4.6 Article

Re-evaluation of energy return on investment (EROI) for China's natural gas imports using an integrative approach

期刊

ENERGY STRATEGY REVIEWS
卷 22, 期 -, 页码 179-187

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.esr.2018.09.003

关键词

Natural gas imports; EROI; Energy losses; Environmental inputs; Net energy

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71722003, 71690244, 71273277]
  2. National Key RD Program [2016YFC0208901]
  3. Philosophy and Social Sciences Major Research Project of the Ministry of Education [11JZD048]
  4. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2017M620809]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

China's gas-import dependency has been growing rapidly, driven by increasing natural gas consumption paired with insufficient domestic reserves. Energy Return on Investment (EROI) has been widely applied to examine the net energy cost for natural gas production in China. EROI analysis for imported gas are, however, limited. The few existing studies on this topic have adopted inconsistent evaluation frameworks and have not considered life-cycle or environment-related energy inputs. This paper builds an integrative evaluation framework for natural gas imports in China and quantifies the EROI values for natural gas from seven major national exporters supplying to China. Results show a downward trend for the EROI of China's gas imports from 2009 to 2015 - more energy inputs were required for the same output - reflecting the increase in gas prices during this period. The average standard EROI of gas imports in 2015 is 10.2, slightly higher than that of domestic gas production at approximately 10. Consideration of life-cycle direct energy inputs and environment-related energy inputs results in a decrease in EROI by 18.2%-48.1%. Establishing an updated standard EROI evaluation framework for gas imports is the central contribution of this study. The updated EROI framework can provide a useful reference for research on gas imports for other countries.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据