Reducing Environmental Impact of Coal-Fired Power Plants by Building an Indoor Coal Storage: An Economic Analysis

JongRoul Woo, Jungwoo Shin, Seung-Hoon Yoo and Sung-Yoon Huh ()
Additional contact information
JongRoul Woo: Graduate School of Energy and Environment (KU-KIST Green School), Korea University, 145 Anam-Ro, Seongbuk-Gu, Seoul 02841, Republic of Korea
Jungwoo Shin: Department of Industrial and Management Systems Engineering, Department of Big Data Analytics, Kyung Hee University, 1732 Deogyeongdae-Ro, Giheung-Gu, Yongin 17104, Republic of Korea
Seung-Hoon Yoo: Department of Future Energy Convergence, Seoul National University of Science & Technology, 232 Gongneung-Ro, Nowon-Gu, Seoul 01811, Republic of Korea
Sung-Yoon Huh: Department of Future Energy Convergence, Seoul National University of Science & Technology, 232 Gongneung-Ro, Nowon-Gu, Seoul 01811, Republic of Korea

Energies, 2023, vol. 16, issue 1, 1-14

Abstract: Coal-fired power plants have been identified as one of the major sources of air pollutants in the power sector. Most coal-fired power stations have large open-air coal stockpiles, which lead to a considerable amount of fugitive dust. The construction of an indoor coal storage is known to control coal dust; however, it requires significant upfront capital. Certain power utilities, including those in South Korea, are currently considering or are required to build indoor coal storages. This study analyzed the benefit and economic feasibility of indoor coal storages in coal-fired power stations. A contingent valuation method was used to elicit people’s willingness to pay for the construction of new indoor coal storages. The results showed that, on average, a South Korean household was willing to pay KRW 59,242 (USD 53.97) in a lump-sum payment toward the construction of indoor coal storages at six coal-fired power stations (total storage capacity of 5.47 million tons of coal, with a site area of 1.15 million m 2 ). The resulting benefit–cost ratio of the project was calculated to be 0.52, which was not economically feasible. Thus, it is recommended that the South Korean government should focus on other cost-effective projects to improve air quality.

Keywords: closed coal storage; coal silo; coal shed; stated preference technique; monetary value; benefit–cost analysis (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: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/1/511/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/1/511/ (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:16:y:2023:i:1:p:511-:d:1023006

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 ().