Green Energy and Its Impact on the Reduction in Carbon Footprint

IJEP 43(10): 936-946 : Vol. 43 Issue. 10 (October 2023)

Satabdi Chatterjee1, Indranil Mukherjee2*, Barun Mandal3 and Ayindrila Roy1

1. Techno International Newtown, Department of Electrical Engineering, New Town – 700 156, West Bengal, India
2. Aliah University, Department of Civil Engineering, New Town – 700 156, West Bengal, India
3. Kalyani Government Engineering College, Department of Electrical Engineering, Kalyani – 741 235, West Bengal, India


Integration of carbon emissions from various daily activities is difficult. The overall carbon footprint value, after integration, shows the total carbon emission or macro-level consumption. Estimating one’s carbon footprint is crucial for determining how much greenhouse effect is contributing to global warming. There has not been much research done on carbon footprint estimates from utility-based generation for a hybrid system. This study was conducted considering the significance of carbon footprint estimates and their detrimental effects on the surrounding environment. It covers the above aspects for a micro-community in Rajarhat, Newtown. Here, an effort has been made to compare the carbon footprint values produced in a microgrid considering a standard tariff as well as with 30% and 100% green energy contribution, taking into account energy supply from conventional as well as non-conventional sources. A thorough output analysis has been used. The results show that the usage of conventional energy resources yields a carbon footprint of 49.8 tonnes person. However, this value reduces to 21.3 tonnes and 8.1 tonnes/person, respectively by using 30% and 100% green energy resources. The results suggest the use of biofuel in conjunction with non-conventional energy sources to reduce the overall carbon footprint output.


Carbon footprint, Global warming, Microgrid, Biofuels, Greenhouse effect, Calculators, Emissions


