Chapter 4. Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems

106 CHAPTER 4 CHAPTER 4 DOI: 10.15587/978-617-8360-19-1.CH4 Petro Lezhniuk, Viacheslav Komar, Vladyslav Lysyi, Yuliia Malohulko, Volodymyr Netrebskyi, Olena Sikorska © The Author(s) of individual chapters, 2025. This is an Open Access chapter distributed under the terms of the CC BY license Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems Abstract The work is devoted to a close analysis of the state and prospects for the development of the energy complex of Ukraine. The aim of the study is to develop a methodology for selecting and substantiating the predominant type of energy resources for energy supply of regions. The state of use of available energy resources, their share in the total volume of energy production is clarified. The advantages and disadvantages of available resources in connection with their impact on the environment are considered. It is proved that the predominant amount of energy is produced using traditional fossil and produced resources: coal, oil, gas and nuclear fuel. Energy production traditionally follows the availability of resources in the region and the need for energy, which creates an uneven concentration of industry and its accompanying environmental impact. The use of a complex indicator for assessing the efficiency of types of energy resources and the impact of their use on the state of the environment is proposed. A methodology for using the proposed complex indicator to substantiate the energy strategies of regions is developed. KEYWORDS Energy resource, hydropower, wind power, solar power plants, bioenergy, thermal power, nuclear power, efficiency and pollution index, energy strategies, regions. In the modern world, energy is the basis for the development of basic industries that determine the progress of social production. According to British Petroleum in 2022 [1]. 29,165.1 TWh of electricity were produced in the world. Among the main sources of electricity generation by type of resource are: oil – 728.6 TWh (2.5%); gas – 6,631.4 TWh (22.7%); coal – 1,031.2 TWh (35.4%); nuclear – 2,679.0 TWh (9.2%); hydro – 4,334.2 TWh (14.9%); renewable – 4,204.3 TWh (14.4%); other – 270.5 TWh (0.9%) (Table 4.1). 107 chapter 4. Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems CHAPTER 4 According to Reuters, the Energy Institute’s Statistical Review of World Energy in 2023 [2] reports that total global primary energy consumption reached a historic high of 620 exajoules (EJ) (620 1018 J), and emissions exceeded 40 gigatons of CO2 for the first time. Fossil fuel use in 2023 increased by 1.5% to 505 EJ, accounting for 81.5% of total energy consumption, down 0.5% from 2022. Oil consumption in 2023 exceeded 100 million barrels per day for the first time in history.  Table 4.1 Global electricity production in 2022 by resource type, according to British Petroleum Place of production Oil Gas Coal Nuclear Hydro Renewable Other Total Worldwide TWh 728.6 6,631.4 10,317.2 2,679.0 4,334.2 4,204.3 270.5 29,165.1 % 2.5 22.7 35.4 9.2 14.9 14.4 0.9 – European Union TWh 43.9 556.2 461.2 608.6 276.9 801.7 63.5 2,812.0 % 1.6 19.8 16.4 21.6 9.8 28.5 2.3 – Ukraine TWh 0.5 7.2 24.8 62.1 11.1 7.0 – 112.7 % 0.4 6.4 22.0 55.1 9.8 6.2 – – Source: [1] Total electricity generation in 2023 grew by 2.5%, slightly higher than the 2.3% increase in the previous year. Renewable fuel generation (excluding hydropower) increased by 13% to a new record high of 4,748 terawatt-hours (TWh). The share of renewable energy sources in the total energy balance excluding hydropower was 8%, compared to 7.5% in the 2022 report. Including hydropower, renewable energy sources account for 15% of the global balance. The record growth in renewable generation was driven by increases in wind and solar capacity: in 2023, the capacity growth in these two categories was 67% higher than in 2022. The 2% increase in emissions (over 40 gigatons of CO2) in 2023 is due to more intensive consumption of oil and coal, while gas consumption has remained stable. This figure is expected to increase to 3.3% in 2024 due to the improvement of the global economic outlook [3]. By 2030, the global demand for electricity may amount to 33,275 TWh [4]. The Ministry of Energy and Coal Industry predicts an increase in electricity consumption in Ukraine by 86% by 2030 to 280 billion kWh [5]. 4.1 State and prospects for the development of the energy sector of Ukraine According to the Energy Strategy of Ukraine [6], the share of renewable energy sources in the structure of electricity production by 2030 will be 13%. 108 PROCESSES AND CONTROL SYSTEMS: SYNTHESIS, MODELING, OPTIMIZATION CHAPTER 4 The main directions of development of RES until 2030 (Table 4.2) and further prospects are: – use of wind energy and hydropower for electricity production; – use of solar and geothermal energy – for electricity and heat production; – utilization of biomass waste, solid household waste, etc. – by burning or obtaining biogas for heat and electricity production.  Table 4.2 Promising directions and levels of development of renewable energy sources in Ukraine until 2030 Indicators Production of thermal and electrical energy from renewable sources in 2020–2030 2020 2030 MTOE % MTOE % Wind energy 1.00 6.97 2.15 9.95 Photovoltaics 0.01 0.07 0.03 0.14 Small hydropower 0.48 3.36 0.65 3.01 Large hydropower 5.6 39.06 6.53 30.23 Solar thermal collectors 0.7 4.88 1.28 5.93 Bioenergy 6.3 43.93 10.13 46.9 Geothermal energy 0.247 1.73 0.83 3.84 TOTAL 14.34 100 21.6 100 In 2022–2024, the entire Ukrainian energy sector found itself in the epicenter of a full-scale war, therefore, the information component of the performance indicators of electricity production subsectors in the materials provided is based on data from the pre-war period (until 2022). In 2021, the share of electricity generated from renewable energy reached 8.1% or 12.8 TWh, of which 56% was due to solar radiation, 33% to wind energy, almost 8% to biomass and biogas combustion, and 3% to small hydropower [7]. Thus, in 2021, all RES power plants produced 12,804 million kWh [7] of clean electricity, which exceeded last year’s figures by 1,941.9 million kWh or 17.8%: – Ukrainian wind power plants produced 3,866 million kWh or 614.4 million kWh more compared to 2020, which is 2.9 7% of total electricity production; – solar power plants produced 7,670 million kWh or 4.8%, which is 1,065.4 million kWh more than the amount of electricity produced in the same period of 2020; – small hydropower plant generation increased by 56.1 million kWh, reaching 276 million kWh or 0.17% of the total balance; – Ukrainian bioenergy plants generated 992 million kWh or 0.6%, which is 206 million kWh more than the previous year’s production level. 109 chapter 4. Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems CHAPTER 4 4.1.1 Hydropower In 2019, in the Unified Energy System (UES) of Ukraine, with a total capacity of all generating sources of 52.7 million kW and a total production of 154 billion kWh, the capacity of hydroelectric power plants (HPPs) and pumped storage power plants (PSPPs) amounted to 12% of the total capacity, and the production without small HPPs amounted to 7.87 billion kWh (5.1% of the total production) [8, 9], including: 1) large HPPs of the Dnipro and Dniester cascades (taking into account the first stage of the reconstruction of the Dnipro cascade HPP), respectively: – Dnipro cascade HPP (capacity 3.92 million kW, production 9.42 billion kWh); – Dniester cascade HPP (capacity 0.74 million kW, production 1.01 billion kWh); 2) small hydroelectric power plants (Tereblia-Rikska on the Tereblia River, Oleksandrivska on the Southern Bug River) with a total capacity of 0.041 million kW and a production of 0.23 billion kWh; 3) small hydroelectric power plants (SHPs up to 10 MW) with a total capacity of 0.1 million kWh and a production of about 0.3 billion kWh (according to the existing classification, small hydroelectric power plants (SHPs) include hydroelectric power plants with a capacity of 1 to 10 MW, mini hydroelectric power plants – from 200 to 1000 kW, and micro hydroelectric power plants – no more than 200 kW).  