Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Review Study of Energy Efficiency Measures in Favor of Reducing Carbon Footprint of Electricity and Power, Buildings, and Transportation

  • Review paper
  • Published:
Circular Economy and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Circular economy aspires to achieve environmental quality by minimizing resource input and waste, emissions, and energy leakage by which the environmental impact of any of these activities is equivalent to its carbon footprint production. To combat climate change, an immediate task that depends on the promise of a single alternative would be extremely dangerous. Instead, a variety of options are needed, including changing the composition of demand (using less energy), structural changes in the composition of the economy (dirty vs cleaner sectors and products, and different input mixes in production), low-carbon transportation, more energy-efficient technologies, and low-carbon (particularly renewable) energy sources. This study aims to address means of promoting energy efficiency implemented within socio-economic sectors: electricity and power, buildings, and logistics and transportation along with their carbon footprint impact. Starting from illustrating the notion of carbon footprint and ways of estimation, strategies for lowering carbon footprint are discussed. Moreover, this paper demonstrates three case studies of energy efficiency and reduction of carbon footprint. The first highlighted the effectiveness of employing geothermal renewable resources via analyzing the system to determine which of the cooling tower or shallow aquifer cooling is more efficient, to be implemented in the system. The second case examined and optimized a cogeneration system to achieve the optimum configuration as well as maximum energy efficiency. The third study investigated an option to decarbonize heavy-duty transport via fuel cell electric vehicles in Switzerland. Last but not least, to enhance economic development by enhancing energy efficiency and low-carbon approaches, carbon pricing should be on the top of climate policy makers’ objectives to promote and implement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Not applicable.

Notes

  1. https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tables?country=WORLD

  2. https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html

  3. For more information on U.S. GHG Emissions from Transportation and what the numbers in these pie charts represent, please see Fast Facts: U.S. Transportation Sector GHG Emissions (PDF) (5 pp, 289 K, June 2021, EPA-420-F-21–049, About PDF).

Abbreviations

ATD:

Air terminal devices

BEV:

Battery-powered electric

CCHP:

Combined cooling heat and power system

CFL:

Compact fluorescent lamp

CHP:

Combined heat and power

CO2 :

Carbon dioxide

CO2eq :

Carbon dioxide equivalents

CT:

Cooling tower method

DCS:

Distributed cogeneration solution

DHN:

District heating network

DRS:

Distributed renewable solution

ETI:

External thermal insulation

FCV:

Fuel cell vehicles

GHGs:

Greenhouse gases

GT:

Gas turbine

GWP:

Global warming potential

IEA:

International Energy Agency

IES:

Illuminating Engineering Society

IS:

Isolated solution

ITI:

Internal thermal insulation

KC:

Kalina cycle

LED:

Light-emitting diode

LPG:

Liquefied petroleum gas

ORC:

Organic Rankine cycle

PCM:

Phase change material

PES:

Primary energy saving

PV:

Photovoltaic

PVS:

Personalized ventilation system

SAC:

Shallow aquifer cooling method

SOFC:

Solid oxide fuel cells

SP:

Separate production

ST:

Steam turbine

VM:

Virtual meetings

WBCSD:

Conventional solution

SMR:

Steam methane reforming

ENTSO-E:

European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity

CCGT:

Gas-fired combined cycle power plant

References

  1. Ghisellini P, Cialani C, Ulgiati S (2016) A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems. J Clean Prod 114:11–32

    Google Scholar 

  2. Taylor S (2016) A review of sustainable development principles: centre for environmental studies. University of Pretoria, South Africa

    Google Scholar 

  3. Geissdoerfer M, Savaget P, Bocken NM, Hultink EJ (2017) The circular economy–a new sustainability paradigm? J Clean Prod 143:757–768

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ritchie H, Roser M (2020) CO2 and greenhouse gas emissions. Our world in data.

  5. Bastianoni S, Pulselli FM, Tiezzi E (2004) The problem of assigning responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions. Ecol Econ 49(3):253–257

    Google Scholar 

  6. Pachauri RK, Allen MR, Barros VR, Broome J, Cramer W, Christ R, et al (2014) Climate change 2014: synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Ipcc.

