Nuclear Engineering and Technology

  • 제56권1호
  • /
  • Pages.180-188
  • /
  • 2024
  • /
  • 1738-5733(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-358X(eISSN)
한국원자력학회 (Korean Nuclear Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Does nuclear energy reduce consumption-based carbon emissions: The role of environmental taxes and trade globalization in highest carbon emitting countries

  • 투고 : 2023.06.15
  • 심사 : 2023.09.15
  • 발행 : 2024.01.25
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

This research examined consumption-based carbon emission reduction by nuclear energy consumption and environmental tax while considering the context of trade globalization in the highest five emitter nations from 1990 to 2020. This study used various empirical methodologies, including preliminary analysis to check the stationarity and cointegration, the CS-ARDL for long-run analysis, CCEMG, AMG for robustness, and the D-H causality test for short-term pairwise causation. The results indicated that nuclear energy consumption, environmental tax, and trade globalization help to mitigate consumption-based carbon emissions while economic growth and population density boost carbon emissions. Furthermore, the results also found two-way casual connection exists between nuclear energy consumption, population density, and consumption-based carbon emissions. Thus, the results emphasize the need for government policies that encourage nuclear energy and environmental tax as a strategy to reduce carbon emissions and achieve and maintain environmental development.

키워드

과제정보

The work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Theory Reconstruction, Strategies and Policies of China's Dominant Design Development in the Hi-tech Industries from the Perspective of New Situation of International Competition, No. 72274223) and National Social Science Fund of China (Strategies and Policies of the Development of Essential Patents of Standards in New Generation Information Technology Industry, No. 21BJY019).

