Vattenfall aB GeneRatIOn nORDIC CeRtIfIeD enVIROnmental ...

Vattenfall AB GENERATION NORDIC 

Certified Environmental Product 

Declaration EPD ® of electricity 

from vattenfall´s Nordic Hydropower 

S-P-00088 

2008-10-31 

version 1.1 

revised 2010-02-15 

UNCPC Code 17, Group 171 – Electrical energy 

© Vattenfall AB Generation Nordic 2008

Summary 

ProduCER 

Vattenfall AB Vattenkraft is responsible for Vattenfall AB Nordic´s hydropower generation in 

the Nordic countries. Vattenfall AB Vattenkraft is part of Vattenfall AB, SE-162 87 Stockholm, 

Sweden. Phone: +46 8 739 50 00; www.vattenfall.se and www.vattenfall.com. Vattenfall AB 

Vattenkraft implements a certified quality, work environment and environmental management 

system designated KAM. This system is based on the standards ISO 9001:2000, 

AFS 2001:1, och ISO 14001:2004). 

ProduCt och deClared UNIt 

Electricity belongs to the product category UNCPC Code 17, Group 171 – Electrical Energy. 

Vattenfall AB Generation Nordic owns or has majority share in about 60 large-scale hydropower 

stations in the Nordic countries and about 50 small-scale stations. These stations 

have a total installed capacity of 8,7 GW and the average annual electricity generation is 

31,3 TWh. Several reservoirs enable the generation to follow the load curve, and electricity 

can be delivered without backup sources. The declared unit 1 kWh of electricity generated 

and thereafter distributed to an industrial customer connected to the 70/130 kV network. 

THE EPD ® SYSTEm 

The EPD ® system managed by the International EPD Consortium (IEC) is based on ISO 14025, 

Type III environmental declarations. The relevant governing documents in hierarchical order 

are: PCR-CPC17, General Programme Instructions for an international EPD ® system for environmental 

product declaration (GPI, 2008), ISO 14025, ISO 14040, ISO 14044. 

Environmental Performance – based on LCA 

See chapter 3 in the complete EPD ® documentation. 

System boundaries 

The EPD ® describes the Core process, i.e. the generation of electricity in Vattenfall’s Nordic 

hydropower stations, Upstream process comprising production of auxiliary supplies, and 

Downstream process including distribution of electricity. The Core process - infrastructure 

is included i.e. construction of power stations, dams and waterways. Decommissioning 

has not been included but the technical lifetime has been set at a level that provides 

for complete replacement of the power station through reinvestments. Technical lifetime 

for machinery in power stations has been set to 60 years and for buildings, dams and waterways 

100 years. Construction and decommissioning of infrastructure in Downstream 

process have been included. The use of electricity at the consumer has been excluded. 

Hydropower stations, majority and wholly owned by Vattenfall AB Generation Nordic, have 

been selected for the study to be representative regarding location, physical geography 

regions, and type and size of station. The stations are located in different so called river 

regions. The selected stations have a third of Vattenfall’s installed capacity and generate 

a third of Vattenfall’s hydro-electricity. 

Environmental information 

A short summary of compiled data per kWh electricity is presented below. The results are 

presented for following lifecycle modules. 

Upstream process 

Core process 

Core process – infrastructure 

Downstream process 


– infrastructure 

Production of oils, chemicals and fuels for vehicles and reserve power. 

Operation of power plant, i.e. emissions from inspection trips, emissions of oil 

to water and ground, incineration or deposit of operational waste. 

Construction and reinvestments in machinery , dams and waterways. 

Operation of electricity networks, i.e. emissions from inspection trips, 

production and emissions of oils. Extra generation in Vattenfall’s 

hydropower plants to compensate for losses in the networks. 

Construction of national grid and distribution networks. 


SUmmary 

Distribution of electricity implies losses, which must be compensated for by increased 

generation, in this study through generation in Vattenfall’s Nordic hydropower. The losses 

are different for different types of customers and often higher in the countryside. The loss 

to an average large industrial customer connected to the 70/130 kV network amounts to 

3 %. The average loss to a household customer in Sweden varies between 8–9 %. 

