Electrification Can Cut Emissions of Transport, Buildings and Industry in Europe by 60% by 2050

in hive-174578 •  2 months ago  (edited)

Electrification Can Cut Emissions of Transport, Buildings and Industry in Europe by 60% by 2050 (BNEF)

  • According to a new report published by research company BloombergNEF (BNEF), electrification of the transport, buildings, and industrial sectors in Europe could reduce GHG emissions by 60% over the next 30 years.
  • Electrification could take place via both ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ changes. Direct changes involve the proliferation of EVs in the transport sector and the spread of electric heating systems in buildings and some parts of industry, while indirect measures include switching from fossil fuels to ‘green hydrogen’ – produced by electrolysis using renewable electricity – to provide heat for buildings and as many industrial processes as possible.

  • To enable this change, the report estimates that the power system would have to become more flexible and could need 75% more generation capacity by 2050, the majority of which would come from low-cost wind and solar plants.

Analysis and Comments

  • It is interesting how quickly the debate in Europe has moved on from the need to grow the renewable electricity generation base to the wider issue of system electrification.
  • This is reflected in the swathe of announcements from the new European Commission on their Green Deal, Sustainable Investing Taxonomy (classifications) & Circular Economy.
  • Analysts expect more detail around the EU plans as the year progresses, it is something we are following closely. While we know the direction of travel, the detail is only slowly becoming clearer.
  • Analysts expect the various issues around greenhouse gases to move even further up the investing agenda, with some material impacts for both corporates and asset managers (around what funds can continue to be called green, ESG positive or sustainable).
  • There are three points to pick up on out of this report. First is the point around the need to support the “reinforcement and extension of the grid”. This is becoming a live issue and solving this will be positive for companies such as Alfen & Ceres.
  • The second relates to the estimates around decarbonisation of buildings. BNEF et al forecast potential reductions of greenhouse gas emissions of as much as 78% (by 2050) if the sector is electrified. We see this providing a material tailwind in demand for companies such as Boostheat, Belimo, Polypipe, Volution & Kingspan.
  • Third, hydrogen. There is a lot of debate around this topic. The key point is that hydrogen produced from steam methane reformation is the most cost effective solution, although there is clearly a lot of work going on to explore the use of “surplus” renewable generation.

You don't want to miss a Crypto news?

Follow me on Twitter or Facebook

Come try out a great blockchain game: Splinterlands

Come try out the new STEEM blockchain game: HolyBread

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Hi Dear Friend @vlemon.

This is encouraging news. If this statistical projection were achieved, the reduction in emission levels would be of great magnitude.

Replacing the burning of fossil fuel with electricity is a very green alternative.

But I wonder, how is the electric energy that is consumed in Europe produced? Is it by hydroelectric or thermoelectric generation?
I ask because if the generation is thermoelectric and consumption is increased in homes, transport and industry, the effect would be the opposite. Because it would have to burn more fuel to cover the electricity demand. A vicious circle

All best, Piotr.

Hello 👋 Piotr,

It depends on each country. Norway and Switzerland are very lucky to have a lot of hydraulic. France powers most of its energy from nuclear whereas Germany is trying to move full green but it either importing coal energy from Poland, nuclear from France (even if they stopped in their own country) or producing energy with gas.

I am a FULL pro nuclear, cleanest, most flexible energy at the moment. And the least dead per Twh ! Gas, coal and other sources KILL people for sure, nuclear could be killing if there is an issue but Over the last 40 years it kills the least (150 less) per energy produced (taking intro account direct and indirect death in Tchernobyl for example).

It's me again @vlemon

I just realized that I never actually thanked you for your comment. Big thx.

ps.
I would need to ask you for little favour. Recently I've decided to join small contest called "Community of the week" and I desribed our project.hope hive/community. Would you mind helping me out and RESTEEM this post - just to get some extra exposure? Your valuable comment would be also appreciated.

Link to my post: on steemit or on steempeak

Thanks :)
Yours, Piotr

Hi @vlemon!

Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 4.816 which ranks you at #1466 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has improved 2 places in the last three days (old rank 1468).

In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 97 contributions, your post is ranked at #8.

Evaluation of your UA score:
  • Some people are already following you, keep going!
  • The readers appreciate your great work!
  • Try to work on user engagement: the more people that interact with you via the comments, the higher your UA score!

Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server