SF6-GIS-Technology L I F E CYC L E

ASSESSMENT
for Power Distribution
– Medium Voltage –
Summary

Solvay
Fluor und Derivate
 Life Cycle Assessment

SF6-GIS Technology
for Power Distribution
– Medium-Voltage –
Summary

Author: Commissioned by:

Dr.-Ing. Ivo Mersiowsky ABB
Solvay Management Support AREVA T&D (formerly: ALSTOM)
— Life Cycle & Sustainability — EnBW Regional
Hannover, November 2003 e.on Hanse
RWE
SIEMENS
SOLVAY Fluor und Derivate

1 Pages
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

Introduction

In autumn 2002, the German Ministry of the Environment published a policy paper
on the »Implementation of the National Climate Protection Programme regarding
Fluorinated Greenhouse Gases (HFC, FC, SF6)«. This policy paper addressed,
among other sectors, the use of SF6 in certain electrical switchgear, claiming appli-
cation of SF6 in medium-voltage switchgear to be dispensable and suggesting a
ban of SF6-insulated in favour of air-insulated medium-voltage switchgear.

Transmission and distribution losses account for approximately 4 % of the electric-

ity consumption in the public utility sector. Specific losses in the medium-voltage
range (MV, 1–52 kV) are higher than in the high-voltage range. This study investi-
gated 10 and 20 kV grids.

When analysing the contribution of electricity distribution grids to Germany’s

greenhouse gas emission burden (global warming potential), the largest share by
far arises from the ohmic losses of cables, lines, and transformers. To date, SF6
emissions from medium-voltage switchgear constitute less than 0.005 % of the
man-made greenhouse effect in Germany.

An earlier life cycle assessment (LCA) on high-voltage (HV) switchgear had shown
power supply systems using SF6-insulated switchgear to be advantageous or at
least competitive from an environmental point of view. The present LCA was com-
missioned by:

♦ Grid operators: EnBW Regional, e.on Hanse, and RWE;

♦ Equipment manufacturers: ABB, AREVA T&D (formerly: ALSTOM), and Sie-

mens;

♦ SF6 producer: Solvay Fluor und Derivate.

This LCA was conducted in accordance with ISO 14040–43 standards and in-
cluded stakeholder participation. The Critical Review according to ISO 14040 was
conducted by TÜV NORD CERT. The independent advisory board comprised:

♦ Zentralverband Elektrotechnik- und Elektronikindustrie ZVEI;

♦ Verband der Netzbetreiber VDN beim Verband der Elektrizitätswirtschaft

VDEW;

♦ Institut für Hochspannungstechnik IFHT an der RWTH Aachen;

♦ Umweltbundesamt UBA; Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Re-

aktorsicherheit BMU.

Page 2
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

Goal and Scope

The goal and scope of the present study is to investigate the environmental profile
of power distribution in the medium-voltage range (Figure 1). This is accomplished
by life cycle assessment (LCA) of representative product mixes and grids in the
medium-voltage (MV) range, with a comparison between on the one hand air-
insulated switchgear (AIS) and on the other hand gas-insulated switchgear (GIS).

The prerequisite of applying LCA methods is that the systems under comparison
are functionally equivalent. In this case, the functional unit is the distribution of a
certain amount of electricity on the medium-voltage level during one year. Hence,
the comparison cannot be made switchgear by switchgear, but must rather en-
compass representative product mixes and grid designs.

Figure 1: Simplified scheme of electricity supply – transfer (high-voltage level, 110 kV and above) and distribution
(medium-voltage level, 10/20 kV).

Data Collection and Life Cycle Inventory

Investigated AIS and GIS Switchgear

Data were collected for a representative product mix of MV switchgear: transformer

substations, ring-main units (RMU), and consumer substations (Table 1). All se-
lected switchgear models are state of the art and representing standard user speci-
fications in accordance with relevant norms. The switchgear designs comply with
DIN EN 60694 Classification VDE 0670 Part 1000 and DIN EN 60298 Classifica-
tion VDE 0670 Part 6. All conduits and busbars were made of copper. In order to
examine equipment that is fully comparable and well-documented, only type-tested
switchgear were considered eligible for this LCA.

