Description
Equipment-supply reference for 1 unit of procurement miscellaneous TI EPR. It provides the recorded material, processing and linked equipment inputs for the EPR construction supply chain.
Nuclear electricity
procurement miscellaneous TI EPR
Reference product Procurement miscellaneous TI EPR RER
Published
Version 1.0.1
Latest published
Stable dataset identity
procurement-miscellaneous-ti-epr-2
- Unit
- unit
- Reuse license
- CC BY 4.0
- Published
- 2026-11-03
- Version
1.0.1- Technology maturity
- See quality profile
Published inventory
Overview
Process description and catalog context. View scientific metadata
Dataset details
Classification, keywords, bookmarks and download counts.
Classification path: Energy > Electricity > Nuclear electricity
Log in to bookmarkMetadata & sources Methods, scope, reference years, publications, contributors, projects and funding.
Source
Source documentation, background profiles and references.
Scientific journal publication
Simons, A., Bauer, C. (2012). Life cycle assessment of the European pressurized reactor and the influence of different fuel cycle strategies. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy 226(3), 427–444. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549
These are the stored source profiles for this version. Foreground methodology is recorded in Scientific metadata.
Technology characterization Scale, utilization, production, lifetime, technology readiness and representativeness.
- Commercial maturity stage
- Early commercial
- Design capacity
- Not provided
- Design capacity unit
- Not provided
- Capacity factor
- Not provided
- Annual production volume
- Not provided
- Annual production volume unit
- Not provided
- Annual production volume year
- Not provided
- Plant lifetime
- Not provided
Missing exchange uncertainty generation: Not requested
Representativeness scores use a 1–5 scale when provided. Lower scores indicate a closer fit to the modeled technology, geography, or time period.
Inventory & impacts 10 exchanges · exchange table, supply-chain graph and environmental screening.
Precalculated screening profile
Environmental impacts
Results per unit, using UVEK 2025 and the ecoinvent 3.10 biosphere. Exchange rows are shaded from green to red by relative contribution to the selected indicator.
Acidification
2003.01
mol H+-Eq / unit
Climate change
352545
kg CO2-Eq / unit
Freshwater ecotoxicity
988147
CTUe / unit
Freshwater eutrophication
146.216
kg P-Eq / unit
Marine eutrophication
273.568
kg N-Eq / unit
Terrestrial eutrophication
2890.06
mol N-Eq / unit
Human toxicity, cancer
0.0016581
CTUh / unit
Human toxicity, non-cancer
0.00935176
CTUh / unit
Ionising radiation
79233
kBq U235-Eq / unit
Land use
1.1110e+06
dimensionless / unit
Ozone depletion
0.00610321
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
Particulate matter
0.0235681
disease incidence / unit
Photochemical ozone formation
1240.28
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
Resource use, fossils
3.6521e+06
MJ, net calorific value / unit
Resource use, minerals and metals
3.69905
kg Sb-Eq / unit
Water use
98401.4
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
Screening result
This screening result uses Brightpath mappings from the source background to UVEK 2025; mapped suppliers are not claims of scientific equivalence.
Show all 16 indicator totals
Calculation details
Profile uvek-2025-ef-v3-1-4e70d56a85b1 · artifact
4e70d56a85b1 · calculated
2026-11-03 09:14 UTC. These screening results do not replace a reviewed comparative LCA.
Outputs
Reference flow 1 row Reference production exchanges extracted from the uploaded inventory.
| Exchange | Reference / categories | Amount | Unit | Metadata | Climate change contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
procurement miscellaneous TI EPR
RER
|
Procurement miscellaneous TI EPR
Axpo NH 5b / year technologies
|
1
|
unit | Reference flow |
Inputs
Technosphere inputs 9 rows Linked foreground or background product inputs used by this dataset.
