Climate change, population increase, and urbanisation present severe threats to energy security throughout the world. As a result, governments all over the world have made significant investments in diversifying and developing local energy systems, notably in the renewable energy sector. In this light, this review was conducted to analyse the production trends of fossil energy, renewable energy and nuclear energy, as well as the impact of renewable energy production on fossil energy production, between 2000 and 2021. Using correlation and regression analysis, the relationship between these energy sources and the impact of renewable energy on fossil energy production were studied and then measured against similar studies in the literature. The findings showed an increasing trend in fossil energy and renewable energy production and a slightly decreasing trend in nuclear energy production from 2000 to 2021. In addition, there was a significant impact of renewable energy production on fossil energy production in the last two decades. In Ghana, it was found that the addition of solar energy generation to the national grid significantly influenced thermal energy generation. On the whole, renewable energy production has significantly increased over the last decades, and it has the potential to reduce the dependence on fossil energy if effectively developed and managed.
Therefore, future energy development should focus on more research and development in the area of smart and efficient renewable energy technologies.
Citation: Emmanuel Arthur. Energy development: A global perspective and advances in Ghana[J]. AIMS Energy, 2022, 10(2): 306-339. doi: 10.3934/energy.2022017
[1] | Patrick Moriarty, Damon Honnery . The limits of renewable energy. AIMS Energy, 2021, 9(4): 812-829. doi: 10.3934/energy.2021037 |
[2] | Chukwuebuka Okafor, Christian Madu, Charles Ajaero, Juliet Ibekwe, Happy Bebenimibo, Chinelo Nzekwe . Moving beyond fossil fuel in an oil-exporting and emerging economy: Paradigm shift. AIMS Energy, 2021, 9(2): 379-413. doi: 10.3934/energy.2021020 |
[3] | Patrick Moriarty, Damon Honnery . Energy policy and economics under climate change. AIMS Energy, 2018, 6(2): 272-290. doi: 10.3934/energy.2018.2.272 |
[4] | Muhammad Amir Raza, M. M. Aman, Abdul Ghani Abro, Muhammad Shahid, Darakhshan Ara, Tufail Ahmed Waseer, Mohsin Ali Tunio, Shakir Ali Soomro, Nadeem Ahmed Tunio, Raza Haider . Modelling and development of sustainable energy systems. AIMS Energy, 2023, 11(2): 256-270. doi: 10.3934/energy.2023014 |
[5] | Albert K. Awopone, Ahmed F. Zobaa . Analyses of optimum generation scenarios for sustainable power generation in Ghana. AIMS Energy, 2017, 5(2): 193-208. doi: 10.3934/energy.2017.2.193 |
[6] | David Schwartzman, Peter Schwartzman . Scenarios for combating global warming: China's critical role as a leader in the energy transition. AIMS Energy, 2024, 12(4): 809-821. doi: 10.3934/energy.2024038 |
[7] | Shahrouz Abolhosseini, Almas Heshmati, Masoomeh Rashidghalam . Energy security and competition over energy resources in Iran and Caucasus region. AIMS Energy, 2017, 5(2): 224-238. doi: 10.3934/energy.2017.2.224 |
[8] | Arben Gjukaj, Rexhep Shaqiri, Qamil Kabashi, Vezir Rexhepi . Renewable energy integration and distributed generation in Kosovo: Challenges and solutions for enhanced energy quality. AIMS Energy, 2024, 12(3): 686-705. doi: 10.3934/energy.2024032 |
[9] | Samuel Asumadu-Sarkodie, Phebe Asantewaa Owusu . A review of Ghana’s solar energy potential. AIMS Energy, 2016, 4(5): 675-696. doi: 10.3934/energy.2016.5.675 |
[10] | Erdiwansyah, Asri Gani, Nurdin MH, Rizalman Mamat, R.E Sarjono . Policies and laws in the application of renewable energy Indonesia: A reviews. AIMS Energy, 2022, 10(1): 23-44. doi: 10.3934/energy.2022002 |
Climate change, population increase, and urbanisation present severe threats to energy security throughout the world. As a result, governments all over the world have made significant investments in diversifying and developing local energy systems, notably in the renewable energy sector. In this light, this review was conducted to analyse the production trends of fossil energy, renewable energy and nuclear energy, as well as the impact of renewable energy production on fossil energy production, between 2000 and 2021. Using correlation and regression analysis, the relationship between these energy sources and the impact of renewable energy on fossil energy production were studied and then measured against similar studies in the literature. The findings showed an increasing trend in fossil energy and renewable energy production and a slightly decreasing trend in nuclear energy production from 2000 to 2021. In addition, there was a significant impact of renewable energy production on fossil energy production in the last two decades. In Ghana, it was found that the addition of solar energy generation to the national grid significantly influenced thermal energy generation. On the whole, renewable energy production has significantly increased over the last decades, and it has the potential to reduce the dependence on fossil energy if effectively developed and managed.
Therefore, future energy development should focus on more research and development in the area of smart and efficient renewable energy technologies.
Abbreviations: IDP: Intrinsically disordered protein; IDR: Intrinsically disordered region; YPRA: Yeast proteinase A; TFE: 2,2,2-trifluoroethanol; CD: Circular dichroism; SDSL: Site-directed spin labeling; CW-EPR: Continuous wave electron paramagnetic resonance; IAP: 3-(2-Iodoacetamido)-PROXYL; MTSL: (1-oxyl-2,2,5,5-tetramethyl-Δ3-pyrroline-3-methyl) methanethiosulfonate; MSL: 4-maleimido-TEMPO; DTT: Dithiothreitol
Proteins or protein regions of 50 or more residues, which do not have stable secondary or tertiary structure under physiological conditions, are characterized as intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) or intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs) [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]. Although the structure-function paradigm suggests that 3D structure is necessary for function, the discovered importance of intrinsic disorder within proteins or protein regions of higher eukaryotic systems shows how function could arise from various unstructured states [3,4,8,9]. IDPs have important roles in cellular signal transduction, translation, and transcription, influencing the study of disordered proteins, focusing on both the functions provided by IDPs, and the conformational changes associated with target binding [4,7,10].
