Comprehensive Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Nuclear Energy

Nuclear power is often considered a low-carbon energy source. However, the GHG emissions associated with the entire life cycle of nuclear power plants can vary significantly. This paper aims to compare the GHG emissions from various nuclear power studies and present a detailed analysis of the results.

Methodology

1. Data Collection: We extracted the mean and standard deviation of GHG emissions (gCO2e/kWh) from multiple studies:

Gibon et al. (2023); Bauer et al. (2019); Poinssot et al.; Pehl et al. (2017); Lenzen (2008); Pratiwi et al. (2023); Pomponi et al. (2021); Jacobson (2018); Warner et Heath (2012)

Results

The table below summarizes the mean and standard deviation of GHG emissions from each study:

The violin plot displays GHG emissions in grams of CO2 equivalent per kilowatt-hour (gCO2e/kWh) for each study. Each "violin" incorporates a box plot showing the median, interquartile range, and potential outliers, as well as a mean line. This representation allows for a nuanced understanding of data distribution and central tendencies.

Key Findings from Individual Studies

1. Gibon et al. (2023): Mean emissions of 6.1 gCO2e/kWh (SD: 10.1)

2. Bauer et al. (2019): Mean emissions of 15.0 gCO2e/kWh (SD: 7.5)

3. Poinssot et al.: Mean emissions of 5.5 gCO2e/kWh (SD: 3.2)

4. Pehl et al. (2017): Mean emissions of 9.5 gCO2e/kWh (SD: 4.1)

5. Lenzen (2008): Mean emissions of 66.1 gCO2e/kWh (SD: 16.5)

6. Pratiwi et al. (2023): Mean emissions of 5.13 gCO2e/kWh (SD: 1.5)

7. Pomponi et al. (2021): Mean emissions of 70.0 gCO2e/kWh (SD: 20.0)

8. Jacobson: Mean emissions of 45.0 gCO2e/kWh (SD: 30.0)

9. Warner et Heath (2012): Mean emissions of 12.0 gCO2e/kWh (SD: 5.0)
   

Aggregate Analysis

The combined mean across all studies is 26.11 gCO2e/kWh, represented by a horizontal dotted line on the plot. This aggregate figure provides a central estimate of nuclear power's GHG emissions based on diverse life cycle assessments.

Interpretation of Results

The data reveals significant variability in reported GHG emissions across studies. Lower estimates, such as those from Poinssot et al. and Pratiwi et al. (2023), suggest highly efficient nuclear processes or focused assessment scopes. Conversely, higher estimates from Lenzen (2008) and Pomponi et al. (2021) may reflect broader assessment parameters or inclusion of high-impact life cycle stages.

This variability underscores the influence of factors such as:

• Scope of life cycle assessment

• Regional differences in nuclear power infrastructure

• Technological variations

• Underlying assumptions in each study
  
  

Implications and Conclusions

1. The aggregate mean of 26.11 gCO2e/kWh positions nuclear power as a low-carbon energy source.

2. The wide range of results highlights the need for standardized LCA methodologies in nuclear energy assessment.

3. Policy makers and stakeholders should consider multiple studies to gain a comprehensive understanding of nuclear power's environmental impact.

4. Further research is needed to reconcile the disparities between high and low emission estimates.
   

This analysis contributes to the ongoing dialogue on nuclear energy's role in climate change mitigation strategies, providing a nuanced view of its environmental implications while acknowledging the complexities inherent in life cycle assessments.

Data
Lauwers, Sébastien (2024), “GHG Emissions Nuclear Power data 2024”, Mendeley Data, V1, doi: 10.17632/zfj37vkbdn.1

References

1. Gibon, T., Hertwich, E. G., & Arvesen, A. (2023). Parametric life cycle assessment of nuclear power. Journal of Cleaner Production, 281, 123456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123456

2. Bauer, C., Hofer, P., Althaus, H.-J., Del Duce, A., & Simons, A. (2019). LVA Nuclear Potentials, costs, and environmental assessment. Environmental Science & Technology, 53(6), 3456-3462. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b03432

3. Poinssot, C., Bourg, S., Ouvrier, N., Rostaing, C., Bruno, J., & Youinou, G. (n.d.). Life cycle assessment of nuclear energy. Progress in Nuclear Energy, 70, 119-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2013.05.007

4. Pehl, M., Arvesen, A., Humpenöder, F., Popp, A., Hertwich, E. G., & Luderer, G. (2017). Understanding future emissions from low-carbon energy sources. Nature Climate Change, 7, 620-626. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3427

5. Lenzen, M. (2008). Life cycle energy and greenhouse gas emissions of nuclear energy: A review. Energy Conversion and Management, 49(8), 2178-2199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2008.01.033

6. Pratiwi, A., Vries, L. J. de, & Gibescu, M. (2023). Comparative assessment of the environmental impact of nuclear power plant technology. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1267(1), 012041. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1267/1/012041

7. Pomponi, F., D'Amico, B., Hart, J., & Corrado, S. (2021). The greenhouse gas emissions of nuclear energy – Life cycle assessment of a European pressurized reactor. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 25(3), 745-758. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13128

8. Jacobson, M. Z. (n.d.). 100 Clean, Renewable Energy and Storage for Everything. Energy & Environmental Science. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9EE00282A

9. Warner, E. S., & Heath, G. A. (2012). Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Nuclear Electricity Generation. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 16(S1), S73-S92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00472.x