Resource use 

ECOPROFIle 

Input 

Resource use 

Unit/ 

kWh 

Upstream 

process 

Total 

generated 

Coreprocess 

Coreprocess 

- infrastructure 

Downstream 

process 2 

Downstream 

process 


Total 

distributed 

Copper in ore g 6,1 . 10 -7 4,6 . 10 -8 4,2 . 10 -3 4,2 . 10 -3 1,3 . 10 -4 6,8 . 10 -3 1,1 . 10 -2 

Electricity use in the power plant 1 kWh 3,2 . 10 -3 3,2 . 10 -3 9,6 . 10 -5 3,3 . 10 -3 

Fossil energy resources kWh 6,3 . 10 -5 3,4 . 10 -6 3,1 . 10 -3 3,2 . 10 -3 3,2 . 10 -4 5,0 . 10 -3 8,5 . 10 -3 

Gravel, stone, and sand g 2,9 . 10 -9 2,9 . 10 -10 36 36 1,1 5,7 . 10 -7 37 

Iron in ore g 5,5 . 10 -5 8,6 . 10 -6 4,9 . 10 -1 4,9 . 10 -1 1,5 . 10 -2 6,4 . 10 -1 1,1 

Potential energy of water through 

hydro turbines 

kWh 1,1 3,4 -2 1,2 

Renewable fuel kWh 4,6 . 10 -13 5,0 . 10 -14 9,2 . 10 -6 9,2 . 10 -6 2,8 . 10 -7 1,1 . 10 -10 9,5 . 10 -6 

Soil, morain g 21 21 6,2 . 10 -1 21 

Water use g 5,6 . 10 -2 7,3 . 10 -3 13 13 5,8 . 10 -1 16 30 

Input of material from the technosphere 

(agglomeration of app. 

30 substances) 

g 2,5 . 10 -5 1,3 . 10 -6 3,9 . 10 -4 4,2 . 10 -4 1,0 . 10 -4 3,0 . 10 -4 8,2 . 10 -4 

Emissions 

ECOPROFIle 

Output 

Pollutant emissions 

Greenhouse gases 

Ozone-depleting gases 

Unit/ 

kWh 

g CO 2 eq. 

(100 y) 

g CFC-11 eq. 

(20 y) 

Acidifying substances g SO 2 

- 

eq. 

Gases contributing to the 

formation of ground-level ozone 

g ethene 

eq. 

Eutrophying substances g PO 

3- 4 

eq. 

Emissions of toxic and other substances 

to air, ground, and water 

Total 

generated 

Upstreamprocess 

Coreprocess 

Coreprocess 


Downstream 

process 2 

Downstream 

process 


Total 

distributed 

2,9 . 10 -3 2,0 . 10 -2 4,5 4,5 2,7 . 10 -1 1,2 6,0 

1,5 . 10 -9 4,2 . 10 -10 3,1 . 10 -8 3,3 . 10 -8 7,6 . 10 -9 3,8 . 10 -8 7,8 . 10 -8 

2,6 . 10 -5 1,8 . 10 -5 4,5 . 10 -3 4,6 . 10 -3 2,8 . 10 -4 4,9 . 10 -3 9,8 . 10 -3 

1,7 . 10 -5 6,3 . 10 -6 8,1 . 10 -4 8,4 . 10 -4 8,6 . 10 -5 1,1 . 10 -3 2,0 . 10 -3 

2,3 . 10 -6 8,0 . 10 -6 4,9 . 10 -2 4,9 . 10 -2 1,5 . 10 -3 8,5 . 10 -4 5,1 . 10 -2 

Particulate matter to air (PM) g 2,1 . 10 -6 2,8 . 10 -6 1,0 . 10 -3 1,1 . 10 -3 4,4 . 10 -5 6,4 . 10 -3 7,5 . 10 -3 

Polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) g 2,6 . 10 -10 3,0 . 10 -11 9,2 . 10 -8 9,2 . 10 -8 3,5 . 10 -9 1,6 . 10 -6 1,7 . 10 -6 