Fig. 4.1 Hydropower potential of small rivers of Ukraine 12501 8252 3747 Total potential, mln kWh/year Technical potential, mln kWh/year Reasonable economic potential, mln kWh/year Donetsk Mykolaiv Kyiv Cherkasy Poltava Kropyvnytskyi Dnipro Kharkiv Chernihiv Sumy Lviv Uzhhorod Chernivtsi Lutsk Rivne Zhytomyr Vinnytsia Khmelnytskyi IvanoFrankivsk Ternopil Odesa Kherson Simferopol Zaporizhzhia Luhansk 436 283 131 153 125 57 263 177 80 283 197 83 170 112 51 331 219 99 350 238 108 304 200 91 427 282 128 884 683 264 1614 1197 544 355 263 120 4532 2991 1357 304 201 91 115 76 35 336 222 101 200 132 60 178 112 54 101 67 30 157 104 47 211 139 63 3825 11 6133 15 221 336 261 119 110 PROCESSES AND CONTROL SYSTEMS: SYNTHESIS, MODELING, OPTIMIZATION CHAPTER 4 The total installed capacity of pumped storage power plants (PSPPs) (in turbine mode) is 1.5 million kW, production – 1.5 billion kWh, including: – Kyiv PSPP (capacity – 0.23 million kW, production – 0.226 billion kWh); – three units of Dniester PSPP (capacity – 0.97 million kW, production – 1.02 billion kWh); – two units of Tashlyk PSPP (capacity – 0.3 million kW, production – 0.23 billion kWh). According to the Institute of Renewable Energy of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, the hydropower potential of small rivers is about 12.5 billion kWh, which is about 28% of the total hydropower potential of all rivers in Ukraine [10]. The potential by region of Ukraine is shown in Fig. 4.1 [11]. The main disadvantage of the construction of SHPPs is the threat of disrupting the natural state of the ecological system. Environmental protection. Potentially, the construction of hydropower facilities changes the landscape and land use conditions, ecological chains in the relevant rivers, water temperature and quality, affects biodiversity, can lead to increased greenhouse gas emissions as a result of intensification of organic compound decomposition processes, etc. 4.1.2 Wind power For Ukraine, wind power plants (WPPs) are a new industry, their contribution to energy supply is currently not significant (6.97% in the overall structure of electricity production in Ukraine, Table 4.1), and while it is in its infancy. According to the draft of the updated Energy Strategy, Ukraine has significant potential for the development of wind power. The most promising areas for its development are the southern and southeastern regions of the country, where the average wind speed exceeds 5 meters per second (see the areas shaded in brown and red in Fig. 4.2). Most often, to ensure the economic efficiency of WPP construction, the minimum required average annual wind speed should be 2.0–4.5 m/s. To reliably ensure the efficient operation of WPP, the average annual wind speed should be in the range from 5 m/s to 25 m/s [12]. At the end of 2021, the total capacity of the wind energy sector in mainland Ukraine reached 1,672.9 MW [7]. Installed wind energy capacity by regions of mainland Ukraine in the first half of 2021, MW is shown in Fig. 4.3 [13]. It should also be noted that in the first half of 2021, 73 new wind turbines with a total capacity of 278.4 MW were put into operation in three regions of Ukraine [13]: – the first stage of the Dniester WPP with a total capacity of 40 MW in the Odesa region; – the first stage of the Zaporizhzhia WPP with a total capacity of 98 MW in the Zaporizhzhia region; – the second stage of the Syvash WPP with a total capacity of 140.4 MW in the Kherson region. 111 chapter 4. Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems CHAPTER 4  Fig. 4.2 Wind energy potential in Ukraine 15 30 60 100 Natural wind potential, kWh/m2year Technically achievable wind potential, kWh/m2year Specific indicators of wind energy potential at different heights Average wind speed (at an altitude of 10 m) V < 4.5 m/s V = 4.5 m/s V = 5.0 m/s V > 5.5 m/s Sumy Poltava Kharkiv Luhansk Donetsk Zaporizhzhia Dnipro Cherkasy Vinnytsia Lutsk Rivne Ternopil Chernivtsi Khmelnytskyi Zhytomyr Kropyvnytskyi Mykolaiv Odesa Simferopol Chernihiv Kyiv 3210 620830 1020 1150 4320 5810 7230 1120 200280 375 460 1510 2030 2530 2810 520690 860 975 3790 5100 6350 2010 390520 700 850 2710 3640 4540 Source: [11]  Fig. 4.3 Installed wind power capacity by regions of mainland Ukraine in the first half of 2021, MW 0.6 101.5 595.8 579.5 152.1 72.67 50 33.9 0.45 5.98 Donetsk region Ivano-Frankivsk region Zaporizhzhia region Kyiv region Luhansk region Lviv region Mykolaiv regionMykolaiv region Odesa region Ternopil region Kherson region Source: [13] 112 PROCESSES AND CONTROL SYSTEMS: SYNTHESIS, MODELING, OPTIMIZATION CHAPTER 4 4.1.2.1 Disadvantages of modern wind power plants Along with the obvious advantages of wind power plants (autonomy, available energy resource, etc.), one cannot fail to note the characteristic disadvantages [14]: 1. Instability and wind dependence. It is impossible to accurately predict how much electricity will be received in a certain period of time, and in the absence of wind, energy production will completely cease. 2. High construction cost. Installation of a plant capable of producing 1 MW of electricity is more than 1 million USD. 3. Interference with radio communications and telecommunications. The operation of wind power plants causes signal distortion. 4. Change in the natural landscape. 5. Large area required to install an entire generator unit. 6. Danger to living creatures. The blades of turbines that constantly rotate pose a potential threat to certain species of living organisms, in particular, birds. For example, according to statistics, such turbines are the cause of the death of about 5 birds per year. 7. Noise pollution (up to 50 decibels at a distance more than 1 km). The noise created by «windmills» causes concern not only for wildlife, but also for people living near such structures. 8. The emergence of dangerous infrasound with a frequency of 6–7 Hz, which causes vibration. 9. Low energy output. Wind generators are much smaller in rank than other sources of electricity. Wind turbines are inefficient at high loads. 4.1.3 Solar energy Solar energy is one of the new types of energy production based on renewable sources, in particular, solar energy. The main goal is to convert solar radiation into other technological types of energy. In Ukraine, as of the end of the first half of 2021, the total installed capacity of solar power plants (SPPs) is 7284 MW, including: – 6,351 MW – solar power plants; – 933 MW – household SPPs. The main determining factors in the use of solar energy are the intensity of solar radiation (Fig. 4.4) and the duration of sunshine hours (Fig. 4.5). Solar radiation intensity is the power of the Sun’s radiation per unit surface area, measured in watts per square meter (W/m2). To calculate the amount of solar radiation that is converted into thermal energy, it is also necessary to take into account the duration of radiation (Fig. 4.5). The total energy of solar radiation is the power for a selected period of time, measured as watt-hours (W·h). The period can be taken as: day, month, year, etc. 113 chapter 4. Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems CHAPTER 4  Fig. 4.4 Solar energy potential in Ukraine Average annual solar radiation < 1000 kWh/m21400 kWh/m2 Donetsk Mykolaiv Kyiv Cherkasy Poltava Kropyvnytskyi Dnipro Kharkiv Chernihiv Sumy Lviv Uzhhorod Chernivtsi Lutsk Rivne Zhytomyr Vinnytsia Khmelnytskyi Ivano-Frankivsk Ternopil Odesa Kherson Simferopol Sevastopil Zaporizhzhia Luhansk Source: [15]  Fig. 4.5 Duration of sunshine hours 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 up to over3800 4200 4600 5000 Number of hours of sunshine per year Total annual solar radiation (MJ/m) under average cloud conditions 2400 2200 4200 2000 3800 4200 1800 1800 1800 1800 1600 1600 1600 1600 2000 4600 2400 5000 Donetsk Mykolaiv Kyiv Cherkasy Poltava Kropyvnytskyi Dnipro Kharkiv Chernihiv Sumy Lviv Uzhhorod Chernivtsi Lutsk Rivne Zhytomyr Vinnytsia Khmelnytskyi Ivano-Frankivsk Ternopil Odesa Kherson Simferopol Sevastopil Zaporizhzhia Luhansk Source: [16] 114 PROCESSES AND CONTROL SYSTEMS: SYNTHESIS, MODELING, OPTIMIZATION CHAPTER 4 The maximum daily total solar radiation in Ukraine is about 8 kWh/m2 in the summer. Sometimes on a sunny winter day, the total solar radiation can reach a value of up to 3 kWh/m2. The total average annual solar radiation in the territory of Ukraine, according to long-term observations, varies from 1,000 kWh/(m2) in the northern and central parts of the country to 1,350 kWh/(m2) in the Crimean Peninsula and the southern part of the Odesa region. For the convenience of analysis, these calculations were divided into 4 zones. All southern regions of Ukraine are located in the first and second zones; more than half of the country’s territory is located in the third zone, the fourth zone is the least favorable for the use of solar energy. The highest value of solar radiation in the first zone is 1350 kWh/km2 per year, and the lowest is in the fourth zone 1000 kWh/km2 per year. In the second and third zones, these values are, respectively, 1250 kWh/km2 and 1150 kWh/km2 per year. In general, the territory of Ukraine belongs to the zone of medium solar intensity. The average monthly level of solar radiation for Ukrainian cities is given in Table 4.3 [17].  Table 4.3 Average monthly level of solar radiation (solar constant) in Ukrainian cities (kWh/m2/day). Average over the last 22 years Regions / Months January February March April May June July August September October November December Average 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Simferopol 1.27 2.06 3.05 4.30 5.44 5.84 6.20 5.34 4.07 2.67 1.55 1.07 3.58 Vinnytsia 1.07 1.89 2.94 3.92 5.19 5.3 5.16 4.68 3.21 1.97 1.10 0.9 3.11 Lutsk 1.02 1.77 2.83 3.91 5.05 5.08 4.94 4.55 3.01 1.83 1.05 0.79 2.99 Dnipro 1.21 1.99 2.98 4.05 5.55 5.57 5.70 5.08 3.66 2.27 1.20 0.96 3.36 Donetsk 1.21 1.99 2.94 4.04 5.48 5.55 5.66 5.09 3.67 2.24 1.23 0.96 3.34 Zhytomyr 1.01 1.82 2.87 3.88 5.16 5.19 5.04 4.66 3.06 1.87 1.04 0.83 3.04 Uzhhorod 1.13 1.91 3.01 4.03 5.01 5.31 5.25 4.82 3.33 2.02 1.19 0.88 3.16 Zaporizhzhia 1.21 2.00 2.91 4.20 5.62 5.72 5.88 5.18 3.87 2.44 1.25 0.95 3.44 Ivano-Frankivsk 1.19 1.93 2.84 3.68 4.54 4.75 4.76 4.40 3.06 2.00 1.20 0.94 2.94 Kyiv 1.07 1.87 2.95 3.96 5.25 5.22 5.25 4.67 3.12 1.94 1.02 0.86 3.10 Kropyvnytskyi 1.20 1.95 2.96 4.07 5.47 5.49 5.57 4.92 3.57 2.24 1.14 0.96 3.30 Luhansk 1.23 2.06 3.05 4.05 5.46 5.57 5.65 4.99 3.62 2.23 1.26 0.93 3.34 Lviv 1.08 1.83 2.82 3.78 4.67 4.83 4.83 4.45 3.00 1.85 1.06 0.83 2.92 Mykolaiv 1.25 2.10 3.07 4.38 5.65 5.85 6.03 5.34 3.93 2.52 1.36 1.04 3.55 Odesa 1.25 2.11 3.08 4.38 5.65 5.85 6.04 5.33 3.93 2.52 1.36 1.04 3.55 121 chapter 4. Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems CHAPTER 4 4.1.5 Thermal power The main part of the electricity in the world as of the end of 2021 is produced at thermal power plants (TPPs). This is followed by hydroelectric power plants (HPPs) and nuclear power plants (NPPs) (Table 4.1) [1]. Thermal power plants. Coal, black oil, gas, and oil shale are usually used as fuel for thermal power plants. Fossil fuels are non-renewable resources. According to many estimates, coal on the planet will last for 100–300 years, oil for 40–80 years, and natural gas for 50–120 years. It is known that thermal power plants are decisive in water and oxygen consumption, as well as in thermal pollution. A typical TPP with a capacity of 2 million kW consumes 18,000 tons of coal, 2,500 tons of black oil, and 150,000 m3 of water daily. 7 million m3 of water are used daily to cool the exhaust steam at thermal power plants, which leads to thermal pollution of the cooling reservoir. The following are emitted with the products of fuel combustion (of the total amount): ~30% of solid aerosol particles, ~60% of sulfur oxides (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOX), as well as the main share of CO2 as a determining factor in the greenhouse effect, which leads to climate warming. The impact of the energy sector on the environment strongly depends on the type of fuel used. The most “clean” fuel is natural gas, which produces the least amount of substances that pollute the atmosphere when burned. This is followed by oil (black oil), hard coal, brown coal, shale, peat. As mentioned above, many by-products are formed during the combustion of fuel. When burning coal, a significant amount of ash and slag is formed. Most of the ash can be captured, but not all. All exhaust gases are potentially harmful, even water vapor and carbon dioxide CO2. These gases absorb infrared radiation from the Earth’s surface, and some of it is reflected back to the Earth, creating the so-called “greenhouse effect”. If the level of CO2 concentration in the Earth’s atmosphere increases, global climate change may occur. When fuel is burned, heat is generated, some of which is released into the air, leading to thermal pollution of the atmosphere. This, ultimately, entails an increase in the temperature of water and air basins, melting glaciers, etc. This, ultimately, causes an increase in the temperature of water and air basins, melting glaciers, and similar phenomena. In turn, an increase in temperature can cause profound climate changes throughout the Earth. The effect of a large number of solid particles entering the atmosphere can be equally catastrophic. Tables 4.6, 4.7 provide quantitative data on various substances formed during the operation of a typical 1000 MW thermal power plant using organic fuel [24].  Table 4.6 Emissions of pollutants during the operation of a 1000 MW thermal power plant Contaminant SОx, t NxOx, t СО2, t СО, t Solid particles, t Radioactivity*, Bq Flue gases, GJ Heat of condensation, GJ Per year 1 100 350 72 500 94 300 259 1 350 4 050 Note: *Radioactivity is mainly caused by the radium isotopes 235Ra and 238Ra. Data are given for coal. For oil, this figure is 50 times lower 122 PROCESSES AND CONTROL SYSTEMS: SYNTHESIS, MODELING, OPTIMIZATION CHAPTER 4  Table 4.7 Comparison of the TPP and NPP operation with a capacity of 1000 MW for one year of operation Parameters TPP NPP Fuel demand 3.5 million tons of coal 1.5 tons of enriched uranium (or 1 thousand tons of uranium ore) CO2 emissions 10 million m3Does not release SO2 and other acid rain emissions More than 400 thousand tons Does not release Solid waste 100 thousand tons of ash About 2 tons (radioactive!) TPPs are characterized by high radiation and toxic pollution of the environment. This is due to the fact that ordinary coal and its ash contain trace impurities of uranium and a number of toxic elements in much higher concentrations than the earth’s crust. The impact of energy on the environment strongly depends on the type of fuel used. The most “clean” fuel is natural gas, which produces the smallest amount of substances that pollute the atmosphere when burned. This is followed by oil (black oil), hard coal, brown coal, shale, peat. As mentioned