The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Real-time carbon accounting method for the European electricity markets
Open accessAbstract
Electricity accounts for 25% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Reducing emissions related to electricity consumption requires accurate measurements readily available to consumers, regulators and investors. In this case study, we propose a new real-time consumption-based accounting approach based on flow tracing. This method traces power flows from producer to consumer thereby representing the underlying physics of the electricity system, in contrast to the traditional input-output models of carbon accounting. With this method we explore the hourly structure of electricity trade across Europe in 2017, and find substantial differences between production and consumption intensities. This emphasizes the importance of considering cross-border flows for increased transparency regarding carbon emission accounting of electricity.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
electricitymap.org estimates are based on a closed-source system and use the methodology described by Tranberg et al. (2019).
“We note that electricitymap.org estimates are based on a closed-source system and uses the methodology described by Tranberg et al. (2019).”
From Towards the Systematic Reporting of the Energy and Carbon Footprints of Machine Learning (2020) · cites this paper as Tranberg et al. (2019)
Section 2.1 (Data) says the authors used electricityMap data, and Section 2.2 (Carbon emission allocation) says they applied their flow-tracing method to it. Neither section says electricitymap.org uses that method for its own estimates or that its system is closed-source; searches for those terms found no such passage. (LLM, conf=0.75)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 17
- Victor, 2014, Introductory chapter
- Brander, 2018, Creative accounting: a critical perspective on the market-based method for reporting purchased electricity (scope 2) emissions, Energy Policy, 112, 29, 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.09.051 · DOI
- Jiusto, 2006, The differences that methods make: cross-border power flows and accounting for carbon emissions from electricity use, Energy Policy, 34, 2915, 10.1016/j.enpol.2005.05.002 · DOI
- Fan, 2016, Exploring the characteristics of production-based and consumption-based carbon emissions of major economies: a multiple-dimension comparison, Appl. Energy, 184, 790, 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.06.076 · DOI
- Zhang, 2018, From production-based to consumption-based regional carbon inventories: insight from spatial production fragmentation, Appl. Energy, 211, 549, 10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.11.047 · DOI
- Li, 2013, Carbon flow tracing method for assessment of demand side carbon emissions obligation, IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, 4, 1100, 10.1109/TSTE.2013.2268642 · DOI
- Sjödin, 2004, Emissions accounting for use and supply of electricity in the nordic market, Energy Policy, 32, 1555, 10.1016/S0301-4215(03)00129-0 · DOI
- Lenzen, 2007, Shared producer and consumer responsibility theory and practice, Ecol. Econ., 61, 27, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.05.018 · DOI
- Peters, 2008, From production-based to consumption-based national emission inventories, Ecol. Econ., 65, 13, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.10.014 · DOI
- Wernet, 2016, The ecoinvent database version 3 (part I): overview and methodology, Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., 21, 1218, 10.1007/s11367-016-1087-8 · DOI · Paper page
- Bialek, 1996, Tracing the flow of electricity, IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib., 143, 313, 10.1049/ip-gtd:19960461 · DOI
- Kirschen, 1997, Contributions of individual generators to loads and flows, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 12, 52, 10.1109/59.574923 · DOI
- Tranberg, 2015, Power flow tracing in a simplified highly renewable European electricity networks, New J. Phys., 17, 10.1088/1367-2630/17/10/105002 · DOI
- Schäfer, 2017, Decompositions of injection patterns for nodal flow allocation in renewable electricity networks, Eur. Phys. J. B, 90, 144, 10.1140/epjb/e2017-80200-y · DOI
- Hörsch, 2018, Flow tracing as a tool set for the analysis of networked large-scale renewable electricity systems, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 96, 390, 10.1016/j.ijepes.2017.10.024 · DOI
- Tranberg, 2018, Flow-based nodal cost allocation in a heterogeneous highly renewable european electricity network, Energy, 150, 122, 10.1016/j.energy.2018.02.129 · DOI
- Kunz, 2018, Quo vadis? (un)scheduled electricity flows under market splitting and network extension in central europe, Energy Policy, 116, 198, 10.1016/j.enpol.2018.01.051 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Towards the Systematic Reporting of the Energy and Carbon Footprints of Machine Learning
Henderson, P., Hu, J., Romoff, J., Brunskill, E., Jurafsky, D., & Pineau, J. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2002.05651 · Cited by 393
Review and Meta-Analysis of EVs: Embodied Emissions and Environmental Breakeven
Dillman, K. J., Árnadóttir, Á., Heinonen, J., Czepkiewicz, M., & Davíðsdóttir, B. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12229390 · Cited by 77
Charging, steady-state SoC and energy storage distributions for EV fleets
Hipolito, F., Vandet, C. A., & Rich, J. (2022) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119065 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Tranberg, B., Corradi, O., Lajoie, B., Gibon, T., Staffell, I., & Andresen, G. B.
- Affiliations
- Aarhus University (DK)
- Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology (LU)
- Imperial College London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Tranberg, Bo
- Venue
- Energy Strategy Reviews
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-11
- Volume
- 26
- Pages
- 100367
- ISSN
- 2211-467X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2904551500
- Cited by
- 200
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 41 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 6
- FWCI
- 6.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Energy Strategy Reviews (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Sustainability and Ecological Systems Analysis
- Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Renewable Energy and Sustainability
- Keywords
- carbon accounting, electricity consumption, flow tracing, real-time accounting, cross-border electricity flows, greenhouse gas emissions, European electricity market
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