  1. Du, Q., et al. 2019. Impact of prefabrication technology on the cardle-to-site CO2emissions of residential buildings. Clean Tech. Env. Policy. 21:1499-1514.
  2. Jafar-Nowdeh, A., et al. 2020. Meta-heuristic matrix moth-fame algorithm for optimal reconfiguration of distribution networks and placement of solar and wind renewable sources considering reliability. Env. Tech. Innov., 20:101118.
  3. Jahannoosh, M., S.A. Nowdeh and A. Naderipour. 2020. New hybrid meta-heuristic algorithm for reliable and cost-effective designing of photovoltaic/wind/fuel cell energy system considering load interruption probability. J. Clean Prod., 278:123406.
  4. Gao, T., Q. Liu and J. Wang. 2013. A comparative study of carbon footprint and assessment standards. Int. J. Low Carbon Tech., 9:237-243.
  5. Jaramillo, P., W.M. Griffin and H.S. Mathews. 2007. Comparative life-cycle air emissions of coal, domestic natural gas, LNG and SNG for electricity generation. Env. Sci. Tech., 41(17):6290-6296.
  6. Cabrucean, D., V. Cebrucean and I. Ionel. 2020. Modelling and performance analysis of subcritical and supercritical coal-fired power plants with biomass co-firing and CO2capture. Clean Tech. Env. Policy. 22:153-169.
  7. Bare, J.C. 2010. Life cycle impact assessment research development and needs. Clean Tech. Env. Policy. 12:341-351.
  8. Mustafa, A., et al. 2022. Towards a carbon neutral and sustainable campus: Case study of NED University of Engineering and Technology. Sustain., 14(2):794.
  9. Ngar, M.S. and C.W. Tan. 2012. Assessment of economic viability for PV/wind/diesel hybrid energy system in southern peninsular Malaysia. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 16:634-636.
  10. Tan, S.T., et al. 2014. Energy and emissions benefits of benefits of renewable energy derived from municipal solid waste: Analysis of a low carbon scenario in Malaysia. Appl. Energy. 136:797-804.
  11. Robinson, O., S. Kemp and I. Williams. 2015. Carbon management at universities: A reality check. Clean Prod., 106:109-118.
  12. Gomez, N., M.A. Cadarso and F. Monsalve. 2016. Carbon footprint of a university in a multiregional model: The case of the University of Castilla-La Mancha. Clean. Prod., 138:119-130.
  13. Peng, C. and X. Wu. 2015. Case study of carbon emissions from a building’s life cycle based on ecotect and building information modelling. J. Clean. Prod., 112:453–465.
  14. Victoria, M., S. Perera and A. Davies. 2015. Developing an early design stage embodied carbon prediction model : A case study. 31st Annual Conference on Association of researchers in construction management (ARCOM), Lincoln, UK. pp 267-276.
  15. Perera, S. and M.F. Victoria. 2017. The role of carbon in sustainable development. In Future challenges in evaluating and managing sustainable development in the built environment. Ed P.S. Brandon, P. Lombardi and G.Q. Shen. pp 125-154.
  16. Radu, A.L., M.A. Scrieciu and D.M. Caracota. 2013. Carbon footprint analysis: Towards a projects evaluation model for promoting sustainable development. Procedia Eco. Finance. 1(6):353-363.
  17. Sangwan, K.S. 2018. Measuring carbon footprint of a Indian university using life cycle assessment. 25th CIRP Life cycle engineering (LCE) Conference. Proceedings, pp 475-480.
  18. Ridhosari, B. and R. Ari. 2020. Carbon footprint assessment at Universitas Pertamina from the scope of electricity transportation and waste generation: Toward a green campus and promotion of environmental sustainability. J. Clean. Prod., 246: 119172.
  19. Utaraskul, T. 2015. Carbon footprint of environmental science students in Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University, Thailand. Procedia Social Behav. Sci., 197:1156-1160.
  20. Avci, A.S. and K. Hakan. 2019. Calculating energy-induced carbon footprint: Batman University case. European J. Technique. (1):114-120.
  21. Aroonsrimorakot, S., et al. 2013. Carbon footprint of Faculty of Environment and Resource Studies, Mahidol University, Salaya campus, Thailand. APCBEE Procedia. 5:175-180.
  22. Spirovski, D., et al. 2012. Realization of a low emission university campus through the implementation of a climate action plan. Procedia Social Behav. Sci., 46: 4695-4702.
  23. Udas, E., M. Wolk and M. Wilmking. 2018. The carbon-neutral university: A study from Germany. Int. J. Sustain. Higher Education.
  24. Criolio, N.P., et al. 2019. The role of higher education institutions regarding climate change: The case of Escuela Superior Politecnica del Litoral and its carbon footprint in Ecuador. ASME International mechanical engineering Congress and exposition. American Society of Mechanical Engineers. Proceedings, vol. 59421.
  25. O’ Keeffe, J. M., et al. 2020. Sustainable deployment of environmental management systems for higher education institutions: Challenges and limitations. In University partnerships for sustainable development. Ed E. Sengupta, P. Blessinger and T.S. Yamin. Ernerald Publishing Limited. pp 81-99.
  26. Kamyab, H., et al. 2020. Transition to sustainable energy system for smart cities and industries. Energy. 207:1181104.
  27. West, S.E., et al. 2016. Evaluating the use of a carbon footprint calculator: Communicating impacts of consumption at household level and exploring mitigation options. J. Ind. Ecol., 20(3):396-409.
  28. Malak, N.A. and K.K. Kumarasan. 2019. Design and development of a carbon footprint calculation model for Universiti Tenaga National. Int. J. Recent Tech. Eng., 8(4): 6236-6239.
  29. Townsend, J. and J. Barrett. 2015. Exploring the applications of carbon footprinting towards sustainability at a UK university: Reporting and decision making. J. Clean. Prod., 107:164-176.
  30. Naderipour, A., et al. 2021. Assessment of carbon footprint from transportation, electricity, water and waste generation: Towards utilisation of renewable energy sources. Clean Tech. Env. Policy., 23(1): 183-201.
  31. Zen, I.S., et al. 2021. Magnitudes of households carbon footprint in Iskandar, Malaysia: Policy implications for sustainable development. J. Clean. Prod., 315:12804.
  32. Yanez, P., A. Sinha and M. Vasquez. 2019. Carbon footprint estimation in a university campus: Evaluation and insights. Sustain., 12(1):181.
  33. Papilo, P., E. Hambali and I.S. Sitanggang. 2018. Sustainability index assessment of palm oil-based bioenergy in Indonesia. J. Clean. Prod., 196:808-820.
  34. Gu, Y., et al. 2019. Quantification of interlinked environmental footprints on a sustainable university campus: A nexus analysis perspective. Appl. Energy. 246:65-76.
  35. Latif, S.N.A., et al. 2021. The trend and status of energy resources and greenhouse gas emissions in the Malaysia power generation mix. Energies. 14(8):2200.
  36. Vaisi, S., et al. 2021. Developing the ecological footprint assessment for a university campus the component based method. Sustain., 13(17):9928.
  37. Genta, C., et al. 2022. Quantitative assessment of environmental impacts at the urban scale: The ecological footprint of a university campus. Env. Develop. Sustain., 24(4):5826-5845.
  38. Clabeaux, R., et al. 2020. Assessing the carbon footprint of a university campus using a life-cycle assessment approach. J. Clean. Prod., 273: 122600.
  39. Chatterjee, S., I. Mukherjee and B. Mandal. 2020. Sensitivity analysis for micro-community. Int. J. Env. Prot., 40(1):91-98.
  40. Yasuhara, K., et al. 2007. Influence of global warming on coastal infrastructural instability. Sustain. Sci., 2:13-25.
  41. Kim, B. and R. Neff. 2009. Measurement and communication of greenhouse gas emissions from US food consumption via carbon calculators. Ecol. Eco., 69(1):186-96.
  42. Smith, M.A. 2009. Recent research progress on UNIC at Argonne National Laboratory. International Conference on Mathematics, computational methods and reactor physics (M and C 2009), Saratoga Springs, New York. Proceedings, pp 1-18.
  43. Tukker, A., et al. 2010. Sustainable consumption and production. J. Ind. Ecol., 14(1):1-3.
  44. Shirley, R., C. Jones and D. Kammen. 2012. A household carbon footprint calculator for islands: Case study of the United States Virgin Islands. Ecol. Eco., 1(80):8-14.