above, many by-products are formed during the combustion of fuel. When burning coal, a significant amount of ash and slag is formed. Most of the ash can be captured, but not all. All exhaust gases are potentially harmful, even water vapor and carbon dioxide CO2. These gases absorb infrared radiation from the Earth’s surface and some of it is reflected back to Earth, creating the so-called “greenhouse effect”. If the CO2 concentration in the Earth’s atmosphere increases, global climate change may occur. During coal combustion, most of the uranium, thorium and their decay products are released from the original coal matrix and distributed between the gas and solid fractions. Almost 100% of the radon present is converted to the gas phase and is released with the flue gases [25]. In addition to flue gases, the main sources of radionuclides entering the environment during coal combustion at power plants include the removal of coal particles from open coal storage sites (coal drift) and ash dumps [26]. During combustion, most of the mineral fraction of coal melts and forms a glassy ash residue, a significant portion of which remains in the form of slag. Heavy particles are trapped in the ash, but the lightest part of the ash, the so-called “fly ash”, is carried along with the gas flow into the power plant pipe. The specific efficiency of ash-carryover increases with increasing dispersion. Highly dispersed ash is practically not captured by equipment for cleaning TPP gases [27], so flue gases are the main source of pollution from power plants. The total emission of radionuclides at coal-fired power plants, on average, is about 1.33·1010 Bq per 1 GW. Table 4.8 shows the average annual emissions of radionuclides from US TPPs according to [28] per 1 GWh. It is seen that the main share is contributed by radon isotopes, which in total give 1.2·1010 Bq per GWh of electricity. 123 chapter 4. Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems CHAPTER 4  Table 4.8 Average annual emissions of radionuclides from a thermal power plant, Bq/ GWh Radionuclide Bq/ GWh Half-life period 220Rn 4.07·10955,6 s 222Rn 8.14·1093.8 days 238U 5.55·1074.5 billion years 234U 5.55·107245 thousand years 226Ra 4.44·1071600 years 218Po 1.41·1083 minutes 214Pb 1.41·10827 minutes 214Po 1.41·1080,00016 s 210Pb 1.41·10822 years 210Po 1.41·108138 days 216Po 8.88·1070.15 s 212Pb 8.88·10711 years 40K 1.96·1081.3 billion years The isotope 210Pb accumulates in ash especially intensively due to thermochemical processes, so that its concentration increases by 5–10 times [29]. It is known that lead and its compounds are toxic. In particular, when entering the body, lead accumulates in bones, causing their destruction. Table 4.9 presents typical ratios of concentrations of the main radionuclides in coal, slag and fly ash according to [30]. Fly ash emitted into the air poses a great danger due to its ability to spread over considerable distances and penetrate human lungs. Fine fractions of fly ash are enriched with various harmful substances. In addition to radionuclides, they contain heavy metals and trace elements Co, V, Cu, Zn, Cr, Ni, Cd, As, Be [31]. For example, in soils located in the zone of influence of TPPs, concentrations of vanadium up to 110 mg/kg, beryllium – up to 15–50 mg/kg of dry soil were observed [32].  Table 4.9 Specific activity of the main radionuclides in coal, slag and ash in Bq/kg Isotope Coal Slag Fly ash 238U 9–31 56–185 70–370 226Ra 7–25 20–166 85–281 232Th 9–19 59 81–174 40K 2–130 230–962 233–740 The dispersion of pollution with flue gases occurs over large areas, since TPP emissions into the atmosphere are carried out at an altitude of 100–300 m. 124 PROCESSES AND CONTROL SYSTEMS: SYNTHESIS, MODELING, OPTIMIZATION CHAPTER 4 The average emissions of the main radionuclides, the density of contamination of the territory and their retention in the atmosphere in the area of the nominal average TPP location, according to [29], are presented in Table 4.10. Specific emissions of harmful substances with TPP flue gases and exhaust gases of gas turbine plants when using different fuels are given in Table 4.11. Gross emissions and fuel consumption for a 1000 MW TPP are given in Table 4.12.  Table 4.10 Average emissions of the main radionuclides, the density of contamination of the territory and the RN concentration in the air per 1 GWh in the area of the nominal TPP location Indicators Radionuclides 226Ra 228Ra 210Pb 210Po 232Th 40K Annual emission, 1010 Bq 1.96 1.11 8.14 7.40 1.96 19.61 Territory contamination density, 107 Bq/km238.85 9.25 114.70 70.30 – 388.5 Air concentration, 10-8 Bq/l 6.29 4.07 14.80 14.43 6.29 –  Table 4.11 Specific emissions of atmospheric pollution (g/kWh) from the combustion of organic fuels (according to the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Vienna) Emissions Fuel type Coal Brown coal Black oil Natural gas SO26.0 7.7 7.4 0.002 NOХ2.8 3.4 2.4 1.9 Solid particles 1.4 2.7 0.7 – Fluorine compounds 0.05 1.11 0.004 – Source: [33]  Table 4.12 Gross emissions (thousand tons/year) and fuel consumption for a 1000 MW TPP Emissions Type and annual fuel consumption Natural gas (1.9·109 m3) Black oil (1.57·106 t) Coal (2.3·106 t) SO2 0.012 52.7 139,0 139.0 NOХ 12.0 22.0 21.0 CO insignificant 0.08 0.21 solid particles 0.46 0.73 4.49 hydrocarbonates insignificant 0.67 0.52 Note: Content: in black oil Sp = 1.6%; in coal Sp = 3.59% Source: [33] 125 chapter 4. Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems CHAPTER 4 Substances emitted by heat and power enterprises when operating on various types of fossil fuels are given in Table 4.13. Annual emissions from a 1000 MW fossil fuel TPP are presented in Table 4.14.  Table 4.13 List of substances emitted by heat and power enterprises when operating on various types of fossil fuels Fuel type Gaseous substances Aerosols Impurity elements Coal NO, NO2, SO2, SO3, CO2, HCl, HF, Hg (vapors), As (vapors) – The Donetsk deposit is very rich in arsenic., H2S, NH3 Fly ash, soot; formaldehyde, benzopyrene; 40К, 226Ra, 232Th(thorium), As, Cd, Pb, Ti, Cr, Na, Ni, V, Cu, Zn, Mn, Mo, Sb, SiO2, Al2O3, TiO2, NO3–, SO4 2– Black oil NO, NO2, SO2, SO3, CO, CO2, Hg (vapors), hydrocarbons Ash (V2O5), formaldehyde, benzopyrene, soot (ash contains particles of unburned fuel, soot does not contain these particles) As, Cd, Pb, Ti, Cr, Na, Ni, V, Cu, Zn, Mn, Mo, Sb – these particles are usually removed from the surface of boilers during cleaning Gas NO, NO2, CO, CO2, SO2 traces, hydrocarbons Hydrocarbons – Source: [33]  Table 4.14 Annual emissions from a 1000 MW fossil fuel TPP Fuel type Substance, t/year NO2CO SO2 Solid particles V2O5 Benzapyrene, С20Н12 Formaldehyde НСОН Total Natural gas 13,888 14681 – 2 – 0.0009 – 28,564 Black oil 23,242 27,975 153,786 1,090 2,150 0.018 1,200 209,442 Coal (brown) 45,114 530,405 269,864 134,366 – 0.13 2,850 982,600 Source: [33] 4.1.6 Nuclear energy Nuclear energy is the most important subsector of the global energy industry. The low cost of electricity produced by NPPs represents serious competition to other types of power plants. Nuclear generation is 6 times cheaper than “green” and 3 times cheaper than thermal [34]. A clear advantage of NPPs is the absence of aerosol and greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) [35–37], greenhouse gas emissions from nuclear power over the entire life cycle are equal to 12 tons of CO2 equivalent per GWh. For comparison: wind power plants – 11 tons of CO2 equivalent per GWh, hydropower 126 PROCESSES AND CONTROL SYSTEMS: SYNTHESIS, MODELING, OPTIMIZATION CHAPTER 4 plants – 24 tons of CO2 equivalent per GWh, solar power plants – 48 tons of CO2 equivalent per GWh, gas – 490 tons of CO2 equivalent per