IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v37y2009i12p5056-5068.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Greenhouse gas emissions in the nuclear life cycle: A balanced appraisal

Author

Listed:
  • Beerten, Jef
  • Laes, Erik
  • Meskens, Gaston
  • D'haeseleer, William

Abstract

In order to combat global warming, a detailed knowledge of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with different energy conversion technologies is important. For nuclear energy, GHG emissions result from different process stages of the whole fuel cycle. A life-cycle assessment offers the possibility to properly calculate these emissions. In the past, both indirect energy use and GHG emissions were studied by many researchers. Most of the studies result in low indirect emissions comparable to wind turbines. However, some of the studies in the literature obtain high results adding up to a significant fraction of the direct emissions from a CCGT. In this paper, the GHG emissions resulting from the overall nuclear fuel cycle are analyzed by making a detailed comparison of the results from three different life-cycle assessments. Hereby, the studies are chosen in order to reflect the range of results available in open literature. The studies under consideration result in indirect emissions of around 8 and 58Â g CO2/kWhe and more than 110Â g CO2/kWhe. An explanation is given for these strongly varying results by analyzing the input data, assumptions and estimations made for different process steps.

Suggested Citation

  • Beerten, Jef & Laes, Erik & Meskens, Gaston & D'haeseleer, William, 2009. "Greenhouse gas emissions in the nuclear life cycle: A balanced appraisal," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5056-5068, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:12:p:5056-5068
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(09)00510-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hewlett, James G., 1992. "The operating costs and longevity of nuclear power plants : Evidence from the USA," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(7), pages 608-622, July.
    2. Bullard, Clark W. & Penner, Peter S. & Pilati, David A., 1978. "Net energy analysis : Handbook for combining process and input-output analysis," Resources and Energy, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 267-313, November.
    3. Fthenakis, Vasilis M. & Kim, Hyung Chul, 2007. "Greenhouse-gas emissions from solar electric- and nuclear power: A life-cycle study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 2549-2557, April.
    4. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2008. "Valuing the greenhouse gas emissions from nuclear power: A critical survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 2940-2953, August.
    5. Chapman, Peter F., 1975. "Energy analysis of nuclear power stations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 285-298, December.
    6. Roberts, P. C., 1982. "Energy and value," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 171-180, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nick King & Aled Jones, 2020. "An Assessment of Civil Nuclear ‘Enabling’ and ‘Amelioration’ Factors for EROI Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-34, October.
    2. Carless, Travis S. & Griffin, W. Michael & Fischbeck, Paul S., 2016. "The environmental competitiveness of small modular reactors: A life cycle study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 84-99.
    3. Sheldon, Seth & Hadian, Saeed & Zik, Ory, 2015. "Beyond carbon: Quantifying environmental externalities as energy for hydroelectric and nuclear power," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 36-44.
    4. Poinssot, Ch. & Bourg, S. & Ouvrier, N. & Combernoux, N. & Rostaing, C. & Vargas-Gonzalez, M. & Bruno, J., 2014. "Assessment of the environmental footprint of nuclear energy systems. Comparison between closed and open fuel cycles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 199-211.
    5. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Burke, Matthew & Baker, Lucy & Kotikalapudi, Chaitanya Kumar & Wlokas, Holle, 2017. "New frontiers and conceptual frameworks for energy justice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 677-691.
    6. Dittmar, Michael, 2012. "Nuclear energy: Status and future limitations," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 35-40.
    7. Muellner, Nikolaus & Arnold, Nikolaus & Gufler, Klaus & Kromp, Wolfgang & Renneberg, Wolfgang & Liebert, Wolfgang, 2021. "Nuclear energy - The solution to climate change?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    8. Verbruggen, Aviel & Laes, Erik & Lemmens, Sanne, 2014. "Assessment of the actual sustainability of nuclear fission power," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 16-28.
    9. Jeong, Minsoo & You, Jung S., 2022. "Estimating the economic costs of nuclear power plant outages in a regulated market using a latent factor model," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    10. Tingzhu Li & Debin Du & Xueli Wang & Xionghe Qin, 2022. "Can Nuclear Power Products Mitigate Greenhouse Gas Emissions? Evidence from Global Trade Network," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-25, June.
    11. Pomponi, Francesco & Hart, Jim, 2021. "The greenhouse gas emissions of nuclear energy – Life cycle assessment of a European pressurised reactor," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
