Life cycle assessment of nuclear power in france: EDF case study

被引:2
作者
Le-Boulch, Denis [1 ]
Morisset, Vincent [1 ]
Jobard, Zoe [2 ]
Burguburu, Alexis [2 ]
Czyrnek-Deletre, Magdalena M. [2 ]
机构
[1] EDF, Dept TREE, EDF Lab Les Renardieres, Direct R&D, Ave Renardieres, F-77250 Ecuelles, Moret Sur Loing, France
[2] I Care BearingPoint, 28,Rue 4 Septembre, F-75002 Paris, France
来源
EPJ NUCLEAR SCIENCES & TECHNOLOGIES | 2024年 / 10卷
关键词
GREENHOUSE-GAS EMISSIONS; ENERGY;
D O I
10.1051/epjn/2024005
中图分类号
TL [原子能技术]; O571 [原子核物理学];
学科分类号
0827 ; 082701 ;
摘要
The French electricity mix is dominated by nuclear power, representing 69% of the power generation in 2021, and further development of nuclear power for electricity is expected. This study applied Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to evaluate the potential environmental impact of nuclear power generated by EDF SA., the world's largest nuclear operator and electric utility company operating all the nuclear reactors in France. The study's main objective was to assess the potential environmental impacts of nuclear power, from raw material extraction to end-of-life, according to several indicators, while focusing on the climate change indicator. The total impact of nuclear power on climate change (3.7 gCO2eq/kWh) is found to be in the lower range of LCA studies on nuclear power conducted so far. Mining and milling of uranium are the most contributing stages, while EDF's electricity generation is the second largest contributor. The key output of this LCA is the extensive data collected, resulting in a detailed LCA model covering the entire French nuclear fleet. Future studies should focus on (1) collecting more specific data on uranium mining and processing, as these are so far based on database data, and (2) addressing other LCA indicators, such as water use, land use, and ecotoxicity.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A comparative life-cycle assessment of hydro-, nuclear and wind power: A China study
    Wang, Like
    Wang, Yuan
    Du, Huibin
    Zuo, Jian
    Li, Rita Yi Man
    Zhou, Zhihua
    Bi, Fenfen
    Garvlehn, McSimon P.
    APPLIED ENERGY, 2019, 249 : 37 - 45
  • [2] Life cycle assessment of an upcoming nuclear power plant decommissioning: the Fessenheim case study from public data
    Iguider, Mehdi
    Robineau, Paul
    Kozderka, Michal
    Boltoeva, Maria
    Quaranta, Gaetana
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2024, 29 (07) : 1229 - 1245
  • [3] Parametric Life Cycle Assessment of Nuclear Power for Simplified Models
    Gibon, Thomas
    Menacho, Alvaro Hahn
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2023, 57 (38) : 14194 - 14205
  • [4] Life cycle assessment of steel production in Poland: a case study
    Burchart-Korol, Dorota
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2013, 54 : 235 - 243
  • [5] Comparison of life cycle assessment databases: A case study on building assessment
    Takano, Atsushi
    Winter, Stefan
    Hughes, Mark
    Linkosalmi, Lauri
    BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT, 2014, 79 : 20 - 30
  • [6] Integrating risk assessment and life cycle assessment: A case study of insulation
    Nishioka, Y
    Levy, JI
    Norris, GA
    Wilson, A
    Hofstetter, P
    Spengler, JD
    RISK ANALYSIS, 2002, 22 (05) : 1003 - 1017
  • [7] Life Cycle Assessment of organic waste management strategies: an Italian case study
    Buratti, C.
    Barbanera, M.
    Testarmata, F.
    Fantozzi, F.
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2015, 89 : 125 - 136
  • [8] Life cycle assessment and life cycle costing of sanitary ware manufacturing: A case study in China
    Lv, Jingxiang
    Gu, Fu
    Zhang, Wujie
    Guo, Jianfeng
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2019, 238
  • [9] Life cycle assessment of sanitaryware production: A case study in Italy
    Silvestri, Luca
    Forcina, Antonio
    Silvestri, Cecilia
    Ioppolo, Giuseppe
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2020, 251
  • [10] Life Cycle Assessment of pig production: A case study in Galicia
    Noya, I.
    Villanueva-Rey, P.
    Gonzalez-Garcia, S.
    Fernandez, M. D.
    Rodriguez, M. R.
    Moreira, M. T.
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2017, 142 : 4327 - 4338