GWh, coal – 820 tons of CO2 equivalent per GWh. If to evaluate the planetary scale, the operation of all nuclear power plants in the world saves greenhouse gas emissions at the level of 2 billion tons of CO2 equivalent per year, which is proportional to the absorption capacity of the entire forest massif of the planet. A positive factor is also material intensity. Studies by the Joint Research Center (Jointresearchcenter) at the European Commission [38] show that nuclear power has the lowest specific material intensity compared to other low-carbon types of generation. For example, the metal content for the production of 1 MWh of electricity at NPP is 13 times less than in wind generation. It is also important that NPP requires a relatively small area: for example, 950 hectares of land are required to install a 1 GW WPP, and 28 hectares NPP of the same capacity. At the same time, NPPs provide a stable base load of networks, which does not depend on weather conditions, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for at least 60 years. NPPs emit very little CO2 during their life cycle. The criterion for inclusion in the Taxonomy of electricity generation technology is emissions of less than 100 g/kWh. According to the JRC report [39], NPPs emit an average of 28 g/kWh of CO2, which is comparable to the emissions of hydro and wind power plants, and even lower than that of solar panels, which have an average emission of about 85 g/kWh. The figures vary from source to source (for example, the ICPP 2014 report [40] gives average emissions for NPPs at 12 g/kWh and for industrial photovoltaics at 48 g/kWh), but the order and ratio are approximately the same. Emissions from gas and coalfired plants are around 500 and 900 g/kWh, respectively. According to the IAEA PRIS [41] as of January 1, 2024: – there are 412 operating reactors in operation worldwide (excluding 25 reactors that have been shut down) with a gross installed capacity of 391,387 MW; 57 reactors are under construction; – the total NPP number in the world with the status of operating reactors is 170 NPPs; with the status of operating reactors and suspended in operation – 179 NPPs. Nuclear power can currently be considered as the most promising. This is due to both relatively large reserves of nuclear fuel and a gentle impact on the environment. The advantages also include the possibility of building NPP without being tied to resource deposits, since their transportation does not require significant costs due to small volumes. It is enough to note that 0.5 kg of nuclear fuel allows to get as much energy as burning 1000 tons of coal. NPPs are safe, reliable and do not emit greenhouse gases, and therefore it is worth considering nuclear power as the most attractive industry for investment. On the other hand, it is impossible not to note the issues of volumes, cost of disposal and safety of radioactive waste produced, which require separate research. In addition, the article [42] discusses the risks of man-made disasters using the examples of events at the Three Mile Island NPP (1979), the Chernobyl NPP (1986), and Fukushima-1 (2011). Among the causes of accidents, errors and shortcomings in the design of the plants and the human factor are primarily highlighted. However, it is noted that after the mentioned events, the designs of nuclear power plants were revised in such a way as to ensure a significant increase in the safety of their operation. 127 chapter 4. Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems CHAPTER 4 Currently, small modular reactors (SMRs) [43], which produce electricity in the range of 10 to 300 MW [44–48], are considered particularly promising, offering more compact and cost-effective alternatives to conventional nuclear reactors. This makes them particularly attractive for use in smaller or remote locations. The development of SMRs, which began in the 1970s, has accelerated significantly in recent years due to the increasing demand for clean energy sources and advances in technology. Key design features of SMRs that ensure their increased safety and efficiency compared to classic nuclear reactors include: – optimized geometric arrangement of the reactor, which minimizes the possibility of accidents; – application of passive safety systems that operate without external intervention in emergencies; – simplicity of design to facilitate maintenance and repair. Thus, SMRs open wide opportunities for the production of electricity, hydrogen and heat. They can be located both on land and in water. The SMR-160, designed as an advanced PWR-type SMR, has a thermal capacity of 525 MW and an electrical capacity of 160 MW [45]. The design includes robust passive safety systems to provide protection against design basis accidents, acts of sabotage or unintentional human actions. According to the Holtec development concept, the SMR-160 is designed for “safe abandonment” in design basis incident situations, allowing for safe dissipation of residual heat without the need for operator action. By combining fully passive safety systems with natural circulation in the primary circuit, the design is significantly simplified compared to classic NPPs, which contributes to the ease of its manufacture, construction and maintenance. The modular design of the SMR-160 involves the manufacture and assembly of key components in advance, which allows for a reduction in the construction time of each NPP – up to 24 months. 4.2 Methodology for substantiating the choice of the type of energy resource for the region According to studies [49], any energy source is characterized by two parameters: energy density and speed of its transmission. The product of these values is the maximum power that can be obtained from a unit of surface using the energy of this type. For solar energy, this value in the near-Earth space is more than a kilowatt per square meter, and at sea level, taking into account losses in the atmosphere, a flow of 100–200 watts per square meter can actually be used. This flow is sufficient for life on the planet, but as the main source of energy for humanity it is extremely inefficient. Similar problems limit the use of geothermal energy due to the heat-conducting properties of rocks. Hydropower of river flows and the use of sea tides is no more than 5% and is profitable only in mountainous areas, when there is a large potential energy per unit area of the reservoir. 128 PROCESSES AND CONTROL SYSTEMS: SYNTHESIS, MODELING, OPTIMIZATION CHAPTER 4 The use of wind, also due to the insufficient density of the energy flow, turns out to be economically insufficiently justified. Sources with high energy density – fuel cells – are characterized by a low rate of its transmission, so the real energy consumption does not exceed 200 W/m2. In addition, it is worth considering such an indicator as the installed capacity utilization factor (ICUF). It indicates the efficiency of the operation of electric power enterprises. It is calculated as the ratio of the arithmetic average capacity to the installed capacity of the electric power plant for a certain time interval [50]. Thus, if there are two power plants – nuclear and solar, with the same nominal capacity (720,000 MWh/month), the solar power plant will produce only 15–30% of this value, since it directly depends on the sun. This indicator will be its ICUF. Taking into account the above, there is a need to introduce the “General indicator for the selection and development of energy production taking into account the environmental component” of the Paris Agreement [51]. 