities from Green Energy Sources. Energy Sources 2006, 1, 291–301.
  33. Killingtveit, Å. Hydropower. In Managing Global Warming; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2019; pp. 265–315.
  34. Kougias, I.; Aggidis, G.; Avellan, F.; Deniz, S.; Lundin, U.; Moro, A.; Muntean, S.; Novara, D.; Pérez-Díaz, J.I.; Quaranta, E.; et al. Analysis of emerging technologies in the hydropower sector. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 113, 109257.
  35. Kałuża, T.; Hämmerling, M.; Zawadzki, P.; Czekała, W.; Kasperek, R.; Sojka, M.; Mokwa, M.; Ptak, M.; Szkudlarek, A.; Czechlowski, M.; et al. The hydropower sector in Poland: Historical development and current status. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 158, 112150.
  36. Tang, S.; Chen, J.; Sun, P.; Li, Y.; Yu, P.; Chen, E. Current and future hydropower development in Southeast Asia countries (Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Myanmar). Energy Policy 2019, 129, 239–249.
  37. Moran, E.F.; Lopez, M.C.; Moore, N.; Müller, N.; Hyndman, D.W. Sustainable hydropower in the 21st century. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2018, 115, 11891–11898.
  38. Kuriqi, A.; Pinheiro, A.N.; Sordo-Ward, A.; Bejarano, M.D.; Garrote, L. Ecological impacts of run-of-river hydropower plants—Current status and future prospects on the brink of energy transition. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 142, 110833.
  39. Pata, U.K.; Aydin, M. Testing the EKC hypothesis for the top six hydropower energy-consuming countries: Evidence from Fourier Bootstrap ARDL procedure. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 264, 121699.
  40. Oladosu, G.A.; Werble, J.; Tingen, W.; Witt, A.; Mobley, M.; O’Connor, P. Costs of mitigating the environmental impacts of hydropower projects in the United States. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 135, 110121.
  41. Asumadu-Sarkodie, S.; Owusu, P.A. The potential and economic viability of wind farms in Ghana. Energy Sources Part A Recover. Util. Environ. Eff. 2016, 38, 695–701.
  42. Qin, B.; Li, H.; Zhou, X.; Li, J.; Liu, W. Low-Voltage Ride-Through Techniques in DFIG-Based Wind Turbines: A Review. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 2154.
  43. López-Manrique, L.; Macias-Melo, E.; Aguilar-Castro, K.; Hernández-Pérez, I.; Díaz-Hernández, H. Review on methodological and normative advances in assessment and estimation of wind energy. Energy Environ. 2019, 32, 25–61.
  44. IEA. Wind Electricity, IEA, Paris. Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/wind-electricity (accessed on 15 October 2022).
  45. Zhang, S.; Wei, J.; Chen, X.; Zhao, Y. China in global wind power development: Role, status and impact. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 127, 109881.
  46. Duan, H. Emissions and temperature benefits: The role of wind power in China. Environ. Res. 2017, 152, 342–350.
  47. Tarroja, B.; Mueller, F.; Eichman, J.D.; Brouwer, J.; Samuelsen, S. Spatial and temporal analysis of electric wind generation intermittency and dynamics. Renew. Energy 2011, 36, 3424–3432.
  48. Gunturu, U.B.; Schlosser, C.A. Characterization of wind power resource in the United States and its intermittency. Mit joint Program on the science and policy of global change. Atmospheric Meas. Tech. 2011, 12, 9687–9702.
  49. Ren, G.; Wan, J.; Liu, J.; Yu, D.; Söder, L. Analysis of wind power intermittency based on historical wind power data. Energy 2018, 150, 482–492.
  50. Vargas, S.A.; Esteves, G.R.T.; Maçaira, P.M.; Bastos, B.Q.; Oliveira, F.L.C.; Souza, R.C. Wind power generation: A review and a research agenda. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 218, 850–870.
  51. Kumari, N.; Singh, S.K.; Kumar, S. A comparative study of different materials used for solar photovoltaics technology. Mater. Today: Proc. 2022, 66, 3522–3528.
  52. Ahmadi, M.H.; Ghazvini, M.; Sadeghzadeh, M.; Alhuyi Nazari, M.; Kumar, R.; Naeimi, A.; Ming, T. Solar power technology for electricity generation: A critical review. Energy Sci. Eng. 2018, 6, 340–361.
  53. Islam, M.T.; Huda, N.; Abdullah, A.B.; Saidur, R. A comprehensive review of state-of-the-art concentrating solar power (CSP) technologies: Current status and research trends. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 91, 987–1018.
  54. IEA. Solar PV, IEA: Paris, France. 2022. Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/solar-pv (accessed on 20 January 2023).
  55. Jayachandran, M.; Gatla, R.K.; Rao, K.P.; Rao, G.S.; Mohammed, S.; Milyani, A.H.; Azhari, A.A.; Kalaiarasy, C.; Geetha, S. Challenges in achieving sustainable development goal 7: Affordable and clean energy in light of nascent technologies. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessments 2022, 53, 102692.
  56. Zhang, X.; Li, H.; Liu, Q.; Tan, X. A Study on the Technology Diffusion of China’s Solar Photovoltaic Based on Bass and Generalized Bass Model. IOP Conf. Series: Earth Environ. Sci. 2020, 571, 012016.
