IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v136y2014icp712-725.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nuclear power can reduce emissions and maintain a strong economy: Rating Australia’s optimal future electricity-generation mix by technologies and policies

Author

Listed:
  • Hong, Sanghyun
  • Bradshaw, Corey J.A.
  • Brook, Barry W.

Abstract

Legal barriers currently prohibit nuclear power for electricity generation in Australia. For this reason, published future electricity scenarios aimed at policy makers for this country have not seriously considered a full mix of energy options. Here we addressed this deficiency by comparing the life-cycle sustainability of published scenarios using multi-criteria decision-making analysis, and modeling the optimized future electricity mix using a genetic algorithm. The published ‘CSIRO e-future’ scenario under its default condition (excluding nuclear) has the largest aggregate negative environmental and economic outcomes (score=4.51 out of 8), followed by the Australian Energy Market Operator’s 100% renewable energy scenario (4.16) and the Greenpeace scenario (3.97). The e-future projection with maximum nuclear-power penetration allowed yields the lowest negative impacts (1.46). After modeling possible future electricity mixes including or excluding nuclear power, the weighted criteria recommended an optimized scenario mix where nuclear power generated >40% of total electricity. The life-cycle greenhouse-gas emissions of the optimization scenarios including nuclear power were <27kg CO2-e MWh−1 in 2050, which achieves the IPCC’s target of 50–150kg CO2-e MWh−1. Our analyses demonstrate clearly that nuclear power is an effective and logical option for the environmental and economic sustainability of a future electricity network in Australia.

