THERMAL SCIENCE

International Scientific Journal

Authors of this Paper

External Links

Vojin R. Grković

,

Đorđije D. Doder

A CONTRIBUTION TO EVALUATION OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS COMPETITIVENESS USING 3E INDICATOR: ONE POSSIBLE APPROACH

ABSTRACT
The strong restrictions of greenhouse gasses emissions and the high penetration of intermittent renewable energy sources are the frame for researching more closely the contribution of nuclear power plants to competitiveness of corresponding technology portfolio for electricity generation. For the competitiveness indication 3E Indicator is applied. The 3E Indicator is expressed as the function of two variables that indicate the configuration of the technology portfolio i.e. participation of intermittent renewables in covering overall electricity load and participation of nuclear power plants in covering the residual electricity load. Obtained results point out that an increase of nuclear power plants participation in residual load contributes to the increase of the technology portfolio’s competitiveness, i.e. to the reduction of the 3E Indicator’s numerical value. On the other hand, an increase of intermittent renewables participation in overall load in principle contributes to the decrease of the technology portfolio’s competitiveness, i.e. to the increase of the 3E Indicator’s numerical value with the maximal value at the certain participation rate. The competitiveness of the technology portfolios for electricity generation in eleven European countries is also examined. The results point out that the country with highest participation of intermittent renewables in overall load domain has the less favorable competitiveness, and the lowest annual equivalent operation time of the technology portfolio. On the other hand, the country with highest participation of nuclear power plants in residual load domain has the most favorable value of 3E indicator and the highest annual equivalent operation time of its technology portfolio.
KEYWORDS
nuclear power plants, competitiveness, 3E indicator
PAPER SUBMITTED: 2019-04-04
PAPER REVISED: 1970-01-01
PAPER ACCEPTED: 2019-06-11
PUBLISHED ONLINE: 2019-07-06
DOI REFERENCE: https://doi.org/10.2298/TSCI190404294G
CITATION EXPORT: view in browser or download as text file
THERMAL SCIENCE YEAR 2019, VOLUME 23, ISSUE Issue 6, PAGES [4095 - 4105]
REFERENCES
  1. Dong-Sung, C., Hwy-Chang, M., From Adam Smith to Michael Porter - Evolution of competitiveness theory, World Scientific, Chennai, 2013
  2. Chorafas, D., Energy, environment, natural resources and business competitiveness, GOWER, Surrey, England, 2011
  3. Grković, V., Controversies of modern energetics and the concept of the future thermal energy equipment, Annals of SANU - Branch in Novi Sad, Vol. 2013., pp. 36-45, (in Serbian)
  4. Grković, V., European turnaround in energy - content, consequences and options for thermal energetic, Thermal Power Plants 2014, Zlatibor, Serbia, October, 2014
  5. Grković, V., Marginal share of renewable energy sources of variable electricity generation - a contribution to the concept definition, Thermal Science, 19, (2015), 2, pp. 383-396
  6. *** International Status and Prospects for Nuclear Power 2017, IAEA, GOV/inf/2017/12-GC(61)/inf/8, www-legacy.iaea.org
  7. Cobb, J., World nuclear performance report, VGB PowerTech (2017), 12, pp. 77-82
  8. Hundt, M., et all., Compatibility of renewable energies and nuclear power in the generation portfolio, Summary, IER, Stuttgart, October 2009
  9. Hartung, M., New power plant construction in Europe - a challenge for project and quality management, VGB PowerTech, (2011), 5. pp. 30-33. (in German)
  10. Stoll, U., Between German phase-out and Chinese new-build rally: the situation of the nuclear industry worldwide five years after Fukushima", VGB PowerTech, (2016), 5, pp.36-39
  11. Emsley, I., Cobb, J., Nuclear power economic, VGB PowerTech, (2017), 5, pp.52-59
  12. Powell, D.J., Hunt, B. S., Powering Europe in the 21st century, VGB PowerTech, (2012), 3, pp.35-40
  13. Poncelet, J-P., Overview of nuclear new build projects and global perspective, VGB PowerTech, (2017), 1/2, pp.36-39
  14. Fürsch, M., et all., Optimization of power plant investments under uncertain renewable energy development paths - A multistage stochastic programming approach, Energy Systems, (2013), DOI 10.1007/s12667-013-0094-0
  15. What People Really Think about Nuclear Energy, VGB PowerTech, (2017), 5, pp.60-66
  16. Fouquet, D., Nysten, J., The Role of Renewable Energy in the Changing Energy Landscape in Europe - Some Reflections, VGB PowerTech, (2012), 1/2, pp. 38-42.
  17. Kosel, D., Meyer, H., Requirements for Cleaning of the Flue Gas in Oxyfuel-Process, VGB PowerTech, (2010), 4, pp. 56-58. (in German)
  18. Grkovic, V., Doder, Dj., On competitiveness of nuclear power plants in the concept of sustainable development with strong restrictions of CO2 emissions, Proceedings, (Editors: P. Stefanvić and D. Cvetinović), Power plants 2018, Zlatibor, Srbija, 2018, ISBN 978-86-7877-029-6, pp. 351-361.
  19. Grkovic, V., Key indicators for competitiveness assessment of energy technologies, Proceedings, International Conference Energy and Ecology Industry, October, 2018, Belgrade, pp. 74-81.
  20. Grkovic, V., Ecology, economy and energy evaluation of electricity generating technologies using 3E Indicator, Proceedings, (Edit. Guoqian Chen), International Workshop on Environment and Geoscience, IWEG2018 June, 2018, Hangzhou, China, (Key note speech), pp.139-144.
  21. Grković V.: Evaluation of Electricity Generating System's Technology Mix Using 3E Indicator, Journal of Thermal Science, (2019), Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 218-224, DOI 10.1007/s11630-019-1095-7.
  22. ***, Capital Costs Estimates for Utility Scale Electricity Generating Plants, U.S. Energy Information Administration, November 2016 www.eia.gov
  23. Breeze, P., The Cost of power Generation, Business Insight, 2010.
  24. Kather, A., Future Climate Friendly Electricity supply with Fossil Fired Power plants, VGB PowerTech, (2011), 9, pp. 44-53. (in German)
  25. ***, Entso-e Transparency Platform. transparency.entsoe.eu (accessed: 7.1.2018.)
  26. ***, energia.fi/en/ energy_sector_in_finland/energy_production/electricity_generation (accessed: 15.3.2019.)
  27. ***, www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/cnpp2016/countryprofiles/Slovakia/Slovakia.htm (accessed: 15.3.2019.)
  28. Wissel, S., et all., Electricity Production Cost in Comparison, Report No. 4, Stuttgart, Germany. 2008. (in German)
  29. The Role of Nuclear Energy in a Low-carbon Energy Future, OECD 2012/NEA No. 6887, 2012
  30. Comparison of Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Various Electricity Generating Sources, WNA Report, 2011.
  31. Liu, Z., Zeng, W., H., Research of optimization framework for China's low-carbon technology development based on 3E model: A case study of electricity industry, Applied Mechanics and Materials, (2014), 535, pp. 500-505.
  32. Liu W.B, at all., The 3E methodology for developing performance indicators for public sector organizations. Public Money and Management, (2010), 5, pp. 305-312.
PDF VERSION [DOWNLOAD]
A contribution to evaluation of nuclear power plants competitiveness using 3E indicator: One possible approach

© 2024 Society of Thermal Engineers of Serbia. Published by the Vinča Institute of Nuclear Sciences, National Institute of the Republic of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International licence