4.2.1 Comprehensive assessment of efficiency indicators of energy resources Analysis of the distribution and use of energy resources convincingly shows that energy production traditionally follows the availability of resources in the region and the need for energy. In this regard, an uneven concentration of industry and its accompanying environmental impact are created. To level the situation, it is necessary to have indicators that allow a comprehensive assessment of the possibilities of regions for the development of the economic sector, taking into account the availability of resources and minimal environmental impact. In order to justify the choice of the preferred type of energy resource, using the example of the energy supply of the region (Odesa), the “Method of expert assessments of the use of energy resources (system efficiency)” was formed. The most common energy resources are divided into two main categories: fossil and non-fossil [52] (Table 4.15). Fossil resources are represented by hydrocarbons in various phase states. Non-fossil resources, in turn, consist of renewable and manufactured resources.  Table 4.15 Main categories of energy resources Fossil Non-fossil Renewable Manufactured Coal, peat Oil Gas Solar Wind Hydropower Biogas Household waste Hydrogen Nuclear 129 chapter 4. Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems CHAPTER 4 Fossil fuels – coal, natural gas and oil are the main sources of primary energy for thermal energy (thermal power). In Ukraine, about 30% of all electricity [53] is provided by thermal power. It works both on its own and on imported raw materials. The operation of thermal power plants is accompanied by emissions of many greenhouse gases, the main of which are water vapor and carbon dioxide, which are formed during the combustion of all types of hydrocarbon fuels. The products of coal combustion and anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide accumulate in the atmosphere, contributing to the development of the greenhouse effect. The annual emission of CO2 by all TPPs in the world is approaching 10 billion tons of carbon dioxide, accounting for about 30% of all anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere of the planet [54]. An important element of the study is the establishment of a comprehensive assessment of the efficiency indicators of the choice of the type of energy resource, favorable for electricity and heat supply in the conditions of a specific region. To conduct such an assessment, the method of expert assessments [55] was used using a random number generator to form an information field about the values of the characteristics of energy resources and statistical processing of data on acceptable energy resources in the conditions of the regions under consideration. The developed methodology was applied to analyze and form a number of preferences by type of energy resources of the large southern region of Ukraine – Odesa region. The aim of the presented methodology is to form a comprehensive assessment of the degree of efficiency of electricity generation and pollution of the territories of energy production facilities based on the analysis of the values of the observed environmental indicators. The methodology proposes two mutually complementary criteria, the resource preference index and the environmental preservation index, which evaluate a number of preferences of energy resources from the standpoint of accessibility and impact on the environment of a particular region. To achieve the formulated aim, it is necessary to solve the following tasks: – forming a list of observed indicators; – forming limit or normalizing values of the observed indicators; – consistent normalization according to permissible values, amounts of resources under consideration, and observed indicators. The existing global trend provides for the preferential development of the use of non-fossil resources [56]. Each of the types of energy resources specified in (Table 4.15) is characterized by qualities, the totality of which in dimensionless form can be a criterion for making a decision on the preferential acceptability of using a particular resource. The algorithm for constructing a comprehensive assessment of the efficiency of the system is the sequence of procedures is presented in Table 4.16 [57]. 130 PROCESSES AND CONTROL SYSTEMS: SYNTHESIS, MODELING, OPTIMIZATION CHAPTER 4  Table 4.16 Algorithm for constructing a comprehensive assessment of the efficiency of systems Stage Procedure Stage 1 Selection of a set of indicators characterizing the state of systems Stage 2 Selection of reference systems by indicators Stage 3 Assessment of intervals of partial indicators of system functioning Stage 4 Average point estimate of values of temporary indicators of system functioning Stage 5 Assessment of weighting coefficients for temporary indicators Stage 6 Integral assessment of system functioning efficiency Factors reflecting the applicability of the resource formed 6 groups, which include 27 indicators that have a positive (+) or negative (–) trend of change [57] (Table 4.17).  Table 4.17 Factors reflecting the applicability of the resource No. Group Indicators 1 2 3 1 TECHNOLOGICAL FACTORS are variables related to the existence, availability and development of technology 1 + Availability of the resource in the region 2 – Need to import resources 3 + Availability of delivery transport 4 + Availability, readiness 5 + Productivity 6 + Quality of the resources supplied 7 + Final carbon intensity of energy 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS are variables that are caused by the interaction of resources and the environment 8 – Volume of waste 9 – Level of emissions in general 10 – Level of CO2 emissions per TPES 11 + Waste recycling 12 – Waste disposal 13 + Safety of maintenance 3 RELIABILITY FACTORS are caused by the quality of service, the interaction of the system and the environment (technical, software, operational) 14 + Reliability, failure 15 + Repairability 16 + Duration of operation 17 + Level of renewal of fixed assets 18 + Support of the life cycle of objects 137 chapter 4. Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems CHAPTER 4  Fig. 4.11 Concordance coefficient 0.60 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 Concordance coefficient Availability of АER in the region Need to import resources Availability of delivery transport Availability, readiness Productivity Quality of resources supplied Final carbon intensity of energy Volume of waste Level of emissions in general Level of CO2 emissions per TPES Waste recycling Waste disposal Safety of maintenance Reliability Repairability Duration of operation Level of renewal of fixed assets Life cycle support Capital investments Dimensions Material intensity Own energy consumption Consumption of reagents Possibility of utilization Level of remuneration Quality of management Quality of personnel  Fig. 4.12 Environmental pollution index by power plants depending on the energy resource for electricity production in the world and Ukraine 0.2 0.16 0.12 0.08 0.04 0 World production NPP Coal Oil Gas In Ukraine The results obtained differ in absolute values of acceptability for different types of resources and different methods. At the same time, the trends of change by resource are preserved. 