ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Using Alternative Sources of Energy for Decarbonization: A Piece of Cake, but How to Cook This Cake?
Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Russian Biodiversity Collections: A Professional Opinion Survey.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Dual Carbon Goal-Based Quadrilateral Evolutionary Game: Study on the New Energy Vehicle Industry in China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Few analytical or research works claim that the negative impact of improper use of ASEs may be comparable with that of hydrocarbons and sometimes even greater. It has become a common view that "green" energy (ASE) is clean, safe and environmentally friendly (eco-friendly) in contrast with "black" energy (hydrocarbons). We analyzed 144 works on systemic and/or comparative research of the modern and prospective ASE: biofuels, hydrogen, hydropower, nuclear power, wind power, solar power, geothermal power, oceanic thermal power, tidal power, wind wave power and nuclear fusion power. We performed our analysis within the Spaceship Earth paradigm. We conclude that there is no perfect ASE that is always eco-friendly. All ASEs may be dangerous to the planet considered as a closed and isolated unit ("spaceship") if they are used in an inconsistent manner. This is not in the least a reason to deny them as prospective sources of energy. Using all ASEs in different proportions in various regions of the planet, where their harm to the planet and humanity can be minimized and, on the contrary, their efficiency maximized, would give humanity the opportunity to decarbonize the Earth, and make the energy transition in the most effective way.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.