IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v223y2011i1p81-90.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic and environmental performance of electricity production in Finland: A multicriteria assessment framework

Author

Listed:
  • Häyhä, Tiina
  • Franzese, Pier Paolo
  • Ulgiati, Sergio

Abstract

Meeting environmental, economic, and societal targets in energy policy is complex and requires a multicriteria assessment framework capable of exploring trade-offs among alternative energy options. In this study, we integrated economic analysis and biophysical accounting methods to investigate the performance of electricity production in Finland at plant and national level. Economic and environmental costs of electricity generation technologies were assessed by evaluating economic features (direct monetary production cost), direct and indirect use of fossil fuels (GER cost), environmental impact (CO2 emissions), and global environmental support (emergy cost). Three scenarios for Finland's energy future in 2025 and 2050 were also drawn and compared with the reference year 2008. Accounting for an emission permit of 25€/tCO2, the production costs calculated for CHP, gas, coal, and peat power plants resulted in 42, 67, 68, and 74€/MWh, respectively. For wind and nuclear power a production cost of 63 and 35€/MWh were calculated. The sensitivity analysis confirmed wind power's competitiveness when the price of emission permits overcomes 20€/tCO2. Hydro, wind, and nuclear power were characterized by a minor dependence on fossil fuels, showing a GER cost of 0.04, 0.13, and 0.26J/Je, and a value of direct and indirect CO2 emissions of 0.01, 0.04, and 0.07tCO2/MWh. Instead, peat, coal, gas, and CHP plants showed a GER cost of 4.18, 4.00, 2.78, and 2.33J/Je. At national level, a major economic and environmental load was given by CHP and nuclear power while hydro power showed a minor load in spite of its large production. The scenario analysis raised technological and environmental concerns due to the massive increase of nuclear power and wood biomass exploitation. In conclusion, we addressed the need to further develop an energy policy for Finland's energy future based on a diversified energy mix oriented to the sustainable exploitation of local, renewable, and environmentally friendly energy sources.