  7. Keyßer LT, Lenzen M (2021) 1.5 C degrowth scenarios suggest the need for new mitigation pathways. Nat Commun 12(1):1–16

    Google Scholar 

  8. Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Farahani E, Kadner S, Seyboth K, et al (2014) JM (eds.), Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Tech. rep., Working Group III Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of;2014

  9. Arora VK, Scinocca J, Boer G, Christian J, Denman K, Flato G, et al (2011) Carbon emission limits required to satisfy future representative concentration pathways of greenhouse gases. Geophys Res Lett 38(5)

  10. Wiedmann T, Minx J (2008) A definition of ‘carbon footprint.’ Ecol Econ Res Trends 1:1–11

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pandey D, Agrawal M, Pandey JS (2011) Carbon footprint: current methods of estimation. Environ Monit Assess 178(1):135–160

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Cabernard L, Pfister S, Oberschelp C, Hellweg S (2021) Growing environmental footprint of plastics driven by coal combustion. Nat Sustain 1–10

  13. Bhatia P, Ranganathan J (2004) The Greenhouse Gas Protocol.

  14. WBCSD W (2004) The greenhouse gas protocol. A corporate accounting and reporting standard, Rev ed Washington, DC, Conches-Geneva.

  15. Loyarte-López E, Barral M, Morla JC (2020) Methodology for carbon footprint calculation towards sustainable innovation in intangible assets. Sustainability 12(4):1629

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wiedmann T, Allen C (2021) City footprints and SDGs provide untapped potential for assessing city sustainability. Nat Commun 12(1):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  17. Change I (2006) IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Hayama, Kanagawa, Japan. 2006.

  18. Cherry C, Scott K, Barrett J, Pidgeon N (2018) Public acceptance of resource-efficiency strategies to mitigate climate change. Nat Clim Chang 8(11):1007–1012

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bielaczyc P, Szczotka A, Woodburn JA (2016) comparison of exhaust emissions from vehicles fuelled with petrol, LPG and CNG. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering: IOP Publishing; p. 012060.

  20. Bailey L, Mokhtarian PL, Little A (2008) The broader connection between public transportation, energy conservation and greenhouse gas reduction. ICF International Fairfax, Va.

  21. Shahid S, Minhans A, Puan OC (2014) Assessment of greenhouse gas emission reduction measures in transportation sector of Malaysia. Jurnal teknologi 70(4)

  22. Tao Y, Steckel D, Klemeš JJ, You F (2021) Trend towards virtual and hybrid conferences may be an effective climate change mitigation strategy. Nat Commun 12(1):1–14

    Google Scholar 

  23. Babacan O, De Causmaecker S, Gambhir A, Fajardy M, Rutherford AW, Fantuzzi A et al (2020) Assessing the feasibility of carbon dioxide mitigation options in terms of energy usage. Nat Energy 5(9):720–728. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-020-0646-1

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Penz E, Polsa P (2018) How do companies reduce their carbon footprint and how do they communicate these measures to stakeholders? J Clean Prod 195:1125–1138

    Google Scholar 

  25. Arnfalk P, Pilerot U, Schillander P, Grönvall P (2016) Green IT in practice: virtual meetings in Swedish public agencies. J Clean Prod 123:101–112

    Google Scholar 

  26. Capehart BL, Turner WC, Kennedy WJ (2020) Guide to energy management. River Publishers.

  27. Luderer G, Madeddu S, Merfort L, Ueckerdt F, Pehl M, Pietzcker R, et al (2021) Impact of declining renewable energy costs on electrification in low-emission scenarios. Nat Energy 1–11.

  28. Kruitwagen L, Story KT, Friedrich J, Byers L, Skillman S, Hepburn C (2021) A global inventory of photovoltaic solar energy generating units. Nature 598(7882):604–610. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03957-7

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Tyagi R, Agrawal A, Ali SS (2018) Indian Renewable Energy Act 2015: a step towards reducing carbon footprint. Indian J Power River Val Dev 68(9/10):145–151

    Google Scholar 

  30. Shove E (2018) What is wrong with energy efficiency? Build Res Inf 46(7):779–789

    Google Scholar 

  31. D’Adamo I (2018) The profitability of residential photovoltaic systems. A new scheme of subsidies based on the price of CO2 in a developed PV market. Soc Sci 7(9):148

    Google Scholar 

  32. Mauleón I (2019) Assessment of renewable energy deployment roadmaps. Energies 12(15):2875

    Google Scholar 

  33. Issac T, Silas S, Rajsingh EB (2020) Dynamic and static system modeling with simulation of an eco-friendly smart lighting system. Systems Simulation and Modeling for Cloud Computing and Big Data Applications. Elsevier 81–97.

