对尼日利亚家庭能源结构中烹饪能源替代品的评估

I. O. Akinwumi, I. Obioh, A. S. Momodu, J. Akinbami
{"title":"对尼日利亚家庭能源结构中烹饪能源替代品的评估","authors":"I. O. Akinwumi, I. Obioh, A. S. Momodu, J. Akinbami","doi":"10.3233/RED-120057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Globally, energy consumption is projected to grow, with the major increase expected in developing countries, including Nigeria. Bio-energy sources accounted for 60% of the total final energy consumption in Nigeria, of which 85% was utilized by the household sector, in 2000. The effect of technology intervention on household energy mix in Nigeria was examined for a 30-year period by using four different economic development scenarios. These consist of the baseline scenario, NEEDS (National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy) Baseline, or N_BS, and three technology intervention scenarios, namely, NEEDS Trend Scenario, or N_TS, NEEDS Action Scenario, or N_AOS, and Non-NEEDS Scenario, or N-NS. The study was carried out for different ecological zones, namely, forest and savanna. Long-range Energy Alternatives Planning, or LEAP, system, an energy simulation model, was employed for the analysis of the study. Lower and upper limits of the cost of technology intervention are $17.40 billion and $39.20 billion for N_BS and N-NS, respectively. The final energy demand dropped by about 47%, 55%, and 64% for the three intervention scenarios, namely, N_TS, N_AOS, and N-NS, respectively. Environmental implications, in terms of GHG (greenhouse gas) savings, are savings of 1.5 billion kg of C equivalent, and the avoided cost is about −$0.11 million/tonne of C equivalent, which actually represents benefit. Cumulative GHG emission per capita at about 690 kg CO2 equivalent was highest for N_BS in 2030, with the least emission occurring for N-NS for the same time period, at 550 kg CO2 equivalent. The final energy intensity for the country's household sector was estimated to be 50.96 GJ/annum. With a technology intervention that is more efficient than the current trend and provides better alternatives for cooking energy, this figure is expected to drop appreciably over the 30-year time frame of the analysis. However, the immediate contending issues for household energy use in Nigeria are ensuring accessibility to energy sources in terms of availability and affordability, and enabling the rural populace and urban poor to achieve a sustainable path for national economic growth and development.","PeriodicalId":17166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Resources, Energy, and Development","volume":"96 1","pages":"23-43"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An evaluation of alternatives for cooking energy in Nigeria's household energy mix\",\"authors\":\"I. O. Akinwumi, I. Obioh, A. S. Momodu, J. Akinbami\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/RED-120057\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Globally, energy consumption is projected to grow, with the major increase expected in developing countries, including Nigeria. Bio-energy sources accounted for 60% of the total final energy consumption in Nigeria, of which 85% was utilized by the household sector, in 2000. The effect of technology intervention on household energy mix in Nigeria was examined for a 30-year period by using four different economic development scenarios. These consist of the baseline scenario, NEEDS (National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy) Baseline, or N_BS, and three technology intervention scenarios, namely, NEEDS Trend Scenario, or N_TS, NEEDS Action Scenario, or N_AOS, and Non-NEEDS Scenario, or N-NS. The study was carried out for different ecological zones, namely, forest and savanna. Long-range Energy Alternatives Planning, or LEAP, system, an energy simulation model, was employed for the analysis of the study. Lower and upper limits of the cost of technology intervention are $17.40 billion and $39.20 billion for N_BS and N-NS, respectively. The final energy demand dropped by about 47%, 55%, and 64% for the three intervention scenarios, namely, N_TS, N_AOS, and N-NS, respectively. Environmental implications, in terms of GHG (greenhouse gas) savings, are savings of 1.5 billion kg of C equivalent, and the avoided cost is about −$0.11 million/tonne of C equivalent, which actually represents benefit. Cumulative GHG emission per capita at about 690 kg CO2 equivalent was highest for N_BS in 2030, with the least emission occurring for N-NS for the same time period, at 550 kg CO2 equivalent. The final energy intensity for the country's household sector was estimated to be 50.96 GJ/annum. With a technology intervention that is more efficient than the current trend and provides better alternatives for cooking energy, this figure is expected to drop appreciably over the 30-year time frame of the analysis. However, the immediate contending issues for household energy use in Nigeria are ensuring accessibility to energy sources in terms of availability and affordability, and enabling the rural populace and urban poor to achieve a sustainable path for national economic growth and development.