| Exchange | Reference / categories | Amount | Unit | Metadata | Climate change contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
market for copper, cathode
GLO
|
copper, cathode
Materials/fuels
|
1000
|
kilogram |
907.981
mol H+-Eq / unit
45.3% of total
8509.59
kg CO2-Eq / unit
2.4% of total
73426
CTUe / unit
7.4% of total
20.3315
kg P-Eq / unit
13.9% of total
16.1787
kg N-Eq / unit
5.9% of total
164.553
mol N-Eq / unit
5.7% of total
8.9767e-06
CTUh / unit
0.5% of total
0.000352705
CTUh / unit
3.8% of total
2965.69
kBq U235-Eq / unit
3.7% of total
66993.7
dimensionless / unit
6.0% of total
0.000183345
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
3.0% of total
0.00107562
disease incidence / unit
4.6% of total
95.2806
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
7.7% of total
111737
MJ, net calorific value / unit
3.1% of total
0.087012
kg Sb-Eq / unit
2.4% of total
7602.03
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
7.7% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
market for hot rolling, steel
GLO
|
hot rolling, steel
Materials/fuels
|
1.30e+05
|
kilogram |
29.4541
mol H+-Eq / unit
1.5% of total
21596.4
kg CO2-Eq / unit
6.1% of total
97146
CTUe / unit
9.8% of total
3.62889
kg P-Eq / unit
2.5% of total
10.9105
kg N-Eq / unit
4.0% of total
105.367
mol N-Eq / unit
3.6% of total
2.6259e-05
CTUh / unit
1.6% of total
0.000392567
CTUh / unit
4.2% of total
15797.2
kBq U235-Eq / unit
19.9% of total
65228.6
dimensionless / unit
5.9% of total
0.000823823
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
13.5% of total
0.00101467
disease incidence / unit
4.3% of total
89.4257
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
7.2% of total
471392
MJ, net calorific value / unit
12.9% of total
0.0204799
kg Sb-Eq / unit
0.6% of total
18409.8
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
18.7% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
market for reinforcing steel
GLO
|
reinforcing steel
Materials/fuels
|
2000
|
kilogram |
8.08691
mol H+-Eq / unit
0.4% of total
2919.1
kg CO2-Eq / unit
0.8% of total
7701.04
CTUe / unit
0.8% of total
1.12627
kg P-Eq / unit
0.8% of total
1.93822
kg N-Eq / unit
0.7% of total
20.3465
mol N-Eq / unit
0.7% of total
8.6472e-06
CTUh / unit
0.5% of total
8.8378e-05
CTUh / unit
0.9% of total
702.311
kBq U235-Eq / unit
0.9% of total
8336.68
dimensionless / unit
0.8% of total
3.5057e-05
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
0.6% of total
0.000179408
disease incidence / unit
0.8% of total
8.82153
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
0.7% of total
28982.5
MJ, net calorific value / unit
0.8% of total
0.019469
kg Sb-Eq / unit
0.5% of total
642.415
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
0.7% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
market for steel, chromium steel 18/8
GLO
|
steel, chromium steel 18/8
Materials/fuels
|
1.00e+04
|
kilogram |
224.406
mol H+-Eq / unit
11.2% of total
44204.9
kg CO2-Eq / unit
12.5% of total
147989
CTUe / unit
15.0% of total
16.4817
kg P-Eq / unit
11.3% of total
39.5624
kg N-Eq / unit
14.5% of total
422.56
mol N-Eq / unit
14.6% of total
0.000712307
CTUh / unit
43.0% of total
0.00216503
CTUh / unit
23.2% of total
9224.99
kBq U235-Eq / unit
11.6% of total
180438
dimensionless / unit
16.2% of total
0.000566187
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
9.3% of total
0.00321327
disease incidence / unit
13.6% of total
145.87
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
11.8% of total
516554
MJ, net calorific value / unit
14.1% of total
1.21395
kg Sb-Eq / unit
32.8% of total
9682.97
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
9.8% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
market for steel, low-alloyed
GLO
|
steel, low-alloyed
Materials/fuels
|
1.20e+05
|
kilogram |
749.143
mol H+-Eq / unit
37.4% of total
256459
kg CO2-Eq / unit
72.7% of total
605032
CTUe / unit
61.2% of total
100.003
kg P-Eq / unit
68.4% of total
173.198
kg N-Eq / unit
63.3% of total
1848.19
mol N-Eq / unit
63.9% of total
0.000893247
CTUh / unit
53.9% of total
0.00612135
CTUh / unit
65.5% of total
45920.9
kBq U235-Eq / unit
58.0% of total
613186
dimensionless / unit
55.2% of total
0.00247526
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
40.6% of total
0.01747
disease incidence / unit
74.1% of total
789.295
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
63.6% of total
2.2510e+06
MJ, net calorific value / unit
61.6% of total
2.26494
kg Sb-Eq / unit
61.2% of total
41941.3
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
42.6% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
market for transport, freight train
Europe without Switzerland
|
transport, freight train
Materials/fuels
|
6.66e+04
|
ton kilometer |
4.87809
mol H+-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
1114.22
kg CO2-Eq / unit
0.3% of total
2934.54
CTUe / unit
0.3% of total
0.672768
kg P-Eq / unit
0.5% of total
1.62182
kg N-Eq / unit
0.6% of total
16.251
mol N-Eq / unit
0.6% of total
1.3416e-06
CTUh / unit
0.1% of total
1.4173e-05
CTUh / unit
0.2% of total
1092.21
kBq U235-Eq / unit
1.4% of total
20600.2
dimensionless / unit