C-14 to air kBq 1,5 . 10 -8 1,8 . 10 -9 3,1 . 10 -6 3,1 . 10 -6 1,3 . 10 -7 4,5 . 10 -6 7,7 . 10 -6 

Kr-85 to air kBq 6,2 . 10 -9 6,7 . 10 -10 1,7 . 10 -7 1,7 . 10 -7 2,2 . 10 -8 1,2 . 10 -6 1,4 . 10 -6 

Rn-222 to air kBq 2,8 . 10 -4 3,2 . 10 -5 5,9 . 10 -2 5,9 . 10 -2 2,5 . 10 -3 8,2 . 10 -2 1,4 . 10 -1 

1 Environmental impact from this electricity use is included in the results. 

2 Includes the extra electricity generation in Vattenfall´s Nordic hydropower plants necessary to compensate 

for distribution losses in the networks. 


Summary 

Resource use and emissions emanating from waste treatment through incineration or 

deposition are included in the Ecoprofile, i.e. no crediting has been performed. 

Conclusions of the LCA 

The major environmental impact is attributable to construction and reinvestment of power 

stations and dams. Operation contributes approximately 1 %. 

ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION 

Land use and impact on biodiversity 

Vattenfall´s Biotope Method 2005 is used to quantify impacts on biodiversity as a direct 

consequence of the utilisation of land and water for economic activities. Affected areas are 

categorised into Critical Biotope, Rare Biotope, General Biotope, and Technotope. 

The 14 studied power stations, with their respective storage reservoirs, together occupy 

and area of 74 850 hectares. The main part of this area, 70 320 hectares, constitutes reservoirs. 

The table below shows the aggregated change of biotope categories caused by the 

construction of the 14 stations. The specific values in the table give a rough approximation 

of the direct biotope changes caused by Vattenfall’s Nordic hydropower. Data should be 

interpreted based on the whole chapter on land use and biodiversity. See chapter 4.1 in the 

complete EPD ® documentation. 

Category Biotope change (ha) Change per kWh electricity 

(m 2 /kWh electricity) 

Critical biotope -30 000 –3 . 10 -4 

Rare biotope -20 000 –2 . 10 -4 

General biotope 30 000 3 . 10 -4 

Technotope 20 000 2 . 10 -4 

Environmental risk assessment 

The conclusion is that over a longer period of time, the emissions due to undesired events 

are considerably smaller than those emanating from operation under normal circumstances 

except for emissions of gasified copper. See chapter 4.3 of the complete EPD ® 

documentation. 

Noise 

The most notable noise outdoors is the sound from water running through above-ground 

power stations. The noise levels are however lower than before development. 