  34. Principi P, Fioretti R (2014) A comparative life cycle assessment of luminaires for general lighting for the office–compact fluorescent (CFL) vs Light Emitting Diode (LED)–a case study. J Clean Prod 83:96–107

    Google Scholar 

  35. Konstantzos I, Sadeghi SA, Kim M, Xiong J, Tzempelikos A (2020) The effect of lighting environment on task performance in buildings–A review. Energy Build 226:110394

    Google Scholar 

  36. Juslén H, Tenner A (2005) Mechanisms involved in enhancing human performance by changing the lighting in the industrial workplace. Int J Ind Ergon 35(9):843–855

    Google Scholar 

  37. Van Bommel IW, Van Den Beld IG, Van Ooyen IM (2002) Industrial lighting and productivity. Philips Lighting, The Netherlands. 2002;20.

  38. Riyanto I, Margatama L, Hakim H, Hindarto DE (2018) Motion sensor application on building lighting installation for energy saving and carbon reduction joint crediting mechanism. Appl Syst Innov 1(3):23

    Google Scholar 

  39. Oh M, Roh S, Jang M, Park J (2018) Evaluation of heating and cooling load according to applying electrochromic glass to office building envelope in South Korea.

  40. Xu C, Li S, Zou K (2019) Study of heat and moisture transfer in internal and external wall insulation configurations. J Build Eng 24:100724

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kolaitis DI, Malliotakis E, Kontogeorgos DA, Mandilaras I, Katsourinis DI, Founti MA (2013) Comparative assessment of internal and external thermal insulation systems for energy efficient retrofitting of residential buildings. Energy Build 64:123–131

    Google Scholar 

  42. Keçebaş A (2012) Determination of insulation thickness by means of exergy analysis in pipe insulation. Energy Convers Manag 58:76–83

    Google Scholar 

  43. UNECE (2013) Room Document : Baseline Efficiency Analysis of Fossil Fuel Power Plants.

  44. Luu L, Halog A (2016) Life cycle sustainability assessment: a holistic evaluation of social, economic, and environmental impacts. Sustainability in the design, synthesis and analysis of chemical engineering processes. Elsevier 327–52.

  45. Chicco G, Mancarella P (2008) Assessment of the greenhouse gas emissions from cogeneration and trigeneration systems. Part I Models Indic Energy 33(3):410–417

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Milani D (2019) Chapter 14 - Renewable Energy Integration in Combined Cooling, Heating, and Power (CCHP) Processes. In: Khalilpour KR (ed) Polygeneration with Polystorage for Chemical and Energy Hubs. Academic Press, pp 459–491

    Google Scholar 

  47. Cheddie DF (2011) Thermo-economic optimization of an indirectly coupled solid oxide fuel cell/gas turbine hybrid power plant. Int J Hydrogen Energy 36(2):1702–1709

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Guo Y, Yu Z, Li G, Zhao H (2020) Performance assessment and optimization of an integrated solid oxide fuel cell-gas turbine cogeneration system. Int J Hydrogen Energy 45(35):17702–17716

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Morfeldt J, Davidsson Kurland S, Johansson DJA (2021) Carbon footprint impacts of banning cars with internal combustion engines. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ 95:102807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2021.102807

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. McQueen M, MacArthur J, Cherry C (2020) The E-bike potential: estimating regional e-bike impacts on greenhouse gas emissions. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ 87:102482

    Google Scholar 

  51. Notter DA, Gauch M, Widmer R, Wager P, Stamp A, Zah R, et al (2010) Contribution of Li-ion batteries to the environmental impact of electric vehicles. ACS Publications.

  52. Nanaki EA, Koroneos CJ (2013) Comparative economic and environmental analysis of conventional, hybrid and electric vehicles–the case study of Greece. J Clean Prod 53:261–266

    Google Scholar 

  53. Van Vliet O, Brouwer AS, Kuramochi T, van Den Broek M, Faaij A (2011) Energy use, cost and CO2 emissions of electric cars. J Power Sources 196(4):2298–2310

    Google Scholar 

  54. Schäppi R, Rutz D, Dähler F, Muroyama A, Haueter P, Lilliestam J et al (2021) Drop-in fuels from sunlight and air. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04174-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Manoharan Y, Hosseini SE, Butler B, Alzhahrani H, Senior BTF, Ashuri T et al (2019) Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles; current status and future prospect. Appl Sci 9(11):2296

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Gao C, Kuklane K, Wang F, Holmér I (2012) Personal cooling with phase change materials to improve thermal comfort from a heat wave perspective. Indoor Air 22(6):523–530

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Mneimneh F, Ghaddar N, Ghali K, Moussalem C, Omeis I (2019) Would personal cooling vest be effective for use during exercise by people with thoracic spinal cord injury? J Therm Biol 82:123–141

    Google Scholar 

  58. Mneimneh F, Moussalem C, Ghaddar N, Ghali K, Omeis I (2020) Experimental study on the effectiveness of the PCM cooling vest in persons with paraplegia of varying levels. J Therm Biol 91:102634

    Google Scholar 

  59. Mneimneh F, Ghaddar N, Ghali K, Moussalem C, Omeis I. A (2021) Comparative Study on the Effectiveness of Evaporative and Phase Change Material Cooling Vests for People With Paraplegia. Heat Transfer Summer Conference: American Society of Mechanical Engineers; 2021. p. V001T11A.

