IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i10p4610-d1658373.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable Lifespan Re-Extension Management of Energy Facilities: Economic Assessment and Decision-Making Model for Phased Decommissioning

Author

Listed:
  • Hanna Hrinchenko

    (Department of Automation, Metrology and Energy Efficient Technologies, V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, 4 Svobody Sq., 61000 Kharkiv, Ukraine)

  • Olha Prokopenko

    (Estonian Entrepreneurship University of Applied Sciences, Suur-Sojamae 10a, 11415 Tallinn, Estonia
    Department of Business Economics and Administration, Sumy State Makarenko Pedagogical University, 87 Romenska St., 40000 Sumy, Ukraine)

  • Aziza Karbekova

    (Department of Economics, Accounting and Finance, Jalal-Abad State University Named After B. Osmonov, Lenin St. 57, Jalal-Abad 715600, Kyrgyzstan)

  • Nataliia Antonenko

    (Department of Automation, Metrology and Energy Efficient Technologies, V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, 4 Svobody Sq., 61000 Kharkiv, Ukraine)

  • Nataliia Kovshun

    (Department of Enterprise Economics and International Business, National University of Water and Environmental Engineering, Soborna St. 11, 33028 Rivne, Ukraine)

  • Tetiana Kubakh

    (Department of Financial Technologies and Entrepreneurship, Sumy State University, Petropavlivska St. 59, 40014 Sumy, Ukraine)

  • Serhii Poliushkin

    (Department of Design and Reconstruction of Architectural Environment, Ukrainian State University of Science and Technologies, 49005 Dnipro, Ukraine)

Abstract

This study proposes a decision-making model based on the economic assessment of phased decommissioning of energy facilities, specifically focusing on a nuclear power plant (NPP). The objective of the research is to develop and validate an economic assessment methodology for comparing immediate and deferred dismantling strategies for a 1000 MW NPP unit. For economic justification, a comparison of the economic expenses is proposed based on the accumulation of radioactive waste, safety activities, and labour costs for the two options. The methods employed include a multifactorial analysis based on expert assessments, considering economic expenses related to radioactive waste accumulation, safety activities, and labour costs. Criteria with differences exceeding 10% for quantitative indicators and fundamental differences for qualitative indicators were deemed significant; each criterion’s acceptability was weighted accordingly. The key results show that deferred dismantling is economically preferable; the total score for deferred dismantling exceeds that of immediate dismantling by approximately 10% (14.16 points vs. 15.86 points). A comparison of block schedules for decommissioning, dynamics of labour costs, and annual volumes of reprocessed radioactive waste for the baseline and optimised deferred dismantling options shows that both options meet the continuity condition of the ‘active’ stages. At the same time, the optimised option demonstrates significant advantages in the uniformity of labour costs and workload of radioactive waste treatment plants during dismantling. The activities at the stage of power unit decommissioning are proposed to be carried out within the licence framework for its operation by the organisational and technical solutions to ensure safety during operation. The deterministic consequences and risks will align with the safety assessment, which will be determined based on the latest analysis results, taking into account sustainable operation.

Suggested Citation

  • Hanna Hrinchenko & Olha Prokopenko & Aziza Karbekova & Nataliia Antonenko & Nataliia Kovshun & Tetiana Kubakh & Serhii Poliushkin, 2025. "Sustainable Lifespan Re-Extension Management of Energy Facilities: Economic Assessment and Decision-Making Model for Phased Decommissioning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-23, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:10:p:4610-:d:1658373
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/10/4610/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/10/4610/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:10:p:4610-:d:1658373. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.