IA3, an IDP found in Sacchoromyeces cerevisiae, is composed of 68 amino acid residues and acts as an inhibitor of yeast proteinase A (YPRA). Previous studies have shown IA3 to adopt an α-helical conformation when bound in the active site of YPRA and when exposed to the secondary structure stabilizer 2,2,2-trifluoroethanol (TFE). These observed helical tendencies of IA3 differ between the N-terminal residues (2-34) and C-terminal residues (35-68) [11,12,13,14,15]. X-ray crystallographic models of IA3 bound to YPRA indicate α-helical structure in the N-terminal region (residues 2-34). In contrast, the C-terminal region (residues 35-68) has unresolved electron density, suggesting disorder (Figure 1) [11]. Biophysical methods of circular dichroism (CD) spectroscopy, 2D H1 N15 nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, molecular dynamics simulations, laser temperature-jump fluorescence spectroscopy, fluorescence resonance energy transfer spectroscopy, and site directed spin labeling (SDSL), provide data supporting a two-state transition for IA3, where the C-terminus undergoes a helical transition but is less pronounced than the N-terminus [13,14,15,16,17,18].
SDSL, in combination with continuous wave electron paramagnetic resonance (CW-EPR) spectroscopy is a biophysical tool for probing structure, dynamics, and conformational changes in macromolecules [19,20,21,22,23]. For proteins, typically a CW-EPR active chemical group, such as a nitroxide spin label, is incorporated at desired locations by chemical modification of a substituted cysteine. The introduction of an active chemical group provides a reactive side group for covalent bond spin labeling. Recent progress in spin labeling methodology has also demonstrated the ability to incorporate non-natural amino acids for subsequent chemical modification, as well as novel schemes for specifically labeling tyrosine residues; a potentially very useful strategy for spin labeling IDPs [24,25,26,27].
The resultant CW-EPR spectral line shape reflects motional averaging of the nitroxide spin label [20,21,28]. Typically, the effects are described by three main types of motion, occurring in the 0.1-50 ns time scale [29,30]. The corresponding correlation times are referred to as the following: τR, the overall tumbling of the protein, τI, the movement of the spin label about the bonds connecting it to the protein, and τB, the motion of the spin labeled protein backbone. SDSL CW-EPR has been applied to study structure-to-unstructured transitions in proteins as well as to IDP systems [5,17,22,31,32]. For structured proteins ≥ 15 kDa, line shape parameters such as the second moment and scaled mobility readily reveal conformational changes without the need to increase solution viscosity [29,33]. Ordered to disordered transitions in structured proteins are readily characterized by these “traditional” line shape parameter analyses [34,35]. However, in IDPs, the degree of disorder and the dynamics of the system often times results in “isotropic-like” spectra that fall into the fast motional averaging limit. In these cases, for relatively fast motional averaging, the ratio of the intensities of the low field (h(+1)) and central field (h(0)) transitions provide an alternative line shape analysis parameter, h(1)/h(0), that is useful to describe conformational changes [5,17,22,36].
Here, extending upon previous work, we performed a spin-labeled cysteine scanning profile of the N- and C-termini of IA3, where a series of fifteen singly spin-labeled IA3 constructs consisting of ten and five cysteine substitutions in the N- and C-terminus were generated, respectively (Figure 1) [17]. A comparison is provided between the termini on a site by site basis revealing variations in the degree of transition of the two termini, and sensitivity of the helical content of the N-terminus to the spin-labeled cysteine substitution and select amino acid substitutions. As these results show, the degree of site-specific helical propensity of the N-terminus is modulated by the introduction of a chemically modified cysteine residue. By further probing site V8 of IA3, the specific effects on secondary structure due to site-specific amino acid substitution and spin labeling are analyzed. The size of an introduced residue or chemical modification has marked effects on the helical propensity within the N-terminal region of IA3, whether found on the buried (concave) or solvent exposed (convex) side of the helix when bound to YPRA. By comparing SDSL and CD results, we are able to determine sites within IA3 that can tolerate spin-label incorporation and retain WT helical tendencies; thus, we label those our “wild-type mimics”.
BL21(DE3) pLysS cells were purchased from Invitrogen (Carlsbad, CA). E. coli codon-optimized DNA for the IA3 gene from S. cerevisiae, and DNA primers used for site-directed mutagenesis were purchased from DNA2.0 (Newark, CA). DNA taq polymerase and Dpn1 were purchased from New England Biolabs (Ipswich, MA). A 5-mL chelating column was purchased from GE Healthcare (Wauwatosa, WI). A HiPrep 26/10 desalting column was purchased from Amersham (Pittsburgh, PA). The 16.5% Tris-Tricene gels were purchased from Bio-Rad (Hercules, CA). 3-(2-Iodoacetamido)-PROXYL (IAP), (1-oxyl-2,2,5,5-tetramethyl-Δ3-pyrroline-3-methyl) methanethiosulfonate (MTSL), and 3-maleimido-TEMPO (MSL) spin label was purchased from Sigma Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). The 0.60 i.d. × 0.84 o.d. capillary tubes were purchased from Fiber Optic Center (New Bradford, MA). Unless otherwise stated, all other reagents and products were purchased from Fisher Scientific (Pittsburgh, PA) and used as received.