Page 3
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

Table 1: Investigated switchgear and their technical data

Type of Operating Voltage Rated Current [A] Insulation Switching

1)
Switchgear [kV] Medium Medium
(Arc-quenching)

Transformer 12 1,250 Air Vacuum

Substation HV/MV
12 1,250 SF6 Vacuum
Single
Busbar 24 1,250 Air Vacuum

24 1,250 SF6 Vacuum

Transformer 12 2,000 Air Vacuum

Substation HV/MV
12 2,000 SF6 Vacuum
Double
Busbar 24 1,250 Air Vacuum

24 1,250 SF6 Vacuum

2)
Ring-Main Unit 12 630 Air Polymer
RMU
12 630 SF6 SF6
2)
24 630 Air Polymer

24 630 SF6 SF6

2)
Consumer 12 630 Air Polymer – Vacuum
Substation
12 630 SF6 SF6 – Vacuum
2)
24 630 Air Polymer – Vacuum

24 630 SF6 SF6 – Vacuum

1)
For consumer substations, arc-quenching media are given in the following order: switch – circuit breaker.
2)
Polymeric arc-quenching medium, »hard-gas« principle.

Losses of electric power due to ohmic resistance were differentiated into constant
and load-dependent in order to facilitate a subsequent variation of load. The default
load of all switchgear was assumed to be 50 %. This was later on varied between a
minimum of 30 % (rural) and up to 80 % (urban).

Table 2: Investigated switchgear and their electrical data based upon calculations from single-line diagrams. Fig-
ures were aggregated into ZVEI Product Mix according to Table 5.

ZVEI Product Mix

Variant AIS GIS

Type of Switchgear Trans- RMU Customer Trans- RMU Customer
former S/S former S/S
S/S S/S
Ohmic Loss PL,50 W 2.347 7.763 2.093 1.801 5.321 2.089
Ohmic Loss PL,100 W 4.435 31.051 6.173 3.439 21.243 6.149
∗
Ohmic Loss P L W 1.656 0 733 1.256 0 733

Abbreviations: PL,50 — ohmic loss at 50 % load; PL,100 — ohmic loss at 100 % load (nominal current); PL∗ — constant ohmic loss
due to voltage transformers. RMU — ring-main unit. S/S — substation.

Ohmic resistance of each distinct part of switchgear were taken from type testing
documents. Single-line diagrams were used to determine actual flows of electric

Page 4
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

currents and calculate losses according to ohmic losses accordingly (Table 2). Cur-
rent and voltage transformers as well as fuses were appropriately considered.

Apart from electrical data, the survey also comprised amounts of material based
upon disassembly analysis by each equipment manufacturer (Table 3). Amounts of
concrete for buildings were calculated with an empirical formula based upon di-
mensions of the switchgear and required aisles.

Based upon operators’ experiences and expectations, the total lifecycle was as-
sumed to be 30 years for AIS, and 40 years for GIS. This assumption was supple-
mented by a variation between 30 and 50 years.

Table 3: Investigated switchgear and their material data based upon disassembly analysis. Figures were aggre-
gated into ZVEI Product Mix according to Table 5.

ZVEI Product Mix

Variant AIS GIS

Type of Switchgear Trans- RMU Customer Trans- RMU Customer
former S/S former S/S
S/S S/S
SF6 kg 0 0 0 248 159 56
Aluminium kg
ƒ Cast alloy kg 494 0 0 3,422 0 56
ƒ Wrought alloy kg 440 0 33 393 0 195
Copper kg 11,993 6,610 1,923 4,248 2,233 1,415
Steel kg
ƒ Steel kg 76,083 92,537 32,720 33,328 15,577 7,763
ƒ Electrical sheet kg 460 0 733 1,578 0 417
Polymers
ƒ Epoxy Resin kg 9,524 4,627 1,440 1,816 2,214 1,978
ƒ Thermoplastics kg 637 147 147 655 417 119
ƒ Polymer (arc- kg 0 220 49 0 0 0
quenching)
Concrete t 275 487 125 142 89 43
Ceramics kg 0 0 56 615 0 207

Abbreviations: RMU — ring-main unit. S/S — substation.