138 PROCESSES AND CONTROL SYSTEMS: SYNTHESIS, MODELING, OPTIMIZATION CHAPTER 4 Conclusions Almost all types of energy resources are present in the energy complex of Ukraine. The overwhelming amount of energy is produced using traditional energy resources with a stable trend of using renewable resources. Hydropower plants and pumped storage power plants produce up to 12% of the total capacity. The use of the potential of small rivers is constrained by threats of disruption of the natural state of the ecological system. Wind power plants are a new industry in the energy balance of Ukraine, its contribution to energy supply does not significantly exceed 1% in the overall structure of electricity production with a tendency of gradual growth. The development of the use of wind resources is constrained by characteristic disadvantages: wind dependence, noise pollution, impact on living organisms, change in the natural landscape. The installed capacity of solar power plants is more than 7.5 GW and continues to grow, mainly in the southern regions, where solar insolation is longer. The large potential of biomass available for energy production is a good prerequisite for the dynamic development of the bioenergy sector. The economically feasible energy potential of biomass in the country is about 20–25 MTOE per year. The spread of solar power plants is restrained by: intermittent production mode, the need for storage, indirect impact on the environment, etc. The spread of biomass potential is restrained by the need for a balance between food and industrial agriculture, the lack of effective waste processing technologies, etc. The bulk of electricity in the world, and until recently in Ukraine, is produced at thermal power plants using fossil energy resources. Thermal power plants are decisive in the consumption of fossil resources, water and oxygen, as well as environmental pollution. The most “clean” fuel is natural gas, which produces the least amount of substances that pollute the atmosphere when burned. This is followed by oil (fuel oil), coal, brown coal, shale, peat. Nuclear energy is the most important subsector of the global energy industry. The low cost of electricity produced by nuclear power plants represents serious competition to other types of power plants. Nuclear generation is 6 times cheaper than “green” and 3 times cheaper than thermal. Its clear advantage is the practical absence of aerosol and greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere throughout its life cycle. Energy production traditionally follows the availability of resources in the region and the need for energy, which creates an uneven concentration of industry and its accompanying environmental impact. To level the situation, it is necessary to have indicators that allow for a comprehensive assessment of the opportunities of regions for the development of the economic sector, taking into account the availability of resources and minimal environmental impact. An integrated approach is based on the formation of groups of indicators that reflect individual aspects of the state of the system. 139 chapter 4. Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems CHAPTER 4 Existing comprehensive indicators assess the efficiency of the used resource and its impact on the environment differently, as a result of which the detection of the impact of resource use on the environment is lost. The proposed indicator is built on a monitoring study of 33 indicators, divided into 6 groups, reflecting the capabilities and needs of the analyzed systems. The summaries of heterogeneous indicators are combined by normalization according to available limit indicators: permissible limit values of indicators, maximum permissible emissions and maximum permissible concentrations. The proposed efficiency and pollution index consistently reflect the advantage of the resource for the region, taking into account technological, environmental, technical and other indicators. The proposed efficiency and pollution index allows for independent justification of energy strategies of regions, taking into account their industrial, resource and environmental potentials. References 1. Statistical Review of World Energy (2023). Energy Institute. Available at: https://www.energyinst.org/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/1055542/EI_Stat_Review_PDF_single_3.pdf 2. Harvey, R. (2024). Fossil fuel use, emissions hit records in 2023, report says. Reuters. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/fossil-fuel-use-emissions-hitrecords-2023-report-says-2024-06-19/ 3. Yermolenko, H. (2023). Global electricity demand to grow by 3.3% in 2024. GMK Center. Available at: https://gmk.center/news/globalnyj-spros-na-elektroenergiju-v-2024-godu-vyrastet-na-3-3 4. Heletukha, H. H., Zheliezna, T. A., Prakhovnik, A. K. (2015). Analiz enerhetychnykh stratehii krain YeS ta svitu i roli v nykh vidnovliuvanykh dzherel enerhii. Analitychna zapyska BAU № 13. Available at: https://uabio.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/uabio-position-paper-13-ua.pdf 5. Potreblenie elektroenergii v Ukraine k 2030 godu udvoitsya, - prognoz (2012). LB.ua. Available at: https://lb.ua/economics/2012/03/27/142943_potreblenie_elektroenergii.html 6. Pro skhvalennia Enerhetychnoi stratehii Ukrainy na period do 2030 roku (2013). Rozporiadzhennia Kabinetu Ministriv Ukrainy No. 1071-р. 24.07.2013. Available at: https://zakon. rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1071-2013-%D1%80#Text 7. Omelchenko, V. (2022). Ukraine’s renewable energy sector before, during and after the war. Razumkov Centre. Available at: https://razumkov.org.ua/en/articles/ukraines-renewableenergy-sector-before-during-and-after-the-war 8. Zvit z otsinky vidpovidnosti (dostatnosti) heneruiuchykh potuzhnostei (2019). NPC «Ukrenergo». Available at: https://ua.energy/zvit-z-otsinky-vidpovidnosti-dostatnosti-generuyuchyh-potuzhnostej/ 9. Landau, Yu. A. (2020). Analysis of the state and prospects of using hydropower resources in the development of the United power system (UES) of Ukraine. Hidroenerhetyka Ukrainy, 3–4, 16–21. Available at: https://uhe.gov.ua/sites/default/files/2020-12/8.pdf 140 PROCESSES AND CONTROL SYSTEMS: SYNTHESIS, MODELING, OPTIMIZATION CHAPTER 4 10. Suchasnyi stan, problemy ta perspektyvy rozvytku hidroenerhetyky Ukrainy. Analitychna dopovid (2014). Natsionalnyi instytut stratehichnykh doslidzhen, 54. 11. Atlas enerhetychnoho potentsialu vidnovliuvanykh ta netradytsiinykh dzherel enerhii Ukrainy (2001). Natsionalna akademiia nauk Ukrainy, 41. 12. Solovev, A., Degtiarev, K. (2013). Vetrenaia vetrianaia energetika. Nauka i zhizn, 7, 42–47. 13. Yatseno, O. (2021). Nazvano oblasti Ukrainy, de naibilshe vitroelektrostantsii. EcoPolitic. Available at: https://ecopolitic.com.ua/ua/news/nazvano-oblasti-ukraini-de-najbilshe-vitroelektrostancij/ 14. Palchevskaia, E. S., Kuimova, M. V. (2015). O preimushchestvakh i nedostatkakh vetroelektrostantsii. Molodoi uchenyi, 9 (89), 479–480. 15. Solar Service. Available at: https://solarservice.pro/karta-solnechnoj-aktivnosti-ukrainy 16. Renewable energy sector: Unlocking sustainable energy potential (2018). National Investment Council of Ukraine. Available at: https://publications.chamber.ua/Renewable%20energy%20sector.pdf 17. Surface meteorology and Solar Energy (2013). Available at: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/ citations/20080012200 18. Labeish, V. G. (2003). Netraditsionnye i vozobnovliaemye istochniki energii, 79. 19. Babyna, O. M. (2018). The role of bioenergy in the development of agrarian sector of Ukraine. Black sea economic studies, 30–1, 28–32. Available at: http://www.bses.in.ua/ journals/2018/30_1_2018/8.pdf 20. Omolchenko, V. (2022). Ukraine’s renewable energy sector before, during and after the war. Razumkov Centre. Available at: https://razumkov.org.ua/en/articles/ukraines-renewableenergy-sector-before-during-and-after-the-war 21. Bioenerhetyka v Ukraini vzhe zamishchuie 5,2 mlrd kubometry pryrodnoho hazu (2021). Mirror of the Week. Available at: https://zn.ua/ukr/ECONOMICS/bioenerhetika-v-ukrajinivzhe-zamishchuje-5-2-mlrd-kubometri-prirodnoho-hazu.html 22. Geletukha, G., Zheliezna, T., Matveev, Yu., Kucheruk, P., Kramar, V. (2020). Roadmap for bioenergy development in Ukraine until 2050. UABIO Position Paper № 26. Bioenergy Association of Ukraine. Available at: https://uabio.