| 摘要 | ABSTRACT
1. Research Purpose
The request for cost evaluation of power generating technologies taking account of accident risk costs and external costs as well as economic costs of nuclear power plants has been increasing since the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident. At a time when the international community recognizes the risk of nuclear power anew after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident in Japan, the demand for evaluation of "Real costs" of nuclear, which includes nuclear accident risk costs and accident risk avoidance costs, has increased.
Nuclear generation costs in Korea currently includes the decommissioning costs of nuclear power plants(revised in December, 2012), safety system refurbishment costs(1.1 trillion won), and liability insurance premium and so on. After revised, the back-end costs, which includes decommissioning costs and mid-low level and high level radioactive waste disposal costs, are higher than world average and assessed biennially. Accident risk avoidance costs are external costs and there is no country including Japan that includes the accident risk avoidance costs into the nuclear generation costs. However, the necessity arises to draw energy mix plan that considers external costs to enhance the validity of optimal generation mix plan.
This is the second study of three year(2013-2015) study and aims to draw optimal generation mix taking account of economic and social costs of nuclear generation. In the first year, we focused on modeling that can be used in optimal generation mix and collected related basic data. In the second year, we focus on the external costs of generating technologies and in the third year, we would draw a optimal generation mix taking account of economic and social costs of nuclear based on the information accumulated in the first and second year.
2. Summary
This study estimates the willingness-to-pay by the changes in shares of generation technologies taking account of social costs such as accident risk, greenhouse gas emissions using Choice Experiment among stated preference approaches. Among the 900 surveyed, 500 lives in Seoul, 200 in Busan, and 200 near nuclear plants including Uljin, Gyeongju, and Gijang. Conditional Logit Model and Mixed Logit Model are used to analyze survey results and willingness- to-pay of each characteristics and the differences of willingness- to-pay between alternavtives are drawn based on estimated utility function.
The questionnaire briefly presented the merits and demerits of nuclear, coal, gas, oil, hydropower and alternatives on the basis of severe accident risks, greenhouse-gas emissions, electricity generating costs, and supply stability. It also presented the shares of each technologies and household electricity prices in total generating capacity of 2012 in Korea. We provided generally known information about accident risks and greenhouse-gas emissions, which are the causes of social costs between nuclear and coal/gas, rather than providing technical and specific figures that the public feels difficult to understand.
The options the surveyed can choose have three features including the share of nuclear, the share of gas and coal, and electricity prices. Other features excluding these three features, such as the shares of renewable or oil power plants, are assumed to maintain current levels as of 2012. Three features of each options in questionnaire should not be regarded as independent from each other because the electricity generation costs go down and lowers electricity prices when the shares of nuclear or coal increases. However, the share of nuclear in total generation and the shares of gas and coal among thermal powers can be independently chosen and electricity prices may vary depending on the relative shares of nuclear and gas and coal.
3. Research Results
The analysis finds that when the share of nuclear decreases 1%, the willingness-to-pay is KRW1.289 in Conditional Logit Model and KWR1.039 in Mixed Logit Model. When the share of coal-fired power plants decreases 1%, the willingness-to-pay stand at KRW0.418/kWh and KRW0.420/kWh, which take account of 0.20% of standard electricity prices and there is little difference between model options. Therefore, when the share of nuclear decreases 1%, he willingness-to-pay increases 2.5-fold or 3.1-fold from the willingness-to-pay when the share of coal-fired power plants decreases 1%.
In this study, the share of oil, hydropower and renewable energies remains at the current level taking account the issues of nuclear, coal, gas, oil, hydropower, and other renewable energies and changed the share of nuclear and coal while the difference from the change is filled with gas. Taking the differences between experimental designs and circumstances of countries into account, the willingness-to-pay, when the share of nuclear decreases, is within the range of preceding domestic and foreign research. This study has also drawn relative differences of values of the public from the risk of nuclear power generation and air pollution from coal-fired electricity generation. |