Content 

1 Introduction 1 

1.1 Declared Product 1 

1.2 The Declaration and the EPD ® System 1 

1.3 Vattenfall, LCA, and EPD ® 2 

2 Producer and product 3 

2.1 Vattenfall AB Nordic 3 

2.2 Vattenfall AB Vattenkraft 3 

2.3 Selected Electricity Power Plants 3 

2.4 Electricity Transmission and Distribution 6 

3 Environmental Performance BASED ON LCA 7 

3.1 Background 7 

3.2 System Boundaries, Allocation, and Data Sources 7 

3.2.1 System boundaries 7 

3.2.2 Life time 8 

3.2.3 Allocation 8 

3.2.4 Ecoprofile 8 

3.3 Environmental Information – based on LCA 10 

3.3.1 Ecoprofile quality 12 

3.3.2 Resource use 14 

3.3.3 Pollutant emissions 14 

3.3.4 Waste and material subject to recycling 20 

3.3.5 Dominance analysis and conclusions 21 

3.3.6 Differences vs. earlier versions of EPD ® s 22 

4 Additional Environmental Information 24 

4.1 Land Use and Impact on Biodiversity 24 

4.1.1 The Biotope Method 24 

4.1.2 Background 25 

4.1.3 Results 26 

4.2 Land and Water Use 27 

4.2.1 Description of the land use in the river areas 27 

4.2.2 Land use of Core process, Upstream and Downstream processes – 

classification according to Corine 35 

4.2.3 Land use of Downstream process – distribution of electricity 36 

4.3 Environmental Risk Assessment 36 

4.3.1 Method 36 

4.3.2 System boundaries 37 

4.3.3 Summary of risks 37 

4.3.4 Natural phenomena 38 

4.3.5 Transportation, general 38 

4.3.6 Construction of plants and facilities 38 

4.3.7 Operation of power stations 39 

4.3.8 Large water flows and dam safety 39 

4.3.9 Results and comparison with emissions under normal conditions 40 

4.3.10 ERM (Enterprise Risk Management) 41 

4.4 EMF 41 

4.5 Noise 42 

5 Information frOM THE CertifiCATION BODY AND MANDATORY information 43 

5.1 Information from the Certification Body 43 

5.2 Mandatory Statements 43 

5.2.1 General 43 

5.2.2 Omissions of life cycle stages 43 

5.2.3 Means of obtaining explanatory materials 43 

5.2.4 Information on verification 43 

6 Links AND references 44 


1 INtroduction 

1.1 Declared Product 

This document constitutes the certified Environmental Product Declaration EPD ® of electricity 

generated in Vattenfall AB Generation Nordic´s (below called Vattenfall) hydropower 

stations in the Nordic countries. Electricity belongs to the product category UNCPC 

code 17, Group 171 – Electrical energy. 

The declared product is 1 kWh electricity generated and thereafter distributed 

to a customer connected to the 70/130 kV network. 

Some of the power stations are constructed for the provision of capacity as well as electricity 

enabling concurrence with the fluctuations in electricity consumption. Due to annual 

reservoirs, the delivery of electricity is relatively evenly distributed throughout the 

year, requiring no other forms of electricity generation. 

1.2 The Declaration and the EPD ® system 

Environmental Product Declaration is recognised as a vehicle for the industry for the 

communication of environmental impact of products and services. 

This Environmental Product Declaration is an EPD ® in accordance with the system administered 

by the International EPD Consortium (IEC, www.environdec.com). EPD ® is an 

international application of ISO 14025, Type III environmental declarations. The EPD ® system 

and its applications are described in General Programme Instructions. 

The hierarchic structure of the fundamental documents for the EPD ® system is: 

• Product Category Rules, PCR-CPC17 (Product Category Rules, PCR, for preparing an Environmental 

Product Declaration, EPD ® , for Electricity, Steam, and Hot and Cold Water Generation 

and Distribution) 

• General Programme Instructions for environmental product declaration EPD 

• ISO 14025 on Type III environmental declarations 

• ISO 14040 and 14044 on Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) 

This EPD ® contains an environmental performance declaration based on a life cycle assessment. 

Additional environmental information is presented in accordance with the PCR: 

• Information on land use: 

- an assessment of impact on biodiversity based on The Biotope Method, 

(Kyläkorpi et al, 2005) 

- a categorisation of land use according to Corine Land Cover Classes, 

land occupation, time periods, and exploitative activities 

- a description of visual impacts (see appendix Technology and Environment) 

- qualitative description of potential impacts on indigenous people and their 

traditional activities (see appendix Technology and Environment) 

• An Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) of the potential emissions that may result from 

abnormal incidents and that have an impact on the environment or are toxic to humans. 

• Electromagnetic fields, a description of measures to keep fields low and some information 

on limits and recommendations by different bodies. 

• Noise 

© Vattenfall AB Generation Nordic 2008 

1

1 INTRODUCTION 

1.3 Vattenfall, LCA, and EPD ® 

Vattenfall has employed LCA since 1993 and has accumulated competence and experience 

in this field. The additional development through the EPD ® enhances the ability to objectively 

inform about the complex environmental issues associated with generation of electricity 

and heat. 

There are multiple reasons to declare the environmental performance of electricity, most 

significantly: 

• Electricity is used in the manufacturing of virtually every product. Information regarding 

resource use in electricity generation is central to LCA of other products. This has 

generated an increased interest in the market for this type of information primarily 

because users need certified and modular life cycle data, as input to their own EPD ® 

or LCA. 