The optimized IA3 gene was cloned into the pET-22b+ vector containing a C-terminal 6× His-tag, adding the sequence LEHHHHHH to the C-terminus as described previously [17]. Site directed mutagenesis via polymerase chain reaction was used to introduce non-native cysteines by designing mutagenic primers. The substituted sequence in each resultant plasmid was confirmed via Sanger DNA sequencing. WT and cysteine substituted constructs were purified as described previously [17]. Following affinity chromatography, residual nickel from the column was removed by addition of EDTA to a concentration of 100 mM and cysteine reduction was ensured by addition of dithiothreitol (DTT) to a concentration of 0.1 mM. Protein purity was assessed using a 16.5% tris-tricene SDS-PAGE gel.
WT and cysteine substituted proteins were buffer exchanged into 50 mM sodium phosphate, 300 mM sodium chloride, pH 7.4 using a desalting column. This step also removed residual nickel, EDTA, and DTT that were added as described above. After desalting, IAP, MTSL, or MSL nitroxide spin label, dissolved in ethanol, was added in excess (5-10× molar ratio) and allowed to react with cysteine substituted constructs for 10-12 h at room temperature, in the dark. Spin labeling schemes are represented in Figure 2A. Excess spin label was removed by repeating the desalting buffer exchange process as described above.
For each spin labeled construct, nine separate samples were prepared with increasing 5% (v/v) increments of 2,2,2-trifluoroethanol (TFE) that spanned 0-40%. Each individual sample was prepared at a final volume of 500 µL: 300 µL of 50 mM sodium phosphate, 300 mM sodium chloride, pH 7.4 buffer, (200−x) µL of TFE, where x ranged from 0-200 µL, and x µL of appropriately prepared solution of 5× stock buffer diluted with water to keep all samples at equal ionic strength and pH. These larger 500 µL sample volumes were prepared to help mitigate pipetting errors of small volumes. Samples of ∼10 µL were drawn into 0.60 i.d. × 0.84 o.d. capillary tubes, which were then flame sealed on both ends ensuring minimal to no TFE evaporation.
For each spin labeled construct, samples were prepared with varying percentages of increasing TFE concentrations. For IAP labeled cysteine scanning and the V8C construct with varying spin label attachments, three samples were prepared with increasing 15% (v/v) increments of TFE from 0-30%. For amino acid scanning at the 8th position of the IA3 sequence and cysteine or alanine substitution at the 11th position, six or nine samples were prepared with increasing 7% (v/v) increments of TFE from 0-35% or increasing 5% (v/v) increments of TFE from 0-40%, respectively. Samples were prepared with 80-120 μL of protein sample in 50 mM sodium phosphate, 300 mM sodium chloride, pH 7.4 to reach a final concentration of 10 μM protein in 1000 μL. The final volume was adjusted using 10 mM sodium phosphate, pH 7.0 buffer or TFE to reach appropriate % (v/v) TFE. For the V8C un-labeled construct, 0.1 mM DTT was present to prevent disulfide bonding of free cysteine residues.
Either a Bruker ER200 spectrometer with an ER023 M signal channel, an ER032 M field control unit or a Bruker E500 with a loop gap resonator (Medical Advances, Milwaukee, WI) was used to collect CW X-band EPR spectra. For all experiments the temperature was kept at a constant 27 ± 0.2 °C using a nitrogen gas passed through a copper coil submersed into a water bath, while monitored with a temperature probe and thermometer from OMEGA Engineering Inc (Norwalk, CT). All spectra are reported as an average of four scans, collected as 100 G sweep width, 0.6 modulation amplitude, 70 ms conversion time, 100 kHz modulation amplitude, and 2 mW incident microwave power. Spectra were normalized using labVIEW software allowing for baseline correction and double integral area normalization. A representative nitroxide EPR spectrum with the typical three-line transition pattern is shown and labeled in Figure 2B. Spectral line shapes were analyzed by calculating the ratio of the intensities of the low field and center field transitions, h(+1)/h(0) as a function of TFE percentage. Although the low field and center field transitions individually are not as sensitive to motion as the high field transition (h(−1)), this ratio has been previously shown to change considerably as the unstructured-to-structured transition occurs and is not sensitive to errors in baseline correction or double integration [17,36]. We have used this analysis previously to monitor the unstructured to helical transition in IA3 by % TFE. Plots of h(+1)/h(0) values versus the % TFE are sigmoidal in shape and are well fit by a two-state Boltzmann transition, given by
(1) |
A1 is the initial value of the curve, A2 is the final value of the curve and x0 is the midpoint of the curve—which corresponds well to the midpoint of folding transitions observed by CD and NMR [14]. Data were fit using Origin 8.5 software.
CD measurements were collected using an AVIV model 202 CD spectrometer set at 27 °C. To collect the spectra, 400 μL of each sample were loaded into a 1mm path length quartz cuvette, cleaned between runs with nanopure H2O and ethanol. Typically, four scans of each buffer blank and sample were collected between wavelengths of 200-250 nm with 1 nm increments and a four second averaging time. Each set of CD scans for each construct was averaged, and the averaged buffer baseline was subtracted from each individual construct averaged scan. Units were converted to Δε (molar circular dichroism, M−1 cm−1) from the instruments output unit of Θ (ellipticity, mdeg) using
(2) |
Θ is the output ellipticity value from the CD measurement, C is the concentration of sample in g/L, L is the path length in cm, and M is the average molecular weight in g/mol.
It is well known that the labeling of a naturally occurring or substituted cysteine may impact the native function of a protein. To understand if spin-label and cysteine substitution within IA3 impacted folding or folding propensity, cysteine scanning was performed across the N- and C-termini of IA3. Sites K7, V8, S9, E10, I11, F12, Q13, S14, S15, and S27 were chosen within the N-terminus and span two helical turns containing both solvent exposed and buried residues in the α-helix when bound to YPRA. Sites Y57, N58, K59, L60, and K61, were selected in the C-terminus (Figure 1).