Suggested Citation

  • Hong, Sanghyun & Bradshaw, Corey J.A. & Brook, Barry W., 2014. "Nuclear power can reduce emissions and maintain a strong economy: Rating Australia’s optimal future electricity-generation mix by technologies and policies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 712-725.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:136:y:2014:i:c:p:712-725
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.09.062
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261914010101
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.09.062?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. Rashad, S. M. & Hammad, F. H., 2000. "Nuclear power and the environment: comparative assessment of environmental and health impacts of electricity-generating systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 65(1-4), pages 211-229, April.
    2. Feeley, Thomas J. & Skone, Timothy J. & Stiegel, Gary J. & McNemar, Andrea & Nemeth, Michael & Schimmoller, Brian & Murphy, James T. & Manfredo, Lynn, 2008. "Water: A critical resource in the thermoelectric power industry," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 1-11.
    3. Felder, Frank A., 2009. "A critical assessment of energy accident studies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5744-5751, December.
    4. Trainer, Ted, 2012. "Can Australia run on renewable energy? The negative case," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 306-314.
    5. Kunsch, Pierre L. & Friesewinkel, Jean, 2014. "Nuclear energy policy in Belgium after Fukushima," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 462-474.
    6. Elliston, Ben & MacGill, Iain & Diesendorf, Mark, 2013. "Least cost 100% renewable electricity scenarios in the Australian National Electricity Market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 270-282.
    7. Hoogwijk, Monique & van Vuuren, Detlef & de Vries, Bert & Turkenburg, Wim, 2007. "Exploring the impact on cost and electricity production of high penetration levels of intermittent electricity in OECD Europe and the USA, results for wind energy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1381-1402.
    8. Pierre Louis Kunsch & Jean Friesewinkel, 2014. "Nuclear energy policy in Belgium after Fukushima," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/189447, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    9. Graham Palmer, 2012. "Does Energy Efficiency Reduce Emissions and Peak Demand? A Case Study of 50 Years of Space Heating in Melbourne," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(7), pages 1-36, July.
    10. Stoppato, A., 2008. "Life cycle assessment of photovoltaic electricity generation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 224-232.
    11. Burgherr, Peter & Hirschberg, Stefan, 2008. "Severe accident risks in fossil energy chains: A comparative analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 538-553.
    12. Wang, Jiang-Jiang & Jing, You-Yin & Zhang, Chun-Fa & Zhao, Jun-Hong, 2009. "Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2263-2278, December.
    13. Vivian Scott & Stuart Gilfillan & Nils Markusson & Hannah Chalmers & R. Stuart Haszeldine, 2013. "Last chance for carbon capture and storage," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(2), pages 105-111, February.
    14. Turner, Graham M. & Elliston, Ben & Diesendorf, Mark, 2013. "Impacts on the biophysical economy and environment of a transition to 100% renewable electricity in Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 288-299.
    15. Hong, Sanghyun & Bradshaw, Corey J.A. & Brook, Barry W., 2013. "Evaluating options for the future energy mix of Japan after the Fukushima nuclear crisis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 418-424.
    16. Fthenakis, Vasilis & Kim, Hyung Chul, 2010. "Life-cycle uses of water in U.S. electricity generation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(7), pages 2039-2048, September.
    17. Gagnon, Luc & Belanger, Camille & Uchiyama, Yohji, 2002. "Life-cycle assessment of electricity generation options: The status of research in year 2001," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(14), pages 1267-1278, November.
    18. Iea, 2012. "A Policy Strategy for Carbon Capture and Storage," IEA Energy Papers 2012/4, OECD Publishing.
    19. Weinzettel, Jan & Reenaas, Marte & Solli, Christian & Hertwich, Edgar G., 2009. "Life cycle assessment of a floating offshore wind turbine," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 742-747.
    20. Bruninx, Kenneth & Madzharov, Darin & Delarue, Erik & D'haeseleer, William, 2013. "Impact of the German nuclear phase-out on Europe's electricity generation—A comprehensive study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 251-261.
    21. Manfred Lenzen, 2010. "Current State of Development of Electricity-Generating Technologies: A Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-130, March.
    22. 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.
    23. Hong, Sanghyun & Bradshaw, Corey J.A. & Brook, Barry W., 2013. "Evaluating options for sustainable energy mixes in South Korea using scenario analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 237-244.
    24. Pehnt, Martin, 2006. "Dynamic life cycle assessment (LCA) of renewable energy technologies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 55-71.
    25. De Roo, Guillaume & Parsons, John E., 2011. "A methodology for calculating the levelized cost of electricity in nuclear power systems with fuel recycling," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 826-839, September.
    26. Evans, Annette & Strezov, Vladimir & Evans, Tim J., 2009. "Assessment of sustainability indicators for renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 1082-1088, June.
    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. Song, Houde & Song, Meiqi & Liu, Xiaojing, 2022. "Online autonomous calibration of digital twins using machine learning with application to nuclear power plants," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 326(C).
    2. Vladimir M. Cvetković & Adem Öcal & Yuliya Lyamzina & Eric K. Noji & Neda Nikolić & Goran Milošević, 2021. "Nuclear Power Risk Perception in Serbia: Fear of Exposure to Radiation vs. Social Benefits," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    3. Nock, Destenie & Baker, Erin, 2019. "Holistic multi-criteria decision analysis evaluation of sustainable electric generation portfolios: New England case study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 242(C), pages 655-673.
    4. Corey J. A. Bradshaw & Barry W. Brook, 2016. "Implications of Australia's Population Policy for Future Greenhouse Gas Emissions Targets," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(2), pages 249-265, May.
    5. Henning Meschede & Paul Bertheau & Siavash Khalili & Christian Breyer, 2022. "A review of 100% renewable energy scenarios on islands," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(6), November.
    6. Hansen, Kenneth & Breyer, Christian & Lund, Henrik, 2019. "Status and perspectives on 100% renewable energy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 471-480.
    7. Thushara, De Silva M. & Hornberger, George M. & Baroud, Hiba, 2019. "Decision analysis to support the choice of a future power generation pathway for Sri Lanka," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C), pages 680-697.
    8. Wang, Yu & Gu, Jibao & Wu, Jianlin, 2020. "Explaining local residents’ acceptance of rebuilding nuclear power plants: The roles of perceived general benefit and perceived local benefit," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    9. Vögele, Stefan & Rübbelke, Dirk & Mayer, Philip & Kuckshinrichs, Wilhelm, 2018. "Germany’s “No” to carbon capture and storage: Just a question of lacking acceptance?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 205-218.
    10. Kim, Philseo & Kim, Jihee & Yim, Man-Sung, 2020. "How deliberation changes public opinions on nuclear energy: South Korea's deliberation on closing nuclear reactors," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 270(C).
    11. Malkawi, Salaheddin & Al-Nimr, Moh'd & Azizi, Danah, 2017. "A multi-criteria optimization analysis for Jordan's energy mix," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 680-696.
    12. Dong, Zhe & Pan, Yifei, 2018. "A lumped-parameter dynamical model of a nuclear heating reactor cogeneration plant," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 638-656.
    13. Thangavelu, Sundar Raj & Khambadkone, Ashwin M. & Karimi, Iftekhar A., 2015. "Long-term optimal energy mix planning towards high energy security and low GHG emission," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 959-969.
    14. JongRoul Woo & Sesil Lim & Yong-Gil Lee & Sung-Yoon Huh, 2018. "Financial Feasibility and Social Acceptance for Reducing Nuclear Power Plants: A Contingent Valuation Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-16, October.
    15. Barry W. Brook & Tom Blees & Tom M. L. Wigley & Sanghyun Hong, 2018. "Silver Buckshot or Bullet: Is a Future “Energy Mix” Necessary?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-14, January.
    16. Lucheroni, Carlo & Mari, Carlo, 2017. "CO2 volatility impact on energy portfolio choice: A fully stochastic LCOE theory analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 278-290.

