| Fuel Type | Value | source | |
|---|---|---|---|
| CCGT | 499 | Mean value from above publication | |
| Nuclear | 29 | Mean value from above publication | |
| Biomass | 45 | Mean value from above publication | |
| Coal | 888 | Mean value from above publication | |
| Wind | 26 | Mean value from above publication | |
| Solar | 85 | Mean value from above publication | |
| Oil | 733 | Mean value from above publication | |
| OCGT | 499 | Mean value from above publication | |
| HydroElectric | 26 | Mean value from above publication | |
| Pumped Hydro | 415 | Assumes that the plant produces 70% of the energy needed to pump the water to the higher resevoir. The co2 for this will come from other fuels so a calculation is made with CCGT being 50% of the co2 and the rest being split between Nuclear,Biomass,Wind and Solar. TO this figure is added the Co2 of a Non Pumped HydroElectrical. ((100/70)* ((CCGT/2)+(((Nuclear+Biomass+Wind+Solar)/4)/2)))+Hydroelectric | |
| Interconnectors | 273 | These use the calculation (CCGT/2)+(((Nuclear+Biomass+Wind+Solar)/4)/2). There is likely scope to attribute different values to each interconnector as the mix of fuels will differ (ie The French Interconnector will use a high percentage of Nuclear) Only interconnectors importing are added to the total as the co2e produced for exporting is already accounted for under each fuel. | |
| Other | 273 | I do not currently have the break down of this so have used the use the calculation (CCGT/2)+(((Nuclear+Biomass+Wind+Solar)/4)/2). |
Although you are in no way obligated, some users have requested a way to support the project.
A big thank you goes out to all the donors who have already contributed.