CW X-band EPR spectra were collected for the fifteen IAP spin labeled-IA3 variants (referred to within as P1-IA3) as a function of TFE concentration that ranged from 0-40% (v/v) TFE. Figure 3 shows representative CW-EPR spectra for 0%, 15%, and 30% (v/v) TFE for each P1-IA3 variant. Spectra are plotted with normalized double integral area to allow for easy visualization of changes in mobility. As mobility (defined as both the rate of motion and order of motion) decreases, the line shape broadens. As a result, when plotted with normalized area, the intensity appears to be less. A decrease in mobility upon increasing TFE percentage is observed for nearly all sites and indicates a conformational change upon increasing TFE concentration (earlier work has ruled out the impact of increased solution viscosity) [17]. Inspection of the line shapes shows that the change in mobility differs among these 15 P1-IA3 variants, indicating that some spin-labeled cysteine substitutions affect the conformation of each state, altering the TFE-induced helical propensity of IA3.
A more quantitative way to analyze the TFE-induced conformational changes for each variant is to plot h(+1)/h(0) values as a function of TFE % (Figure 4). For isotropic motion, the h(+1)/h(0) value is expected to be 1. As the mobility decreases as the protein becomes helical, lower values of h(+1)/h(0) are expected. In the unfolded state (absence of TFE), all P1-IA3 variants have similar CW-EPR spectra indicative of similar high nitroxide mobility (indicated by values of h(+1)/h(0) ∼ 0.9). As a function of TFE concentration, the shape of each h(+1)/h(0) plot can be well fit by
Several conclusions can be drawn from the data in Figure 4. Firstly, the sigmoidal behavior of the h(+1)/h(0) parameter for N-terminal P1-IA3 variants (gray shade, solid diamonds) varies both in sharpness and extent of transition, which is defined by the limiting h(+1)/h(0) value. In contrast C-terminal P1-IA3 variants (no shade, open circles) exhibit similar behavior, both in the sharpness and extent of transition. Secondly, there are site specific variations in the behavior of the h(+1)/h(0) parameter in the N-terminus that follow a helical trend that maps to the surface of IA3 in the YRPA bound site. Specifically, sites V8P1, I11P1, and S15P1 which are located on the concave buried face of the peptide when bound to YPRA, have small changes (<0.05 over the 0-40% (v/v) TFE range) in their h(+1)/h(0) values. In contrast, sites S9P1, Q13P1 and S27P1, which reside on the convex solvent exposed face when bound to YPRA, pose large changes in their h(+1)/h(0) values (>0.3 over the 0-40% TFE range). Figure 5 shows the location of these residues in the IA3: YPRA complex crystal structure. These results indicate a sensitivity of the N-terminal helicity to amino acid substitution.
To further explore these observations, CD spectroscopy was performed on each of the N-terminal P1-IA3 variants with 0%, 15%, and 30% (v/v) TFE. Data are shown in Figure 6, which also overlays results from WT IA3 (gray solid line) in 30% (v/v) TFE for comparison. For wild type IA3, CD data reveal a predominantly random coil conformation for 0% (v/v) TFE, whereas with 30% (v/v) TFE the spectra reflect a mostly helical conformation with features at 208 nm and 222 nm indicative of helix formation [37,38]. For all N-terminal P1-IA3 variants, CD data confirm that in the absence of TFE, all constructs adopt a random coil conformation and that the addition of TFE induces a helical conformation. As was observed with the CW-EPR data, the degree of the helical transition, as reflected in the values of Δε222nm in CD spectra, varies when compared to WT for the P1 variants. It can be seen that I11P1 and S14P1 possess CD spectra that very closely match that of WT (i.e., represent SL wild-type mimics). V8P1 is found to be less helical than WT, whereas all other variants have greater helicity than WT. To directly compare the SDSL CW-EPR characterized unstructured-to-structured transition within the N-terminus to the degree of α-helicity from CD spectroscopy, we plotted the values of Δh(+1)/h(0), or degree of transition (h(+1)/h(0) (40% (v/v) TFE) − h(+1)/h(0) (0% (v/v) TFE)) against the Δε222nm (30% (v/v) TFE) (
Because the P1 substitution at site V8 revealed less helical character than WT, we proceeded to generate a series of substitutions at this site to probe how amino acid size and type impacted helical propensity. The following constructs were chosen: V8A and V8I (smaller and larger than V; respectively), V8P (typical helical disrupter), V8D (charged), and V8C (our cysteine mutation without spin-label). CD spectroscopy was performed on each of the V8 variants with 0-40% or 0-35% (v/v) TFE (
The result that V8C contained WT helicity was surprising, which prompted us to examine if and how spin-label structure influenced helicity when incorporated at this site. CD spectroscopy was performed on the V8C spin-labeled variants from 0-40% or 0-30% (v/v) TFE (
Nevertheless, results appear to indicate a dependency of structural bulkiness for disruption or enhancement of helical propensity. Indeed, the structure of IA3 bound to YPRA shows a slight concave bend on the buried interface, making substitution to larger residues disrupt helical behavior and conversely, a smaller residue would enhance helicity. To test this idea, we made two additional constructs, V8P1-I11A and V8A-I11P1, which would place the smaller alanine residue next to the P1 spin-label. CD spectroscopy was performed on each additional construct from 0-40% or 0-35% (v/v) TFE (
It was determined through SDSL CW-EPR that the extent of helical order within the N-terminal region of IA3 is easily perturbed by amino acid substitution and IAP labeling. The C-terminal region did not have similar susceptibility, where changes in labeled amino acid substitution did not reveal drastic changes in the unstructured-to-structured transition, and as we showed previously, retained WT behavior [17]. CD results confirmed that the helical order within the N-terminus varied due to the location of the altered residue in relation to the buried or solvent-exposed, or the concave or convex face of the protein, respectively. The concave face of IA3, is negatively affected by cysteine mutation and labeling, whereas the convex surface increases in helical order. It is proposed that the change in helical propensity on either side of the protein is due to spatial availability when incorporating a cysteine residue and nitroxide probe. Residue V8, located on the concave side of the N-terminal region showed the greatest negative perturbation due to cysteine substitution, and spin labeling. Mutations to the V8 residue, including substitutions in residue, charge, and size did not drastically affect the helical propensity, but rather the addition of the IAP nitroxide probe had the greatest effect on helical formation.
