Search

Energy demand associated with energy consumption (commonly fossil fuels) has increased in line with the rise in world population and this has led to a number of complications. The best known and most prominent issue induced by fossil fuel utilization is unavoidable greenhouse gas emissions released as a result of the combustion of fuels. Emitted greenhouse gases from various sources, such as industrial plants, power plants, transportation services, residential utilization and so on, are largely responsible for global warming and climate change. According to latest reports, the share of the transportation sector in total energy-related CO2 emissions is approximately 23%. As a result of a detailed investigation and dissemination of transportation-induced emissions, air transportation is found to be responsible for approximately 3–4% of total energy-related CO2 emissions. The current study introduces a different perspective in the evaluation of aircraft greenhouse gas emissions. In this manner, a thermodynamic evaluation on the basis of the first and second laws of thermodynamics and a cost evaluation of greenhouse gases emitted from domestic flights in the UK are presented in the current paper, in addition to an environmental impact assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current editorial summarized some of the scientific works presented in the Sustainable Energy and Environmental Protection (SEEP) conference-held at the University of the West of Scotland, UK, 2018. The selected work was directly related to the scope of the Renewable, Sustainable Energy Reviews (RSER) journal. During the conference activities, experts from all around the world in the subjects of: renewable energy, climate change, optimization, and economics presented and discussed the progress made in renewable energy sources, as well as the new strategies for protecting the environment from the hazards connected with fossil fuel utilization. The methods presented in the conference focused on several directions: the development of efficient energy conversion systems with low/no environmental impacts; the suggested policies to widespread renewable energies; the restriction in the emission of greenhouse gases, and the recent progresses in CO 2 capture. This editorial focused on the renewable energy developments and their positive effect on the climate change, and briefly summarized the accepted manuscripts in this issue. • Effects of renewable energy on climate change. • Background on the International Conference on Sustainable Energy and Environmental Protection SEEP. • Summary of selected papers of SEEP 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Countries around the world have made an international commitment to decrease the amount of greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 according to the Paris Agreement. Among several power stations options of low carbon emissions, nuclear energy has been proved the most reliable source for electricity production. According to the sustainable development scenario targets, nuclear energy should play an important role in the next years for the decarbonization of the energy system. Countries with consolidated nuclear programmes such as Canada and the UK have similar nuclear fuel technology development, but they have chosen different nuclear fuel cycle options: open fuel cycle and closed fuel cycle, respectively. Both of them have future plans to continue with their nuclear programme. Therefore, this works evaluates the nuclear energy systems for three different scenarios for high, basic and low production of nuclear energy for both countries. The results compare the resources needs, the economy of the nuclear fuel cycle options, the policy of each country and the future of the nuclear power plants to achieve the reduction of the greenhouse gases. The main findings are that reprocessing is a good option for the UK for the whole or partial new nuclear fleet and becomes viable if the price of uranium increases in the market. For Canada, it is worth continuing to increase its nuclear energy up to 1.5 times its current energy capacity. The main difference between the programmes of the two countries is the higher amount of spent fuel generated in the case of Canada due to the choice of reactor technology. This paper has studied the main features of different nuclear fuel options and their perspective of the nuclear power programmes. The choice of the nuclear fuel option was made according to the uranium reserves and their best performance for the next reactor generation. The cost benefits of the closed fuel cycle will depend on the future trends of uranium price. [Display omitted] • Nuclear fuel options: Once-through cycle and closed fuel cycled. • UK and Canada nuclear energy system. • Spent nuclear fuel recycling and reprocessing. • Nuclear fuel cycle cost for open and closed fuel cycle. • Utilization of MOX in the next reactor generation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]