Investigated Product Mixes and Grids

The functional unit of power distribution requires that a certain product mix, i. e.
specific numbers of units from each type of switchgear, be considered. Two differ-
ent approaches for obtaining such representative product mixes were employed.

♦ Firstly, an average product mix was calculated based upon figures from a ZVEI
statistical survey of units sold in Germany. This covered the entire range of MV
switchgear equipment for utilities as well as industrial and infrastructure cus-

Page 5
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

tomers, both 10 and 20 kV. However, this did not allow a consideration of ca-
bles and lines in grids.

♦ Secondly, two sample utility distribution grids were designed, one for an urban
(10 kV, Figure 2) and one for a rural area (20 kV, Figure 3). These grids are
representative of Germany in that their topology was derived from a medium-
sized city. Based upon the grid design study, the lengths of cables and lines
were given (Table 4).

Table 4: Topology and quantity structures of sample urban and rural utility grids [ABB 2003]

Grid Rural Urban

Voltage / kV 20 10
Load / MW 25.3 36.1
Grid area / km² ≈ 51 ≈ 12
Load density / MW/km² 0.5 3.0
Ohmic losses per year / GWh/a 1.12 1.52

MV cable 150 mm²/ km 63.1 56.2

MV cable 240 mm²/ km 8.9 0
MV line 95 mm²/ km 34.8 0
Grid length / km 106.8 56.2

Number of transformer substations with double busbar 1 1

Number of bays, comprising – 13 23
Incoming/outgoing feeder 10 20
Transformer feeder 2 2
Bus coupler 1 1
Number of transformer substations with single busbar 1 0
Number of bays, comprising – 9 —
Incoming/outgoing feeder 8 —
Transformer feeder — —
Bus sectionaliser 1 —
Number of ring-main units (RMU) with MV/LV transformers 116 132
Number of bays, comprising – 348 396
Incoming/outgoing feeder 247 264
Transformer feeder 118 135

Number of transformers HV/MV 2 2

Number of transformers MV/LV 118 135
Number of lines MS 10 20
Installed transformer electrical power rating HV/MV / MVA 80 80
Installed transformer electrical power rating MV/LV / MVA 26.6 56.7

Page 6
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

Figure 2: Topology of urban distribution grid [ABB 2003]

Figure 3: Topology of rural distribution grid [ABB 2003]

Page 7
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

For the two sample utility distribution grids, ohmic losses for cables and lines, and
for HV/MV transformers were computed from actual load and considered as con-
stant. Since the presupposition was an identical grid topology in case of AIS and
GIS equipment, this did not impinge upon the comparison. Conversely, medium- to
low-voltage (MV/LV) transformers were by definition beyond the system boundary
of MV power distribution; therefore, their substantial ohmic losses were not in-
cluded.

The two sample grids represent municipal utility structures, i. e. do not comprise
industrial grids connected by consumer substations. Therefore, RMUs are even
more abundant. Aside from the lack of industrial sub-grids, however, the quantity
structures of the two sample grids are sufficiently comparable with the ZVEI prod-
uct mix described above. Table 5 provides a comparative overview of all medium-
voltage product mixes thus obtained.

Table 5: Investigated product mixes for medium-voltage switchgear. ZVEI Product Mix is derived from ZVEI sta-
tistical survey of medium-voltage units sold in Germany. Figures are units, normalised with reference to
one double-busbar transformer substation 24 kV. Figures for urban and rural utility grids are derived
from representative topology and grid planning, cf. Figure 2 and Figure 3, respectively [ABB 2003].
Types of switchgear are specified in Table 1.

Type of Switchgear ZVEI Product Mix Urban Grid (Utility) Rural Grid (Utility)

Transformer S/S, Single Busbar 12 kV 2.61 0.00 0.00

Transformer S/S, Single Busbar 24 kV 2.14 0.00 0.75
Transformer S/S, Double Busbar 12 kV 1.22 1.92 0.00
Transformer S/S, Double Busbar 24 kV 1.00 0.00 1.08
RMU 12 kV 40.39 132.00 0.00
RMU 24 kV 33.05 0.00 116.00
Customer S/S 12 kV 4.48 0.00 0.00
Customer S/S 24 kV 3.66 0.00 0.00

Abbreviations: RMU — ring-main unit. S/S — substation.