1.9% of total
2.7089e-05
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
0.4% of total
5.0202e-05
disease incidence / unit
0.2% of total
5.18276
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
0.4% of total
21538.4
MJ, net calorific value / unit
0.6% of total
0.00249682
kg Sb-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
631.245
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
0.6% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
market for transport, freight, lorry, unspecified
RER
|
transport, freight, lorry, unspecified
Materials/fuels
|
1.33e+04
|
ton kilometer |
70.9694
mol H+-Eq / unit
3.5% of total
16584.6
kg CO2-Eq / unit
4.7% of total
46644.8
CTUe / unit
4.7% of total
1.55957
kg P-Eq / unit
1.1% of total
29.3026
kg N-Eq / unit
10.7% of total
303.709
mol N-Eq / unit
10.5% of total
5.5677e-06
CTUh / unit
0.3% of total
0.000126014
CTUh / unit
1.3% of total
3187.07
kBq U235-Eq / unit
4.0% of total
151853
dimensionless / unit
13.7% of total
0.00194399
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
31.9% of total
0.000526027
disease incidence / unit
2.2% of total
102.412
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
8.3% of total
239071
MJ, net calorific value / unit
6.5% of total
0.0395208
kg Sb-Eq / unit
1.1% of total
19221
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
19.5% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
wire drawing, copper
RER
|
wire drawing, copper
Materials/fuels
|
1000
|
kilogram |
6.81623
mol H+-Eq / unit
0.3% of total
373.41
kg CO2-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
2700.1
CTUe / unit
0.3% of total
2.19257
kg P-Eq / unit
1.5% of total
0.570697
kg N-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
6.30017
mol N-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
1.0507e-06
CTUh / unit
0.1% of total
7.9364e-05
CTUh / unit
0.8% of total
188.758
kBq U235-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
2301.59
dimensionless / unit
0.2% of total
9.3424e-06
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
1.8227e-05
disease incidence / unit
0.1% of total
2.7539
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
6371.75
MJ, net calorific value / unit
0.2% of total
0.0455486
kg Sb-Eq / unit
1.2% of total
159.414
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
0.2% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
wire drawing, steel
RER
|
wire drawing, steel
Materials/fuels
|
2000
|
kilogram |
1.271
mol H+-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
783.342
kg CO2-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
4572.92
CTUe / unit
0.5% of total
0.219783
kg P-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
0.285212
kg N-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
2.7844
mol N-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
7.0192e-07
CTUh / unit
0.0% of total
1.2182e-05
CTUh / unit
0.1% of total
153.762
kBq U235-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
2078.73
dimensionless / unit
0.2% of total
3.9120e-05
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
0.6% of total
2.0722e-05
disease incidence / unit
0.1% of total
1.23748
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
5403.38
MJ, net calorific value / unit
0.1% of total
0.00564094
kg Sb-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
111.284
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
0.1% of total
BAFU:2025
|
Parameters 0 source definitions · values, formulas and uncertainty.
Read-only definitions preserved with this inventory version. Values are supplied by the source; CLIC does not evaluate formulas or recalculate exchange amounts and impact scores from them.
No parameter definitions were supplied with this inventory snapshot.
Supply-chain graph
Direct technosphere and natural-resource inputs appear on the left; emissions appear on the right.
Current dataset
Technosphere inputs
Environmental resource inputs
Emissions
1 CLIC node and 9 background boundary nodes shown. Direct inputs appear to the left of the current dataset, while emissions appear to the right. Hover an arrow to inspect its amount and unit, click a blue supplier node to reveal up to three upstream steps, or click an emissions node to open its biosphere flows, then scroll or drag the canvas to navigate.
Reuse and provenance
Downloads & files
Add this version to your basket, inspect original uploads, or reuse it in your LCA software.
Add to download basket
Original source files are currently unavailable, but you can still add this version to your basket for generated package export.
Raw uploaded files 0 files preserved with this version.
Original uploaded files were not included in the inventory archive. Generated inventory exports remain available.
Versions & changes 2 versions · change rationale, release notes and comparisons.
Version history
Published versions are immutable and remain available.
Oldest to newest. Arrows show recorded revision links; each node describes the change introduced by that version.
- Version 1.0.1 revises version 1.0.0.
-
Version 1.0.0
Published
First published inventory; no earlier version is available for comparison.
