Description
Equipment-supply reference for 1 unit of switchgear LV. It provides the recorded material, processing and linked equipment inputs for the EPR construction supply chain.
Nuclear electricity
switchgear LV
Reference product Switchgear LV RER
Published
Version 1.0.1
Latest published
Stable dataset identity
switchgear-lv-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 11 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
280.692
mol H+-Eq / unit
Climate change
3841.54
kg CO2-Eq / unit
Freshwater ecotoxicity
27180.8
CTUe / unit
Freshwater eutrophication
6.75396
kg P-Eq / unit
Marine eutrophication
5.95694
kg N-Eq / unit
Terrestrial eutrophication
59.8942
mol N-Eq / unit
Human toxicity, cancer
4.2993e-06
CTUh / unit
Human toxicity, non-cancer
0.000136354
CTUh / unit
Ionising radiation
1325.4
kBq U235-Eq / unit
Land use
23142.9
dimensionless / unit
Ozone depletion
8.8992e-05
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
Particulate matter
0.000386424
disease incidence / unit
Photochemical ozone formation
32.8687
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
Resource use, fossils
57485.5
MJ, net calorific value / unit
Resource use, minerals and metals
0.0361558
kg Sb-Eq / unit
Water use
8355.34
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 09:13 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
switchgear LV
RER
|
Switchgear LV
Axpo NH 5b / year technologies
|
1
|
unit | Reference flow |
Inputs
Technosphere inputs 10 rows Linked foreground or background product inputs used by this dataset.
| Exchange | Reference / categories | Amount | Unit | Metadata | Climate change contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
market for aluminium, primary, ingot
IAI Area, EU27 & EFTA
|
aluminium, primary, ingot
Materials/fuels
|
61.2
|
kilogram |
2.70842
mol H+-Eq / unit
1.0% of total
545.54
kg CO2-Eq / unit
14.2% of total
1589.49
CTUe / unit
5.8% of total
0.146328
kg P-Eq / unit
2.2% of total
0.482265
kg N-Eq / unit
8.1% of total
3.93309
mol N-Eq / unit
6.6% of total
6.3581e-07
CTUh / unit
14.8% of total
1.0451e-05
CTUh / unit
7.7% of total
305.747
kBq U235-Eq / unit
23.1% of total
933.482
dimensionless / unit
4.0% of total
9.2175e-06
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
10.4% of total
3.0428e-05
disease incidence / unit
7.9% of total
1.44951
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
4.4% of total
8401.17
MJ, net calorific value / unit
14.6% of total
0.000458345
kg Sb-Eq / unit
1.3% of total
3866.57
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
46.3% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
market for copper, cathode
GLO
|
copper, cathode
Materials/fuels
|
303
|
kilogram |
275.118
mol H+-Eq / unit
98.0% of total
2578.4
kg CO2-Eq / unit
67.1% of total
22248.1
CTUe / unit
81.9% of total
6.16044
kg P-Eq / unit
91.2% of total
4.90215
kg N-Eq / unit
82.3% of total
49.8595
mol N-Eq / unit
83.2% of total
2.7199e-06
CTUh / unit
63.3% of total
0.00010687
CTUh / unit
78.4% of total
898.604
kBq U235-Eq / unit
67.8% of total
20299.1
dimensionless / unit
87.7% of total
5.5554e-05
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
62.4% of total
0.000325914
disease incidence / unit
84.3% of total
28.87
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
87.8% of total
33856.2
MJ, net calorific value / unit
58.9% of total
0.0263646
kg Sb-Eq / unit
72.9% of total
2303.41
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
27.6% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
market for hot rolling, steel
GLO
|
hot rolling, steel
Materials/fuels
|
89.6
|
kilogram |
0.0203007
mol H+-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
14.8849
kg CO2-Eq / unit
0.4% of total
66.956
CTUe / unit
0.2% of total
0.00250114
kg P-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
0.00751983
kg N-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
0.0726222
mol N-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
1.8098e-08
CTUh / unit
0.4% of total
2.7057e-07
CTUh / unit
0.2% of total
10.8879
kBq U235-Eq / unit
0.8% of total
44.9575
dimensionless / unit
0.2% of total
5.6780e-07
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
0.6% of total
6.9934e-07
disease incidence / unit
0.2% of total
0.061635
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
324.898
MJ, net calorific value / unit
0.6% of total
1.4115e-05
kg Sb-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
12.6886
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
0.2% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
market for polyester resin, unsaturated
RER
|
polyester resin, unsaturated
Materials/fuels
|
0.34
|
kilogram |
0.00522869
mol H+-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
2.24243
kg CO2-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
72.4585
CTUe / unit
0.3% of total
0.000356486
kg P-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
0.000927629
kg N-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
0.00951543
mol N-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
1.0412e-09
CTUh / unit
0.0% of total
2.5699e-08
CTUh / unit
0.0% of total
0.328641
kBq U235-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
3.01682
dimensionless / unit
0.0% of total
1.9411e-07
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
6.0068e-08
disease incidence / unit
0.0% of total
0.00509383
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
33.2552
MJ, net calorific value / unit
0.1% of total
8.7266e-06
kg Sb-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
0.338106
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
0.0% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
market for polyethylene, high density, granulate
GLO
|
polyethylene, high density, granulate
Materials/fuels