참고문헌

  1. A.A. Alola, T.S. Adebayo, Analysing the waste management, industrial and agriculture greenhouse gas emissions of biomass, fossil fuel, and metallic ores utilization in Iceland, Sci. Total Environ. (2023) 887, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.164115. 
  2. C.W. Su, M. Umar, D. Kirikkaleli, A. Ayobamiji Awosusi, M. Altuntas,, Testing the asymmetric effect of financial stability towards carbon neutrality target: the case of Iceland and global comparison, Gondwana Res. 116 (2023) 125-135, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2022.12.014. 
  3. 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. 
  4. S.T. Hassan, Salah Danish, Ud-Din khan, 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. 
  5. N. Haneklaus, S. Qvist, P. Gladysz, L. Bartela, Why coal-fired power plants should get nuclear-ready, Energy 280 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.128169. 
  6. M. Sadiq, R. Shinwari, F. Wen, M. Usman, S.T. Hassan, F. Taghizadeh-Hesary, Do globalization and nuclear energy intensify the environmental costs in top nuclear energy-consuming countries? Prog. Nucl. Energy 156 (2023), 104533 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2022.104533. 
  7. Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), Uranium 2022: Resources, Production and Demand, OECD Publishing, 2023, pp. 12-13. https://www.oecd-nea.org/jcms/pl_79960/uranium-2022-resources-production-and-demand?details=true. (Accessed 10 September 2023). 
  8. D. Shang, B. Geissler, M. Mew, L. Satalkina, L. Zenk, H. Tulsidas, L. Barker, A. El-Yahyaoui, A. Hussein, M. Taha, Y. Zheng, M. Wang, Y. Yao, X. Liu, H. Deng, J. Zhong, Z. Li, G. Steiner, M. Bertau, N. Haneklaus, Unconventional uranium in China's phosphate rock: Review and outlook, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 140 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.110740. 
  9. C. Poinssot, S. Bourg, N. Ouvrier, N. Combernoux, C. Rostaing, M. Vargas-Gonzalez, J. Bruno, Assessment of the environmental footprint of nuclear energy systems. Comparison between closed and open fuel cycles, Energy 69 (2014) 199-211, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.02.069. 
  10. M. Sadiq, F. Wen, M.F. Bashir, A. Amin, Does nuclear energy consumption contribute to human development? Modeling the effects of public debt and trade globalization in an OECD heterogeneous panel, J. Clean. Prod. 375 (2022), 133965, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133965. 
  11. R. Pravalie, G. Bandoc, Nuclear energy: between global electricity demand, worldwide decarbonisation imperativeness, and planetary environmental implications, J. Environ. Manag. 209 (2018) 81-92, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2017.12.043. 
  12. D. Kirikkaleli, T.S. Adebayo, Political risk and environmental quality in Brazil: role of green finance and green innovation, Int. J. Finance Econ. (2022), https://doi.org/10.1002/ijfe.2732. 
  13. S. Ullah, R. Luo, T.S. Adebayo, M.T. Kartal, Dynamics between environmental taxes and ecological sustainability: evidence from top-seven green economies by novel quantile approaches, Sustain. Dev. (2022), https://doi.org/10.1002/SD.2423.
  14. F. Wen, N. Wu, X. Gong, China's carbon emissions trading and stock returns, Energy Econ. 86 (2020), 104627, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2019.104627. 
  15. L.N. Hao, M. Umar, Z. Khan, W. Ali, Green growth and low carbon emission in G7 countries: how critical the network of environmental taxes, renewable energy and human capital is? Sci. Total Environ. 752 (2021), 141853 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141853. 
  16. Z. Zhang, Q. Zheng, Sustainable development via environmental taxes and efficiency in energy: evaluating trade adjusted carbon emissions, Sustain. Dev. 31 (2023) 415-425, https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2400. 
  17. M. Murshed, H. Mahmood, P. Ahmad, A. Rehman, M.S. Alam, Pathways to Argentina's 2050 carbon-neutrality agenda: the roles of renewable energy transition and trade globalization, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 29 (2022) 29949-29966, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17903-7. 
  18. X. Wang, X. Wang, X. Ren, F. Wen, Can digital financial inclusion affect CO2 emissions of China at the prefecture level? Evidence from a spatial econometric approach, Energy Econ. 109 (2022), 105966, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2022.105966. 
  19. S. Ghosh, Globalization and environment: an Asian experience, J. Int. Comm., Econ. Pol. 9 (2018) 1-27, https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793993318500102. 
  20. N.D. Cakar, S. Erdogan, A. Gedikli, M.A. Oncu, Nuclear energy consumption, nuclear fusion reactors and environmental quality: the case of G7 countries, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 54 (2022) 1301-1311, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.NET.2021.10.015. 
  21. 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. 
  22. A.A. Alola, T.S. Adebayo, The potency of resource efficiency and environmental technologies in carbon neutrality target for Finland, J. Clean. Prod. 389 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136127. 
  23. T.S. Adebayo, M.T. Kartal, M. Aga, M.A.S. Al-Faryan, Role of country risks and renewable energy consumption on environmental quality: evidence from MINT countries, J. Environ. Manag. 327 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116884. 
  24. H.S. Kim, Comparison of cost efficiencies of nuclear power and renewable energy generation in mitigating CO2 emissions, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 28 (2021) 789-795, https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-020-10537-1/TABLES/4. 
  25. B. Danish, R. Ozcan, Ulucak, An empirical investigation of nuclear energy consumption and carbon dioxide (CO2) emission in India: bridging IPAT and EKC hypotheses, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 53 (2021) 2056-2065, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2020.12.008. 
  26. J. Zhang, S. Ali, L. Ping, Asymmetric linkages between nuclear energy and environmental quality: evidence from Top-10 nuclear energy consumer countries, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 55 (2023) 1878-1884, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2023.01.006. 
  27. U.K. Pata, M.T. Kartal, Impact of nuclear and renewable energy sources on environment quality: testing the EKC and LCC hypotheses for South Korea, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 55 (2023) 587-594, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2022.10.027. 
  28. S.P. Nathaniel, M.S. Alam, M. Murshed, H. Mahmood, P. Ahmad, The roles of nuclear energy, renewable energy, and economic growth in the abatement of carbon dioxide emissions in the G7 countries, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 28 (2021) 35, https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-021-13728-6, 28 (2021) 47957-47972. 
  29. M. Naimoglu, The impact of nuclear energy use, energy prices and energy imports on CO2 emissions: evidence from energy importer emerging economies which use nuclear energy, J. Clean. Prod. 373 (2022), 133937, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2022.133937. 
  30. 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. 
  31. N. Mahmood, Danish, Z. Wang, B. Zhang, The role of nuclear energy in the correction of environmental pollution: evidence from Pakistan, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 52 (2020) 1327-1333, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2019.11.027. 