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/uabio-position-paper-26-en.pdf 23. Biopalyvo. Alternatyvna enerhetyka u sviti ta Ukraini (2016). Enerhiia pryrody. Available at: https://alternative-energy.com.ua/uk/vocabulary/біопаливо/ 24. Shevchenko, V. V., Don, A. V., Kononova, T. G. (2019). Problems of modern electric power industry, ways of its development and estimation of electric power sources. Collection of works XVI International Scientific Conference «Science and Society», 61–73. https:// doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3892964 25. Radioactive Elements in Coal and Fly Ash: Abundance, Forms, and Environmental Significance. (1997). U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet FS-163-97. Available at: https://pubs.usgs.gov/ fs/1997/0163/report.pdf 141 chapter 4. Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems CHAPTER 4 26. Mauricheva, T. S., Kiselev, G. P. (2006). Osnovnye polozheniia kolichestvennoi otsenki radioaktivnogo vozdeistviia ugolnykh TETS na okruzhaiushchuiu sredu. Vestnik Pomorskogo universiteta, 1 (9), 110. 27. Mauricheva, T. S. (2007). Kolichestvennaia otsenka postupleniia radionuklidov v okruzhaiushchuiu sredu pri rabote ugolnykh TETS na primere TETS-1 g Severodvinska. [Doctoral dissertation]. 28. Study of Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions from Electric Utility Steam Generating Units (1998). Final Report to Congress. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/airtoxics/combust/utiltox/eurtc1.pdf 29. Puchkov, L. A., Vorobev, A. E. (2000). Chelovek i biosfera: vkhozhdenie v tekhnosferu, 335. 30. Warner, F., Harrison, R. M. (1993). Radioecology after Chernobyl: Biogeochemical Pathways of Artificial Radionuclides. Wiley, 400. 31. Kovalenko, G., Piven, G. (2010). Environmental Risk for the Public Health from Releases from Thermal and Nuclear Power Plants of Ukraine. Nuclear and Radiation Safety, 4 (48), 50–56. https://doi.org/10.32918/nrs.2010.4(48).11 32. Kryshev, I. I. (2010). Ekologicheskaia bezopasnost iaderno-energeticheskogo kompleksa Rossii, 382. 33. V. A. Maliarenko, V. A., Kanilo, P. M. (2012). Incineration of organic fuels and ekologo-chemical safety. Energy saving. Power engineering. Energy audit, 11 (105), 30–37. Available at: http://eee.khpi.edu.ua/article/view/20805 34. Nuclear Power: Myth and Reality. Second Edition. (2010). Heinrich Boell Foundation, 352. 35. Novak, A. (2021). Razvitie atomnoi energetiki neobkhodimoe uslovie globalnoi klimaticheskoi povestki. Energeticheskaia politika, 9 (163), 6–11. 36. Technical assessment of nuclear energy with respect to the ‘do no significant harm’ criteria of Regulation (EU) 2020/852 (‘Taxonomy Regulation’) (2021). JRC Science for Policy Report. Available at: https://finance.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-03/210329-jrc-report-nuclear-energy-assessment_en.pdf 37. Core Writing Team, Pachaurim R. K., Meyer, L. A. (Eds.) (2014). Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151. Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full.pdf 38. IAEA. The Power Reactor Information System (PRIS). Available at: https://pris.iaea.org/pris/ home.aspx 39. Naskolko ekologichna atomnaia energetika Na samom dele tak zhe kak solnechnaia i vetrovaia. ITSOFT. Available at: https://habr.com/ru/articles/552964/ 40. Ustanovlennaia moshchnost elektrostantsii. Available at: https://www.eeseaec.org/ustanovlennaa-mosnost-elektrostancij 41. Roberts, J. W. (2018). If nuclear energy is the answer, why doesn’t everyone agree? Physics Education, 53, 024003. http://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/aa9f7c 142 PROCESSES AND CONTROL SYSTEMS: SYNTHESIS, MODELING, OPTIMIZATION CHAPTER 4 42. Petrus, O., Zemerov, E., Pogosov, O. (2024). Technical and economic analysis of electricity supply to energy deficit regions using small modular reactors (SRM). Science and Technology Today, Series “Physical and Mathematical Sciences”, 3 (31), 1035–1054. https:// doi.org/10.52058/2786-6025-2024-3(31)-1035-1054 43. Advances in Small Modular Reactor Technology Developments (2022). International Atomic Energy Agency. Available at: https://aris.iaea.org/publications/SMR_booklet_2022.pdf 44. Lee, J. S., Kim, Y. S., Kim, J. H. (2022). A review of small modular reactors for power generation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 169, 108–109. 45. Zohuri, B. (2020). Nuclear Micro Reactors. Springer Nature, 120. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-030-47225-2 46. Ghimire, L., Waller, E. (2023). Small Modular Reactors: Opportunities and Challenges as Emerging Nuclear Technologies for Power Production. Journal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science, 9 (4), 044501. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4062644 47. Stadzhi, D. (2022). Matematika zelenoi energetiki khorosho no malo. Energy Business Magazine, 1–2, 1245–1246. Available at: https://e-b.com.ua/matematika-zelenoi-energetiki-xoroso-no-malo-3003 48. HOST 19431-84. Enerhetyka ta elektryfikatsiia. Terminy ta vyznachennia. (1986). Ministerstvo enerhetyky i elektryfikatsii SRSR. 49. Adoption of the Paris Agreement (2015). FCCC/CP/2015/L.9/Rev.1, 32. Available at: https:// unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09r01.pdf 51. Maksmadiev, B. S., Ochilov, M. A., Mirzaev, Sh. N., Iuldashov, S. Sh. (2019). Types of Energy Resources and Possibilities of Development of Alternative Energy Based on Renewable Energy Sources in Uzbekistan. International Academy Journal Web of Scholar, 6 (36), 12–16. 10.31435/rsglobal_wos/30062019/6550 52. Struktura elektroheneratsii v Ukraini ta yii zviazok iz taryfamy na elektroenerhiiu (2021). Torhova Elektrychna Kompaniia. Available at: https://tek.energy/news/struktura-elektrogeneratsii-v-ukraini-ta-ii-zvyazok-iz-tarifami-na-elektroenergiyu 53. IPCC Report on Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Key Takeaways (2022). United Nations. Available at: https://www.un.org/climatechange/ipcc-wgii-report 54. Khalafian, A. A., Borovikov, V. P., Kalaidina. G. V. (2017). Teoriia veroiatnostei, matematicheskaia statistika i analiz dannykh: Osnovy teorii i praktika na kompiutere. STATISTICA. EXCEL, 320. 55. Pro skhvalennia Enerhetychnoi stratehii Ukrainy na period do 2035 roku “Bezpeka, enerhoefektyvnist, konkurentospromozhnist” (2017). Rozporiadzhennia Kabinetu Ministriv Ukrainy No. 605-р. 18.08.2017. Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/ 605-2017-%D1%80#Text 56. Kozlov, I., Kovalchuk, V., Klymchuk, O., Dorozh, O., Sigal, A., Aksyonova, I., et. al. (2022). Assessing the region’s energy provision. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 2 (8 (116)), 13–20. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2022.255740 143 chapter 4. Intelligentization of control systems for local electric power systems CHAPTER 4 57. Biliaiev, N. N., Shynkarenko, V. S., Gabrinets, V. A., Kalashnikov, I. V., Berlov, O. V. (2018). Modeling of atmosphere pollution and territorial risk assessment at emission of hazardous substances. Geо-Technical Mechanics, 140, 158–165. https://doi.org/10.15407/ geotm2018.03.158 58. Zviagintseva, A. V. (2016). Veroiatnostnye metody kompleksnoi otsenki prirodno-antropogennykh sistem, 257. 59. Iaili, E. A. (2006). Nauchnye i prikladnye aspekty otsenki i upravleniia urbanizirovannymi territoriiami na osnove instrumenta riska i novykh pokazatelei kachestva okruzhaiushchei sredy, 448. 60. Savchuk, I. H. Konkordatsii koefitsiient. Slovnyk suspilnoi heohrafii. Available at: https:// geohub.org.ua/node/4219