Calculation of Life Cycle Inventory and Environmental Impact Indicators

The life cycle inventory covered acquisition of raw materials, pre-production of all
relevant materials, manufacture and operation of switchgear, and electricity gen-
eration. SF6 emissions from GIS included losses during manufacture, operation,
and end-of-life management. Discounted SF6 emissions during manufacture and
operation were calculated to be 0.14 % p. a., based upon ZVEI surveys. Losses
during end-of-life management were assumed to be 2 %, provided that SF6 ReUse
is employed. This figure was varied across a wide range.

The following environmental impact indicators were calculated using dedicated

LCA software: primary energy demand, global warming potential (GWP), acidifica-
tion potential (AP, »acid rain«), and nutrification potential (NP, eutrophication).

Page 8
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

Moreover, parameter variations and scenario analyses covered the following rele-
vant factors: SF6 emission rates, length of switchgear use phase, load of switch-
gear, shares of AIS and GIS equipment in grids, and electricity generation mix. The
latter scenarios addressed varying CO2 loads per kWh due to different national
electricity generation mixes.

Results for Environmental Impact Categories

First, the results are presented on switchgear level, i. e. not considering other grid
components, such as cables, lines, and transformers. This allows for a more de-
tailed comparison. In a subsequent step, however, a dominance analysis will show
the rather minor contribution of switchgear compared with those other grid compo-
nents. This will put the results on switchgear level into perspective of the grid level.

All results for environmental impact categories are shown as relative figures, nor-
malised to the AIS reference system. The results obtained for global warming po-
tential (GWP) as the critical impact category – with the smallest differences be-
tween AIS and GIS systems – are commented individually. Results for the other
impact categories – primary energy demand, acidification potential (AP), and nutri-
fication potential (NP) – show even larger advantages for the GIS systems.

ZVEI Product Mix

The ZVEI Product Mix should represent an average assortment of MV switchgear

equipment for utilities and industrial customers in Germany. The global warming
potential GWP100 calculated for the ZVEI Product Mix amounts to 115 tonnes of
CO2 eq./a with AIS switchgear and approx. 90 tonnes of CO2 eq./a with GIS
switchgear. Ohmic losses account for 67 % (AIS) and 65 % (GIS) of these figures,
respectively. With GIS switchgear, SF6 emissions contribute 22 % to the total
GWP100 of the system. Using GIS switchgear, the advantage regarding GWP100 is
almost 22 %, as compared to AIS (Figure 4). Results for all environmental impact
categories in absolute figures calculated for the ZVEI Product Mix are shown in
Table 6.

Page 9
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

Primary Energy Demand Global Warming Potential GWP100

120% 120%

100% 100%

80% 80%

60% 60%

40% 40%

20% 20%

0% 0%
ZVEI AIS ZVEI GIS ZVEI AIS ZVEI GIS

Acidification Potential AP Nutrification Potential NP

120% 120%

100% 100%

80% 80%

60% 60%

40% 40%

20% 20%

0% 0%
ZVEI AIS ZVEI GIS ZVEI AIS ZVEI GIS

Materials and manufacture Ohmic losses SF6 emissions

Figure 4: Results for environmental impact categories calculated for the ZVEI Product Mix (switchgear level, i. e.
other grid components, such as cables, lines, and transformers were not considered). Relative figures
normalised to the reference system AIS = 100 %.