These experiments demonstrate the care that must be taken when spin-labeling IDPs. Proper checks-and-balances are needed to ensure that a labeled site retains WT helical propensity (in addition to any other functional assays). Overall, the results identify key sites for spin-label incorporation that mimic WT helical tendencies that can be used in future studies of IA3 conformational sampling studies.
This work was supported by NSF MCB 1329467 & MCB 1715384 and NIH 1S10-RR031603-01 to GEF. The authors would like to thank Stephen J. Hagen and Robert McKenna for access to the Aviv CD spectrometer, and Christian Altenbach for Labview software to analyze the EPR data.
All authors declare no conflict of interest in this paper.
[1] |
Liu Z (2015) Global energy development: The reality and challenges. Global Energy Interconnect 1: 1-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-804405-6.00001-4 doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-804405-6.00001-4
![]() |
[2] |
Kurbatova T, Perederii T (2020) Global trends in renewable energy development. 2020 IEEE KhPI Week on Advanced Technology, KhPI Week 2020—Conference Proceedings 4: 260-263. https://doi.org/10.1109/KhPIWeek51551.2020.9250098 doi: 10.1109/KhPIWeek51551.2020.9250098
![]() |
[3] |
Manso JRP, Behmiri NB (2020) Renewable energy and sustainable development. Estudios de Economia Aplicada 31: 7-33. https://doi.org/10.25115/eea.v31i1.3259 doi: 10.25115/eea.v31i1.3259
![]() |
[4] |
Skjærseth JB (2021) Towards a European Green Deal: The evolution of EU climate and energy policy mixes. Inter Environ Agreements: Polit, Law Econ 21: 25-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-021-09529-4 doi: 10.1007/s10784-021-09529-4
![]() |
[5] |
Zhao J, Jiang Q, Dong X, et al. (2021) Assessing energy poverty and its effect on CO2 emissions: The case of China. Energy Econ 97: 105191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105191 doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105191
![]() |
[6] |
Goodier J (2018) The Paris Agreement on climate change: Analysis and commentary. Ref Rev 32: 4-10. https://doi.org/10.1108/RR-12-2017-0250 doi: 10.1108/RR-12-2017-0250
![]() |
[7] |
Zhu K, Jiang X (2019) Slowing down of globalization and global CO2 emissions—A causal or casual association? Energy Econ 84: 104483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2019.104483 doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2019.104483
![]() |
[8] |
Gil-Alana LA, Monge M (2020) Global CO2 emissions and global temperatures: Are they related. Int J Climatol 40: 6603-6611. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.6601 doi: 10.1002/joc.6601
![]() |
[9] |
Jiang X, Guan D (2016) Determinants of global CO2 emissions growth. Appl Energy 184: 1132-1141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.06.142 doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.06.142
![]() |
[10] |
Lamb WF, Grubb M, Diluiso F, et al. (2022) Countries with sustained greenhouse gas emissions reductions: An analysis of trends and progress by sector. Clim Policy 22: 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2021.1990831 doi: 10.1080/14693062.2021.1990831
![]() |
[11] |
Morris DW (2021) On the effect of international human migration on nations' abilities to attain CO2 emission-reduction targets. PLoS ONE 16: e0258087. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258087 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0258087
![]() |
[12] |
Santillán OS, Cedano KG, Martínez M (2020) Analysis of energy poverty in 7 Latin American countries using multidimensional energy poverty index. Energies (Basel) 13: 1608. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13071608 doi: 10.3390/en13071608
![]() |
[13] |
Middlemiss L, Ambrosio-Albalá P, Emmel N, et al. (2019) Energy poverty and social relations: A capabilities approach. Energy Res Soc Sci 55: 227-235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.05.002 doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2019.05.002
![]() |
[14] |
Kandel P, Chapagain PS, Sharma LN, et al. (2016) Production patterns of fuelwood in rural households of Dolakha District, Nepal: Reflections from community forest user groups. Small-Scale For 15: 481-495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-016-9335-0 doi: 10.1007/s11842-016-9335-0
![]() |
[15] |
Khan S, Nisar A, Wu B, et al. (2022) Bioenergy production in Pakistan: Potential, progress, and prospect. Sci Total Environ 814: 152872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.152872 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.152872
![]() |
[16] |
Wassie YT, Adaramola MS (2019) Potential environmental impacts of small-scale renewable energy technologies in East Africa: A systematic review of the evidence. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 111: 377-391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.05.037 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2019.05.037
![]() |
[17] |
Branch A, Agyei FK, Anai JG, et al. (2022) From crisis to context: Reviewing the future of sustainable charcoal in Africa. Energy Res Soc Sci 87: 102457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102457 doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2021.102457
![]() |
[18] |
Qurat-ul-Ann AR, Mirza FM (2020) Meta-analysis of empirical evidence on energy poverty: The case of developing economies. Energy Policy 141: 111444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111444 doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111444
![]() |
[19] |
Okushima S (2021) Energy poor need more energy, but do they need more carbon? Evaluation of people's basic carbon needs. Ecol Econ 187: 107081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107081 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107081
![]() |
[20] |
Malinowski M (2021) "Green Energy" and the standard of living of the EU residents. Energies (Basel) 14: 2186. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14082186 doi: 10.3390/en14082186
![]() |
[21] |
Rao ND, Pachauri S (2017) Energy access and living standards: Some observations on recent trends. Environ Res Lett 12: 025011. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa5b0d doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aa5b0d
![]() |
[22] |
Feng L (2021) Research on nuclear energy and fossil fuels in China. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 621: 012068. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/621/1/012068 doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/621/1/012068
