Electricity mix used in Ducky's climate calculator

Learn how Ducky calculates the electricity mix we use in our personal footprint calculations, climate communication and -nudging.

Indirect emissions from electricity consumption is one of the largest components of an individual’s climate footprint. As such, choosing the value used to convert electricity into CO2 equivalents is absolutely crucial, but not at all straightforward. There are a wide variety of calculations to choose from; market or location-based, national or continental averages. Any choice needs to be well-founded.

Ducky’s position has been prepared in collaboration with our research partners Asplan Viak, after discussion with researchers from NTNU, Vestlandsfork and Norsus as well as Norway’s electricity market regulator, The Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate.

Recommended electricity mix for climate communication

This location-based calculation includes both direct emissions (from electricity production) and indirect emissions (those resulting from infrastructure costs over the assumed lifetime of the power plants), and is updated monthly from statistical data.

In addition, market-based calculations provide very different numbers that must be used in some contexts. These numbers are not to be used for communicating any environmental benefits to users, as explained in our article about guarantees of origin.

Why is a European electricity mix the right choice (in this case)?

• Through shared energy grids and transfers of guarantees of origin, European countries form a singular European electricity market. As a result, electricity prices in any one European country change in sync with the prices in countries around them.  
• A European average better represents how global emissions will be affected by changes in European electricity demand in the short term, and is more representative of the long-term impact of our energy use on the planet. A European mix gives clear incentives to save electricity all over Europe and can help inspire industry, individuals and municipalities to work together.
• Current GHG reporting schemes allow cherry-picking among a wide range of emission factors - even omitting most of the life cycle of electricity production. This clearly leads to incomparable reporting and enables greenwashing. The European energy mix we use at Ducky takes into account the entire lifecycle emissions of different generation technologies, and therefore, more accurately captures the environmental impacts of electricity use. 
• Making the average global electricity mix more sustainable is one great unifying goal, and we can already see that things are moving in the right direction in Europe. This goes hand-in-hand with decades of enormous investments in integrating our electricity market. A problem today is that regions with a high share of renewables are punished for integrating with the market: In order to export electricity they also have to import electricity generated from fossil fuels - and this shows up as increasing emissions in typical greenhouse gas reports. Using the European mix instead will support the continued integration of the market and can help gain acceptance for investments in electricity transmission infrastructure.

Other relevant calculations for electricity mix

For location-based calculations, there are several interpretations of the grid on which electricity consumption occurs, ranging from local electricity price areas through countries to larger geographical regions. These are all reasonable alternatives, with different trade-offs and different use cases. For comparison with the above European electricity mix, the average Norwegian mix is around 30 g CO2e/kWh while the average Nordic mix is around 60 g CO2e/kWh (both numbers including indirect emissions).  

In addition, market-based calculations provide very different numbers that must be used in some contexts. These numbers are not to be used for communicating any environmental benefits to users, as explained in our article about guarantees of origin.

Scientific background

Globally, electricity production accounts for around 31% of greenhouse gas emissions, and with the electrification of, among other things, the transport sector, humanity's dependence on the electricity grid will only increase.  For producers and consumers alike, reducing these emissions are critical. 

Electricity is produced with a number of different technologies, and the greenhouse gas emissions per kilowatt hour (kWh) produced vary greatly: from approximately 5 g CO2e/kWh for hydropower plants to close to 1000 g CO2e/kWh for coal (Tranberg et al., 2019). There are also important sources of indirect emissions to consider, like the construction and maintenance of the power grid and transmission loss.

At the same time, end users rarely have the opportunity to influence which energy source is used to produce the electricity they receive through the grid. And since your average citizen does not influence how electricity is produced, they can influence their footprint to the greatest extent by reducing energy consumption.

Norway is in a unique position in Europe with access to large amounts of renewable hydropower. Yet the right to call this electricity “green” is largely sold out of the country in the form of guarantees of origin. The average Norwegian perceives their electricity as clean, so this leads in practice to a kind of double counting of renewable energy. As such, clear and concise use of a selected emission factor for energy, with the most relevance to our impact on the planet, will help the public make more sustainable decisions on a daily basis. The choice of system boundaries has an extreme influence on the outcome of the calculations.

What calculation method is appropriate?

The market-based method is not to be used for communicating any environmental benefits to users, as explained in our article about guarantees of origin. It allows for wasteful use of energy with “a good conscience” for those who purchase guarantees of origin, and doesn’t show any benefits from energy saving actions.

The location-based method is the general standard for greenhouse gas reporting, calculating direct and potentially indirect emissions over an area, and should be used to communicate both environmental impact and the positive effect of environmental actions to individuals.

What scope of life cycle to consider?

Some greenhouse gas reports include no emissions, some include only direct emissions from fuel combustion, some also include indirect emissions from electricity production and finally some even include indirect emissions from usage of the electricity grid. Let’s take three examples from Norway that give quite different results:

1. In the case of public sector reporting, emissions from electricity suppliers and district heating fall under other sectors than consumption. Imported energy is also discounted, since this falls under another country’s direct emission reporting. In order to avoid double counting, the emission factor used for electricity consumption is therefore 0 g CO2e/kWh. See Spørsmål og svar - Miljødirektoratet under “Strøm/fjernvarme: Hvorfor er ikke utslipp fra bruk av strøm/fjernvarme inkludert i kommuneregnskapet?” 
2. In the NVE physical electricity disclosure for 2021, direct emissions from Norwegian and imported energy are included, while indirect emissions are omitted, giving a rather low emission factor of 11 g CO2e/kWh. This is what would be used for scope 2 greenhouse gas reporting
3. In contrast to above scopes, the CO2e-intensity of different sources of electricity as defined in the IPCC (2014) Fifth Assessment Report p. 1335 include the full life cycle of electricity production. Using this scope,  Electricity Maps estimates Norwegian average emissions are estimated to be around 30 g CO2e/kWh. This is what would be used for scope 3 greenhouse gas reporting

On what grid does consumption take place?

For location-based calculations, there are several interpretations of the grid on which electricity consumption occurs, ranging from local electricity price areas through countries to larger geographical regions. These are all reasonable alternatives, with different trade-offs and different use cases. Let’s take some examples from Norway that give quite different results (all including indirect emissions):

1. For a specific electricity price area in Norway, there are large and rather arbitrary variations. The emission intensity might vary by a factor of ten when comparing neighboring areas or when comparing one day to another (say between 10 and 100 g CO2e/kWh), because of variations in grid capacity and  import of fossil-based electricity
2. The average Norwegian mix is around 30 g CO2e/kWh according to Electricity Maps
3. The average Nordic mix is around 60 g CO2e/kWh according to Nordic Energy Research
4. The average European mix is about 300 g CO2e/kWh according to our own calculations

Other scopes are still appropriate in other contexts like to fulfill reporting requirements. Head over to our white paper on greenhouse gas reporting for more details. Emissions from electricity usage are split over scope 2 (use phase) and scope 3 (other indirect) reports.