Biodiversity Impact of China's Power System Transition From a Life Cycle Perspective

Biodiversity loss is a critical but underexplored dimension of global low-carbon energy transitions, particularly in the context of China’s power sector. China’s power sector is undergoing an in-depth decarbonization, which could shape both the local and global environment. To uncover the biodiversity consequences of China’s power system decarbonization, this thesis develops a spatially explicit life cycle assessment (LCA) model to evaluate the biodiversity impacts of China’s power system by applying three mainstream LCIA methods. The model covers the 2020 baseline and two 2050 scenarios—NDC (National Determined Contribution) and PEAK30—and integrates a province-level inventory with scenario-based technology deployment. A stepwise approach was adopted: the model robustness was first validated using indicators of environmental footprints such as Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG), Particulate Matter Formation, Freshwater Eutrophication, Mineral Resource Use, and Land Transformation, then subsequently applied to biodiversity impact assessment. The environmental footprint results of 2020 indicate that coal power dominated climate and air pollution impacts, while hydropower and wind contributed significantly to land and mineral pressures. Environmental footprint results of future scenarios reveal substantial co-benefits and trade-offs: decarbonization reduces climate- and pollution-related burdens by up to 90%, yet land transformation and mineral demand increase markedly—by up to 4–6 times—driven mainly by biomass expansion and large-scale renewable deployment. Biodiversity impacts assessment has further confirmed a fundamental biodiversity trade-off: although decarbonization can successfully alleviate global warming and pollution-related biodiversity impacts, it also exacerbates the land use-driven biodiversity loss, bringing uncertainty to the cumulative biodiversity impacts. This trade-off primarily stems from significant biomass feedstock cultivation. Technology choices strongly influence outcomes: wind, solar, and nuclear offer far lower per-kWh biodiversity impacts than biomass with CCS. Current LCIA methods, however, underrepresent site and species-specific biodiversity impacts. These findings highlight the necessity to integrate biodiversity metrics into energy planning, regulating land-intensive technologies and develop more comprehensive assessment tools that also capture wider aspects and site-specific biodiversity impacts.<p></p>

Author dc:creator

• Yinchen Liu (21040742)

• Renewable energy
• Life Cycle Assessment
• Biodiversity footprint
• Energy transition
• Environmental impact assessment

Statement dc:rights

• All rights reserved
• Open Access after 2027-09-09

Identifier

10779/exe.31579195.v1

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:figshare.com:article/31579195