Beyond carbon: Quantifying environmental externalities as energy for hydroelectric and nuclear power

Together, hydroelectric and nuclear power account for roughly 30% of all electricity generated on earth. Both technologies are often presented as answers to the dual challenge of meeting ever-increasing global energy demand while meeting stricter GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions targets. Indeed, the last two decades have witnessed a great deal of research on the life cycle GHG emissions of these technologies. On the basis of carbon intensity, the general consensus is that these technologies are more efficient than all other technologies of similar scale (e.g. coal, natural gas). However, hydroelectric and nuclear power come with environmental costs that sit outside the boundaries of traditional energy-based accounting methods, including water consumption, land change, and waste generation. We provide a novel framework that integrates energy and environmental life cycle assessment techniques so that dissimilar impacts can be more equitably assessed. The analysis considers diffusion- and centrifuge-based nuclear technologies, as well as reservoir and run-of-river hydropower. Results suggest that these resources are substantially less efficient (in our examples, anywhere from 5 to 85%) when key externalities are included. In the conclusion, we reflect on the benefits of using a physics-based method of measuring the externalities of power generation.

[1]  R. Costanza,et al.  SPECIAL ISSUE: The Dynamics and Value of Ecosystem Services: Integrating Economic and Ecological Perspectives Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services , 2002 .

[2]  Danièle Revel,et al.  IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation , 2011 .

[4]  P. Ciais,et al.  Old-growth forests as global carbon sinks , 2008, Nature.

[5]  G. Daily,et al.  The Ecosystem Services Framework and Natural Capital Conservation , 2008 .

[6]  G. Daily,et al.  Ecosystem Services in Decision Making: Time to Deliver , 2009 .

[7]  F. Roland,et al.  Carbon emission from hydroelectric reservoirs linked to reservoir age and latitude , 2011 .

[8]  William D'haeseleer,et al.  Greenhouse gas emissions in the nuclear life cycle: A balanced appraisal , 2009 .

[9]  N. Kulatilaka,et al.  The Sustainability Babel Fish , 2011, Sustainability Science.

[10]  W. McDowell,et al.  Biological Nitrogen Fixation in Two Tropical Forests: Ecosystem-Level Patterns and Effects of Nitrogen Fertilization , 2009, Ecosystems.

[11]  G. Heath,et al.  Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Nuclear Electricity Generation , 2012 .

[12]  E. Mcpherson,et al.  Chicago's urban forest ecosystem: Results of the Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project. (Includes executive summary). Forest Service general technical report (Final) , 1994 .

[13]  S. M Rashad,et al.  Nuclear power and the environment: comparative assessment of environmental and health impacts of electricity-generating systems , 2000 .

[14]  Michael Q. Wang,et al.  The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: An Update , 2002 .

[15]  Vasilis Fthenakis,et al.  Greenhouse-gas emissions from solar electric-and nuclear power : A life-cycle study , 2007 .

[16]  Vasilis Fthenakis,et al.  Land use and electricity generation: A life-cycle analysis , 2009 .

[17]  Luc Gagnon,et al.  Civilisation and energy payback , 2008 .

[18]  D. M. Rosenberg,et al.  Global-Scale Environmental Effects of Hydrological Alterations: Introduction , 2000 .

[19]  David J. Nowak,et al.  Air pollution removal by Chicago's urban forest , 1994 .

[20]  Z. Jaworowski Observations on the Chernobyl Disaster and LNT , 2010, Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society.

[21]  O. Edenhofer,et al.  Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation , 2011 .

[22]  Ernst Worrell,et al.  Energy savings in the nitrogen fertilizer industry in the Netherlands , 1994 .

[23]  M. V. Ramana,et al.  Nuclear Power: Economic, Safety, Health, and Environmental Issues of Near-Term Technologies , 2009 .

[24]  Ina De Vlieger,et al.  ExternE-Pol Externalities of Energy: Extension of Accounting Framework and Policy Applications , 2005 .

[25]  Barry W. Brook,et al.  How carbon pricing changes the relative competitiveness of low-carbon baseload generating technologi , 2011 .

[26]  R. Ostfeld,et al.  A call to ecologists: measuring, analyzing, and managing ecosystem services , 2005 .

[27]  Frank Zeman,et al.  Energy and material balance of CO2 capture from ambient air. , 2007, Environmental science & technology.

[28]  R. D. Groot,et al.  Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services , 2006 .

[29]  C. Brack,et al.  Pollution mitigation and carbon sequestration by an urban forest. , 2002, Environmental pollution.

[30]  R. Doll,et al.  Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: Assessing what we really know , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[31]  Pat Bodger,et al.  EMBODIED ENERGY ANALYSIS OF NEW ZEALAND POWER GENERATION SYSTEMS , 2010 .

[32]  Wilhelm Bier,et al.  Nuclear Power, The Energy Balance , 2005 .

[33]  M. Nilsson,et al.  NITROGEN FIXATION INCREASES WITH SUCCESSIONAL AGE IN BOREAL FORESTS , 2004 .

[34]  Robert Costanza,et al.  A flexible assurance bonding system for improved environmental management , 1990 .

[35]  Garvin A. Heath,et al.  Review of Operational Water Consumption and Withdrawal Factors for Electricity Generating Technologies , 2011 .

[36]  Phillip Jordan,et al.  ESTIMATING OVERALL RISK OF DAM FAILURE: PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN COMBINING FAILURE PROBABILITIES , 2005 .

[37]  Kaveh Madani,et al.  A Systems Approach to Energy Efficiency Assessment , 2013 .

[38]  B. John Garrick,et al.  Probabilistic risk assessment practices in the USA for nuclear power plants , 2002 .