| 摘要 | ABSTRACT
In June 2015, the Government submitted an Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) to the UNFCCC. The key point of the INDC submitted by Korea is a 37% reduction on business-as-usual emissions by 2030. Its INDC target will be achieved through domestic efforts (25.7%) and the international market mechanism.
Achieving its 2030 reduction targets in Korea requires a big change in existing energy supply and its consumption pattern. Especially, the power generation sector which is the main source of greenhouse gas emissions must play a critical role. It is necessary to reduce the proportion of fossil fuels and to expand low-carbon power generation sources as soon as possible. Under the new climate era, the power sector faces two severe challenges of greenhouse gas reduction and a stable supply of electricity at an affordable price.
Nuclear power generation is the most talked about as a viable alternative to overcome these challenges. One of the major reasons why nuclear power is considered as a countermeasure against climate change is that nuclear power generation is a commercially available technology with low greenhouse gas emissions and a continual large source of energy. The amount of greenhouse gases generated over the life cycle of nuclear power generation is very small as that of hydro or wind power generation. Nuclear energy can also help to relieve concerns about a stable supply of energy. Although fossil fuel price has declined in recent years, they are likely to rebound at any time, and fundamental concerns still remain about the political instability of major fossil fuel supply area. However, the supply sources of uranium are stably distributed all over the world and the proportion of uranium in nuclear power generation is very small, therefore, nuclear energy can play a key role in stabilizing the supply of energy.
Nuclear power generation is also evaluated as economical. According to a recent study, under the assumption that a carbon cost for fossil fuel-based technologies is US$30/tCO2, the LCOE for nuclear power generation is US$26-64/MWh at 3% discount rate, this is much lower than US$65-95/MWh of coal power generation and US$61-133/MWh of gas power generation. Although the LCOE of renewable energy is currently declining, it is still considerably high compared to the LCOE of existing power generation, and it is difficult to obtain economic efficiency right now.
However, the concerns about radioactive hazards, waste management and the proliferation of nuclear weapons related to nuclear energy should never be overlooked. In Korea, nuclear power plants are concentrated in some region, and it is one of a kind in the world. Through the earthquake occurred in September 12, 2016, it is confirmed that the area is not safe from earthquakes. If the potential risks of the nuclear power plant are large enough to overwhelm the advantages of the nuclear power plant mentioned above, it is socially optimal to dispose of it as early as possible. Therefore, by carefully comparing the advantages and disadvantages of nuclear power, it is necessary to draw up consensus on the level of risk that our society can afford, and the policy on nuclear energy should be decided on the basis of such consensus.
Based on this awareness, this study closely examines the advantages and disadvantages of nuclear power generation in terms of climate change. The necessity of nuclear power generation was examined mainly in terms of the stable supply of climate change and energy, and at the same time, the fatal shortcoming of nuclear power was discussed.
In turn, we will empirically analyze whether nuclear power generation is actually effective in terms of greenhouse gas reduction. This can be done by examining the change in CO2 emissions due to changes in the percentage of nuclear power generation by adding variables indicating the proportion of nuclear power generation to the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis. As of October 2016, data from 18 countries operating at least four reactors were used. As a result, it was estimated that CO2 emissions per capita decreased by 0.26-0.32% when the proportion of nuclear power generation increased by 1% over the long term.
In order to estimate the social benefits of nuclear power generation, we constructed a stochastic optimization model under uncertainty to derive the optimum power structure from a medium - term perspective considering the nuclear accident under the GHG reduction target. Like the 7th Basic Plan for Long-term Electricity Supply and Demand, it was considered up to 2029 and was based on the expected electricity demand given in the plan. Under this scenario, the benefits for the first nuclear plant expansion are 17.7 trillion won, and the cost increase for the first nuclear power plant is 14.7 trillion won, respectively. For scenarios in which new and renewable energy costs are drastically reduced, the benefit for the first nuclear power plant is estimated to be 12.3 trillion won, while the cost increase for the first nuclear power plant project is estimated at 13.1 trillion won. For scenarios in which the nuclear power plant is not extended, the benefit for the first nuclear power plant is about 20.0 trillion won, and the cost increase for the first nuclear power plant is 13.5 trillion won. Taken together, the social benefit of one nuclear power plant is about 13-20 trillion won. However, the figures do not include the cost of adding and closing the nuclear power plant, so the cost of the nuclear power plant should be considered when calculating the net social benefit. |