  32. R. Danish, S. Ulucak, Erdogan, The effect of nuclear energy on the environment in the context of globalization: consumption vs production-based CO2 emissions, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 54 (2022) 1312-1320, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2021.10.030. 
  33. 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. 
  34. A.F. Ghaith, F.M. Epplin, Consequences of a carbon tax on household electricity use and cost, carbon emissions, and economics of household solar and wind, Energy Econ. 67 (2017) 159-168, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2017.08.012. 
  35. A. Sharif, M.T. Kartal, F.V. Bekun, U.K. Pata, C.L. Foon, S. Kilic Depren, Role of green technology, environmental taxes, and green energy towards sustainable environment: insights from sovereign Nordic countries by CS-ARDL approach, Gondwana Res. 117 (2023) 194-206, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2023.01.009. 
  36. M.F. Bashir, B. Ma, M. Shahbaz, Z. Jiao, The nexus between environmental tax and carbon emissions with the roles of environmental technology and financial development, PLoS One 15 (2020) 1-20, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0242412. 
  37. O. Depren, M.T. Kartal, F. Ayhan, S. Kilic Depren, Heterogeneous impact of environmental taxes on environmental quality: tax domain based evidence from the nordic countries by nonparametric quantile approaches, J. Environ. Manag. 329 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.117031. 
  38. Z. Hussain, M. Kaleem Khan, Z. Xia, Investigating the role of green transport, environmental taxes and expenditures in mitigating the transport CO2 emissions, Transportation Letters (2022), https://doi.org/10.1080/19427867.2022.2065592. 
  39. B. Dogan, L.K. Chu, S. Ghosh, H.H. Diep Truong, D. Balsalobre-Lorente, How environmental taxes and carbon emissions are related in the G7 economies? Renew. Energy 187 (2022) 645-656, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.01.077. 
  40. P. Xie, F. Jamaani, Does green innovation, energy productivity and environmental taxes limit carbon emissions in developed economies: implications for sustainable development, Struct. Change Econ. Dynam. 63 (2022) 66-78, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.STRUECO.2022.09.002. 
  41. S. Silajdzic, E. Mehic, Do environmental taxes pay off? The impact of energy and transport taxes on CO2 emissions in transition economies, S. East Eur. J. Econ. Bus. 13 (2018) 126-143, https://doi.org/10.2478/JEB-2018-0016. 
  42. Y. Wolde-Rufael, E. Mulat-Weldemeskel, Do environmental taxes and environmental stringency policies reduce CO2 emissions? Evidence from 7 emerging economies, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 28 (2021) 22392-22408, https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-020-11475-8/TABLES/2. 
  43. Z. Ahmed, H.P. Le, Linking Information Communication Technology, trade globalization index, and CO2 emissions: evidence from advanced panel techniques, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 28 (2021) 8770-8781, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11205-0. 
  44. 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. Control Ser. 26 (2019) 13246-13262, https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-019-04761-7/TABLES/2. 
  45. S.A.H. Zaidi, M.W. Zafar, M. Shahbaz, F. Hou, Dynamic linkages between globalization, financial development and carbon emissions: evidence from Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation countries, J. Clean. Prod. 228 (2019) 533-543, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2019.04.210. 
  46. A.A. Awosusi, N.G. Xulu, M. Ahmadi, H. Rjoub, M. Altuntas,, S.E. Uhunamure, S. Saint Akadiri, D. Kirikkaleli, The sustainable environment in Uruguay: the roles of financial development, natural resources, and trade globalization, Front. Environ. Sci. 10 (2022) 1-13, https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.875577. 
  47. P. Sethi, D. Chakrabarti, S. Bhattacharjee, Globalization, financial development and economic growth: perils on the environmental sustainability of an emerging economy, J. Pol. Model. 42 (2020) 520-535, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JPOLMOD.2020.01.007. 
  48. Pesaran, 'General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels, ' Cambridge Working Papers in Economics (2004). 
  49. Yamagata Pesaran, Testing slope homogeneity in large panels, J. Econom. 142 (2008) 50-93, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JECONOM.2007.05.010. 
  50. M.H. Pesaran, A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence, J. Appl. Econom. 22 (2007) 265-312, https://doi.org/10.1002/JAE.951. 
  51. J. Westerlund, Testing for error correction in panel data, Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat. 69 (2007) 709-748, https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1468-0084.2007.00477.X. 
  52. A. Chudik, M.H. Pesaran, Common correlated effects estimation of heterogeneous dynamic panel data models with weakly exogenous regressors, CESifo Working Papers (2013). 
  53. M.H. Pesaran, Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panels with a multifactor error structure, Econometrica 74 (2006) 967-1012, https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1468-0262.2006.00692.X. 
  54. M. Eberhardt, S. Bond, Cross-section Dependence in Nonstationary Panel Models: a Novel Estimator, Soc Res, New York), 2009. 
  55. E.I. Dumitrescu, C. Hurlin, Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels, Econ. Modell. 29 (2012) 1450-1460, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECONMOD.2012.02.014. 
  56. T.S. Adebayo, S. Ullah, Formulating sustainable development policies for China within the framework of socioeconomic conditions and government stability, Environ. Pollut. 328 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.121673. 
  57. M. Sadiq, F. Wen, A.A. Dagestani, Environmental footprint impacts of nuclear energy consumption: the role of environmental technology and globalization in ten largest ecological footprint countries, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 54 (2022) 3672-3681, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2022.05.016. 
  58. M. Irfan, S. Ullah, A. Razzaq, J. Cai, T.S. Adebayo, Unleashing the dynamic impact of tourism industry on energy consumption, economic output, and environmental quality in China: a way forward towards environmental sustainability, J. Clean. Prod. 387 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135778. 
  59. M. Sadiq, S.T. Hassan, I. Khan, M.M. Rahman, Policy uncertainty, renewable energy, corruption and CO2 emissions nexus in BRICS-1 countries: a panel CS-ARDL approach, Environ. Dev. Sustain. (2023) 1-27, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-03546-w. 
  60. T.S. Adebayo, M. Aga, M.T. Kartal, Analyzing the co-movement between CO2 emissions and disaggregated nonrenewable and renewable energy consumption in BRICS: evidence through the lens of wavelet coherence, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 30 (2023) 38921-38938, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-24707-w. 
  61. M. Uzair Ali, Z. Gong, M.U. Ali, F. Asmi, R. Muhammad, CO2 emission, economic development, fossil fuel consumption and population density in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh: a panel investigation, Int. J. Finance Econ. 27 (2022) 18-31, https://doi.org/10.1002/IJFE.2134.