Industrial energy, materials and products: UK decarbonisation challenges and opportunities

Barrett, John; Cooper, Tim; Hammond, Geoffrey P.; Pidgeon, Nick

doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.03.049

Cited by 51 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To bridge the mitigation gap there will need to be changes to both the design of products and their consumption. This is subject to consumer preferences, business practices and policies (Barrett, Cooper, Hammond, & Pidgeon, ). Technical obsolescence has been designed into products for decades as a means for businesses to cut production costs and increase sales (Sherif & Rice, ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridging the climate mitigation gap with economy‐wide material productivity

Scott

Giesekam

Barrett

et al. 2018

J of Industrial Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Projections of UK greenhouse gas emissions estimate a shortfall in existing and planned climate policies meeting UK climate targets: the UK's mitigation gap. Material and product demand is driving industrial greenhouse gas emissions at a rate greater than carbon intensity improvements in the economy. Evidence shows that products can be produced with fewer carbon intensive inputs and demand for new products can be reduced. The economy-wide contribution of material productivity and lifestyle changes to bridging the UK's mitigation gap is understudied. We integrate an input-output framework with econometric analysis and case study evidence to analyse the potential of material productivity to help the UK bridge its anticipated emissions deficits, and the additional effort required to achieve transformative change aligned with 2 and 1.5 • C temperature targets. We estimate that the emissions savings from material productivity measures are comparable to those from the Government's planned climate policy package. These additional measures could reduce the UK's anticipated emissions deficit up to 73%. The results demonstrate that material productivity deserves greater consideration in climate policy.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridging the climate mitigation gap with economy‐wide material productivity

Scott

Giesekam

Barrett

et al. 2018

J of Industrial Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…() that both extensions are useful and the choice depends on the perspective, (often‐implicit) principles of responsibility and the research question, either focusing on the upstream part (origin/source) or the downstream part (actual energy use of industries) of the energy conversion chain. The observed variations are considerable and emphasize the importance of the extension design when EE‐MIOTs are used for monitoring energy efficiency and short‐ or medium‐term emission reduction targets (Barrett et al., ; Barrett, Cooper, Hammond, & Pidgeon, ; Scott & Barrett, ; Steininger et al., ), which usually aim at the same percentage range as the divergences. Which extension is used also reflects an assumption of responsibility in the energy conversion chain and where a demand‐side measure is supposed to intervene in order to curb current unsustainably high levels of energy consumption (Creutzig et al., ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supply versus use designs of environmental extensions in input–output analysis: Conceptual and empirical implications for the case of energy

Wieland

Giljum

Eisenmenger

et al. 2019

J of Industrial Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Input-output analysis is one of the central methodological pillars of industrial ecology. However, the literature that discusses different structures of environmental extensions (EEs), that is, the scope of physical flows and their attribution to sectors in the monetary input-output table (MIOT), remains fragmented. This article investigates the conceptual and empirical implications of applying two different but frequently used designs of EEs, using the case of energy accounting, where one represents energy supply while the other energy use in the economy. We derive both extensions from an official energy supply-use dataset and apply them to the same single-region inputoutput (SRIO) model of Austria, thereby isolating the effect that stems from the decision for the extension design. We also crosscheck the SRIO results with energy footprints from the global multi-regional input-output (GMRIO) dataset EXIOBASE. Our results show that the ranking of footprints of final demand categories (e.g., household and export) is sensitive to the extension design and that product-level results can vary by several orders of magnitude. The GMRIO-based comparison further reveals that for a few countries the supply-extension result can be twice the size of the use-extension footprint (e.g., Australia and Norway). We propose a graph approach to provide a generalized framework to disclosing the design of EEs. We discuss the conceptual differences between the two extension designs by applying analogies to hybrid life-cycle assessment and conclude that our findings are relevant for monitoring of energy efficiency and emission reduction targets and corporate footprint accounting. K E Y W O R D Senergy consumption, energy efficiency, energy flow analysis, energy footprint, environmental input-output analysis, industrial ecology

show abstract

“…In Brazil for instance, the food industry is the largest energy consumer in the entire industrial sector [8]. The UK food and drink industry is one of the largest emitters of CO 2 in the UK [9], it consumed as much as 24.6 TWh of energy and emitted approximately 9.1 MtCO2e, or just over 1% of the total UK CO 2 emissions in 2014 [10] and is the fourth-highest industrial energy user in the country [11]. In view of the resolutions of the United Nations Framework on Climate Change, and the subsequent Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement on emission reduction targets of the various countries of the world, improving energy-efficiency and decarbonising food manufacturing operations become critical.…”

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-Energy Optimum Pathway for the UK Food Manufacturing Industry to Meet the UK National Emission Targets

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates and outlines a cost-energy optimised pathway for the UK food manufacturing industry to attain the national Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission reduction target of 80%, relative to 1990 levels, by 2050. The paper employs the linear programming platform TIMES, and it models the current and future technology mix of the UK food manufacturing industry. The model considers parameters such as capital costs, operating costs, efficiency and the lifetime of technologies to determine the cheapest pathway to achieve the GHG emission constraints. The model also enables future parametric analyses and can predict the influence of different economic, trade and dietary preferences and the impact of technological investments and policies on emissions. The study showed that for the food manufacturing industry to meet the emission reduction targets by 2050 the use of natural gas as the dominant source of energy in the industry at present, will have to be replaced by decarbonised grid electricity and biogas. This will require investments in Anaerobic Digestion (AD), Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plants driven by biogas and heat pumps powered by decarbonised electricity.

show abstract

Industrial energy, materials and products: UK decarbonisation challenges and opportunities

Cited by 51 publications

References 62 publications

Bridging the climate mitigation gap with economy‐wide material productivity

Bridging the climate mitigation gap with economy‐wide material productivity

Supply versus use designs of environmental extensions in input–output analysis: Conceptual and empirical implications for the case of energy

Cost-Energy Optimum Pathway for the UK Food Manufacturing Industry to Meet the UK National Emission Targets

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About