• EPD ® provides a basis for professional procurement, in the private as well as in the 

public sector, in permitting comparisons of different power sources, heat production 

technologies, and different producers. This creates an incentive for producers to reduce 

their use of resources and the impact on the environment caused by their systems. 

• EPD ® is an effective instrument in the continuing environmental efforts within Vattenfall, 

the objective being constant improvement. 

• The Directive 2003/54/EC requires member states to introduce systems for customer 

information regarding the origin of the electricity and, at a minimum, figures on CO 2 and 

radioactive waste. The information given in an EPD ® is verified and exceeds the requirements 

in the Directive. 

The environmental impact of hydropower differs considerably from that of other forms 

of electricity generation, as it often is direct and tangible. As an economic activity, hydropower 

generation can be described as a land use based activity, similar to agriculture or 

forestry. This differs considerably from e.g. generation using fossil fuels, where environmental 

impact is diffuse and thus more difficult to grasp. 

Questions concerning this EPD ® should be directed to Caroline Setterwall, Vattenfall AB 

Generation Nordic, SE-162 87 Stockholm, Sweden, 

telephone +46 8 739 5000, (caroline.setterwall@vattenfall.com). 

For additional information about Vattenfall, please visit our web site at www.vattenfall.com. 


2

2 PRODUCER AND PRODUCT 

2.1 Vattenfall AB Nordic 

Vattenfall AB Nordic is part of Vattenfall AB, which is the fifth largest electricity producer and 

the largest heat producer in Europe. Group sales amount to 144 billion SEK (2007, ~15 billion 

EUR). Vattenfall’s vision is to be a leading European energy company. 

The business group Vattenfall AB Nordic comprises the following: 

• Generation Nordic generates about 90 TWh electricity and 6 TWh district heat in majority-owned 

plants. The main generation units are seven nuclear reactors and more 

than 100 hydropower stations as well as five fossil-fuelled base-load plants and more 

than 500 wind turbines. Moreover there are fossil-fuelled reserve power plants. Generated 

electricity is sold to NordPool (www.nordpool.com). 

• Distribution Nordic distributes electricity to 1,3 million customers in Sweden and Finland. 

• Sales Nordic sells electricity and energy related services. 

• Heat Nordic owns and operates heat-producing plants in the Nordic and Baltic countries, 

and sells district heat. 

• Services provides consulting and contract work within the energy, infrastructure and industry 

sectors. 

2.2 Vattenfall AB Vattenkraft 

Vattenfall AB Vattenkraft is accountable for Vattenfall AB Generation Nordic’s generation 

of hydro power including generating plants, annual reservoirs, and short-term reservoirs. 

Vattenfall AB Vattenkraft is part of Vattenfall AB, SE-162 87 Stockholm, Sweden. The technical 

and environmental aspects of hydropower are presented in appendix “Technology and 

Environment”. 

Questions regarding Vattenfall AB Vattenkraft should be directed to Richard Holmgren, 

SE-971 77 Luleå, Sweden, telephone +46 (0)920-77175, (richard.holmgren@vattenfall.com). 

Vattenfall AB Vattenkraft implements an environmental management system in accordance 

with ISO 14001 since 1999. Since 2000, Vattenfall AB Vattenkraft implements a certified 

quality, work environment and environmental management system designated KAM. This 

system is based on the standards ISO 9001:2000, AFS 2001:1, and ISO 14001:2004. 

Questions regarding Vattenfall AB Vattenkraft and KAM should be directed to Sören Ek, 

Vattenfall AB Vattenkraft, Björkvägen 19, SE-960 30 Vuollerim, Sweden, 

telephone +46 (0)976 77918 (soren.ek@vattenfall.com). 

2.3 Selected Power Plants 

Sites selected for this EPD ® are majority- (or wholly) owned by Vattenfall AB, and are representative 

of Vattenfall’s Nordic hydropower stations with respect to geographic setting, 

physical geography, type of station, and size. The large-scale hydroelectric sites are arranged 

into so called river regions. Small-scale hydropower is assessed separately. 