  60. Mneimneh F, Ghaddar N, Ghali K, Itani M (2021) The effectiveness of evaporative cooling vest with ventilation fans on the thermal state of persons with paraplegia during exercise. Build Environ 206:108356

    Google Scholar 

  61. Itani M, Ghaddar N, Ghali K (2017) Innovative PCM-desiccant packet to provide dry microclimate and improve performance of cooling vest in hot environment. Energy Convers Manag 140:218–227

    Google Scholar 

  62. Schiavon S, Melikov AK, Sekhar C (2010) Energy analysis of the personalized ventilation system in hot and humid climates. Energy Build 42(5):699–707

    Google Scholar 

  63. Yang B, Sekhar C, Melikov AK (2010) Ceiling mounted personalized ventilation system in hot and humid climate—An energy analysis. Energy Build 42(12):2304–2308

    Google Scholar 

  64. El-Fil B, Ghaddar N, Ghali K (2016) Optimizing performance of ceiling-mounted personalized ventilation system assisted by chair fans: assessment of thermal comfort and indoor air quality. Sci Technol Built Environ 22(4):412–430

    Google Scholar 

  65. Wang X, Bierwirth A, Christ A, Whittaker P, Regenauer-Lieb K, Chua HT (2013) Application of geothermal absorption air-conditioning system: a case study. Appl Therm Eng 50(1):71–80

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Buoro D, Pinamonti P, Reini M (2014) Optimization of a Distributed Cogeneration System with solar district heating. Appl Energy 124:298–308

    Google Scholar 

  67. Çabukoglu E, Georges G, Küng L, Pareschi G, Boulouchos K (2019) Fuel cell electric vehicles: an option to decarbonize heavy-duty transport? Results from a Swiss case-study. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ 70:35–48

    Google Scholar 

  68. Baranzini A, Van den Bergh JC, Carattini S, Howarth RB, Padilla E, Roca J (2017) Carbon pricing in climate policy: seven reasons, complementary instruments, and political economy considerations. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Chang 8(4):e462

    Google Scholar 

  69. Chen M, Sinha A, Hu K, Shah MI (2021) Impact of technological innovation on energy efficiency in industry 4.0 era: moderation of shadow economy in sustainable development. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 164:120521

  70. Parry I, Veung C, Heine D (2015) HOW MUCH CARBON PRICING IS IN COUNTRIES’OWN INTERESTS? THE CRITICAL ROLE OF CO-BENEFITS. Climate Chang Econ 6(04):1550019

    Google Scholar 

  71. Yu X, Moreno-Cruz J, Crittenden JC (2015) Regional energy rebound effect: the impact of economy-wide and sector level energy efficiency improvement in Georgia, USA. Energy Policy 87:250–259

    Google Scholar 

  72. Alsalemi A, Himeur Y, Bensaali F, Amira A (2022) An innovative edge-based Internet of Energy solution for promoting energy saving in buildings. Sustain Cities Soc 78:103571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Watkins K (2007) Human Development Report 2007/2008: fighting climate change: human solidarity in a divided world.

  74. Hertwich EG, Peters GP (2009) Carbon footprint of nations: a global, trade-linked analysis. Environ Sci Technol 43(16):6414–6420

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Ferris L, Best J, Scholefield H, Marques J, Sawada B, Nemetz P (2007) Carbon neutrality and University of British Colombia: a first glance. University of British Colombia, Colombia

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial & Mechanical Engineering, Lebanese American University, Chouran Beirut, P.O. Box 13-5053, Beirut, 1102 2801, Lebanon

    Farah Mneimneh & Hasan Ghazzawi

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore

    Seeram Ramakrishna

Authors
  1. Farah Mneimneh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hasan Ghazzawi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Seeram Ramakrishna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Farah Mneimneh and Hasan Ghazzawi. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Farah Mneimneh and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Farah Mneimneh.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mneimneh, F., Ghazzawi, H. & Ramakrishna, S. Review Study of Energy Efficiency Measures in Favor of Reducing Carbon Footprint of Electricity and Power, Buildings, and Transportation. Circ.Econ.Sust. 3, 447–474 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-022-00179-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-022-00179-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation