IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v117y2016ip2p369-377.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exergo-ecological and economic evaluation of a nuclear power plant within the whole life cycle

Author

Listed:
  • Stanek, Wojciech
  • Szargut, Jan
  • Kolenda, Zygmunt
  • Czarnowska, Lucyna

Abstract

The multi-criteria analysis of different power technologies takes into account TEC (thermo-ecological cost); direct and cumulative emissions; and economic evaluation. The environmental and ecological comparison of the planned nuclear power plant with the existing conventional ones (coal and gas plants) requires the evaluation of the whole life cycle of electricity generation. The main cause of the imperfection of nuclear fuel cycle appears in the stage of conversion, enrichment and nuclear fuel fabrication. TEC analysis takes into account all connected process starting from natural resources extracting, through all related processes influencing product generation, up to disposal or recycling. For this reason, TEC and exergy efficiency evaluate the nuclear fuel life cycle. TEC expresses the total (cumulative) exergy consumption of non-renewable resources burdening the analysed product, which means exergy assembly of the whole cycle of this product. TEC also takes into account the additional non-renewable exergy consumption required for environmental losses mitigation caused by the harmful emissions. A significant amount of GHG (greenhouse gasses) emissions is not covered by the direct analysis since the CO2 emissions also occur in the stages of mining and transportation of fuel production. The nuclear power units are characterized by lower GHG emissions than the coal and gas technologies, for which the GHG emissions is on a comparable level. Additionally, the economic analysis revealed that the investment cost of the nuclear power plant is significantly higher than those of coal or gas power plant the unit cost of electricity generated by the nuclear installation could be about twice lower than from other technologies. It results from an operating cost: the cost of fuel and the fee of direct GHG emissions are higher for coal and gas technology than for nuclear power plant. The nuclear power plants seem to be the competitive technologies for the coal or gas installation and should be taken into account while planning the policy for energy generation.

Suggested Citation

  • Stanek, Wojciech & Szargut, Jan & Kolenda, Zygmunt & Czarnowska, Lucyna, 2016. "Exergo-ecological and economic evaluation of a nuclear power plant within the whole life cycle," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 117(P2), pages 369-377.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:117:y:2016:i:p2:p:369-377
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2016.04.022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544216304285
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2016.04.022?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Szargut, Jan & Stanek, Wojciech, 2010. "Thermo-climatic cost of the domestic consumption products," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 1196-1199.
    2. Szargut, J. & Stanek, W., 2007. "Thermo-ecological optimization of a solar collector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 584-590.
    3. Hermann, Weston A., 2006. "Quantifying global exergy resources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(12), pages 1685-1702.
    4. Finnveden, Göran & Östlund, Per, 1997. "Exergies of natural resources in life-cycle assessment and other applications," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 22(9), pages 923-931.
    5. Gallo-Rivera, María Teresa & Mancha-Navarro, Tomás & Garrido-Yserte, Rubén, 2013. "Application of the counterfactual method to assess of the local economic impact of a nuclear power station," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1481-1492.
    6. Durmayaz, Ahmet & Yavuz, Hasbi, 2001. "Exergy analysis of a pressurized-water reactor nuclear-power plant," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 39-57, May.
    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. Stanek, Wojciech & Czarnowska, Lucyna, 2018. "Thermo-ecological cost – Szargut's proposal on exergy and ecology connection," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(PB), pages 1050-1059.
    2. Khajehpour, Hossein & Miremadi, Iman & Saboohi, Yadollah & Tsatsaronis, George, 2020. "A novel approach for analyzing the effectiveness of the R&D capital for resource conservation: Comparative study on Germany and UK electricity sectors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    3. Stanek, Wojciech & Mendecka, Barbara & Lombardi, Lidia & Simla, Tomasz, 2018. "Environmental assessment of wind turbine systems based on thermo-ecological cost," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 341-348.
    4. Chen, Huadong & Wang, Can & Cai, Wenjia & Wang, Jianhui, 2018. "Simulating the impact of investment preference on low-carbon transition in power sector," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 440-455.
    5. Rigby, Aidan & Lindley, Ben & Cullen, Jonathan, 2023. "An exergy based assessment of the efficiency of nuclear fuel cycles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    6. Pietro Catrini & Tancredi Testasecca & Alessandro Buscemi & Antonio Piacentino, 2022. "Exergoeconomics as a Cost-Accounting Method in Thermal Grids with the Presence of Renewable Energy Producers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-27, March.

