Comparative water scarcity footprint study of two nuclear power plants

• Autorzy: Ansorge L. , Dlabal J.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.22630/PNIKS.2017.26.4.47

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This study compares the Life Cycle Assessment based Water Scarcity Footprint of produced energy unit in two nuclear power plants in the Czech Republic between 2005 and 2015. Primary data has been used to allocate impacts to the core processing stage. Although the real total amount of water consumption in both power plants is similar, the water scarcity footprint in Temelín nuclear power plant is of approximately 8.9 m3 H2Oeq per MWh lower than in Dukovany power plant. The cooling water has the most significant contribution to the freshwater availability impact category. Evaporation from reservoirs which are a part of water management of the individual power plants has lower, but not inconsiderable, contribution to the water consumption. In the case of Temelín nuclear power plant, the loss caused by evaporation from Hněvkovice reservoir is of approximately 6.5% of the difference between withdrawal and discharge of the power plant. In the case of Dukovany nuclear power plant, evaporation from Dalešice - Mohelno reservoir is of even around 11%.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

water scarcity footprint; nuclear power plant; LCA; comparative study; ISO 14046

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo Szkoły Głównej Gospodarstwa Wiejskiego w Warszawie
• Czasopismo: Przegląd Naukowy Inżynieria i Kształtowanie Środowiska
• Rocznik: 2017
• Tom: Vol. 26, No. 4
• Strony: 489--497
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 14 poy., rzs., tab., wzkr.

Twórcy

autor

Ansorge L.

• T.G. Masaryk Water Research Institute – Public, Research Institution, Podbabská 30/2582, 160 00 Praha, Czech Republic

autor

Dlabal J.

• T.G. Masaryk Water Research Institute – Public, Research Institution, Podbabská 30/2582, 160 00 Praha, Czech Republic

Bibliografia

• Boulay, A-M., Motoshita, M., Pfister, S., Bulle, C., Muñoz, I., Franceschini, H. & Margni, M. (2014). Analysis of water use impact assessment methods (part A): evaluation of modeling choices based on a quantitative comparison of scarcity and human health indicators. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 20(1), 139-160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-014-0814-2.
• Dziegielewski, B. & Bik, T. (2006). Water Use Benchmarks for Thermoelectric Power Generation. Project completion report. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Carbondale.
• Hoekstra, A.Y. (2016). A critique on the waterscarcity weighted water footprint in LCA. Ecological Indicators, 66, 564-573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.02.026.
• Hoekstra, A.Y. (2017). Water Footprint Assessment: Evolvement of a New Research Field. Water Resources Management. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-017-1618-5.
• Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. & Mekonnen, M.M. (2011). The water footprint assessment manual: setting the global standard. London – Washington, DC: Earthscan.
• Inhaber, H. (2004). Water Use in Renewable and Conventional Electricity Production. Energy Sources, 26(3), 309-322. https://doi.org/10.1080/00908310490266698.
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, (2011). Renewable energy sources and climate change mitigation: summary for policymakers and technical summary: special report of the Intergovernmental panel on climate change. O. Edenhofer, R. PichsMadruga, Y. Sokona (Eds). Geneva. Retrieved from: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/srren.
• ISO 14046:2014. Environmental management. Water footprint. Principles, requirements and guidelines (ICS:13.020.60;13.020.10).
• Kounina, A., Margni, M., Bayart, J-B., Boulay, A.-M., Berger, M., Bulle, C., … & Humbert, S. (2012). Review of methods addressing freshwater use in life cycle inventory and impact assessment. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 18(3), 707-721. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0519-3.
• Mekonnen, M.M., Gerbens-Leenes, P.W., and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2015). The consumptive water footprint of electricity and heat: a global assessment. Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology, 1(3), 285-297. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5EW00026B.
• Ministry of Agriculture of the Czech Republic, MoA (2015). Report on Water Management in the Czech Republic in 2014. D. Pokorný, E. Rolečková, E. Fousová, & J. Rauscher (Eds). Prague. Retrieved from: http://eagri.cz/public/web/file/428082/Report_on_water_management_in_the_Czech_Republic_in_2014.pdf.
• OTE (2016). Expected Electricity and Gas Balance Report 2015. Praha: OTE a.s. Retrieved: from http://www.ote-cr.cz/o-spolecnosti/souboryvyrocni-zprava-ote/ZOOR_2014.pdf.
• Water Act (Vodni zákon) 254/2001 Coll.
• Yano, S., Hanasaki, N., Itsubo, N. & Oki, T. (2015). Water Scarcity Footprints by Considering the Differences in Water Sources. Sustainability, 7(8), 9753-9772. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7089753.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2021).