A novel Sustainable Development Goal 7 composite index as the paradigm for energy sustainability assessment: A case study from Europe

被引：107
作者：
Madurai Elavarasan R. [1 ,2 ]
Pugazhendhi R. [3 ]
Irfan M. [4 ,5 ,6 ]
Mihet-Popa L. [7 ]
Campana P.E. [8 ]
Khan I.A. [1 ]
机构：
[1] Clean and Resilient Energy Systems (CARES) Laboratory, Texas A&M University, Galveston, 77553, TX
[2] Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Thiagarajar College of Engineering, Madurai
[3] Research & Development Division (Power & Energy), Nestlives Private Limited, Chennai
[4] School of Management and Economics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing
[5] Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing
[6] Department of Business Administration, ILMA University, Karachi
[7] Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Ostfold University College, Halden
[8] Department of Sustainable Energy Systems, Mälardalen University, Västerås
来源：
Applied Energy | 2022年 / 307卷
关键词：
Clean energy; Composite Index; Energy security; Energy Sustainability; Normalization; Sustainable Development Goal 7;
D O I：
10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.118173
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
The Sustainable Development Goal 7 endeavors to ameliorate the energy system towards sustainability. Monitoring the country's progress to the goal will be of utmost for the government to take suitable actions and thus, constructing a performance monitoring index for Sustainable Development Goal 7 would tune the pace of implementation. This study aims to develop a novel Sustainable Development Goal 7 or Energy Sustainability Composite Index to assess the energy sustainability performance. Since Europe tends to have diverged efforts towards energy sustainability, assessing them with the proposed Sustainable Development Goal 7 composite index would provide the evidence needed for effective sustainable development strategies. By describing Europe, the authors signify 40 European countries and the selection of country depends on the availability of all the data that are required for the energy sustainability assessment. In this study, the analyzed energy sustainability aspects include clean energy conversion, energy security, energy accessibility, energy intensity and carbon intensity. The results show that Iceland, Norway, and Sweden tops in energy sustainability aspects with scores of 0.7313, 0.6967, and 0.6313 (on a scale of 0 to 1), respectively. The proposed Sustainable Development Goal 7 composite index is also compared with the actual Sustainable Development Goal 7 index, which comprises the indicators defined by the United Nations. The prime difference between the proposed Sustainable Development Goal 7 composite index and the actual Sustainable Development Goal 7 index resides in the consideration of energy security and carbon intensity indicators and in the framework designed to evaluate the clean energy prevalence. The evaluated actual Sustainable Development Goal 7 index scores of Germany and France are 0.4915 and 0.4656, respectively. On comparing with the proposed Sustainable Development Goal 7 composite index scores, the scores decreased by 20.9% for Germany and increased by 7.2% for France. The robustness of the proposed composite index relies on reducing the effect of outliers by using a modified min–max methodology, namely Aggregated Normalization based on Maximum and Minimum Outliers for normalization and the subsequent weightage allocation criteria utilized in Analytic Hierarchy Process methodology. Sensitivity analyses highlighted that the clean energy indicator is the most influencing indicator for the designed composite index. Nevertheless, uncertainty analysis indicates that the weightage scenario has a more prominent influence than various normalization and aggregation methods. © 2021 Elsevier Ltd
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 86 条
  • [51] Santangeli A., Toivonen T., Pouzols F.M., Pogson M., Hastings A., Smith P., Et al., Global change synergies and trade-offs between renewable energy and biodiversity, GCB Bioenergy, 8, 5, pp. 941-951, (2016)
  • [52] Hiron M., Jonsell M., Kubart A., Thor G., Schroeder M., Dahlberg A., Et al., Consequences of bioenergy wood extraction for landscape-level availability of habitat for dead wood-dependent organisms, J Environ Manage, 198, pp. 33-42, (2017)
  • [53] Destek M.A., Sarkodie S.A., Asamoah E.F., Does biomass energy drive environmental sustainability? An SDG perspective for top five biomass consuming countries, Biomass Bioenergy, 149, (2021)
  • [54] Froggatt A., The climate and energy security implications of coal demand and supply in Asia and Europe, Asia Eur J, 11, 3, pp. 285-303, (2013)
  • [55] Orttung R.W., Overland I., A Limited Toolbox: Explaining the Constraints on Russia's Foreign Energy Policy, J Eurasian Stud, 2, 1, pp. 74-85, (2011)
  • [56] Miller C.A., pp. 37-51, (2013)
  • [57] Sovacool B.K., Cooper C., Parenteau P., From a hard place to a rock: Questioning the energy security of a coal-based economy, Energy Policy, 39, 8, pp. 4664-4670, (2011)
  • [58] San-Akca B., Sever S.D., Yilmaz S., Does natural gas fuel civil war? Rethinking energy security, international relations, and fossil-fuel conflict, Energy Res Soc Sci, 70, (2020)
  • [59] Soderbergh B., Jakobsson K., Aleklett K., European energy security: An analysis of future Russian natural gas production and exports, Energy Policy, 38, 12, pp. 7827-7843, (2010)
  • [60] (2008)
123456789