Inefficient transmission and distribution (T&D) infrastructure that results in losses as electricity travels from supplier to customer contributes to compensatory power generation and therefore to unanticipated GHG emissions. Pilferage, poor planning and management in the T&D system also contribute to losses that can increase total electricity generation. Because the combination of electricity generation, combined heat and power generation and heat plants account for over 40% of global GHG emissions1, mitigation efforts tend to focus on electricity generated rather than delivered. We combine life cycle assessments of power generation with uncertainty analysis to bound potential emissions from compensatory generation from T&D aggregate losses (that is, technical and non-technical) in 142 countries. We estimate that electricity generated due to losses from T&D infrastructure is associated with nearly 1 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents per year (GtCO2e yr–1). Our global average estimates for potential emissions reductions that may be achieved by improvements in technical losses and aggregate losses are 411 and 544 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents per year (MtCO2e yr–1), respectively. By reducing T&D losses, not only may compensatory emissions be reduced, but more electricity from low-carbon power-plant investments may reach the intended consumers.
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $17.42 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
The data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article and its supplementary information files. All remaining data are publicly available by the referenced source and available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
CO 2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion 2018 edn (IEA, 2018).
Pacala, S. & Socolow, R. Stabilization wedges: solving the climate problem for the next 50 years with current technologies. Science 305, 968–972 (2004).
Hertwich, E. G. et al. Integrated life-cycle assessment of electricity-supply scenarios confirms global environmental benefit of low-carbon technologies. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 6277–6282 (2015).
Kneifel, J. Life-cycle carbon and cost analysis of energy efficiency measures in new commercial buildings. Energy Buildings 42, 333–340 (2010).
Jackson, R. et al. Opportunities for Energy Efficiency Improvements in the U.S. Electricity Transmission and Distribution System (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2015).
Reducing Technical and Non-Technical Losses in the Power Sector (World Bank, 2009).
Smith, T. B. Electricity theft: a comparative analysis. Energy Policy 32, 2067–2076 (2004).
IEA Electricity Information Statistics (OECD iLibrary, 2018); https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/energy/data/iea-electricity-information-statistics_elect-data-en
Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs); Mitigation Content Database (World Bank, accessed 16 March 2019); http://spappssecext.worldbank.org/sites/indc/Pages/mitigation.aspx
Weisser, D. A guide to life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from electric supply technologies. Energy 32, 1543–1559 (2007).
Lombardi, L. Life cycle assessment comparison of technical solutions for CO2 emissions reduction in power generation. Energy Convers. Manage. 44, 93–108 (2003).
Whitaker, M., Heath, G. A., O’Donoughue, P. & Vorum, M. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of coal-fired electricity generation. J. Ind. Ecol. 16, S53–S72 (2012).
O’Donoughue, P. R., Heath, G. A., Dolan, S. L. & Vorum, M. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of electricity generated from conventionally produced natural gas. J. Ind. Ecol. 18, 125–144 (2014).
Kasumu, A. S., Li, V., Coleman, J. W., Liendo, J. & Jordaan, S. M. Country-level life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from liquefied natural gas trade for electricity generation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 1735–1746 (2018).
Turconi, R., Simonsen, C. G., Byriel, I. P. & Astrup, T. Life cycle assessment of the Danish electricity distribution network. Int. J. Life Cycle Ass. 19, 100–108 (2014).
Jorge, R. S. & Hertwich, E. G. Grid infrastructure for renewable power in Europe: the environmental cost. Energy 69, 760–768 (2014).
Arvesen, A., Hauan, I. B., Bolsoy, B. M. & Hertwich, E. G. Life cycle assessment of transport of electricity via different voltage levels: a case study for Nord-Trøndelag county in Norway. Appl. Energy 157, 144–151 (2015).
Masanet, E. et al. Life-cycle assessment of electric power systems. Annu. Rev. Env. Resour. 38, 107–136 (2013).
Pehl, M. et al. Understanding future emissions from low-carbon power systems by integration of life-cycle assessment and integrated energy modelling. Nat. Energy 2, 939 (2017).
Hsu, D. D. et al. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of crystalline silicon photovoltaic electricity generation: systematic review and harmonization. J. Ind. Ecol. 16, S122–S135 (2012).
Kim, H. C., Fthenakis, V., Choi, J.-K. & Turney, D. E. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of thin-film photovoltaic electricity generation:systematic review and harmonization. J. Ind. Ecol. 16, S110–S121 (2012).
Dolan, S. L. & Heath, G. A. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of utility-scale wind power. J. Ind. Ecol. 16, S136–S154 (2012).
Warner, E. S. & Heath, G. A. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of nuclear electricity generation. J. Ind. Ecol. 16, S73–S92 (2012).
Coleman, J. W., Kasumu, A., Liendo, J., Li, V. & Jordaan, S. M. Calibrating Liquefied Natural Gas Export Life Cycle Assessment: Accounting for Legal Boundaries and Post-export Markets Occasional Paper No. 49 (Canadian Institute of Resources Law, 2015).
Burkhardt, J. J., Heath, G. & Cohen, E. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of trough and tower concentrating solar power electricity generation. J. Ind. Ecol. 16, S93–S109 (2012).