  57. Chen, S.; Lu, X.; Nielsen, C.P.; Geng, G.; He, K.; McElroy, M.B.; Wang, S.; Hao, J. Improved air quality in China can enhance solar-power performance and accelerate carbon-neutrality targets. One Earth 2022, 5, 550–562.
  58. Singh, A.D.; Sood, B.Y.R.; Deepak, C. Recent Techno-Economic Potential and Development of Solar Energy Sector in India. IETE Tech. Rev. 2019, 37, 246–257.
  59. Chisika, S.; Yeom, C. Enhancing Sustainable Development and Regional Integration through Electrification by Solar Power: The Case of Six East African States. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3275.
  60. Gulaliyev, M.G.; Mustafayev, E.R.; Mehdiyeva, G.Y. Assessment of Solar Energy Potential and Its Ecological-Economic Efficiency: Azerbaijan Case. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1116.
  61. Sanseverino, E.R.; Thuy, H.L.T.; Pham, M.-H.; Di Silvestre, M.L.; Quang, N.N.; Favuzza, S. Review of Potential and Actual Penetration of Solar Power in Vietnam. Energies 2020, 13, 2529.
  62. Al-Shahri, O.A.; Ismail, F.B.; Hannan, M.; Lipu, M.H.; Al-Shetwi, A.Q.; Begum, R.; Al-Muhsen, N.F.; Soujeri, E. Solar photovoltaic energy optimization methods, challenges and issues: A comprehensive review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 284, 125465.
  63. Antar, M.; Lyu, D.; Nazari, M.; Shah, A.; Zhou, X.; Smith, D.L. Biomass for a sustainable bioeconomy: An overview of world biomass production and utilization. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 139, 110691.
  64. Appels, L.; Lauwers, J.; Degrève, J.; Helsen, L.; Lievens, B.; Willems, K.; Van Impe, J.; Dewil, R. Anaerobic digestion in global bio-energy production: Potential and research challenges. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2011, 15, 4295–4301.
  65. IEA. Bioenergy, IEA, Paris. 2022. Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/bioenergy (accessed on 9 January 2023).
  66. Liu, W.; Liu, C.; Gogoi, P.; Deng, Y. Overview of Biomass Conversion to Electricity and Hydrogen and Recent Developments in Low-Temperature Electrochemical Approaches. Engineering 2020, 6, 1351–1363.
  67. Chen, S.; Feng, H.; Zheng, J.; Ye, J.; Song, Y.; Yang, H.; Zhou, M. Life Cycle Assessment and Economic Analysis of Biomass Energy Technology in China: A Brief Review. Processes 2020, 8, 1112.
  68. Ardebili, S.M.S. Green electricity generation potential from biogas produced by anaerobic digestion of farm animal waste and agriculture residues in Iran. Renew. Energy 2020, 154, 29–37.
  69. Vijay, V.; Kapoor, R.; Singh, P.; Hiloidhari, M.; Ghosh, P. Sustainable utilization of biomass resources for decentralized energy generation and climate change mitigation: A regional case study in India. Environ. Res. 2022, 212, 113257.
  70. Sagani, A.; Hagidimitriou, M.; Dedoussis, V. Perennial tree pruning biomass waste exploitation for electricity generation: The perspective of Greece. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessments 2018, 31, 77–85.
  71. Jåstad, E.O.; Bolkesjø, T.F.; Trømborg, E.; Rørstad, P.K. The role of woody biomass for reduction of fossil GHG emissions in the future North European energy sector. Appl. Energy 2020, 274, 115360.
  72. IEA. Renewables 2021, IEA, Paris. Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/renewables-2021 (accessed on 20 December 2022).
  73. Hoang, A.T.; Pham, V.V.; Nguyen, X.P. Integrating renewable sources into energy system for smart city as a sagacious strategy towards clean and sustainable process. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 305, 127161.
  74. Jun, W.; Mughal, N.; Kaur, P.; Xing, Z.; Jain, V.; Cong, P.T. Achieving green environment targets in the world’s top 10 emitter countries: The role of green innovations and renewable electricity production. Econ. Res.-Ekon. Istraživanja 2022, 35, 5310–5335.
  75. Xiaosan, Z.; Qingquan, J.; Iqbal, K.S.; Manzoor, A.; Ur, R.Z. Achieving sustainability and energy efficiency goals: Assessing the impact of hydroelectric and renewable electricity generation on carbon dioxide emission in China. Energy Policy 2021, 155, 112332.
  76. Jing, R.; Zhou, Y.; Wu, J. Electrification with flexibility towards local energy decarbonization. Adv. Appl. Energy 2022, 5, 100088.
  77. Dong, F.; Li, Y.; Gao, Y.; Zhu, J.; Qin, C.; Zhang, X. Energy transition and carbon neutrality: Exploring the non-linear impact of renewable energy development on carbon emission efficiency in developed countries. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2022, 177, 106002.
  78. Nam, E.; Jin, T. Mitigating carbon emissions by energy transition, energy efficiency, and electrification: Difference between regulation indicators and empirical data. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 300, 126962.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
Video Production Service
Feedback