“Vattendragsutredningen 1996 (SOU 1996:155)” divided Sweden into 13 so-called hydrogeographical 

regions, five of which are in Northern Sweden and eight in Southern Sweden 

(south of river Dalälven). Region definitions are based on physical geography, climate, geology, 

topography, flora and fauna. Northern Sweden exhibits a rather homogenous north 

to south gradient making logical subdivision difficult. SOU 1996:155 attempted to arrive at 

subdivisions of equal size. This has been adhered to, but for practical reasons some subdivisions 

are combined, resulting in fewer regions, but nevertheless similar in size. 

River regions in Sweden Regions according to SOU 1996:155 

Norra Norrland 1, 2 

Mellannorrland 3, 4 

Södra Norrland 5 

Västsverige 8 


3


Vattenfall has no large-scale hydropower in the remaining regions described in SOU 1996:155. 

It is reasonable to aggregate regions 1 and 2 because of considerable similarity of geology 

and topography. The flora also exhibits similarities, and both regions have several northerly 

species that are absent further south. 

Regions 3 and 4 exhibit corresponding similarities. Region 5 must be treated separately 

because it constitutes the so-called “limes norrlandicus”. This region is unique because 

it harbors several northerly and southerly species, and it consists entirely of the river 

Dalälven. 

Small-scale hydropower in Sweden represents less than 1 % of Vattenfall’s hydropower 

and is located in several watercourses, mainly south of river Dalälven. The division between 

large-scale and small-scale hydropower is organizational and the capacity of the 

small-scale plants vary between 0,2–5,4 MW. One station is considered. 

Vattenfall’s hydropower in Finland is located in the Finnish Lake District in the central and 

eastern part of the country. Most of the electricity is generated in the eastern part. The 

capacity of the 10 Finnish plants varies between 2–84 MW, and they are all considered 

large-scale according to the Finnish definition (small-scale


Seitevare 

Harsprånget 

Stalon 

Juktan 

Umluspen 

Porsi 

Boden 

Stornorrfors 

FINLAND 

Pamilo 

Bergeforsen 

SWEDEN 

Älvkarleby 

Upperud 

Olidan 

Hojum 

The map shows selected hydropower power stations in Sweden and Finland. 


5


2.4 Electricity Transmission and Distribution 

The power network comprises transmission and distribution systems consisting of numerous 

lines, cables, transformers, and switchgears. The national grid voltage is transformed 

to lower voltages for distribution over distribution networks and local networks to consumers. 

Large customers, e.g. many industries, are frequently connected to the high or medium 

voltage distribution network (10–130 kV), while small users such as single households 

are connected at 0,4 kV to low voltage local networks. 

Transmission and distribution losses depend on several factors, such as distance, load, 

feed voltage, and user connection voltage. In the diagram below the average distribution 

losses are shown. To an industrial customer connected to 70/130 kV the average distribution 

loss is 3 % if the power station feeds the national grid. The loss to a household 

customer in the countryside amounts to app. 9 %. 

National grid 220/400 kV 

Regional grid 70/130 kV 

Local network, urban 70/130 kV 

Local network, rural 10-40 kV 

Local network, urban 10-50 kV 

Local network, rural 0,4 kV 

Local network, urban 0,4 kV 

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 

% of electricity generated 

Average distribution losses at different voltages in Sweden accumulated from the national grid. 

Source: Vattenfall AB 


6

3 Environmental performance 

BASED on LCA 

3.1 Background 

This EPD ® is based on a LCA on Vattenfall’s hydropower in the Nordic countries during the 

reference year 2007. The declared unit is 1 kWh net electricity generated and thereafter distributed 

to a customer connected to the 70/130 kV network. Resource consumption, emissions, 

and waste amounts in conjunction with construction, operation and reinvestments of 

power stations and dams have been inventoried. Decommissioning is excluded because of 

the improbability of that scenario. The reinvestment rate has been set at a level that provides 

for complete replacement of the power station during its lifetime, i.e. a fully functioning 

power station will exit the system at the end of the assumed lifetime. This results in greater 

environmental impact in the LCI than the alternative of including decommissioning. The level 

of uncertainty in the description of the impact on biotopes is reduced, because we avoid 

speculative assessments of how possible/desirable a return to unregulated flows would be, 

and of the process of re-colonization from unaffected biotopes to affected ones. 