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Resources, Energy, and Development\",\"volume\":\"96 1\",\"pages\":\"23-43\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Resources, Energy, and Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/RED-120057\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Resources, Energy, and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/RED-120057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在全球范围内,能源消费预计将增长,预计主要增长将出现在发展中国家,包括尼日利亚。2000年,生物能源占尼日利亚最终能源消费总量的60%,其中85%被家庭部门利用。通过使用四种不同的经济发展情景,研究了技术干预对尼日利亚家庭能源结构的影响,为期30年。这些包括基线情景,需求(国家经济赋权和发展战略)基线,或N_BS,以及三个技术干预情景,即需求趋势情景,或N_TS,需求行动情景,或N_AOS,和非需求情景,或N-NS。本研究针对不同的生态区,即森林和稀树草原进行。采用能源仿真模型LEAP (long - term Energy Alternatives Planning)系统进行分析。N_BS和N-NS的技术干预成本下限和上限分别为174亿美元和392亿美元。在N_TS、N_AOS和N-NS三种干预方案下,最终能源需求分别下降了47%、55%和64%左右。就温室气体节省而言,对环境的影响是节省15亿公斤碳当量,避免的成本约为每吨碳当量- 11万美元,这实际上是一种效益。2030年,N_BS的人均累积温室气体排放量最高,约为690千克二氧化碳当量,同一时期N-NS的人均累积温室气体排放量最少,为550千克二氧化碳当量。该国家庭部门的最终能源强度估计为50.96吉焦/年。随着技术干预比目前的趋势更有效,并提供更好的烹饪能源替代品,预计这一数字将在分析的30年时间框架内明显下降。然而,尼日利亚家庭能源使用的直接竞争问题是确保在可得性和可负担性方面获得能源,并使农村人口和城市穷人能够实现国家经济增长和发展的可持续道路。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An evaluation of alternatives for cooking energy in Nigeria's household energy mix
Globally, energy consumption is projected to grow, with the major increase expected in developing countries, including Nigeria. Bio-energy sources accounted for 60% of the total final energy consumption in Nigeria, of which 85% was utilized by the household sector, in 2000. The effect of technology intervention on household energy mix in Nigeria was examined for a 30-year period by using four different economic development scenarios. These consist of the baseline scenario, NEEDS (National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy) Baseline, or N_BS, and three technology intervention scenarios, namely, NEEDS Trend Scenario, or N_TS, NEEDS Action Scenario, or N_AOS, and Non-NEEDS Scenario, or N-NS. The study was carried out for different ecological zones, namely, forest and savanna. Long-range Energy Alternatives Planning, or LEAP, system, an energy simulation model, was employed for the analysis of the study. Lower and upper limits of the cost of technology intervention are $17.40 billion and $39.20 billion for N_BS and N-NS, respectively. The final energy demand dropped by about 47%, 55%, and 64% for the three intervention scenarios, namely, N_TS, N_AOS, and N-NS, respectively. Environmental implications, in terms of GHG (greenhouse gas) savings, are savings of 1.5 billion kg of C equivalent, and the avoided cost is about −$0.11 million/tonne of C equivalent, which actually represents benefit. Cumulative GHG emission per capita at about 690 kg CO2 equivalent was highest for N_BS in 2030, with the least emission occurring for N-NS for the same time period, at 550 kg CO2 equivalent. The final energy intensity for the country's household sector was estimated to be 50.96 GJ/annum. With a technology intervention that is more efficient than the current trend and provides better alternatives for cooking energy, this figure is expected to drop appreciably over the 30-year time frame of the analysis. However, the immediate contending issues for household energy use in Nigeria are ensuring accessibility to energy sources in terms of availability and affordability, and enabling the rural populace and urban poor to achieve a sustainable path for national economic growth and development.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Social Enterprises, Mission Drift, and Mitigation Strategies The Impact of Coastal Regulation Zone Legislation on City Development: A Study with Reference to Mumbai Importance of Data in Plastic Waste Management in India Anthropological Study of a Typical Drought-Prone Village in India: Strategies for Sustainable Rural Habitat Insights from Big Spatial Data through Machine Learning Techniques for Prudent Management of Natural Resources
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1