Energy Poverty and Low Carbon Just Energy Transition: Comparative Study in Lithuania and Greece

Štreimikienė, Dalia; Kyriakopoulos, Grigorios L.; Lekavičius, Vidas; Siksnelyte-Butkiene, Indre

doi:10.1007/s11205-021-02685-9

Cited by 74 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 100 publications

(150 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lithuania has significantly reduced energy intensity, but the energy transition is certainly hampered by the fact that the government significantly subsidises the prices of natural gas and electricity, which are twice lower than the EU average [ 33 ]. On the other hand, studies show that the largest contribution to decarbonisation in Lithuania can be expected from the production of energy from renewable sources [ 34 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decarbonisation of eastern European economies: monitoring, economic, social and security concerns

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Decarbonisation of the European economy is one of the main strategic goals of energy transition in the European Union (EU), which aims to become a leader in this process by 2050 and to include other European countries making thus the European continent the first carbon neutral region in the world. Although decarbonisation is an important goal of the EU, the models for monitoring the progress of this process have not yet been clearly defined, and views on the social, economic, and security implications in terms of prioritising decarbonisation are conflicting. The main objective of this paper is to determine the methodological correctness of the existing method of decarbonisation monitoring, to develop a new monitoring model indicating the differences in the EU and European countries that are non-EU and to point out the underlying social, economic and security implications that must certainly find their place in the decision-making process in this field. Results The main results showed that there is no clearly defined model for monitoring the success of decarbonisation, while the indicators that are commonly used for this purpose make a model that, as the analysis shows—is methodologically incorrect. In the case of EU countries, the following indicators proved to be the most reliable: consumption-based CO2 and share in global CO2. For non-EU countries, the best monitoring indicators are CO2 per unit of GDP, consumption-based CO2, and renewable energy consumption. These indicators can explain 99% of the variance in decarbonisation success. Conclusions The basic conclusion of the paper is that even before the implementation, the decarbonisation monitoring model should be defined and methodologically tested, and the use of a single model for all EU countries or for all countries is not recommended. It is proposed to simplify the monitoring model, with an emphasis on monitoring of consumption-based CO2, which proved to be the most efficient in all sampled countries. The current method of monitoring is based exclusively on environmentally related indicators while ignoring the fact that decarbonisation is associated with almost all aspects of development. The additional social, economic and security aspects need to be developed and included in the further monitoring process.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decarbonisation of eastern European economies: monitoring, economic, social and security concerns

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The differentiated normality of human lives could throw into question periods of the heating of houses; in parallel, one ought to take into consideration the phenomenon of energy poverty. Energy poverty is looming, and households might use environmentally unfriendly ways of heating, such as rudimentary and unsophisticated wood fuel type, as an alternative heating source [24,25]. On the other hand, during this period, the movement of wheeled vehicles on main roads was significantly reduced, but also at the entrances and exits of cities, as the movement of citizens was prohibited [26,27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban Sustainability at Risk Due to Soil Pollution by Heavy Metals—Case Study: Volos, Greece

Aslanidis

Golia

2022

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The focus of this case study is the meticulous observation of urban soil pollution by heavy metals (HMs), or, alternatively, potentially toxic elements (PTEs). The study took place in the urban center of Volos, Greece. Moreover, 248 soil samples were collected during 2018–2021 (62 samples annually), while 3.65 km2 was, approximately, the study area. The breakdown of total concentrations took place for the interpretation of different soil parameters, also according to mean values and medians of the total concentrations of HMs, the following decreasing order was monitored: Mn > Zn > Cr > Ni > Cu > Pb > Co > Cd. During the 4-year study, an increasing trend of metal concentration was observed (for each year compared to the previous one). Furthermore, the imaginary triangle, which was observed, is bordered by the historic train station, the two city bus and intercity coach stations and the commercial harbor. Statistical analysis was implemented in order to interpret the exceedances of HMs concerning the Directive 86/278/EEC. Principal component analysis (PCA) is an additional technique that was conducted because of the correlations and interdependences between the HMs. A strong correlation was observed between the HMs, but mainly between Cd and Zn, which is probably due to their common origin. During the COVID-19 pandemic, significant changes in metal concentrations were observed in different parts of the city, due to the limited movement of motorized wheeled vehicles, but also due to the long operating hours of the heating systems in the residential area. Further research is needed in the future in order to identify the sources of pollution and to find possible ways to reduce it. All in all, urban soil pollution by HMs is a great conundrum of the environmental aspect of sustainability.

show abstract

“…Lithuania has signi cantly reduced energy intensity, but the energy transition is certainly hampered by the fact that the government signi cantly subsidizes the prices of natural gas and electricity, which are twice lower than the EU average [25]. On the other hand, studies show that the largest contribution to decarbonisation in Lithuania can be expected from the production of energy from renewable sources [26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decarbonisation of Eastern European Economies: Monitoring, Economic, Social and Security Concerns

Radovanović

Filipović

Vukadinović

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Decarbonisation of the European economy is one of the main strategic goals of energy transition in the European Union (EU), which aims to become a leader in this process by 2050 and to include other European countries making thus the European continent the first carbon neutral region in the world. Although decarbonisation is an important goal of the EU, the models for monitoring the progress of this process have not yet been clearly defined, and views on the social, economic, and security implications in terms of prioritizing decarbonisation are conflicting. The main objective of this paper is to determine the methodological correctness of the existing method of decarbonisation monitoring, to develop a new monitoring model indicating the differences in the EU and European countries that are non-EU and to point out the underlying social, economic and security implications that must certainly find their place in the decision-making process in this field.Results.The main results showed that there is no clearly defined model for monitoring the success of decarbonisation, while the indicators that are commonly used for this purpose make a model that, as the analysis shows – is methodologically incorrect. In the case of EU countries, the following indicators proved to be the most reliable: Consumption based CO2 and Share in global CO2. For non-EU countries, the best monitoring indicators are CO2 per unit of GDP, Consumption based CO2, and Renewable energy consumption. These indicators can explain 99% of the variance in decarbonisation success. Conclusions.The basic conclusion of the paper is that even before the implementation, the decarbonisation monitoring model should be defined and methodologically tested, and the use of a single model for all EU countries or for all countries is not recommended. It is proposed to simplify the monitoring model, with an emphasis on monitoring of Consumption based CO2, which proved to be the most efficient in all sampled countries. The current method of monitoring is based exclusively on environmentally-related indicators while ignoring the fact that decarbonisation is associated with almost all aspects of development. The additional social, economic and security aspects need to be developed and included in the further monitoring process.

show abstract

Energy Poverty and Low Carbon Just Energy Transition: Comparative Study in Lithuania and Greece

Cited by 74 publications

References 100 publications

Decarbonisation of eastern European economies: monitoring, economic, social and security concerns

Decarbonisation of eastern European economies: monitoring, economic, social and security concerns

Urban Sustainability at Risk Due to Soil Pollution by Heavy Metals—Case Study: Volos, Greece

Decarbonisation of Eastern European Economies: Monitoring, Economic, Social and Security Concerns

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About