3.2 System Boundaries, Allocation and Data Sources 

3.2.1 System boundaries 

The figure below is a simplified process tree with system boundaries for the LCA for electricity 

generated in Vattenfall’s Nordic hydropower stations and distributed to the consumer. 

Production of 

construction 

materials 

Production of 

raw materials 

trp 

trp 

trp 

Construction 

of suppliers 

factories 

Construction 

and 

reinvestment in 

dams etc. 

Manufacturing 

of turbine and 

generator 

Manufacturing 

of other 

components 

Construction of 

power networks 


Production of operation 

chemicals, oils and other 

auxiliaries for operation 

of hydropower plants 

CORE process 

Power plant 


Losses in transmission/ 

distribution systems and 

maintenance 

1 kWh el 

Decommissioning 

of 

suppliers 

factories 

Scrapped 

reinvested 

material 

Operational 

waste 

Decommissioning 

of power 

networks 

trp trp trp trp trp trp 

Waste to 

landfill 

Waste to 

recycling 

Waste to 

incineration 

Legend 

Core process 

Core process – infrastructure 


Upstream process – infrastructure 


Downstream process – infrastructure 

Not included in the analysis 

Simplified process tree with system boundaries for life cycle inventory of Vattenfall´s 

hydropower. Trp means transportation. 


7

3 Environmental performance based on lca 

The lifecycle is divided in following modules: 

The Core process comprises operation of the hydropower stations and handling/treatment 

of operational waste. 

The Core process - infrastructure includes construction and reinvestment of power stations 

and dams (100 % of material and components are replaced during the lifetime), 

decommissioning is excluded. 

Upstream process – production of operational chemicals includes the production of operational 

chemicals, oil fuel for reserve power, and fuel for vehicles. 

Upstream process - infrastructure comprises construction and decommissioning of factories 

for production of operational chemicals and fuels. Environmental data used come 

from the database ecoinvent, where data for construction is aggregated with data on the 

production processes. Hence environmental impact for upstream infrastructure is not 

reported separately. 

Downstream process – distribution of electricity comprise operation of electricity networks, 

inspection trips, and the extra electricity generation, which is necessary to compensate 

for distribution losses. 

Downstream process - infrastructure comprises construction and decommissioning of 

electricity networks. 

Excluded from the lifecycle: 

• Impacts due to potential accidents, breakdowns, and leakages (included in Additional 

Environmental Information, chapter 4.3 Environmental Risk Assessment). 

• Further treatment of scrapped material that has been transported to recycling plant. 

• Impacts of land use apart from emissions from inundated land (included in Additional 

Environmental Information, chapter 4.1 Land Use and Impacts on Biodiversity). 

3.2.2 Lifetime 

Based on the assumption that power stations and dams are replaced once during their 

lifetime the following technical lifetime have been used: 60 years for machinery and 100 

years for dams, power houses and waterways. 

3.2.3 Allocation 

The main function of studied systems is the generation of electricity, but they also serve as 

components in the control of the Swedish generation system. In addition, water levels are 

controlled e.g. in order to prevent floods. The river systems are also used for fishing and 

recreational purposes. Despite the additional uses all environmental impact is allocated to 

electricity generation. 

3.2.4 Ecoprofile 

The Ecoprofile is composed of LCA results for generation and distribution. 

The results for generation (Core process, including infrastructure and upstream processes) 

of Vattenfall’s electricity from Nordic hydropower have been compiled as follows: 

• Environmental impact is calculated for each individual station, and divided by its total generation 

• Environmental impact from individual stations is weighted according to Vattenfall’s share of 

electricity generated in the river. 

• Environmental impacts from rivers are aggregated into river regions, and weighted according 

to electricity generated. 

