持続可能な電力システムのための原子力：ライフサイクル評価と多基準意思決定手法による統合的評価
Nuclear Energy for Sustainable Power Systems: An Integrated Assessment Using Life Cycle and Multi-Criteria Decision Approaches (原題)
Vipin Kumar Sharma, Satyam Shree, Nakkeeran E.
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
原子力を対象に、1kWhを機能単位としたライフサイクル評価と14指標の多基準意思決定分析を統合した比較評価。ライフサイクルGHGは約12g-CO2eq/kWhで風力に次ぎ、MCDA総合スコアは0.746で首位。±20%の重み摂動130回でも93.8%で1位を維持し、低炭素性・高エネルギー密度・安定供給の組み合わせを示す一方、資本集約性や放射性廃棄物管理を評価に組み込む必要性を指摘する。
English
An integrated LCA and multi-criteria decision analysis compares nuclear power with wind, solar PV, gas and coal using 1 kWh as functional unit and 14 indicators. Nuclear shows ~12 g CO2-eq/kWh life-cycle emissions and the top MCDA score (0.746), holding first place in 93.8% of 130 weight-perturbation simulations. The authors stress that capital intensity and radioactive waste management must remain part of sustainability assessment.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本ではGX推進法・第7次エネルギー基本計画で原子力の活用が議論される中、電源間の定量比較は企業の調達・投資判断や統合報告書での脱炭素電源説明の基礎資料になりうる。ただしSSBJ・TCFD開示項目への直接の示唆は限定的。
In the global GX context
Amid global debate over whether nuclear counts as a transition-aligned low-carbon source (EU taxonomy, green bond eligibility), this paper offers a transparent, sensitivity-tested comparison that can inform transition-finance taxonomies and disclosure of generation-mix decarbonization.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:LCAとMCDAを統合した電源比較の手法設計と重み感度分析の頑健性検証の参考になる。
🏢実務担当者:自社の電源構成・調達戦略の脱炭素性を説明する際の定量的な比較根拠として利用できる。
🏛政策担当者:原子力を含む電源構成の政策評価において、複数指標と感度分析を組み込んだ意思決定枠組みの示唆を与える。
📄 Abstract（原文）
The transition toward secure, low-carbon electricity generation requires energy technologies to be evaluated simultaneously in terms of environmental performance, technical reliability, economic viability, resource requirements, and strategic value. Although nuclear power is widely recognized as a low-carbon and high-capacity-factor technology, its overall benefits remain sensitive to fuel-cycle characteristics, system boundaries, economic assumptions, and decision criteria. This study presents a transparent literature-based comparative assessment of nuclear power using an integrated life-cycle assessment (LCA) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework. The environmental assessment was performed on a cradle-to-grave basis using 1 kWh of net electricity as the functional unit, while the MCDA incorporated 14 technical, environmental, economic, resource, and strategic indicators. Min–max normalisation and equal baseline weighting were applied, followed by a ±20% weight-perturbation analysis over 130 simulations to examine ranking robustness. Literature-derived median life-cycle greenhouse-gas emissions were approximately 12 g CO₂-eq/kWh for nuclear, compared with 11, 48, 490 and 820 g CO₂-eq/kWh for wind, solar photovoltaic, natural gas and coal, respectively. The resulting MCDA scores were 0.746 for nuclear, 0.706 for wind, 0.643 for solar PV, 0.566 for natural gas, and 0.404 for coal. Nuclear retained the first position in 93.8% of sensitivity simulations, indicating robust performance within the defined decision space. The findings demonstrate that nuclear power can provide a strong combination of low life-cycle emissions, high energy density and reliable electricity generation, while limitations associated with capital intensity, radioactive-waste management and deployment conditions must remain integral to sustainability assessments.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.63015/6hs-2498.3.2first seen 2026-10-19 04:55:38
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。