http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380011004984
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 €/t CO2, 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 €/t CO2. Hydro, wind, and nuclear power were characterized by a minor dependence on fossil fuels, showing a GER cost of 0.04, 0.13, and 0.26 J/Je, and a value of direct and indirect CO2 emissions of 0.01, 0.04, and 0.07 t CO2/MWh. Instead, peat, coal, gas, and CHP plants showed a GER cost of 4.18, 4.00, 2.78, and 2.33 J/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.
by Tiina Häyhä, Pier Paolo Franzese and Sergio Ulgiati; all of the Department of Environmental Sciences, Parthenope University of Naples, Centro Direzionale, Isola C4, 80143 Naples, Italy
Ecological Modelling via Elsevier Science Direct www.ScienceDirect.com
Volume 223, Issue 1; 24 December 2011; Pages 81-90
Special Issue: Can We Break the Addiction to Fossil Energy? Special Issue, 7th Biennial International Workshop “Advances in Energy Studies”, Barcelona, Spain, 19-21 October 2010
Keywords: Electricity; Finland; Production cost; GER; Emergy; CO2
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 €/t CO2, 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 €/t CO2. Hydro, wind, and nuclear power were characterized by a minor dependence on fossil fuels, showing a GER cost of 0.04, 0.13, and 0.26 J/Je, and a value of direct and indirect CO2 emissions of 0.01, 0.04, and 0.07 t CO2/MWh. Instead, peat, coal, gas, and CHP plants showed a GER cost of 4.18, 4.00, 2.78, and 2.33 J/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.
by Tiina Häyhä, Pier Paolo Franzese and Sergio Ulgiati; all of the Department of Environmental Sciences, Parthenope University of Naples, Centro Direzionale, Isola C4, 80143 Naples, Italy
Ecological Modelling via Elsevier Science Direct www.ScienceDirect.com
Volume 223, Issue 1; 24 December 2011; Pages 81-90
Special Issue: Can We Break the Addiction to Fossil Energy? Special Issue, 7th Biennial International Workshop “Advances in Energy Studies”, Barcelona, Spain, 19-21 October 2010
Keywords: Electricity; Finland; Production cost; GER; Emergy; CO2
No comments:
Post a Comment