National Options for a Sustainable Nuclear Energy System: MCDM Evaluation Using an Improved Integrated Weighting Approach

Ruxing Gao, Hyo On Nam, Won Il Ko and Hong Jang
Additional contact information
Ruxing Gao: Department of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Technology, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 989-111 Daedeok-daero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-353, Korea
Hyo On Nam: Department of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Technology, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 989-111 Daedeok-daero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-353, Korea
Won Il Ko: Department of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Technology, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 989-111 Daedeok-daero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-353, Korea
Hong Jang: Department of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Technology, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 989-111 Daedeok-daero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-353, Korea

Energies, 2017, vol. 10, issue 12, 1-24

Abstract: While the prospects look bright for nuclear energy development in China, no consensus about an optimum transitional path towards sustainability of the nuclear fuel cycle has been achieved. Herein, we present a preliminary study of decision making for China’s future nuclear energy systems, combined with a dynamic analysis model. In terms of sustainability assessment based on environmental, economic, and social considerations, we compared and ranked the four candidate options of nuclear fuel cycles combined with an integrated evaluation analysis using the Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) method. An improved integrated weighting method was first applied in the nuclear fuel cycle evaluation study. This method synthesizes diverse subjective/objective weighting methods to evaluate conflicting criteria among the competing decision makers at different levels of expertise and experience. The results suggest that the fuel cycle option of direct recycling of spent fuel through fast reactors is the most competitive candidate, while the fuel cycle option of direct disposal of all spent fuel without recycling is the least attractive for China, from a sustainability perspective. In summary, this study provided a well-informed decision-making tool to support the development of national nuclear energy strategies.

Keywords: integrated evaluation; multi-criteria decision making (MCDM); sustainability; nuclear fuel cycle; dynamic model (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/10/12/2017/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/10/12/2017/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:10:y:2017:i:12:p:2017-:d:121202

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().