![]() |
[23] |
Michaelides EE, Michaelides DN (2020) Impact of nuclear energy on fossil fuel substitution. Nucl Eng Design 366: 110742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2020.110742 doi: 10.1016/j.nucengdes.2020.110742
![]() |
[24] |
Grigoryev LM, Medzhidova DD (2021) Global energy trilemma. Russ J Econ 6: 437. https://doi.org/10.32609/j.ruje.6.58683 doi: 10.32609/j.ruje.6.58683
![]() |
[25] | Energy Commission of Ghana (2020) National Energy Statistics 2000-2019. Available from: https://www.energycom.gov.gh/about/annual-reports/2019 Annual Report.pdf. |
[26] |
Aboagye B, Gyamfi S, Ofosu EA, et al. (2021) Status of renewable energy resources for electricity supply in Ghana. Sci Afr 11: e00660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00660 doi: 10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00660
![]() |
[27] |
Mensah TNO, Oyewo AS, Breyer C (2021) The role of biomass in sub-Saharan Africa's fully renewable power sector—The case of Ghana. Renewable Energy 173: 297-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.03.098 doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2021.03.098
![]() |
[28] | Effah B, Boampong E (2015) Biomass energy: A sustainable source of energy for development in Ghana. Asian Bull Energy Econ Technol 2: 6-12. |
[29] |
Arthur E, Anyemedu FOK, Gyamfi C, et al. (2020) Potential for small hydropower development in the Lower Pra River Basin, Ghana. J Hydrology: Regional Studies 32: 100757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2020.100757 doi: 10.1016/j.ejrh.2020.100757
![]() |
[30] | Energy Commission of Ghana (2017) Annual Energy Report 2016. Available from: https://www.energycom.gov.gh/about/annual-reports/2016 AnnualReport.pdf |
[31] |
Manu E, Akotia J (2021) Introduction to secondary research methods in the built environment. Secondary Research Methods in the Built Environment, Routledge 2: 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003000532-1 doi: 10.1201/9781003000532-1
![]() |
[32] |
Wickham RJ (2019) Secondary analysis research. J Advanced Pract Oncol 10: 395. https://doi.org/10.6004/jadpro.2019.10.4.7 doi: 10.6004/jadpro.2019.10.4.7
![]() |
[33] |
Johnsen TE, Miemczyk J, Howard M (2017) A systematic literature review of sustainable purchasing and supply research: Theoretical perspectives and opportunities for IMP-based research. Ind Mark Manage 61: 130-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.03.003 doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.03.003
![]() |
[34] |
Vallaster C, Kraus S, Kailer N, et al. (2019) Responsible entrepreneurship: Outlining the contingencies. Int J Entrepreneurial Behaviour Res 25: 538-553. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-04-2018-0206 doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-04-2018-0206
![]() |
[35] |
Kraus S, Palmer C, Kailer N, et al. (2019) Digital entrepreneurship: A research agenda on new business models for the twenty-first century. Int J Entrepreneurial Behaviour Res 25: 353-375. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-06-2018-0425 doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-06-2018-0425
![]() |
[36] |
Highfield C, Lee K, Hardie B (2020) Entrepreneurship education today for students unknown futures. J Pedagogical Res 4: 401-417. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.2020063022 doi: 10.33902/JPR.2020063022
![]() |
[37] |
Mohamed Shaffril HA, Samsuddin SF, Abu Samah A (2021) The ABC of systematic literature review: The basic methodological guidance for beginners. Qual Quant 55: 1319-1346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-01059-6 doi: 10.1007/s11135-020-01059-6
![]() |
[38] |
Gunnarsdottir I, Davidsdottir B, Worrell E, et al. (2021) Sustainable energy development: History of the concept and emerging themes. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 141: 110770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.110770 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2021.110770
![]() |
[39] | International Energy Agency (2009) Key World Energy Statistics 2009. OECD Publishing. Available from: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/energy/key-world-energy-statistics-2009_9789264039537-en. |
[40] | OECD/IEA (2016) Key World Energy Statistics 2016. International Energy Agency, Paris. Available from: https://www.ourenergypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/KeyWorld2016.pdf. |
[41] | Enerdata (2021) Enerdata, World Energy Statistics|Enerdata, 2021. Available from: https://www.enerdata.net/publications/world-energy-statistics-supply-and-demand.html?gclid=Cj0KCQjw8_qRBhCXARIsAE2AtRbHVtRSVN4BFRT3_qO5kZtxHupBBdXTzWUnAkAZ-bE6-RnCNJFp7W8aAjPLEALw_wcB. |
[42] | Ritchie H, Roser M, Rosado P (2020) Energy—Our World in Data. Available from: https://ourworldindata.org/energy. |
[43] | International Energy Agency, EIA Energy Atlas, (NCDC) NC for DC (2020) World energy statistics & World energy balances. IEA Statistics. Available from: https://www.iea.org/reports/key-world-energy-statistics-2020/transformation. |
[44] |
Zhang L, Li H, Lee WJ, et al. (2021) COVID-19 and energy: Influence mechanisms and research methodologies. Sustainable Prod Consumption 27: 2134-2152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.05.010 doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2021.05.010
![]() |
[45] |
Jiang P, Fan Y van, Klemeš JJ (2021) Impacts of COVID-19 on energy demand and production: Challenges, lessons and emerging opportunities. Appl Energy 285: 116441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.116441 doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.116441
![]() |
[46] |
Olabi AG, Abdelkareem MA (2022) Renewable energy and climate change. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 158: 112111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112111 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2022.112111
![]() |
[47] |
He Y, Li Y, Xia D, et al. (2019) Moderating effect of regulatory focus on public acceptance of nuclear energy. Nucl Eng Technol 51: 2034-2041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2019.06.002 doi: 10.1016/j.net.2019.06.002
![]() |
[48] | IRENA (2019) Solutions to integrate high shares of variable renewable energy (Report to the G20 Energy Transitions Working Group (ETWG)). International Renewable Energy Agency. Available from: https://www.irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2019/Jun/IRENA_G20_grid_integration_2019.pdf. |
