Optimization of Electricity Generation Technologies to Reduce Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Egypt

Abstract

In February 2016, the Egyptian government introduced Egyptian Vision 2030. An important pillar of this vision is energy. Egyptian Vision 2030 presented renewable energy as the best solution to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the energy sector. Egypt’s electricity comes from various power plants; conventional thermal plants generate over 90% in which gas-fired generation accounts for 75% of the total output. Following the increase in natural gas (NG) projects in Egypt, NG is the dominant electricity source. Based on the pillars of the sustainable development strategy of Egypt, the county can increase dependence on renewable energies, and reduce CO2 emissions and bound electricity production from natural gas. We aim to determine future energy generation strategies from various power plant technologies depending on these three principles. To make the picture more clear and complete, we compared the environmental impacts and external costs of fossil, hydro, and nuclear power plants in Egypt. We used two computer codes: the model for energy supply strategy alternatives and their general environmental impacts (MESSAGE) and the simplified approach for estimating environmental impacts of electricity generation (SIMPACTS). The MESSAGE code modeled the energy-supply systems to determine the best energy-supply technology to meet future energy demands. SIMPACTS estimated the environmental impact and damage costs associated with electricity generation. The results indicated that nuclear power plants and gas power plants are long-term electricity supply sources. Nuclear power plants entail low total external-damage costs, in addition to low environmental impact during normal operation. We conclude that nuclear power plants are the best alternative long-term electricity-generation choice for Egypt to meet future electricity demands.

The Role of Nuclear Energy in Reducing Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions and Energy Security: A Systematic Review

“…Nuclear and gas power plants were shown to be long-term electricity suppliers. However, the research concluded that nuclear power plants are the best long-term alternative source of electricity generation for Egypt to fulfil future demand [84].…”

“…Most research articles asserted that nuclear energy is the most reliable option for achieving national and regional CO 2 emission mitigation targets while meeting the energy supply need [81,82,84,88,89]. Furthermore, along with the rapid increase of emerging industrialized countries, the global geography of the development of nuclear energy is undergoing a spatial reconfiguration phenomenon, as indicated by studies on research and collaboration among nations.…”

“…Although wind energy has proven to be very efficient among sources for pollution and climate change mitigation [78,88], comparatively, nuclear and other renewable energy sources have lower global pollution levels [84,[88][89][90]92]. Studies conducted by Apergis et al [123] on data from 19 industrialized and developing countries between 1984 and 2007 showed that using nuclear energy significantly minimizes CO 2 emissions [117].…”

“…According to a study on Egypt's energy mix, nuclear power plants (NPPs) have low external damage costs and minimal environmental impact during normal operation. This makes nuclear power plants one of the long-term electricity generation choices for the country to satisfy future electricity demands while contributing to combating climate change [84].…”

Possible Scenarios for Reduction of Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Serbia by Generating Electricity from Natural Gas

“…In addition, there are a number of publications on related topics, providing the readership with useful details about GHG emissions in Serbia in general [27,28], CO 2 emissions from various types of coals used in Serbian CPPs [29,30], climate change policies and plans relating to the Southeast European countries [31,32], renewable energy development trends in Serbia and the other Western Balkan countries [33,34], and so on. Moreover, some papers deal with CPPs and/or NGPPs in other countries and regions of the world, namely: India [35], Germany [36], Turkey [37], Algeria [38], Asia-Pacific [12], Southeast Asia [39,40], South Korea [41], Egypt [42], etc. Accordingly, there is no paper reviewing the potential effects of the Balkan Stream pipeline on CO 2 emissions in Serbia, reviewing planned NGPPs in Serbia, or dealing with possible scenarios and necessary measures for reducing CO 2 emissions in Serbia by the end of 2050 (by means of natural gas-fired electricity generation).…”