You are here:  
  1. Home
  2. Archive
  3. 2018
  4. №1
  5. NUCLEAR ENERGY IN THE DISCUSSIONS ON CARBON FOOTPRINT

NUCLEAR ENERGY IN THE DISCUSSIONS ON CARBON FOOTPRINT

 

DOI: 10.24411/1728-323X-2018-11073

Section

Geoecology

Title

NUCLEAR ENERGY IN THE DISCUSSIONS ON CARBON FOOTPRINT

Сontributors

M. E. Rubleva, Assistant to the Scientific Laboratory for Environmental Monitoring, School, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.;

K. E. Khotsinskaia, Assistant, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.;

R. A. Sharafutdinov, Associate Professor, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.;

V. L. Gavrikov, Leading Researcher, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.;

School of Ecology and Geography, Siberian Federal University, Krasnoyarsk, Russia.

V. V. Nagorskaya, Deputy Director for Public Relations. ANO Research Institute of Ecology Problems, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

Moscow, Russia.

Abstract

The article overviews the publications comparing carbon footprint of various energy generation methods. Among the existing methods there are only two main ones that have core properties: 1) low value of the carbon footprint and 2) high potential of the gross production of electricity required for the functioning of the contemporary economy. Nuclear energy, along with hydropower, belongs to such methods. The low value of the carbon footprint of the nuclear generation of electricity helps compensate greenhouse gas emissions through management of Russian forests. According to current estimates, if the Russian industrial enterprises of the nuclear fuel cycle are located within the forest zone, the sanitary protection area is capable to sequestrate 29—31 % of carbon emissions which are emitted as a result of generation at nuclear power plants.

Keywords

carbon footprint, the Paris Agreement, nuclear power, compensation of CO2 emissions, forest ecosystems.

References

1.   The Paris Agreement. 2015. https://unfccc.int/files/meetings/paris_nov_2015/application/pdf/paris_agreement_russian_.pdf Accessed 11 Oct 2017.

2.   Nuclear Energy Institute, 2007. World Energy Outlook 2007, November 17, 2007, available at /http://neinuclearnotes.blogs- pot.com/2007/11/world-energy-outlook-2007.html Accessed 20 Oct 2017.

3.   Environmental News Service, 2005. Greenpeace co-founded says nuclear energy is ‘only option’, July, available at /http:// www.euronuclear.org/e-news/e-news-9/greenpeace.htm Accessed 23 Oct 2017.

4.    Lenzen M. (2008) Life cycle energy and greenhouse gas emissions of nuclear energy: A review. Energy Conversion and Man­agement No. 49, P. 2178—2199.

5.    Sovacool B. K. Valuing the greenhouse gas emissions from nuclear power: A critical survey // Energy Policy. 2008. Vol. 36. No. 8. P. 2950—2963.

6.   WNA (2011), Comparison of Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Various Electricity Generation Sources, WNA Re­port. Available at http://www.world-nuclear.org/uploadedFiles/org/WNA/Publications/Working_Group_Reports/ comparison_of_lifecycle.pdf. Accessed 16 Dec 2017.

7.    Nuclear Energy Agency (2012) The Role of Nuclear Energy in a Low-carbon Energy Future. OECD/NEA, Paris. www.oecd- nea.org/nsd/reports/2012/nea6887-role-nuclear-low-carbon.pdf. Accessed 5 Dec 2017.

8.   Verbruggen A., Yurchenko Y. Positioning nuclear power in the low-carbon electricity transition //Sustainability. 2017. Vol. 9. No. 1. P. 163.

9.    Roger Andrews. Can offshore wind be integrated with the grid? // Energy Matters: Energy, Environment and Policy. Posted on July 7, 2017. URL: http://euanmearns.com/can-offshore-wind-be-integrated-with-the-grid. Accessed 2 Dec 2017.

10.   Heard B. P., Brook B. W., Wigley T. M. L., & Bradshaw C. J. A. (). Burden of proof: A comprehensive review of the feasibility of 100 % renewable-electricity systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2017. No. 76, P. 1122—1133. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.114

11.   Efremov S. P., Efremova T. T., Bloiten V., “Biological Productivity and Carbon Pool of the Phytomass of Forest Mires in Western Siberia”, Sib. Ekologich. Zh., No. 1, 29—44 (2005)

12.   Churakov B. P. Carbon Deposition By Uneven-Age Cultures Of PineДепонирование / B. P. Churakov, E. V. Manyakina // Ulyanovsk State University. 2012. No. 1. P. 125—129.

13.   Belelli Marchesini, Papale D., Reichstein M., Vuichard N., Tchebakova N., and Valentini R. Carbon balance assessment of a natural steppe of southern Siberia by multiple constraint approach. Biogeosciences, 2007. No. 4, P. 581—595.

14.   Gill R. A., Kelly R. H., Parton W. J., Day K. A., Jackson R. B., Morgan J. A., Scurlock J. M. O., Tieszen L. L., Castle J. V., Ojima D. S., and Zhang X. S.: Using simple environmental variables to estimate belowground productivity in grasslands, Glo­bal Ecol. Biogeogr., 2002. No. 11, P. 79—86.

Fuel and energy resources of 2008-2010 Crimea [Electronic resource]: Statistical compilation. Access mode: http://govua- docs.com.ua/docs/index-20825870-1.html?page=88 Accessed 21 Oct 2017.