Page 10
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

Table 6: Results for environmental impact category indicators calculated for the ZVEI Product Mix

Materials and Ohmic Losses Ohmic Losses Ohmic Losses SF6 Emissions of
Manufacture of of Transformer of Ring-Main Units of Customer Switchgear
all Switchgear Substations (RMU) Substations
Primary Energy Demand [MJ/a]
AIS 443,625 263,450 872,130 234,700 —
GIS 135,721 202,000 595,680 234,160 —
Global Warming Potential GWP100 [kg CO2-Äq./a]
AIS 37,855 14,888 49,284 13,263 0
GIS 12,029 11,415 33,662 13,232 19,556
Acidification Potential AP [kg SO2-Äq./a]
AIS 456.0 18.3 60.7 16.3 —
GIS 130.6 14.1 41.4 16.3 —
Nutrification Potential NP [kg PO4-Äq./a]
AIS 12.59 2.80 9.26 2.49 —
GIS 3.37 2.14 6.32 2.49 —

Urban Grid

Since the topology of the urban grid remains identical in case of AIS or GIS equip-
ment (cf. Figure 2 and Table 4), only the results for the underlying switchgear
product mix are given here; the influence of other grid components is shown in the
dominance analysis below.

The global warming potential GWP100 calculated for the urban grid amounts to
1,220 tonnes of CO2 eq./a with AIS switchgear and approx. 1,190 tonnes
of CO2 eq./a with GIS switchgear. However, ohmic losses of cables, lines and
MV/LV transformers are identical in both cases and account for 91 % (AIS) and
92 % (GIS) of these figures, respectively. Whereas the contribution of switchgear is
only 10.4 % (AIS) and 7.4 % (GIS), respectively. With GIS switchgear, SF6 emis-
sions contribute 1.4 % to the total GWP100 of the system. Using GIS switchgear,
the advantage regarding GWP100 is 3.2 %, as compared to AIS. Figure 5 shows
only the comparison by switchgear, excluding the dominant and identical contribu-
tion by cables, lines, and HV/MV transformers. Results for all environmental impact
categories in absolute figures calculated for the urban grid are shown in Table 7.

Page 11
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

Primary Energy Demand Global Warming Potential GWP100

120%
120%

100%
100%

80%
80%

60%
60%

40% 40%

20% 20%

0% 0%
Urban AIS Urban GIS Urban AIS Urban GIS

Acidification Potential AP Nutrification Potential NP

120% 120%

100% 100%

80% 80%

60% 60%

40% 40%

20% 20%

0% 0%
Urban AIS Urban GIS Urban AIS Urban GIS

Materials and manufacture Ohmic losses SF6 emissions

Figure 5: Results for environmental impact categories calculated for the urban grid (switchgear level, i. e. other
grid components, such as cables, lines, and transformers were not considered). Relative figures normal-
ised to the reference system AIS = 100 %.

Page 12
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

Table 7: Results for environmental impact category indicators calculated for the urban grid

Materials and Manufacture of Ohmic Losses Ohmic Losses of SF6 Emissions of

Manufacture of other Components of Switchgear other Components Switchgear
Switchgear
Primary Energy Demand [MJ/a]
AIS 410,737 7,920 1,644,210 19,473,000 —
GIS 84,610 7,920 1,129,595 19,473,000 —
Global Warming Potential GWP100 [kg CO2-Äq./a]
AIS 35,300 393 92,915 1,100,400 0
GIS 7,805 393 63,835 1,100,400 16,965
Acidification Potential AP [kg SO2-Äq./a]
AIS 379.7 6.4 114.4 1354.8 —
GIS 97.5 6.4 78.6 1354.8 —
Nutrification Potential NP [kg PO4-Äq./a]
AIS 11.77 0.15 17.46 206.75 —
GIS 2.38 0.15 11.99 206.75 —

Rural Grid

Since the topology of the rural grid remains identical in case of AIS or GIS equip-
ment (cf. Figure 3 and Table 4), only the results for the underlying switchgear
product mix are given here; the influence of other grid components is shown in the
dominance analysis below.

The global warming potential GWP100 calculated for the rural grid amounts to
930 tonnes of CO2 eq./a with AIS switchgear and approx. 890 tonnes of CO2 eq./a
with GIS switchgear. However, ohmic losses of cables, lines and HV/MV trans-
formers are identical in both cases and account for 87 % (AIS) and 91 % (GIS) of
these figures, respectively. Whereas the contribution of switchgear is only 12.6 %
(AIS) and 8.7 % (GIS), respectively. With GIS switchgear, SF6 emissions contribute
1.6 % to the total GWP100 of the system. Using GIS switchgear, the advantage re-
garding GWP100 is 4.2 %, as compared to AIS. Figure 6 shows only the comparison
by switchgear, excluding the dominant and identical contribution by cables, lines,
and MV/LV transformers. Results for all environmental impact categories in abso-
lute figures calculated for the rural grid are shown in Table 8.