|
149
|
kilogram |
0.804026
mol H+-Eq / unit
0.3% of total
338.23
kg CO2-Eq / unit
8.8% of total
2015.11
CTUe / unit
7.4% of total
0.0188171
kg P-Eq / unit
0.3% of total
0.179154
kg N-Eq / unit
3.0% of total
1.96252
mol N-Eq / unit
3.3% of total
4.8434e-08
CTUh / unit
1.1% of total
1.2810e-06
CTUh / unit
0.9% of total
12.1628
kBq U235-Eq / unit
0.9% of total
140.012
dimensionless / unit
0.6% of total
9.4887e-06
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
10.7% of total
1.0116e-05
disease incidence / unit
2.6% of total
0.857695
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
2.6% of total
10462.8
MJ, net calorific value / unit
18.2% of total
0.000511129
kg Sb-Eq / unit
1.4% of total
1963.78
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
23.5% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
market for steel, low-alloyed
GLO
|
steel, low-alloyed
Materials/fuels
|
89.6
|
kilogram |
0.55936
mol H+-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
191.49
kg CO2-Eq / unit
5.0% of total
451.757
CTUe / unit
1.7% of total
0.074669
kg P-Eq / unit
1.1% of total
0.129321
kg N-Eq / unit
2.2% of total
1.37998
mol N-Eq / unit
2.3% of total
6.6696e-07
CTUh / unit
15.5% of total
4.5706e-06
CTUh / unit
3.4% of total
34.2876
kBq U235-Eq / unit
2.6% of total
457.846
dimensionless / unit
2.0% of total
1.8482e-06
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
2.1% of total
1.3044e-05
disease incidence / unit
3.4% of total
0.58934
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
1.8% of total
1680.76
MJ, net calorific value / unit
2.9% of total
0.00169115
kg Sb-Eq / unit
4.7% of total
31.3161
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
0.4% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
market for transport, freight train
Europe without Switzerland
|
transport, freight train
Materials/fuels
|
137
|
ton kilometer |
0.0100345
mol H+-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
2.29202
kg CO2-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
6.03651
CTUe / unit
0.0% of total
0.00138392
kg P-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
0.00333617
kg N-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
0.0334293
mol N-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
2.7598e-09
CTUh / unit
0.1% of total
2.9155e-08
CTUh / unit
0.0% of total
2.24675
kBq U235-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
42.3759
dimensionless / unit
0.2% of total
5.5725e-08
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
1.0327e-07
disease incidence / unit
0.0% of total
0.0106612
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
44.3058
MJ, net calorific value / unit
0.1% of total
5.1361e-06
kg Sb-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
1.29851
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
0.0% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
market for transport, freight, lorry, unspecified
RER
|
transport, freight, lorry, unspecified
Materials/fuels
|
68.3
|
ton kilometer |
0.364452
mol H+-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
85.1676
kg CO2-Eq / unit
2.2% of total
239.537
CTUe / unit
0.9% of total
0.00800892
kg P-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
0.150479
kg N-Eq / unit
2.5% of total
1.55965
mol N-Eq / unit
2.6% of total
2.8592e-08
CTUh / unit
0.7% of total
6.4712e-07
CTUh / unit
0.5% of total
16.3667
kBq U235-Eq / unit
1.2% of total
779.818
dimensionless / unit
3.4% of total
9.9830e-06
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
11.2% of total
2.7013e-06
disease incidence / unit
0.7% of total
0.525921
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
1.6% of total
1227.71
MJ, net calorific value / unit
2.1% of total
0.000202953
kg Sb-Eq / unit
0.6% of total
98.7064
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
1.2% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
sheet rolling, aluminium
RER
|
sheet rolling, aluminium
Materials/fuels
|
61.2
|
kilogram |
0.0729054
mol H+-Eq / unit
0.0% of total
26.907
kg CO2-Eq / unit
0.7% of total
83.6776
CTUe / unit
0.3% of total
0.0103729
kg P-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
0.015612
kg N-Eq / unit
0.3% of total
0.132554
mol N-Eq / unit
0.2% of total
1.8972e-08
CTUh / unit
0.4% of total
2.2534e-07
CTUh / unit
0.2% of total
16.2622
kBq U235-Eq / unit
1.2% of total
94.7353
dimensionless / unit
0.4% of total
6.7303e-07
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
0.8% of total
6.0505e-07
disease incidence / unit
0.2% of total
0.0830209
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
0.3% of total
492.237
MJ, net calorific value / unit
0.9% of total
2.1741e-05
kg Sb-Eq / unit
0.1% of total
53.1648
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
0.6% of total
BAFU:2025
|
|
|
wire drawing, copper
RER
|
wire drawing, copper
Materials/fuels
|
151
|
kilogram |
1.02925
mol H+-Eq / unit
0.4% of total
56.3849
kg CO2-Eq / unit
1.5% of total
407.715
CTUe / unit
1.5% of total
0.331079
kg P-Eq / unit
4.9% of total
0.0861753
kg N-Eq / unit
1.4% of total
0.951326
mol N-Eq / unit
1.6% of total
1.5866e-07
CTUh / unit
3.7% of total
1.1984e-05
CTUh / unit
8.8% of total
28.5025
kBq U235-Eq / unit
2.2% of total
347.54
dimensionless / unit
1.5% of total
1.4107e-06
kg CFC-11-Eq / unit
1.6% of total
2.7523e-06
disease incidence / unit
0.7% of total
0.415839
kg NMVOC-Eq / unit
1.3% of total
962.135
MJ, net calorific value / unit
1.7% of total
0.00687783
kg Sb-Eq / unit
19.0% of total
24.0716
m3 world Eq deprived / unit
0.3% 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 10 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 switchgear LV now use consistent catalogue spelling across the inventory and its supplier references. The physical recipe is unchanged.