Superseded -
Version 1.0.1
Published
Activity and product names for procurement miscellaneous TI EPR now use consistent catalogue spelling across the inventory and its supplier references. The physical recipe…
Published · Viewing · Latest
Show full version history table (2 versions)
| Version | Published | Reason for this version | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| Version 1.0.1 | 2026-11-03 | Activity and product names for procurement miscellaneous TI EPR now use consistent catalogue spelling across the inventory and its supplier references. The physical recipe is unchanged. | Current view |
| Version 1.0.0 Superseded | Published 2026-07-15 | First published inventory; no earlier version is available for comparison. | Open version |
About this version
Why this version changed
Activity and product names for procurement miscellaneous TI EPR now use consistent catalogue spelling across the inventory and its supplier references. The physical recipe is unchanged.
Release notes
Source: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549.
Declared foreground licence: CC-BY-4.0. Source publications and external supplier inventories retain their own terms.
Changes from version 1.0.0 Compare this version with its predecessor. Exchanges are grouped by type and change; biosphere labels include their environmental compartments. Open the base version. Show changes Hide changes
Why this version changed
Activity and product names for procurement miscellaneous TI EPR now use consistent catalogue spelling across the inventory and its supplier references. The physical recipe is unchanged.
Public revision record
This comparison is permanently visible with the published version so users can assess every detected change before reuse.
Reference flows modified 1
| Exchange / scope | Field | Previous value | Revised value | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| procurement miscellaneous TI EPR (production / RER / unit) | Name | Procurement miscellaneous TI EPR | procurement miscellaneous TI EPR | Activity and product names now follow consistent catalogue spelling, so the intended inventory and its supplier references remain identifiable. |
Metadata changes 12
| Exchange / scope | Field | Previous value | Revised value | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Version metadata | Description | Simons A, Bauer C. Life cycle assessment of the Evolutionary Power Reactor (EPR) and the influence of different fuel cycle strategies. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy. 2012;226(3):427-444. doi:10.1177/0957650912440549 | Equipment-supply reference for 1 unit of procurement miscellaneous TI EPR. It provides the recorded material, processing and linked equipment inputs for the EPR construction supply chain. | No explanation was recorded for this change. |
| Version metadata | Geographical representativeness | 1 | 3 | |
| Version metadata | Methodology and allocation explanation | The source is a 2012 prospective assessment of Swiss/French EPRs in 2030, using mixed-vintage fuel-cycle and infrastructure data. Table 4 distinguishes CH 1500 MWe from FR 1530 MWe; the common 1500-MWe description is not valid for the French scenario. The regional RER copy is not a separately tabulated source scenario. The paper's normal-operation boundaries exclude nuclear accidents. Equipment membership is traced only through unambiguous declared foreground links; underlying bills of materials and supplier/biosphere adaptations remain incompletely verified. | Simons and Bauer (2012) is the primary source for the prospective Swiss/French EPR study. Earlier inventory work by Roberto Dones and Roth et al. (2009) is acknowledged in that study. The component bill of materials and its adapted suppliers are retained from CLIC; the paper's aggregate technology table does not independently verify this equipment recipe. Study year 2012 and scenario year 2030 do not date every material or background input. | |
| Version metadata | Source | Simons, A., & Bauer, C. Life cycle assessment of the Evolutionary Power Reactor (EPR) and the influence of different fuel cycle strategies. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy. 2012;226(3):427-444. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 | Simons, A., Bauer, C. (2012). Life cycle assessment of the European pressurized reactor and the influence of different fuel cycle strategies. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy 226(3), 427–444. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 | |
| Version metadata | Contributors, publications, projects and supporting evidence | Funding: 1. Project: Url: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Funding: 1. Project: Name: Life cycle assessment of the European pressurized reactor and the influence of different fuel cycle strategies Funding: 1. Project: Acronym: Not set Funding: 1. Project: Relation: source_study Funding: 1. Project: Grant identifier: Not set Funding: 1. Organization: Ror: Not set Funding: 1. Organization: Url: Not set Funding: 1. Organization: Name: Axpo Holding AG Funding: 1. Award identifier: Not set Evidence: 1. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 1. Target field: data_origins Evidence: 1. Qualification: Exact documented origins; no claim that every flow is measured. Evidence: 1. Source location: source Evidence: 1. Source reference: Existing published CLIC inventory documentation Evidence: 2. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 2. Target field: included_life_cycle_stages Evidence: 2. Qualification: Only the documented supplied function; component recipes do not inherit the full parent lifecycle. Manufacturing rejects do not imply product end of life. Evidence: 2. Source location: name Evidence: 2. Source reference: Existing published CLIC inventory documentation Evidence: 3. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 3. Target field: intended_application Evidence: 3. Qualification: Source-linked modelling context; no 2030 component year or measured manufacturer inventory is inferred. Evidence: 3. Source location: source Evidence: 3. Source reference: Existing published CLIC inventory documentation Evidence: 4. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 4. Target field: publications Evidence: 4. Qualification: Bibliographic details refer to this explicitly cited DOI. Existing citation text is retained, including any additional sources. Publication year does not establish the inventory reference year; publication authors are not assigned as inventory compilers. Evidence: 4. Source location: DOI registration: title, publication dates and byline Evidence: 4. Source reference: https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1177%2F0957650912440549 Evidence: 5. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 5. Target field: publications Evidence: 5. Qualification: Canonical institutional identity only. Preserve historical declared spelling, departments, attribution and funding relationships; identity verification alone does not verify an award or its scope. Evidence: 5. Source location: Organization identity and registered names Evidence: 5. Source reference: https://api.ror.org/v2/organizations/03eh3y714 Evidence: 6. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 6. Target field: publications Evidence: 6. Qualification: Canonical primary and legacy citations are aligned without changing freeform source, inventory source text or inventory contributors. Publication year is not a measurement/reference year. EPR underlying inventories are acknowledged to Roberto Dones and Roth et al. (2009); component quantities are not all printed in the 2012 article. Preserve each declared source role and historical affiliation. Evidence: 6. Source location: Original paper/SI byline; pinned DOI registration and institutional identity evidence Evidence: 6. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 7. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 7. Target field: methodology_notes Evidence: 7. Qualification: Distinguish electricity, dedicated plant equipment and fuel-cycle supply roles. Only CH/FR electricity nodes receive the explicit 2030 model year. No component measurement year, capacity factor, numeric TRL or accident-risk result is inferred. Evidence: 7. Source location: Table 4, source scope and acknowledgements; foreground equipment paths Evidence: 7. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 8. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 8. Target field: funding Evidence: 8. Qualification: Axpo Holding AG funded the cited study. The project declaration is labelled by the paper title with relation source_study; no formal grant/acronym is invented and no funding of the CLIC adaptation is inferred. Evidence: 8. Source location: Source funding statement immediately before acknowledgements Evidence: 8. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Projects: 1. Url: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Projects: 1. Name: Life cycle assessment of the European pressurized reactor and the influence of different fuel cycle strategies Projects: 1. Acronym: Not set Projects: 1. Relation: source_study Projects: 1. Grant identifier: Not set Publications: 1. Doi: 10.1177/0957650912440549 Publications: 1. Url: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Publications: 1. Title: Life cycle assessment of the European pressurized reactor and the influence of different fuel cycle strategies Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 1. Name: Andrew Simons Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 1. Orcid: Not set Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 1. Affiliations: 1. Ror: https://ror.org/03eh3y714 Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 1. Affiliations: 1. Url: Not set Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 1. Affiliations: 1. Name: Laboratory for Energy Systems Analysis, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 2. Name: Christian Bauer Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 2. Orcid: 0000-0002-1083-9200 Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 2. Affiliations: 1. Ror: https://ror.org/03eh3y714 Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 2. Affiliations: 1. Url: Not set Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 2. Affiliations: 1. Name: Laboratory for Energy Systems Analysis, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland Publications: 1. Citation: Simons, A., Bauer, C. (2012). Life cycle assessment of the European pressurized reactor and the influence of different fuel cycle strategies. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy 226(3), 427–444. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Publications: 1. Relation: primary_source Publications: 1. Source type: scientific_journal Publications: 1. Publication year: 2012 |
Funding: 1. Project: Url: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Funding: 1. Project: Name: Life cycle assessment of the European pressurized reactor and the influence of different fuel cycle strategies Funding: 1. Project: Acronym: Not set Funding: 1. Project: Relation: source_study Funding: 1. Project: Grant identifier: Not set Funding: 1. Organization: Ror: Not set Funding: 1. Organization: Url: Not set Funding: 1. Organization: Name: Axpo Holding AG Funding: 1. Award identifier: Not set Evidence: 1. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 1. Target field: data_origins Evidence: 1. Qualification: Exact documented origins; no claim that every flow is measured. Evidence: 1. Source location: source Evidence: 1. Source reference: Existing published CLIC inventory documentation Evidence: 2. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 2. Target field: included_life_cycle_stages Evidence: 2. Qualification: Only the documented supplied function; component recipes do not inherit the full parent lifecycle. Manufacturing rejects do not imply product end of life. Evidence: 2. Source location: name Evidence: 2. Source reference: Existing published CLIC inventory documentation Evidence: 3. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 3. Target field: intended_application Evidence: 3. Qualification: Source-linked modelling context; no 2030 component year or measured manufacturer inventory is inferred. Evidence: 3. Source location: source Evidence: 3. Source reference: Existing published CLIC inventory documentation Evidence: 4. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 4. Target field: publications Evidence: 4. Qualification: Bibliographic details refer to this explicitly cited DOI. Existing citation text is retained, including any additional sources. Publication year does not establish the inventory reference year; publication authors are not assigned as inventory compilers. Evidence: 4. Source location: DOI registration: title, publication dates and byline Evidence: 4. Source reference: https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1177%2F0957650912440549 Evidence: 5. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 5. Target field: publications Evidence: 5. Qualification: Canonical institutional identity only. Preserve historical declared spelling, departments, attribution and funding relationships; identity verification alone does not verify an award or its scope. Evidence: 5. Source location: Organization identity and registered names Evidence: 5. Source reference: https://api.ror.org/v2/organizations/03eh3y714 Evidence: 6. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 6. Target field: publications Evidence: 6. Qualification: Canonical primary and legacy citations are aligned without changing freeform source, inventory source text or inventory contributors. Publication year is not a measurement/reference year. EPR underlying inventories are acknowledged to Roberto Dones and Roth et al. (2009); component quantities are not all printed in the 2012 article. Preserve each declared source role and historical affiliation. Evidence: 6. Source location: Original paper/SI byline; pinned DOI registration and institutional identity evidence Evidence: 6. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 7. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 7. Target field: methodology_notes Evidence: 7. Qualification: Distinguish electricity, dedicated plant equipment and fuel-cycle supply roles. Only CH/FR electricity nodes receive the explicit 2030 model year. No component measurement year, capacity factor, numeric TRL or accident-risk result is inferred. Evidence: 7. Source location: Table 4, source scope and acknowledgements; foreground equipment paths Evidence: 7. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 8. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 8. Target field: funding Evidence: 8. Qualification: Axpo Holding AG funded the cited study. The project declaration is labelled by the paper title with relation source_study; no formal grant/acronym is invented and no funding of the CLIC adaptation is inferred. Evidence: 8. Source location: Source funding statement immediately before acknowledgements Evidence: 8. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 9. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 9. Target field: technology_description Evidence: 9. Qualification: Technical-characterisation review TC-2226. Design capacity: Unspecified. Basis: No new independently verified plant/component output, utilization or life value; retain qualified existing equipment labels. Do not transfer whole-reactor characteristics to components or fuel factories. Evidence classification: guarded source table and reference boundary review. Confidence: high for retained source assumption not measured performance. A retained model value is not a measured observation or industrial certification. Source-specific assumptions and detailed technical parameters accompany this plan. Evidence: 9. Source location: fields/design_capacity; source Tables4–5 and exact component scope Evidence: 9. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 10. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 10. Target field: technology_description Evidence: 10. Qualification: Technical-characterisation review TC-2226. Design capacity unit: Unspecified. Basis: No new independently verified plant/component output, utilization or life value; retain qualified existing equipment labels. Do not transfer whole-reactor characteristics to components or fuel factories. Evidence classification: guarded source table and reference boundary review. Confidence: high for retained source assumption not measured performance. A retained model value is not a measured observation or industrial certification. Source-specific assumptions and detailed technical parameters accompany this plan. Evidence: 10. Source location: fields/design_capacity_unit; source Tables4–5 and exact component scope Evidence: 10. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 11. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 11. Target field: technology_description Evidence: 11. Qualification: Technical-characterisation review TC-2226. Capacity factor (%): Unspecified. Basis: No new independently verified plant/component output, utilization or life value; retain qualified existing equipment labels. Do not transfer whole-reactor characteristics to components or fuel factories. Evidence classification: guarded source table and reference boundary review. Confidence: high for retained source assumption not measured performance. A retained model value is not a measured observation or industrial certification. Source-specific assumptions and detailed technical parameters accompany this plan. Evidence: 11. Source location: fields/capacity_factor_percent; source Tables4–5 and exact component scope Evidence: 11. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 12. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 12. Target field: technology_description Evidence: 12. Qualification: Technical-characterisation review TC-2226. Annual production volume: Unspecified. Basis: No new independently verified plant/component output, utilization or life value; retain qualified existing equipment labels. Do not transfer whole-reactor characteristics to components or fuel factories. Evidence classification: guarded source table and reference boundary review. Confidence: high for retained source assumption not measured performance. A retained model value is not a measured observation or industrial certification. Source-specific assumptions and detailed technical parameters accompany this plan. Evidence: 12. Source location: fields/annual_production_volume; source Tables4–5 and exact component scope Evidence: 12. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 13. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 13. Target field: technology_description Evidence: 13. Qualification: Technical-characterisation review TC-2226. Annual production volume unit: Unspecified. Basis: No new independently verified plant/component output, utilization or life value; retain qualified existing equipment labels. Do not transfer whole-reactor characteristics to components or fuel factories. Evidence classification: guarded source table and reference boundary review. Confidence: high for retained source assumption not measured performance. A retained model value is not a measured observation or industrial certification. Source-specific assumptions and detailed technical parameters accompany this plan. Evidence: 13. Source location: fields/annual_production_volume_unit; source Tables4–5 and exact component scope Evidence: 13. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 14. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 14. Target field: technology_description Evidence: 14. Qualification: Technical-characterisation review TC-2226. Annual production volume year: Unspecified. Basis: No new independently verified plant/component output, utilization or life value; retain qualified existing equipment labels. Do not transfer whole-reactor characteristics to components or fuel factories. Evidence classification: guarded source table and reference boundary review. Confidence: high for retained source assumption not measured performance. A retained model value is not a measured observation or industrial certification. Source-specific assumptions and detailed technical parameters accompany this plan. Evidence: 14. Source location: fields/annual_production_volume_year; source Tables4–5 and exact component scope Evidence: 14. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 15. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 15. Target field: technology_description Evidence: 15. Qualification: Technical-characterisation review TC-2226. Plant or represented-asset lifetime (years): Unspecified. Basis: No new independently verified plant/component output, utilization or life value; retain qualified existing equipment labels. Do not transfer whole-reactor characteristics to components or fuel factories. Evidence classification: guarded source table and reference boundary review. Confidence: high for retained source assumption not measured performance. A retained model value is not a measured observation or industrial certification. Source-specific assumptions and detailed technical parameters accompany this plan. Evidence: 15. Source location: fields/plant_lifetime_years; source Tables4–5 and exact component scope Evidence: 15. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 16. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 16. Target field: technology_description Evidence: 16. Qualification: Technical-characterisation review TC-2226. Commercial maturity stage: early_commercial. Basis: Retain the legacy early-commercial assessment as EPR supply-chain/scenario context, not independent proof of this exact component's market stage. The 2012 prospective model and a source inventory package do not establish present-day deployment or procurement qualification. Evidence classification: source scenario and exact process boundary assessment. Confidence: medium curator judgement with explicit scope limits. A retained model value is not a measured observation or industrial certification. Source-specific assumptions and detailed technical parameters accompany this plan. Evidence: 16. Source location: Study scope and Tables4–5; exact retained EPR component/fuel-service review Evidence: 16. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 17. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 17. Target field: technology_description Evidence: 17. Qualification: Technical-characterisation review TC-2226. Technology readiness level: 8. Basis: Retain the legacy EPR-context curator rating with an explicit component-scope limitation. It is not a publisher-assigned score for every cable, fuel-cycle or procurement helper and does not certify the material bill or nuclear qualification. Exact own-component readiness remains a source-scope question. Evidence classification: source scenario and exact process boundary assessment. Confidence: medium curator judgement with explicit scope limits. A retained model value is not a measured observation or industrial certification. Source-specific assumptions and detailed technical parameters accompany this plan. Evidence: 17. Source location: Study scope and Tables4–5; exact retained EPR component/fuel-service review Evidence: 17. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 18. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 18. Target field: technology_description Evidence: 18. Qualification: Technical-characterisation review TC-2226. Technological representativeness: 4. Basis: The paper models prospective 2030 EPR pathways with mixed-vintage background information. Exact component inventories contain material/processing proxies and incompletely verified source bills. They meet the prospective/proxy representation category4, rather than a claim of observed industrial operating data for each item. Evidence classification: source scenario and exact process boundary assessment. Confidence: medium curator judgement with explicit scope limits. A retained model value is not a measured observation or industrial certification. Source-specific assumptions and detailed technical parameters accompany this plan. Evidence: 18. Source location: Study scope and Tables4–5; exact retained EPR component/fuel-service review Evidence: 18. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 19. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 19. Target field: technology_description Evidence: 19. Qualification: Technical-characterisation review TC-2226. Geographical representativeness: 3. Basis: RER is an archived regional proxy and is not a separately tabulated scenario in the source paper; category3 reflects generic regional transfer. CH/FR labels retain their source scenario matching, without claiming a measured manufacturing site or operating reactor sample for each component. Evidence classification: source scenario and exact process boundary assessment. Confidence: medium curator judgement with explicit scope limits. A retained model value is not a measured observation or industrial certification. Source-specific assumptions and detailed technical parameters accompany this plan. Evidence: 19. Source location: Study scope and Tables4–5; exact retained EPR component/fuel-service review Evidence: 19. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 20. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 20. Target field: technology_description Evidence: 20. Qualification: Technical-characterisation review TC-2226. Temporal representativeness: 4. Basis: The 2030 date is a scenario horizon in a 2012 prospective study, not a future measurement year or a refresh of underlying manufacturing inputs. The retained scenario/proxy inventories meet category4 for prospective or stale representation; source publication and plant-life assumptions do not supply measurement coverage. Evidence classification: source scenario and exact process boundary assessment. Confidence: medium curator judgement with explicit scope limits. A retained model value is not a measured observation or industrial certification. Source-specific assumptions and detailed technical parameters accompany this plan. Evidence: 20. Source location: Study scope and Tables4–5; exact retained EPR component/fuel-service review Evidence: 20. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Projects: 1. Url: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Projects: 1. Name: Life cycle assessment of the European pressurized reactor and the influence of different fuel cycle strategies Projects: 1. Acronym: Not set Projects: 1. Relation: source_study Projects: 1. Grant identifier: Not set Publications: 1. Doi: 10.1177/0957650912440549 Publications: 1. Url: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Publications: 1. Title: Life cycle assessment of the European pressurized reactor and the influence of different fuel cycle strategies Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 1. Name: Andrew Simons Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 1. Orcid: Not set Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 1. Affiliations: 1. Ror: https://ror.org/03eh3y714 Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 1. Affiliations: 1. Url: Not set Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 1. Affiliations: 1. Name: Laboratory for Energy Systems Analysis, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 2. Name: Christian Bauer Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 2. Orcid: 0000-0002-1083-9200 Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 2. Affiliations: 1. Ror: https://ror.org/03eh3y714 Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 2. Affiliations: 1. Url: Not set Publications: 1. Scientific authors: 2. Affiliations: 1. Name: Laboratory for Energy Systems Analysis, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen PSI, Switzerland Publications: 1. Citation: Simons, A., Bauer, C. (2012). Life cycle assessment of the European pressurized reactor and the influence of different fuel cycle strategies. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy 226(3), 427–444. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Publications: 1. Relation: primary_source Publications: 1. Source type: scientific_journal Publications: 1. Publication year: 2012 |
|
| Version metadata | Technological representativeness | 2 | 4 | |
| Version metadata | Temporal representativeness | 3 | 4 | |
| Version metadata | Intended application | Foreground modelling of the declared EPR hardware, fuel-cycle or electricity-production configuration. | Equipment supply within the linked EPR infrastructure model, using the declared procurement unit and supplier profile. | Apply reviewed discovery metadata and change explanations from the curated release. |
| Version metadata | System boundary | Not set | Declared equipment or procurement package and its recorded upstream materials, forming, freight and component suppliers. Whole-plant operation, replacement schedule and decommissioning are separate from this supply reference unless explicitly represented by an exchange. | |
| Version metadata | Technology description | Not set | Miscellaneous turbine-island procurement represented by steel and copper supplies, forming and freight. This residual package is not a quantified completeness adjustment for unlisted plant systems. | |
| Version metadata | Limitations on use | Not set | The bill of materials is not independently validated by the paper's aggregate plant characteristics. Plant capacity, 60-year reactor life and fuel-cycle assumptions do not automatically specify this component's rating, service life or production volume. Supplier/biosphere adaptations, package completeness and freight ownership remain qualified. | |
| Version metadata | Name | Procurement miscellaneous TI EPR | procurement miscellaneous TI EPR | Activity and product names now follow consistent catalogue spelling, so the intended inventory and its supplier references remain identifiable. |
Review & discussion Publication provenance, scientific review and community discussion.
Public review record Curator-led bulk import. Public evidence is shown without participant accounts, assignments, recommendations, or private editor notes. Show review Hide review
Publication route
Curator-led bulk import
This inventory was restored from a public CLIC archive. Its original publication route is Curator-led bulk import; private review and workflow records were not transferred.
No public review transcript is available for this version.
Discussion 0 public comments · questions, context and problem reports.
Public discussion
No public comments yet. Start the discussion if you have a question about this inventory.
Report this dataset or version
Use this form to report a problem with this dataset or version. To report an individual public comment, use “Report this comment” beside that comment. To propose better numerical inventory data, use “Suggest an inventory improvement” in the inventory section.
Log in to report content