[49] |
Bello MO, Solarin SA (2021) Searching for sustainable electricity generation: The possibility of substituting coal and natural gas with clean energy. Energy Environ 33: 64-84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958305X20985253 doi: 10.1177/0958305X20985253
![]() |
[50] | REN 21—RENEWABLES NOW (2019) Renewables 2019—Global Status Report. Available from: https://www.ren21.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/gsr_2019_full_report_en.pdf. |
[51] | International Energy Agency (2020) Renewables Information—Overview (2020 Edition). IEA Statistics. Available from: https://www.iea.org/reports/renewables-2020. |
[52] | International Hydropower Association (IHA) (2020) Hydropower Status Report 2020. International Hydropower Association. Available from: https://hydropower-assets.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/publications-docs/2020_hydropower_status_report.pdf. |
[53] |
Carayannis EG, Draper J, Bhaneja B (2021) Towards fusion energy in the Industry 5.0 and Society 5.0 context: Call for a global commission for urgent action on fusion energy. J Knowl Econ 12: 1891-1904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-020-00695-5 doi: 10.1007/s13132-020-00695-5
![]() |
[54] |
Hazboun SO, Boudet HS (2020) Public preferences in a shifting energy future: Comparing public views of eight energy sources in North America's Pacific Northwest. Energies (Basel) 13: 1940. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13081940 doi: 10.3390/en13081940
![]() |
[55] | International Energy Agency (2021) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Global Security Studies. Available from: https://www.iea.org/reports/a-10-point-plan-to-cut-oil-use. |
[56] |
Duah NT, Asamoah PK (2018) Renewable energy in Africa; Potential, impact and the way forward. ELEKTRIKA—J Electr Eng 17: 16-20. https://doi.org/10.11113/elektrika.v17n1.47 doi: 10.11113/elektrika.v17n1.47
![]() |
[57] |
Baffoe PE, Sarpong D (2016) Selecting suitable sites for wind energy development in Ghana. Ghana Min J 16: 8-20. https://doi.org/10.4314/gmj.v16i1.2 doi: 10.4314/gmj.v16i1.2
![]() |
[58] |
Jackson RB, le Quéré C, Andrew RM, et al. (2018) Global energy growth is outpacing decarbonization. Environ Res Lett 13: 120401. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaf303 doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aaf303
![]() |
[59] |
Kober T, Schiffer HW, Densing M, et al. (2020) Global energy perspectives to 2060—WEC's World Energy Scenarios 2019. Energy Strategy Rev 31: 6-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2020.100523 doi: 10.1016/j.esr.2020.100523
![]() |
[60] |
Borowski P F (2020) Nexus between water, energy, food and climate change as challenges facing the modern global, European and Polish economy. AIMS Geosci 6: 397-421. https://doi.org/10.3934/geosci.2020022 doi: 10.3934/geosci.2020022
![]() |
[61] |
Höök M, Li J, Johansson K, et al. (2012) Growth rates of global energy systems and future outlooks. Nat Resour Res 21: 23-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11053-011-9162-0 doi: 10.1007/s11053-011-9162-0
![]() |
[62] |
van Vliet O, Krey V, McCollum D, et al. (2012) Synergies in the Asian energy system: Climate change, energy security, energy access and air pollution. Energy Econ 34: S470-S480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2012.02.001 doi: 10.1016/j.eneco.2012.02.001
![]() |
[63] |
Karatayev M, Hall S, Kalyuzhnova Y, et al. (2016) Renewable energy technology uptake in Kazakhstan: Policy drivers and barriers in a transitional economy. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 66: 120-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.07.057 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.07.057
![]() |
[64] |
Abas N, Kalair A, Khan N (2015) Review of fossil fuels and future energy technologies. Futures 69: 31-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2015.03.003 doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2015.03.003
![]() |
[65] |
Lund H, Østergaard PA, Connolly D, et al. (2017) Smart energy and smart energy systems. Energy 137: 556-565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.05.123 doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2017.05.123
![]() |
[66] |
Aized T, Shahid M, Bhatti AA, et al. (2018) Energy security and renewable energy policy analysis of Pakistan. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 84: 155-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.254 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.254
![]() |
[67] |
Chu S, Cui Y, Liu N (2016) The path towards sustainable energy. Nat Mater 16: 16-22. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat4834 doi: 10.1038/nmat4834
![]() |
[68] |
Kannan N, Vakeesan D (2016) Solar energy for future world: A review. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 62: 1092-1105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.022 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.022
![]() |
[69] |
Thellufsen JZ, Lund H (2016) Roles of local and national energy systems in the integration of renewable energy. Appl Energy 183: 419-429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.09.005 doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.09.005
![]() |
[70] |
Connolly D, Lund H, Mathiesen BV (2016) Smart Energy Europe: The technical and economic impact of one potential 100% renewable energy scenario for the European Union. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 60: 1634-1653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.02.025 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.02.025
![]() |
[71] |
Gallo AB, Simões-Moreira JR, Costa HKM, et al. (2016) Energy storage in the energy transition context: A technology review. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 65: 800-822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.07.028 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.07.028
![]() |
[72] |
Lund PD, Lindgren J, Mikkola J, et al. (2015) Review of energy system flexibility measures to enable high levels of variable renewable electricity. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 45: 785-807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.01.057 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.01.057
![]() |
[73] |
Owusu PA, Asumadu-Sarkodie S (2016) A review of renewable energy sources, sustainability issues and climate change mitigation. Cogent Eng 3: 1167990. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2016.1167990 doi: 10.1080/23311916.2016.1167990
