Are Renewables as Friendly to Humans as to the Environment?: A Social Life Cycle Assessment of Renewable Electricity

The adoption of renewable energy technologies in developing nations is recognized to have positive environmental impacts; however, what are their effects on the electricity supply chain workers? This article provides a quantitative analysis on this question through a relatively new framework called social life cycle assessment, taking Malaysia as a case example. Impact assessments by the authors show that electricity from renewables has greater adverse impacts on supply chain workers than the conventional electricity mix: Electricity production with biomass requires 127% longer labor hours per unit-electricity under the risk of human rights violations, while the solar photovoltaic requires 95% longer labor hours per unit-electricity. However, our assessment also indicates that renewables have less impacts per dollar-spent. In fact, the impact of solar photovoltaic would be 60% less than the conventional mix when it attains grid parity. The answer of “are renewables as friendly to humans as to the environment?” is “not-yet, but eventually.”

[1]  H. Pandžić,et al.  Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure in Croatia – First-Hand Experiences and Recommendations for Future Development , 2023, Journal of Energy - Energija.

[2]  J. Othman,et al.  The economic effects of renewable energy expansion in the electricity sector: A CGE analysis for Malaysia , 2018, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.

[3]  Kamaruzzaman Sopian,et al.  Prospects of life cycle assessment of renewable energy from solar photovoltaic technologies: A review , 2018, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.

[4]  J. Sadhukhan,et al.  Social Hotspot Analysis and Trade Policy Implications of the Use of Bioelectrochemical Systems for Resource Recovery from Wastewater , 2018, Sustainability.

[5]  Hui Li,et al.  CO2 emissions, economic and population growth, and renewable energy: Empirical evidence across regions , 2018, Energy Economics.

[6]  Hake Jürgen-Friedrich,et al.  The Social Footprint of Hydrogen Production - A Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA) of Alkaline Water Electrolysis , 2017 .

[7]  J. Murray,et al.  The Sustainability Practitioner’s Guide to Social Analysis and Assessment , 2015 .

[8]  Giacomo Falcone,et al.  Social life cycle assessment and participatory approaches: A methodological proposal applied to citrus farming in Southern Italy , 2015, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[9]  Roberto Merli,et al.  Social Life Cycle Assessment as a Management Tool: Methodology for Application in Tourism , 2013 .

[10]  Pekka Leskinen,et al.  Social life cycle assessment of biodiesel production at three levels: a literature review and development needs , 2013 .

[11]  Stefan Salhofer,et al.  Development of a social impact assessment methodology for recycling systems in low-income countries , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[12]  Gregory A. Norris,et al.  Identifying Social Impacts in Product Supply Chains:Overview and Application of the Social Hotspot Database , 2012 .

[13]  W. S. Ho,et al.  Renewable energy policies and initiatives for a sustainable energy future in Malaysia , 2011 .

[14]  S. Valdivia,et al.  Introducing the UNEP/SETAC methodological sheets for subcategories of social LCA , 2011 .

[15]  Cem Isik,et al.  A nexus of linear and non‐linear relationships between tourism demand, renewable energy consumption, and economic growth: Theory and evidence , 2018 .

[16]  T. Mattila,et al.  Evaluating social sustainability of bioeconomy value chains through integrated use of local and global methods , 2018 .

[17]  Subramanian Senthilkannan Muthu,et al.  Social Life Cycle Assessment: An Insight , 2015 .