IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i7p1807-d343082.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Replacing SF 6 in Electrical Gas-Insulated Switchgear: Technological Alternatives and Potential Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Savings in an EU-28 Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Pieter Billen

    (Intelligence in Processes, Advanced Catalysts & Solvents (iPRACS), Faculty of Applied Engineering, University of Antwerp, 2610 Antwerp, Belgium)

  • Ben Maes

    (Energy and Materials in Infrastructure and Buildings (EMIB), Faculty of Applied Engineering, University of Antwerp, 2610 Antwerp, Belgium)

  • Macarena Larrain

    (Intelligence in Processes, Advanced Catalysts & Solvents (iPRACS), Faculty of Applied Engineering, University of Antwerp, 2610 Antwerp, Belgium
    Department of Engineering Management, Faculty of Business & Economics, University of Antwerp, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium)

  • Johan Braet

    (Department of Engineering Management, Faculty of Business & Economics, University of Antwerp, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium)

Abstract

To date, atmospheric concentrations of sulfur hexafluoride (SF 6 ) are the most potent among the greenhouse gases identified by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and are still rising. In the EU-28, SF 6 has been banned from several applications, however, an important exception is gas-insulated electrical switchgear (GIS) for which cost-effective and environmentally sound alternatives were unavailable when the F-Gas regulation was last revised in 2014. To date, after some recent innovations, we argue that the phasing out of SF 6 could spur the accelerated development of alternatives with a lower carbon footprint. In the EU-28, the SF 6 amount in switchgear is unclear. In this paper, we estimated the SF 6 amount to be between 10,800 and 24,700 t (with a mode at 12,700 t) in 2017, resulting in 68 to 140 t of annual emissions from operational leakage only, corresponding to 1.6 to 3.3 Mt of CO 2 -eq. We additionally calculated the potential greenhouse gas savings over the lifecycle of one exemplary 145 kV gas-insulated switchgear bay upon replacing SF 6 by decafluoro-2-methylbutan-3-one (C5-FK) and heptafluoro-2-methylpropanenitrile (C4-FN) mixtures. Projecting these results over the EU-28, a phase-out scenario starting from 2020 onwards could reduce the carbon footprint by a median of 14 Mt of CO 2 -eq, over a period of 50 years. Extrapolation to medium voltage could be assumed to be of a similar magnitude.

Suggested Citation

  • Pieter Billen & Ben Maes & Macarena Larrain & Johan Braet, 2020. "Replacing SF 6 in Electrical Gas-Insulated Switchgear: Technological Alternatives and Potential Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Savings in an EU-28 Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-16, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:7:p:1807-:d:343082
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/7/1807/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/7/1807/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sheng Zhou & Fei Teng & Qing Tong, 2018. "Mitigating Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF 6 ) Emission from Electrical Equipment in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    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. Maurizio Albano & A. Manu Haddad & Huw Griffiths & Paul Coventry, 2018. "Environmentally Friendly Compact Air-Insulated High-Voltage Substations," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-14, September.
    2. Minde An & Ronald G. Prinn & Luke M. Western & Xingchen Zhao & Bo Yao & Jianxin Hu & Anita L. Ganesan & Jens Mühle & Ray F. Weiss & Paul B. Krummel & Simon O’Doherty & Dickon Young & Matthew Rigby, 2024. "Sustained growth of sulfur hexafluoride emissions in China inferred from atmospheric observations," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-10, December.

    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:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:7:p:1807-:d:343082. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.