Page 13
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

Primary Energy Demand Global Warming Potential GWP100

120% 120%

100% 100%

80% 80%

60% 60%

40% 40%

20% 20%

0% 0%
Rural AIS Rural GIS Rural AIS Rural GIS

Acidification Potential AP Nutrification Potential NP

120% 120%

100% 100%

80% 80%

60% 60%

40% 40%

20% 20%

0% 0%
Rural AIS Rural GIS Rural AIS Rural GIS

Materials and manufacture Ohmic losses SF6 emissions

Figure 6: Results for environmental impact categories calculated for the rural grid (switchgear level, i. e. other grid
components, such as cables, lines, and transformers were not considered). Relative figures normalised
to the reference system AIS = 100 %.

Page 14
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

Table 8: Results for environmental impact category indicators calculated for the rural grid

Materials and Manufacture of Ohmic Losses Ohmic Losses of SF6 Emissions of

Manufacture of other Components of Switchgear other Components Switchgear
Switchgear
Primary Energy Demand [MJ/a]
AIS 368,639 14,693 1,496,159 14,345,000 —
GIS 74,195 14,693 1,001,714 14,348,000 —
Global Warming Potential GWP100 [kg CO2-Äq./a]
AIS 32,533 867 84,548 810,520 0
GIS 6,767 867 56,608 810,830 14,137
Acidification Potential AP [kg SO2-Äq./a]
AIS 344.3 10.4 104.1 997.4 —
GIS 80.6 10.4 69.7 998.2 —
Nutrification Potential NP [kg PO4-Äq./a]
AIS 10.67 0.27 15.89 152.30 —
GIS 2.03 0.27 10.64 152.35 —

Dominance Analysis of Grid Components

A dominance analysis was conducted to examine the contributions of various grid

components to the global warming potential (GWP) indicator of the whole distribu-
tion system. This analysis was applied to the two representative sample distribution
grids, both urban and rural. In either case, cables, lines, and HV/MV transformers
were found to contribute around 90 % of the total GWP result. In contrast to this,
the switchgear themselves constitute only about 10 %. This fundamental proportion
remains true irrespective of whether AIS or GIS equipment is used. As a conse-
quence, the system GWP cannot be reduced substantially by imposing prefer-
ences in switchgear technology.

Figure 7 illustrates this relation for the urban grid; the results for the rural grid are
comparable. Furthermore, this shows that RMU in turn constitute the predominant
contribution among switchgear, i. e. if cables, lines and transformers are ignored.

Moreover, in case of GIS equipment, the contribution of SF6 emissions to the GWP
of these sample grids is only 1.4 % (urban) and 1.6 % (rural), respectively. This
confirms that with respect to climate protection, restrictions on SF6 emissions from
switchgear would reduce total GWP only insignificantly.

Page 15
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

Contributions to Global Warming Potential GWP100

Urban Distribution Grid AIS

Transformer Stations
1%

Other Grid Components

90%

Others
10% Ring-main Units (RMU)
9%

Contributions to Global Warming Potential GWP100

Urban Distribution Grid GIS

Transformer Stations
1%

Other Grid Components

92%

Others
8%
7%
Ring-main Units (RMU)
7%

Figure 7: Dominance analysis for sample urban utility grids using AIS or GIS equipment, respectively. Contribu-
tions of grid components to global warming potential (GWP100) are shown. Grid components other than
switchgear include cables, lines, and transformers. (Totals may differ from 100 % due to rounding im-
precision.)

Page 16
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

Interpretation and Discussion

On grid level, being relevant for planning decisions, the predominant contribution to
climate impact (GWP) of power distribution grids are ohmic losses from compo-
nents other than switchgear. It was shown that restrictions on a particular switch-
gear technology, and SF6-GIS in particular, would fail to be environmentally effec-
tive. On the contrary, GIS technology permits locating the RMU close to consum-
ers, thus further minimising substantial losses arising from MV/LV transformers. In
a conservative approach, this effect has not been quantified in this LCA.