    12. Linares, Pedro & Conchado, Adela, 2013. "The economics of new nuclear power plants in liberalized electricity markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(S1), pages 119-125.
    13. Owen, Anthony D., 2011. "The economic viability of nuclear power in a fossil-fuel-rich country: Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1305-1311, March.
    14. Brook, Barry W., 2012. "Could nuclear fission energy, etc., solve the greenhouse problem? The affirmative case," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 4-8.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tsai, Bi-Huei & Chang, Chih-Jen & Chang, Chun-Hsien, 2016. "Elucidating the consumption and CO2 emissions of fossil fuels and low-carbon energy in the United States using Lotka–Volterra models," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 416-424.
    2. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2008. "Valuing the greenhouse gas emissions from nuclear power: A critical survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 2940-2953, August.
    3. Wu, X.D. & Chen, G.Q., 2017. "Energy and water nexus in power generation: The surprisingly high amount of industrial water use induced by solar power infrastructure in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 125-136.
    4. Turconi, Roberto & Boldrin, Alessio & Astrup, Thomas, 2013. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: Overview, comparability and limitations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 555-565.
    5. Mauro Lafratta & Matthew Leach & Rex B. Thorpe & Mark Willcocks & Eve Germain & Sabeha K. Ouki & Achame Shana & Jacquetta Lee, 2021. "Economic and Carbon Costs of Electricity Balancing Services: The Need for Secure Flexible Low-Carbon Generation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-21, August.
    6. Brown, M. T. & Herendeen, R. A., 1996. "Embodied energy analysis and EMERGY analysis: a comparative view," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 219-235, December.
    7. Schneider, E. & Carlsen, B. & Tavrides, E. & van der Hoeven, C. & Phathanapirom, U., 2013. "Measures of the environmental footprint of the front end of the nuclear fuel cycle," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 898-910.
    8. Carless, Travis S. & Griffin, W. Michael & Fischbeck, Paul S., 2016. "The environmental competitiveness of small modular reactors: A life cycle study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 84-99.
    9. Jones, Christopher R. & Eiser, J. Richard & Gamble, Tim R., 2012. "Assessing the impact of framing on the comparative favourability of nuclear power as an electricity generating option in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 451-465.
    10. Manfred Lenzen & Roberto Schaeffer, 2012. "Historical and potential future contributions of power technologies to global warming," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 112(3), pages 601-632, June.
    11. Alexander T. Dale & André Frossard Pereira de Lucena & Joe Marriott & Bruno Soares Moreira Cesar Borba & Roberto Schaeffer & Melissa M. Bilec, 2013. "Modeling Future Life-Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Environmental Impacts of Electricity Supplies in Brazil," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(7), pages 1-27, July.
    12. Karakosta, Charikleia & Pappas, Charalampos & Marinakis, Vangelis & Psarras, John, 2013. "Renewable energy and nuclear power towards sustainable development: Characteristics and prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 187-197.
    13. Verbruggen, Aviel & Laes, Erik & Lemmens, Sanne, 2014. "Assessment of the actual sustainability of nuclear fission power," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 16-28.
    14. Nian, Victor & Chou, S.K. & Su, Bin & Bauly, John, 2014. "Life cycle analysis on carbon emissions from power generation – The nuclear energy example," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 68-82.
    15. Jacobson, Mark Z. & Delucchi, Mark A., 2011. "Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part I: Technologies, energy resources, quantities and areas of infrastructure, and materials," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1154-1169, March.
    16. Pfenninger, Stefan & Keirstead, James, 2015. "Comparing concentrating solar and nuclear power as baseload providers using the example of South Africa," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 303-314.
    17. Li, Yilin & Chen, Bin & Li, Chaohui & Li, Zhi & Chen, Guoqian, 2020. "Energy perspective of Sino-US trade imbalance in global supply chains," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    18. Jānis Krūmiņš & Māris Kļaviņš, 2023. "Investigating the Potential of Nuclear Energy in Achieving a Carbon-Free Energy Future," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-31, April.
    19. Abolhosseini, Shahrouz & Heshmati, Almas & Altmann, Jörn, 2014. "A Review of Renewable Energy Supply and Energy Efficiency Technologies," IZA Discussion Papers 8145, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Joshua M. Pearce, 2012. "Limitations of Nuclear Power as a Sustainable Energy Source," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-15, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:12:p:5056-5068. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.