Suggested Citation

  • Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2011. "Economic and environmental performance of electricity production in Finland: A multicriteria assessment framework," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 81-90.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:223:y:2011:i:1:p:81-90
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.10.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380011004984
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.10.013?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. Lund, P.D., 2007. "The link between political decision-making and energy options: Assessing future role of renewable energy and energy efficiency in Finland," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(12), pages 2271-2281.
    2. Patterson, Murray G., 2002. "Ecological production based pricing of biosphere processes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 457-478, June.
    3. Alexandre Kossoy & Philippe Ambrosi, "undated". "State and Trends of the Carbon Market 2010," World Bank Publications - Reports 13401, The World Bank Group.
    4. ., 1994. "Cost-Benefit Analysis," Chapters, in: Geoffrey M. Hodgson & Warren J. Samuels & Marc R. Tool (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Institutional and Evolutionary Economics, volume 0, chapter 19, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. 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.
    6. Ulgiati, Sergio & Zucaro, Amalia & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2011. "Shared wealth or nobody's land? The worth of natural capital and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 778-787, February.
    7. Bargigli, Silvia & Raugei, Marco & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2004. "Comparison of thermodynamic and environmental indexes of natural gas, syngas and hydrogen production processes," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(12), pages 2145-2159.
    8. Layard,Richard & Glaister,Stephen (ed.), 1994. "Cost-Benefit Analysis," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521466745, December.
    9. Cariboni, J. & Gatelli, D. & Liska, R. & Saltelli, A., 2007. "The role of sensitivity analysis in ecological modelling," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 203(1), pages 167-182.
    10. Gollier, Christian & Weitzman, Martin L., 2010. "How should the distant future be discounted when discount rates are uncertain?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 350-353, June.
    11. Farber, Stephen C. & Costanza, Robert & Wilson, Matthew A., 2002. "Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 375-392, June.
    12. Thomas Sterner, 1994. "Discounting in a world of limited growth," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(5), pages 527-534, October.
    13. Weitzman, Martin L., 1998. "Why the Far-Distant Future Should Be Discounted at Its Lowest Possible Rate," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 201-208, November.
    14. Ulgiati, S. & Ascione, M. & Bargigli, S. & Cherubini, F. & Franzese, P.P. & Raugei, M. & Viglia, S. & Zucaro, A., 2011. "Material, energy and environmental performance of technological and social systems under a Life Cycle Assessment perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(1), pages 176-189.
    15. Bentley, R. W., 2002. "Global oil & gas depletion: an overview," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 189-205, February.
    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. Kursun, Berrin & Bakshi, Bhavik R. & Mahata, Manoj & Martin, Jay F., 2015. "Life cycle and emergy based design of energy systems in developing countries: Centralized and localized options," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 305(C), pages 40-53.
    2. Brand, Bernhard & Missaoui, Rafik, 2014. "Multi-criteria analysis of electricity generation mix scenarios in Tunisia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 251-261.
    3. Buonocore, Elvira & Häyhä, Tiina & Paletto, Alessandro & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2014. "Assessing environmental costs and impacts of forestry activities: A multi-method approach to environmental accounting," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 271(C), pages 10-20.
    4. 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.
    5. Athanasios P. Vavatsikos & Efstratios Tsesmetzis & Georgios Koulinas & Dimitrios Koulouriotis, 2022. "A robust group decision making framework using fuzzy TOPSIS and Monte Carlo simulation for wind energy projects multicriteria evaluation," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 6055-6073, November.
    6. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo & Paletto, Alessandro & Fath, Brian D., 2015. "Assessing, valuing, and mapping ecosystem services in Alpine forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 12-23.
    7. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2014. "Ecosystem services assessment: A review under an ecological-economic and systems perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 289(C), pages 124-132.
    8. Keena, Naomi & Raugei, Marco & Aly Etman, Mohamed & Ruan, Daniel & Dyson, Anna, 2018. "Clark’s Crow: A design plugin to support emergy analysis decision making towards sustainable urban ecologies," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 367(C), pages 42-57.
    9. Braham, William W. & Lee, Jae Min & Oskierko-Jeznacki, Evan & Silverman, Barry & Khansari, Nasrin, 2019. "Spatial concentration of urban assets in the Philadelphia region: An emergy synthesis," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 401(C), pages 52-68.
    10. Agostinho, Feni & Bertaglia, Ana B.B. & Almeida, Cecília M.V.B. & Giannetti, Biagio F., 2015. "Influence of cellulase enzyme production on the energetic–environmental performance of lignocellulosic ethanol," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 315(C), pages 46-56.
    11. Zhang, Can & Su, Bo & Beckmann, Michael & Volk, Martin, 2024. "Emergy-based evaluation of ecosystem services: Progress and perspectives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    12. Franzese, Pier Paolo & Buonocore, Elvira & Donnarumma, Luigia & Russo, Giovanni F., 2017. "Natural capital accounting in marine protected areas: The case of the Islands of Ventotene and S. Stefano (Central Italy)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 360(C), pages 290-299.
    13. Kveselis, Vaclovas & Dzenajavičienė, Eugenija Farida & Masaitis, Sigitas, 2017. "Analysis of energy development sustainability: The example of the lithuanian district heating sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 227-236.
    14. Shmelev, Stanislav E. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2016. "Optimal diversity of renewable energy alternatives under multiple criteria: An application to the UK," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 679-691.
    15. Tabakaev, Roman & Ibraeva, Kanipa & Kan, Victor & Dubinin, Yury & Rudmin, Maksim & Yazykov, Nikolay & Zavorin, Alexander, 2020. "The effect of co-combustion of waste from flour milling and highly mineralized peat on sintering of the ash residue," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    16. Hottenroth, H. & Sutardhio, C. & Weidlich, A. & Tietze, I. & Simon, S. & Hauser, W. & Naegler, T. & Becker, L. & Buchgeister, J. & Junne, T. & Lehr, U. & Scheel, O. & Schmidt-Scheele, R. & Ulrich, P. , 2022. "Beyond climate change. Multi-attribute decision making for a sustainability assessment of energy system transformation pathways," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).