In the following, the major factors determining the results of this LCA are discussed
as for their influence (derived from parameter variation and scenario analysis):

♦ SF6 emissions from medium-voltage GIS constitute only a minor contribution to

GWP of the distribution grid (about 1.5 %, even when GIS technology is em-
ployed exclusively). Hence, the sensitivity of the results of this LCA towards this
parameter – leakage plus discounted emission from manufacture and end-of-life
management – is very low. The voluntary commitment adopted by electric in-
dustry ensures that, using the SF6 ReUse concept, even during end-of-life
management no significant emissions are incurred.

♦ The realistic lifetime of medium-voltage switchgear is demonstrated to be of

comparatively small influence. The discounted environmental burdens due to
materials do not cause a qualitatively significant change of results throughout
the range of 30–50 years lifetime.

♦ Conversely, an increased load of switchgear substantially improves the advan-

tage of GIS technology concerning GWP. Grid operators expect that the load is
usually rather higher than assumed in this LCA and will grow further in the fu-
ture for reasons of efficient grid utilisation. On the other extreme of the range,
even minimum loads as in rural areas do not cause a break-even in GWP of
AIS and GIS technology.

♦ Since ohmic losses are the single most relevant factor determining the GWP of
the distribution grid, the specific CO2 load of the electricity mix plays a signifi-
cant role. However, variations of the specific CO2 load of the electricity mix are
fairly limited, unless energy generation undergoes a fundamental change. For
instance, a realistically moderate increase of either wind energy or power pur-
chases from other European countries does not substantially influence the re-
sults of this LCA. Conversely, a fundamental change in energy generation (for
instance, with decentralised power plants) would also imply completely different
transmission and distribution grids.

Page 17
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

Transferability of Results

The basic results of this LCA apply to industrial grids as well. Apart from topology,
the main difference is that RMUs are the most prevalent type of switchgear in utility
grids; whereas in industrial grids, there are larger numbers of transformer and cus-
tomer substations. Hence the advantages of GIS technology that were shown to be
greater for RMUs than for substations will make less of a difference. Since ohmic
losses of other components are predominant, this will not substantially affect the
expected results for industrial grids. On the contrary, the load is rather higher in in-
dustrial grids, thus shifting the balance further in favour of GIS equipment.

With a similar rationale, the fundamental conclusions of this LCA can also be ap-
plied to other European countries. As ohmic losses of other components are the
major influence on GWP, the specific national product mix will not affect the out-
come very much. This was shown by a scenario analysis (Figure 8); using the
ZVEI Product Mix, the resulting advantages in GWP are shown in relation to the
AIS reference scenario. Even for countries with a lower CO2 load of the electricity
generation mix – due to either nuclear or renewable energy sources – the relative
GWP advantage of employing GIS equipment remains greater.

Global Warming Potential GWP100

Szenario Analysis for Electricity Mixes
ZVEI Product Mix

100%
Relative GWP Advantage vs. Basis Scenario AIS [%]

80%

60%

40%
Electricity Mix
Czech Rep.
20% Electricity Mix
France

0%

-20%
Electricity Electricity Mix
Mix Norway Germany/Wind +10%
-40%

-60% AIS Basis: Electricity Mix

Germany
-80%
GIS

-100%
0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0 1,2
CO2 Load of Electrity Mix [kg CO2 eq./kWh]

Figure 8: Scenario analysis examining the influence of the CO2 load of the electricity generation mix on results for
global warming potential GWP100 – calculated for ZVEI Product Mix

The shares of RMUs as opposed to transformer and customer substations in the

product mix show a moderate influence on the results; yet, this becomes insignifi-
cant if the other grid components are taken into consideration. With topology re-

Page 18
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

maining identical for AIS and GIS, the differences in grid design in various coun-
tries will not have a substantial bearing on overall results.