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 switchgear LV 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 switchgear LV 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 switchgear LV 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| switchgear LV (production / RER / unit) | Name | Switchgear LV | switchgear LV | 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 switchgear LV. 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: intended_application Evidence: 2. Qualification: Source-linked modelling context; no 2030 component year or measured manufacturer inventory is inferred. Evidence: 2. Source location: source Evidence: 2. Source reference: Existing published CLIC inventory documentation Evidence: 3. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 3. Target field: publications Evidence: 3. 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: 3. Source location: DOI registration: title, publication dates and byline Evidence: 3. Source reference: https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1177%2F0957650912440549 Evidence: 4. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 4. Target field: publications Evidence: 4. 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: 4. Source location: Organization identity and registered names Evidence: 4. Source reference: https://api.ror.org/v2/organizations/03eh3y714 Evidence: 5. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 5. Target field: publications Evidence: 5. 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: 5. Source location: Original paper/SI byline; pinned DOI registration and institutional identity evidence Evidence: 5. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 6. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 6. Target field: methodology_notes Evidence: 6. 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: 6. Source location: Table 4, source scope and acknowledgements; foreground equipment paths Evidence: 6. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 7. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 7. Target field: funding Evidence: 7. 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: 7. Source location: Source funding statement immediately before acknowledgements Evidence: 7. 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: intended_application Evidence: 2. Qualification: Source-linked modelling context; no 2030 component year or measured manufacturer inventory is inferred. Evidence: 2. Source location: source Evidence: 2. Source reference: Existing published CLIC inventory documentation Evidence: 3. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 3. Target field: publications Evidence: 3. 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: 3. Source location: DOI registration: title, publication dates and byline Evidence: 3. Source reference: https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1177%2F0957650912440549 Evidence: 4. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 4. Target field: publications Evidence: 4. 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: 4. Source location: Organization identity and registered names Evidence: 4. Source reference: https://api.ror.org/v2/organizations/03eh3y714 Evidence: 5. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 5. Target field: publications Evidence: 5. 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: 5. Source location: Original paper/SI byline; pinned DOI registration and institutional identity evidence Evidence: 5. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 6. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 6. Target field: methodology_notes Evidence: 6. 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: 6. Source location: Table 4, source scope and acknowledgements; foreground equipment paths Evidence: 6. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 7. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 7. Target field: funding Evidence: 7. 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: 7. Source location: Source funding statement immediately before acknowledgements Evidence: 7. Source reference: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650912440549 Evidence: 8. Origin: editor_verification Evidence: 8. Target field: technology_description Evidence: 8. Qualification: Technical-characterisation review TC-2234. 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: 8. Source location: fields/design_capacity; source Tables4–5 and exact component scope 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-2234. 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: 9. Source location: fields/design_capacity_unit; 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-2234. 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: 10. Source location: fields/capacity_factor_percent; 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-2234. 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: 11. Source location: fields/annual_production_volume; 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-2234. 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: 12. Source location: fields/annual_production_volume_unit; 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-2234. 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: 13. Source location: fields/annual_production_volume_year; 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-2234. 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: 14. Source location: fields/plant_lifetime_years; 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-2234. 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: 15. Source location: Study scope and Tables4–5; exact retained EPR component/fuel-service review 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-2234. 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: 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-2234. 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: 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-2234. 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: 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-2234. 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: 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 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 | Low-voltage switchgear represented by steel, copper, aluminium and polymer materials with forming and freight. The voltage class does not specify rated current, numerical voltage or throughput capacity. | |
| 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 | Switchgear LV | switchgear LV | 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