Life Cycle Assessment Harmonization (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, accessed 18 November 2018); https://www.nrel.gov/analysis/life-cycle-assessment.html
World Energy Outlook 2017; International Energy Agency (OECD iLibrary, 2017); https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/energy/world-energy-outlook-2017_weo-2017-en
Jiménez, R., Serebrisky, T. & Mercado, J. Sizing Electricity Losses in Transmission and Distribution Systems in Latin America and the Caribbean (Inter-American Development Bank, 2014).
Fragile States Index 2016 (The Fund for Peace, 2016); http://fundforpeace.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/fragilestatesindex-2016.pdf
Comoros—Electricity Sector Recovery Project (English) (World Bank, 2013).
Upadhyay, A. & Singh, R. K. How One Woman Tried to Stop a $10 Billion Theft (BloombergNEF, 2017); https://about.bnef.com/blog/how-one-woman-tried-to-stop-a-10-billion-theft/
Quadrennial Energy Review: Energy Transmission, Storage, and Distribution Infrastructure (US Department of Energy, 2015); https://go.nature.com/2YpGR0S
Tracking Clean Energy Progress (International Energy Agency, accessed 20 August 2018); http://www.iea.org/tcep/
World Energy Investment 2018 (IEA, 2018); https://www.iea.org/wei2018/.
Grid Modernization Initiative (US Department of Energy, accessed 18 November 2018); https://www.energy.gov/grid-modernization-initiative
National Smart Grid Mission (NSGM) (Government of India, Ministry of Power, accessed 18 November 2018); http://www.nsgm.gov.in/en/nsgm
MIT Energy Initiative. The Future of the Electric Grid (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2011).
Chicco, G. & Mancarella, P. Distributed multi-generation: a comprehensive view. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 13, 535–551 (2009).
Jorge, R. S., Hawkins, T. R. & Hertwich, E. G. Life cycle assessment of electricity transmission and distribution—part 1: power lines and cables. Int. J. Life Cycle Ass. 17, 9–15 (2011).
Agüero, J. R. Improving the efficiency of power distribution systems through technical and non-technical losses reduction. In Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exposition, IEEE PES 1–8 (IEEE, 2012).
Sub-Saharan Africa—Monitoring Performance of Electric Utilities: Indicators and Benchmarking in Sub-Saharan Africa (World Bank, 2009).
Heath, G. A. & Mann, M. K. Background and reflections on the life cycle assessment harmonization project. J. Ind. Ecol. 16, S8–S11 (2012).
Turconi, R., Boldrin, A. & Astrup, T. Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: overview, comparability and limitations. Renew. Sustain. Energy. Rev. 28, 555–565 (2013).
Heath, G. A., O’Donoughue, P., Arent, D. J. & Bazilian, M. Harmonization of initial estimates of shale gas life cycle greenhouse gas emissions for electric power generation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, E3167–E3176 (2014).
Energy Efficiency Indicators (World Energy Council, 2016); https://www.worldenergy.org/data/efficiency-indicators/
Greenhouse Gas Inventory Guidance: Direct Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2016).
Oracle Crystal Ball Release 18.104.22.168.850 (Oracle, 2018); https://www.oracle.com/applications/crystalball/
Firestone, M. et al. Guiding Principles for Monte Carlo Analysis (US Environmental Protection Agency, 1997).
Hussy, C., Klaassen, E., Koornneef, J. & Wigand, F. International Comparison of Fossil Power Efficiency and CO 2 Intensity—Update 2014 (Ecofys, 2014).
Bilis, E. I., Kröger, W. & Nan, C. Performance of electric power systems under physical malicious attacks. IEEE Syst. J. 7, 854–865 (2013).
National Research Council. Terrorism and the Electric Power Delivery System (National Academies, 2012).
Panteli, M. & Mancarella, P. Influence of extreme weather and climate change on the resilience of power systems: Impacts and possible mitigation strategies. Electr. Pow. Syst. Res. 127, 259–270 (2015).
Zerriffi, H., Dowlatabadi, H. & Strachan, N. Electricity and conflict: advantages of a distributed system. Electr. J. 15, 55–65 (2002).
World Development Indicators (World Bank, accessed 28 March 2019); https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/world-development-indicators
We are grateful for feedback from B. Hobbs on an early version of this paper and for comments from J. Huenteler. V. Specioso, a graduate student at the School for Advanced International Studies of Johns Hopkins University, provided research support for the literature review and data collection.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review information: Nature Climate Change thanks Maryam Arbabzadeh, Anders Arvesen, Constantine Samaras and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Surana, K., Jordaan, S.M. The climate mitigation opportunity behind global power transmission and distribution. Nat. Clim. Chang. 9, 660–665 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0544-3
Influencing factors of the decoupling relationship between CO2 emission and economic development in China’s power industry
Expected Benefits of Laos’ Hydropower Development Curbed by Hydroclimatic Variability and Limited Transmission Capacity: Opportunities to Reform
Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management (2020)
Environmental Science & Technology (2020)
Changing the policy paradigm: A benefit maximization approach to electricity planning in developing countries
Applied Energy (2020)
Nature Climate Change (2019)