Conclusions and Recommendations

When assessing the environmental profile of power distribution, the system ap-
proach, implying a consideration on grid level, is indispensable to obtain meaning-
ful results. Consequently, if ohmic losses from cables, lines, and transformers are
taken into consideration, the differences between MV switchgear technologies AIS
and GIS become all but negligible. This life cycle assessment (LCA) indicates that
electrical power losses due to ohmic resistance of cables, lines, and HV/MV trans-
formers constitute the predominant contribution to the GWP of distribution grids.

Because of their compact construction and their sealed, gas-tight compartments,

the investigated GIS are advantageous from an environmental point of view, even
concerning climate impact (GWP). When considering a GIS unit on its own, the
largest share (about 70 %) of GWP-relevant emissions is due to ohmic losses.
These originate not least from switchgear components that are independent of AIS
or GIS technology, e. g. voltage transformers and fuses. Extrapolating the data of
this LCA, the specific contribution of SF6 emissions from MV switchgear during
their lifecycle to the overall GWP in Germany is estimated at less than 0.005 %.

Since the environmental benefits that can be accomplished by giving preference to

AIS or GIS technology in medium-voltage applications are insignificant, AIS and
GIS switchgear are competitive from an environmental point of view. Aside from
ecological considerations, the assessment of alternatives must take other aspects
into account. This is corroborated by a communication of the European Commis-
sion Directorate General Environment to the ECCP Working Group:

»Amendments to marketing restrictions — […] In making such proposals the

Commission must ensure that an assessment of alternative substances and tech-
nologies has been made which takes into account the safety, impact on human
health, technical feasibility, cost-effectiveness and environmental impact of such al-
ternative substances or technologies.« 1

The following conclusions are derived from the results:

♦ The system approach, involving a consideration on grid level, is indispensable

in order to obtain meaningful results. On the one hand, the overall contribution
of electricity distribution grids to national greenhouse gas emissions is con-
firmed to be very small. On the other hand, ohmic losses are clearly identified

Page 19
 SF6-GIS Technology for Power Distribution – Medium Voltage –

as the predominant factor influencing the climate impact of the system. As a

consequence, if ohmic losses from cables, lines, and transformers are taken
into account, the differences between MV switchgear technologies become all
but negligible. Therefore, relevant climate impact reduction potentials due to a
regulation targeted on electrical switchgear and components are not expected.

♦ If a comparison of medium-voltage applications is yet made, GIS technology

shows advantages compared with AIS technology, regarding primary energy
demand, acidification potential (acid rain), nutrification potential (eutrophication),
and even global warming potential (GWP). Losses of SF6 from GIS medium-
voltage equipment are very small and consequently affect the GWP only to a
negligible extent. Conversely, the load of distribution grids and of switchgear
themselves is found to be the principal GWP factor. The current trend towards
higher utilisation of grid capacities would thus favour GIS. In order to realise any
significant optimisation potential, however, a load management for distribution
grids appears more useful than any technical modification of switchgear.

♦ Hence, bans and restrictions on the use of GIS medium-voltage equipment as

proposed by the recent policy paper are not justified from an ecological point of
view. As a meaningful contribution to climate protection cannot be achieved by
regulatory measures directed at switchgear and components, it appears appro-
priate to leave technological decisions to the grid operators, who will take other
criteria, such as economic feasibility and personnel safety, into consideration.

♦ The results of this LCA may in principle be transferred to other European coun-
tries. The primary energy mix for electricity supply, being the most important re-
gional factor, showed only a minor influence on the results.

References

The full report of this LCA study is available on request – please contact the au-
thor: Dr.-Ing. Ivo Mersiowsky, Solvay Management Support

PO Box 220, D-30002 Hannover, Germany, ivo.mersiowsky@solvay.com

Citations may be made as follows:

[SOLVAY et al. 2003] — Solvay Management Support: SF6-GIS-Technologie in der Energieverteilung –

Mittelspannung. Life Cycle Assessment study commissioned by ABB, AREVA
T&D, EnBW Regional, e.on Hanse, RWE, Siemens and Solvay Fluor und Derivate.
Solvay: Hannover/Germany (in German, abstract and summary available in Eng-
lish).

1
Document DG ENV.C.2/JD D(2003)421117 dated 12/06/2003.

Page 20
Validity Statement by TÜV NORD CERT