Search

• Hydrogen accounts for 5–10% of total energy in 2050 under 2 °C scenarios. • Hydrogen share increases for a 1.5 °C goal and reaches 15% if CCS is limited. • Transport is the largest consumer of hydrogen, followed by industry and power. • Synthetic hydrocarbons based on hydrogen and direct air capture are an option. • Holistic energy policy design is needed rather than heavy dependence on hydrogen. Hydrogen-based energy carriers, including hydrogen, ammonia and synthetic hydrocarbons, are expected to help reduce residual carbon dioxide emissions in the context of the Paris Agreement goals, although their potential has not yet been fully clarified in light of their competitiveness and complementarity with other mitigation options such as electricity, biofuels and carbon capture and storage (CCS). This study aimed to explore the role of hydrogen in the global energy system under various mitigation scenarios and technology portfolios using a detailed energy system model that considers various energy technologies including the conversion and use of hydrogen-based energy carriers. The results indicate that the share of hydrogen-based energy carriers generally remains less than 5% of global final energy demand by 2050 in the 2 °C scenarios. Nevertheless, such carriers contribute to removal of residual emissions from the industry and transport sectors under specific conditions. Their share increases to 10–15% under stringent mitigation scenarios corresponding to 1.5 °C warming and scenarios without CCS. The transport sector is the largest consumer, accounting for half or more of hydrogen production, followed by the industry and power sectors. In addition to direct usage of hydrogen and ammonia, synthetic hydrocarbons converted from hydrogen and carbon captured from biomass or direct air capture are attractive transport fuels, growing to half of all hydrogen-based energy carriers. Upscaling of electrification and biofuels is another common cost-effective strategy, revealing the importance of holistic policy design rather than heavy reliance on hydrogen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The role of low-carbon energy and trade on the environment has drawn several studies that have looked at issues from different perspectives, thus yielding differing conclusions. Considering the current emphasis on the COP25 conference and the commitment to cut down carbon emissions level, this study also draws strength from the United Nations Sustainable development Goals (UNSDGs) that comprises of positive strides for access to clean and responsible energy consumption (SDGs 7, 12) and climate change mitigation issues (SDG-13). To this end, this study is a timely outlook that underpins the case of the European Union (EU) countries as well as the root cause of anthropogenic activities on clean trajectory of global environment. Hence, we investigate the connection between alternative and sustainable energy source, trade, income and emissions in 27 selected European Union economies by utilizing data covering the period 1990–2017 on an annual frequency. We used second-generation panel model estimators to analyze the relationship between the variables in the long-run. Specifically, the long run results from the MG (Mean Group), AMG (Augmented Mean Group), and CCEMG (Common Correlated Effects Mean Group) estimators reveal that sustainable and alternative energy sources have a negative significant impact on pollutant emissions while trade and income have a positive impact on carbon emissions except that the impact of trade is insignificant. Although the positive impact of openness in trade on carbon emission is insignificant, the positive impact suggests that the free-trade policy that is currently in place in the EU should further incorporate sustainable development goals (SDGs) to avoid the outsourcing of carbon emissions among the member countries. Causality tests reveal a feedback hypothesis between renewable energy, income, trade, and carbon emanations. The investigation proposes expanded utilization of sustainable power source to mitigate carbon emissions in the European Union. • Outlook of EU-27 alternative energy and regional trade. • The panel techniques of common correlated effect is employed. • Alternative energy utilization in the regional bloc aids. • Regional trade policy in the EU could posit environmental hardship. • Real income growth in the region hampers environmental sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]