![]() |
[74] |
Ellabban O, Abu-Rub H, Blaabjerg F (2014) Renewable energy resources: Current status, future prospects and their enabling technology. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 39: 748-764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.113 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.113
![]() |
[75] |
Zhao J, Dong K, Dong X, et al. (2022) How renewable energy alleviate energy poverty? A global analysis. Renewable Energy 186: 299-311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.01.005 doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2022.01.005
![]() |
[76] |
Anser MK, Shabbir MS, Tabash MI, et al. (2021) Do renewable energy sources improve clean environmental-economic growth? Empirical investigation from South Asian economies. Energy Explor Exploit 39: 1491-1514. https://doi.org/10.1177/01445987211002278 doi: 10.1177/01445987211002278
![]() |
[77] |
Mukeshimana MC, Zhao ZY, Ahmad M, et al. (2021) Analysis on barriers to biogas dissemination in Rwanda: AHP approach. Renewable Energy 163: 1127-1137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.09.051 doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2020.09.051
![]() |
[78] |
Tripathi L, Mishra AK, Dubey AK, et al. (2016) Renewable energy: An overview on its contribution in current energy scenario of India. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 60: 226-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.01.047 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.01.047
![]() |
[79] |
Strachan PA, Cowell R, Ellis G, et al. (2015) Promoting community renewable energy in a corporate energy world. Sustainable Dev 23: 96-109. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1576 doi: 10.1002/sd.1576
![]() |
[80] |
Li M, Ahmad M, Fareed Z, et al. (2021) Role of trade openness, export diversification, and renewable electricity output in realizing carbon neutrality dream of China. J Environ Manage 297: 113419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113419 doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113419
![]() |
[81] |
Benedek J, Sebestyén TT, Bartók B (2018) Evaluation of renewable energy sources in peripheral areas and renewable energy-based rural development. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 90: 516-535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.020 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.020
![]() |
[82] |
Xu X, Wei Z, Ji Q, et al. (2019) Global renewable energy development: Influencing factors, trend predictions and countermeasures. Resour Policy 63: 101470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101470 doi: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101470
![]() |
[83] |
Irfan M, Elavarasan RM, Ahmad M, et al. (2022) Prioritizing and overcoming biomass energy barriers: Application of AHP and G-TOPSIS approaches. Technol Forecast Soc Change 177: 121524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121524 doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121524
![]() |
[84] |
Jabeen G, Yan Q, Ahmad M, et al. (2019) Consumers' intention-based influence factors of renewable power generation technology utilization: A structural equation modeling approach. J Cleaner Prod 237: 117737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117737 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117737
![]() |
[85] |
Gielen D, Boshell F, Saygin D, et al. (2019) The role of renewable energy in the global energy transformation. Energy Strategy Rev 24: 38-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2019.01.006 doi: 10.1016/j.esr.2019.01.006
![]() |
[86] |
Boadi SA, Owusu K (2019) Impact of climate change and variability on hydropower in Ghana. African Geogr Rev 38: 19-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/19376812.2017.1284598 doi: 10.1080/19376812.2017.1284598
![]() |
[87] |
Aboagye B, Gyamfi S, Ofosu EA, et al. (2021) Status of renewable energy resources for electricity supply in Ghana. Sci Afr 11: e00660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00660 doi: 10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00660
![]() |
[88] |
Mensah C, Mensah MM (2018) Climate change and the viability of renewable energy in Ghana. Innovative Energy Res 07: 2576-1463. https://doi.org/10.4172/2576-1463.1000196 doi: 10.4172/2576-1463.1000196
![]() |
[89] |
Kuamoah C (2020) Renewable energy deployment in Ghana: The hype, hope and reality. Insight Africa 12: 45-64. https://doi.org/10.1177/0975087819898581 doi: 10.1177/0975087819898581
![]() |
[90] |
Mensah TNO, Oyewo AS, Breyer C (2021) The role of biomass in sub-Saharan Africa's fully renewable power sector—The case of Ghana. Renewable Energy 173: 297-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.03.098 doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2021.03.098
![]() |
[91] |
Adom-Opare KB, Inkoom DKB (2017) Rural energy demand and climate change adaptation in Ghana. J Public Manage Res 3: 13-17. https://doi.org/10.5296/jpmr.v3i2.10837 doi: 10.5296/jpmr.v3i2.10837
![]() |
[92] |
Merem EC, Twumasi Y, Wesley J, et al. (2018) Assessing renewable energy use in Ghana: The case of the electricity sector. Energy Power 8:16-34. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.ep.20180801.03 doi: 10.5923/j.ep.20180801.03
![]() |
[93] |
Danso DK, François B, Hingray B, et al. (2021) Assessing hydropower flexibility for integrating solar and wind energy in West Africa using dynamic programming and sensitivity analysis. Illustration with the Akosombo reservoir, Ghana. J Cleaner Prod 287: 125559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125559 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125559
![]() |
1. | Elisabeta Spunei, Andrea-Amalia Minda, Ion Piroi, Naomi-Ionela Șoanda, 2023, Analysis of the Evolution of Electricity Production in Romania, 979-8-3503-1524-0, 1, 10.1109/SIELMEN59038.2023.10290778 | |
2. | Yu Zhang, Huaxing Li, Qiang Zhang, Xue Guo, Zhaoge Zhu, Impact of ultrasonic treatment duration on the microstructure and electrochemical performance of NiZnCo2O4 electrode materials for supercapacitors, 2024, 14, 2045-2322, 10.1038/s41598-024-77851-3 | |
3. | Chuanran Sun, Xiaoran Liu, Xuefeng Bai, Highly efficient dehydrogenation of dodecahydro-N-ethylcarbazole over Al2O3 supported PdCo bimetallic nanocatalysts prepared by galvanic replacement, 2024, 49, 03603199, 1547, 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.10.118 |