    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. Vassallo, P. & Paoli, C. & Buonocore, E. & Franzese, P.P. & Russo, G.F. & Povero, P., 2017. "Assessing the value of natural capital in marine protected areas: A biophysical and trophodynamic environmental accounting model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 355(C), pages 12-17.
    2. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2014. "Ecosystem services assessment: A review under an ecological-economic and systems perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 289(C), pages 124-132.
    3. Hultkrantz, Lars & A. Krüger, Niclas & Mantalos, Panagiotis, 2014. "Risk-adjusted long-term social rates of discount for transportation infrastructure investment," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 70-81.
    4. Giovanni Lombardo & Andrea Mazzocchetti & Irene Rapallo & Nader Tayser & Silvano Cincotti, 2019. "Assessment of the Economic and Social Impact Using SROI: An Application to Sport Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-21, July.
    5. Hansen, Anders Chr., 2006. "Do declining discount rates lead to time inconsistent economic advice?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 138-144, November.
    6. Gollier, Christian, 2016. "Gamma discounters are short-termist," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 83-90.
    7. Bernard Lapeyre & Emile Quinet, 2017. "A Simple GDP-based Model for Public Investments at Risk," Post-Print hal-01666574, HAL.
    8. Mononen, Petri & Leviäkangas, Pekka & Haapasalo, Harri, 2017. "From internal efficiency to societal benefits – Multi modal transport safety agency's socio-economic impact analysis," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 78-90.
    9. Freeman, Mark C. & Groom, Ben, 2016. "How certain are we about the certainty-equivalent long term social discount rate?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 152-168.
    10. Traeger, Christian P., 2012. "What's the Rate? Disentangling the Weitzman and the Gollier Effect," CUDARE Working Papers 121932, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    11. Sigit Perdana & Rod Tyers, 2020. "Global Climate Change Mitigation: Strategic Incentives," The Energy Journal, , vol. 41(3), pages 183-206, May.
    12. Winkler, Ralph, 2006. "Valuation of ecosystem goods and services: Part 1: An integrated dynamic approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 82-93, August.
    13. Fleurbaey, Marc & Zuber, Stéphane, 2015. "Discounting, risk and inequality: A general approach," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 34-49.
    14. Ram Fishman, 2019. "Heterogeneous Patience, Bargaining Power and Investment in Future Public Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(4), pages 1101-1107, August.
    15. Alcaraz Carrillo de Albornoz, Vicente & Molina Millán, Juan & Lara Galera, Antonio & Muñoz Medina, Belén, 2022. "Road speed limit matters – Are politicians doing the right thing?," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    16. Mark C. Freeman & Ben Groom, 2015. "Positively Gamma Discounting: Combining the Opinions of Experts on the Social Discount Rate," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(585), pages 1015-1024, June.
    17. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo & Paletto, Alessandro & Fath, Brian D., 2015. "Assessing, valuing, and mapping ecosystem services in Alpine forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 12-23.
    18. Rick van der Ploeg, 2020. "Discounting and Climate Policy," CESifo Working Paper Series 8441, CESifo.
    19. Szekeres, Szabolcs, 2016. "Testing Gollier and Weitzman’s Solution of the “Weitzman-Gollier Puzzle”," MPRA Paper 72593, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Fahd, S. & Fiorentino, G. & Mellino, S. & Ulgiati, S., 2012. "Cropping bioenergy and biomaterials in marginal land: The added value of the biorefinery concept," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 79-93.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Electricity; Finland; Production cost; GER; Emergy; CO2;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ecomod:v:223:y:2011:i:1:p:81-90. 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/ecological-modelling .

    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.