    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. Hong, Sanghyun & Bradshaw, Corey J.A. & Brook, Barry W., 2014. "South Korean energy scenarios show how nuclear power can reduce future energy and environmental costs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 569-578.
    2. Hong, Sanghyun & Bradshaw, Corey J.A. & Brook, Barry W., 2015. "Global zero-carbon energy pathways using viable mixes of nuclear and renewables," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 451-459.
    3. Hong, Sanghyun & Bradshaw, Corey J.A. & Brook, Barry W., 2013. "Evaluating options for the future energy mix of Japan after the Fukushima nuclear crisis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 418-424.
    4. Hong, Sanghyun & Bradshaw, Corey J.A. & Brook, Barry W., 2013. "Evaluating options for sustainable energy mixes in South Korea using scenario analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 237-244.
    5. Lenzen, Manfred & McBain, Bonnie & Trainer, Ted & Jütte, Silke & Rey-Lescure, Olivier & Huang, Jing, 2016. "Simulating low-carbon electricity supply for Australia," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 553-564.
    6. Heard, B.P. & Brook, B.W. & Wigley, T.M.L. & Bradshaw, C.J.A., 2017. "Burden of proof: A comprehensive review of the feasibility of 100% renewable-electricity systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1122-1133.
    7. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos, 2016. "Decision making in renewable energy investments: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 885-898.
    8. Moreira, João M.L. & Cesaretti, Marcos A. & Carajilescov, Pedro & Maiorino, José R., 2015. "Sustainability deterioration of electricity generation in Brazil," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 334-346.
    9. Troldborg, Mads & Heslop, Simon & Hough, Rupert L., 2014. "Assessing the sustainability of renewable energy technologies using multi-criteria analysis: Suitability of approach for national-scale assessments and associated uncertainties," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1173-1184.
    10. Mostafa Shaaban & Jürgen Scheffran & Jürgen Böhner & Mohamed S. Elsobki, 2018. "Sustainability Assessment of Electricity Generation Technologies in Egypt Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-25, May.
    11. Sokka, L. & Sinkko, T. & Holma, A. & Manninen, K. & Pasanen, K. & Rantala, M. & Leskinen, P., 2016. "Environmental impacts of the national renewable energy targets – A case study from Finland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 1599-1610.
    12. Burgherr, Peter & Hirschberg, Stefan, 2014. "Comparative risk assessment of severe accidents in the energy sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(S1), pages 45-56.
    13. 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.
    14. Zimmermann, Florian & Keles, Dogan, 2022. "State or market: Investments in new nuclear power plants in France and their domestic and cross-border effects," Working Paper Series in Production and Energy 64, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute for Industrial Production (IIP).
    15. Jha, Sunil Kr. & Bilalovic, Jasmin & Jha, Anju & Patel, Nilesh & Zhang, Han, 2017. "Renewable energy: Present research and future scope of Artificial Intelligence," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 297-317.
    16. Riccardo Basosi & Roberto Bonciani & Dario Frosali & Giampaolo Manfrida & Maria Laura Parisi & Franco Sansone, 2020. "Life Cycle Analysis of a Geothermal Power Plant: Comparison of the Environmental Performance with Other Renewable Energy Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-29, April.
    17. Hansen, Kenneth & Breyer, Christian & Lund, Henrik, 2019. "Status and perspectives on 100% renewable energy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 471-480.
    18. Maxim, Alexandru, 2014. "Sustainability assessment of electricity generation technologies using weighted multi-criteria decision analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 284-297.
    19. Raadal, Hanne Lerche & Gagnon, Luc & Modahl, Ingunn Saur & Hanssen, Ole Jørgen, 2011. "Life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the generation of wind and hydro power," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(7), pages 3417-3422, September.
    20. Klein, Sharon J.W. & Whalley, Stephanie, 2015. "Comparing the sustainability of U.S. electricity options through multi-criteria decision analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 127-149.

    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:appene:v:136:y:2014:i:c:p:712-725. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    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.