    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. Rigby, Aidan & Lindley, Ben & Cullen, Jonathan, 2023. "An exergy based assessment of the efficiency of nuclear fuel cycles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    2. Valero, Antonio & Usón, Sergio & Torres, César & Valero, Alicia & Agudelo, Andrés & Costa, Jorge, 2013. "Thermoeconomic tools for the analysis of eco-industrial parks," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 62-72.
    3. Bilgen, Selçuk & Keleş, Sedat & Kaygusuz, Kamil, 2012. "Calculation of higher and lower heating values and chemical exergy values of liquid products obtained from pyrolysis of hazelnut cupulae," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 380-385.
    4. Talens Peiró, L. & Lombardi, L. & Villalba Méndez, G. & Gabarrell i Durany, X., 2010. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) and exergetic life cycle assessment (ELCA) of the production of biodiesel from used cooking oil (UCO)," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 889-893.
    5. Nguyen, Hong X. & Yamamoto, Ryoichi, 2007. "Modification of ecological footprint evaluation method to include non-renewable resource consumption using thermodynamic approach," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 51(4), pages 870-884.
    6. Flórez-Orrego, Daniel & Henriques, Izabela B. & Nguyen, Tuong-Van & Mendes da Silva, Julio A. & Keutenedjian Mady, Carlos E. & Pellegrini, Luiz Felipe & Gandolfi, Ricardo & Velasquez, Hector I. & Burb, 2018. "The contributions of Prof. Jan Szargut to the exergy and environmental assessment of complex energy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 482-492.
    7. Becerra-Lopez, Humberto R. & Golding, Peter, 2007. "Dynamic exergy analysis for capacity expansion of regional power-generation systems: Case study of far West Texas," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(11), pages 2167-2186.
    8. Valero, Alicia & Valero, Antonio & Martínez, Amaya, 2010. "Inventory of the exergy resources on earth including its mineral capital," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 989-995.
    9. Stanek, Wojciech & Czarnowska, Lucyna, 2018. "Thermo-ecological cost – Szargut's proposal on exergy and ecology connection," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(PB), pages 1050-1059.
    10. Mahtta, Richa & Joshi, P.K. & Jindal, Alok Kumar, 2014. "Solar power potential mapping in India using remote sensing inputs and environmental parameters," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 255-262.
    11. Valero, Alicia & Valero, Antonio & Gómez, Javier B., 2011. "The crepuscular planet. A model for the exhausted continental crust," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 694-707.
    12. Hao, Xiaoqing & An, Haizhong & Qi, Hai & Gao, Xiangyun, 2016. "Evolution of the exergy flow network embodied in the global fossil energy trade: Based on complex network," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 1515-1522.
    13. Colombo, Emanuela & Rocco, Matteo V. & Toro, Claudia & Sciubba, Enrico, 2015. "An exergy-based approach to the joint economic and environmental impact assessment of possible photovoltaic scenarios: A case study at a regional level in Italy," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 318(C), pages 64-74.
    14. Chen, G.Q. & Qi, Z.H., 2007. "Systems account of societal exergy utilization: China 2003," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 208(2), pages 102-118.
    15. Cullen, Jonathan M. & Allwood, Julian M., 2010. "Theoretical efficiency limits for energy conversion devices," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2059-2069.
    16. Hepbasli, Arif & Alsuhaibani, Zeyad, 2011. "Exergetic and exergoeconomic aspects of wind energy systems in achieving sustainable development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 2810-2825, August.
    17. Golberg, Alexander, 2015. "Environmental exergonomics for sustainable design and analysis of energy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 314-321.
    18. Dupont, Elise & Koppelaar, Rembrandt & Jeanmart, Hervé, 2018. "Global available wind energy with physical and energy return on investment constraints," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 322-338.
    19. Rocco, M.V. & Colombo, E. & Sciubba, E., 2014. "Advances in exergy analysis: a novel assessment of the Extended Exergy Accounting method," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1405-1420.
    20. Torres, César & Valero, Antonio & Valero, Alicia, 2013. "Exergoecology as a tool for ecological modelling. The case of the US food production chain," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 255(C), pages 21-28.

    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:energy:v:117:y:2016:i:p2:p:369-377. 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.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    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.