IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v28y2003i5p457-477.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost analysis of energy conversion systems via a novel resource-based quantifier

Author

Listed:
  • Sciubba, Enrico

Abstract

The paper presents a new formalism for the costing of production chains, with special emphasis on energy conversion systems. From a mathematical point of view, this method can be described as a standard Leontiev-type input-output technique, in the formulation commonly adopted by most costing theories, including Thermoeconomics. Any complex production chain can be decomposed into modules, to each one of which mass and energy balances are applied. The resulting flow diagram is then examined from an exergetic point of view, and a cost analysis is performed. The costing paradigm is the novel feature here: rather than monetary units, a resource-based quantifier, called “extended exergy”, is employed. It is argued that both labour and financial costs can be properly linked to an equivalent resource consumption through a back-to-resource accounting procedure that expresses the total exergy consumption required to “generate” one man-hour of work or one monetary unit of currency circulation. Environmental remediation costs are similarly taken into account by computing the equivalent cumulative exergy expenditures required to achieve zero impact. It is argued, and discussed on the basis of an example of application to a cogeneration plant, that the new technique, called Extended Exergy Accounting (EEA), is a substantial improvement with respect to current engineering economic techniques, including Thermoeconomics. It is shown that EEA calculates the real, resource-based “value” of a commodity (which is not necessarily equal to its monetary cost) thus enabling Analysts and Energy Planners to perform a more complete and meaningful assessment of an Engineering Complex System. The decisive advantage of EEA consists in its being entirely and uniformly resource-based: in this respect, it owes some of its structural formalism both to the economic theory of production of commodities, which it extends by accounting for the unavoidable energy dissipation in the productive chain, and to resource-oriented economics. It must be acknowledged as well that EEA follows a path originally proposed by Szargut in his “Cumulative Exergy Consumption” method, which it extends by providing a rational and uniform treatment for all non-externalities.

Suggested Citation

  • Sciubba, Enrico, 2003. "Cost analysis of energy conversion systems via a novel resource-based quantifier," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 457-477.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:28:y:2003:i:5:p:457-477
    DOI: 10.1016/S0360-5442(02)00096-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544202000968
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/S0360-5442(02)00096-8?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. Gaggioli, Richard A. & Wepfer, William J., 1980. "Exergy economics," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 5(8), pages 823-837.
    2. 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.
    3. Robert Ayres, 1995. "Thermodynamics and process analysis for future economic scenarios," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(3), pages 207-230, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hoang, Viet-Ngu & Rao, D.S. Prasada, 2010. "Measuring and decomposing sustainable efficiency in agricultural production: A cumulative exergy balance approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1765-1776, July.
    2. Sciubba, Enrico, 2003. "Extended exergy accounting applied to energy recovery from waste: The concept of total recycling," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(13), pages 1315-1334.
    3. Mayumi, Kozo & Tanikawa, Hiroki, 2012. "Going beyond energy accounting for sustainability: Energy, fund elements and the economic process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 18-26.
    4. Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffe, Laure, 2016. "Modelling pollution-generating technologies in performance benchmarking: Recent developments, limits and future prospects in the nonparametric frameworkAuthor-Name: Dakpo, K. Hervé," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 347-359.
    5. Giannantoni, Corrado, 2009. "Ordinal benefits vs economic benefits as a reference guide for policy decision making. The case of hydrogen technologies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(12), pages 2230-2239.
    6. Lixiao Zhang & Qiuhong Hu & Fan Zhang, 2014. "Input-Output Modeling for Urban Energy Consumption in Beijing: Dynamics and Comparison," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-11, March.
    7. Diwekar, Urmila, 2005. "Green process design, industrial ecology, and sustainability: A systems analysis perspective," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 215-235.
    8. Haoran Wang & Toshiyuki Fujita, 2023. "A Review of Research on Embodied Carbon in International Trade," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-15, May.
    9. Brand-Correa, Lina I. & Steinberger, Julia K., 2017. "A Framework for Decoupling Human Need Satisfaction From Energy Use," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 43-52.
    10. Agostinho, Feni & Almeida, Cecília M.V.B. & Bonilla, Silvia H. & Sacomano, José B. & Giannetti, Biagio F., 2013. "Urban solid waste plant treatment in Brazil: Is there a net emergy yield on the recovered materials?," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 143-155.
    11. Arbault, Damien & Rugani, Benedetto & Tiruta-Barna, Ligia & Benetto, Enrico, 2014. "A first global and spatially explicit emergy database of rivers and streams based on high-resolution GIS-maps," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 281(C), pages 52-64.
    12. Puca, Antonio & Carrano, Marco & Liu, Gengyuan & Musella, Dimitri & Ripa, Maddalena & Viglia, Silvio & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2017. "Energy and eMergy assessment of the production and operation of a personal computer," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 124-136.
    13. Pi-qin Gong & Bao-jun Tang & Yu-chong Xiao & Gao-jie Lin & Jian-yun Liu, 2016. "Research on China export structure adjustment: an embodied carbon perspective," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 84(1), pages 129-151, November.
    14. Tilley, David R., 2014. "Exploration of Odum's dynamic emergy accounting rules for suggested refinements," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 279(C), pages 36-44.
    15. Alessandra Cornaro & Giorgio Rizzini, 2022. "Environmentally extended input-output analysis in complex networks: a multilayer approach," Papers 2206.08745, arXiv.org.
    16. Enrico Sicignano & Giacomo Di Ruocco & Roberta Melella, 2019. "Mitigation Strategies for Reduction of Embodied Energy and Carbon, in the Construction Systems of Contemporary Quality Architecture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-14, July.
    17. Paolo Vassallo & Claudia Turcato & Ilaria Rigo & Claudia Scopesi & Andrea Costa & Matteo Barcella & Giulia Dapueto & Mauro Mariotti & Chiara Paoli, 2021. "Biophysical Accounting of Forests’ Value under Different Management Regimes: Conservation vs. Exploitation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, April.
    18. Wang, Donglin & Feng, Hao & Li, Yi & Zhang, Tibin & Dyck, Miles & Wu, Feng, 2019. "Energy input-output, water use efficiency and economics of winter wheat under gravel mulching in Northwest China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 354-366.
    19. Wang, Saige & Cao, Tao & Chen, Bin, 2017. "Urban energy–water nexus based on modified input–output analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 208-217.
    20. Patterson, Murray, 1998. "Commensuration and theories of value in ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 105-126, April.

    More about this item

    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:energy:v:28:y:2003:i:5:p:457-477. 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.