• River regions and small-scale power are aggregated and weighted according to electricity 

generated. 


8

3 Environmental performance BASEd on LCA 

The results for distribution (Downstream process) of generated electricity have been 

compiled as follows: 

• Environmental impact from operation of electricity networks has been inventoried 

and divided by the total amount of electricity distributed in that specific network. 

• The length (km) of different distribution networks has been inventoried and multiplied 

by the environmental impact for construction per km and divided by the total 

amount of electricity distributed in the specific network 

• Environmental impact from distribution losses of 3 % has been calculated through 

multiplication of total environmental impact of generation above with 0,03. 

Vattenfall´s Hydropower in the Nordic Countries 

31,3 TWh 

48,0 % 

Norra Norrland 

2,5 % 

Södra Norrland 

5,1 % 

Västsverige 

1,2 % 

Östra Finland 

0,8 % 

Small-scale hydro 

42,4 % 

Mellannorrland 

Repr. by 

4 sites 

Lule älv 

Repr. by 

1 site 

Dalälven 

Repr. by 

2 sites 

Göta älv 

Repr. by 

1 site 

Vuoksi 

Repr. by 

1 site 

Upperudsälven 

Repr. by 

5 sites 

Ume älv 

Seitevare 

Älvkarleby 

Olidan 

Pamilo 

Upperud 

Juktan 

Porsi 

Hojum 

Umluspen 

Harsprånget 

Stornorrfors 

Ångermanälven 

Boden 

Stalon 

Indalsälven 

Bergeforsen 

The diagram shows the method of weighting environmental impact from selected sites 

to one Ecoprofile for electricity from Vattenfall’s hydropower in the Nordic countries 

(also table in chapter 2.3). 


9


3.3 Environmental information – based on LCA 

The assessment results are summarised in the Ecoprofile below and commented in the 

chapters 3.3.1–3.3.8. 

• For Upstream process, Core process, Core process- infrastructure, and 

Total generated the numbers are expressed per 1 kWh generated electricity. 

• For Downstream process, Downstream process - infrastructure, and Total distributed 

the numbers are expressed per 1 kWh electricity delivered to a customer connected 

to the 70/130 kV nework (distribution loss, 3 % of generated electricity). 

Distribution losses vary depending on what voltage level the customer is connected to. 

These are described in chapter 2.4 Electricity Transmission and Distribution. 

ECOPROFIle 

Input 

Resource use 

Non-renewable material resources 

Aluminium in ore 

Basalt 

Bentonite 

Chromium in ore 

Copper in ore 

Dolomite 

Feldspar 

Fluorspar 

Gravel, stone and sand 

Gypsum 

Iron in ore 

Lead in ore 

Limestone 

Magnesium in ore 

Manganese in ore 

Molybdenum in ore 

Nickel in ore 

Olivine 

Salt 

Soil, moraine 

Sulphur 

Tin in ore 

Titanium dioxide 

Zinc in ore 

Zirconium in sand 

Unit/ 

kWh 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

Upstream 

process 


Core 

process 

10 

Coreprocess 


Total 

generated 

Downstream 

process 1 

Downstream 

process 


Total 

distributed 

6,8 . 10 -7 

2,3 . 10 -7 

2,1 . 10 -6 

4,0 . 10 -7 

6,1 . 10 -7 

1,3 . 10 -7 

2,3 . 10 -13 

1,0 . 10 -6 

2,9 . 10 -9 

3,8 . 10 -10 

5,5 . 10 -5 

1,7 . 10 -8 

4,9 . 10 -8 

7,3 . 10 -7 

7,0 . 10 -8 

8,3 . 10 -8 

1,5 . 10 -6 

2,8 . 10 -11 

3,6 . 10 -6 

1,6 . 10 -9 

1,6 . 10 -9 

2,5 . 10 -7 

2,5 . 10 -7 

4,9 . 10 -11 6,7 . 10 -8 

1,6 . 10 -8 

1,8 . 10 -7 

6,2 . 10 -8 

4,6 . 10 -8 

2,0 . 10 -8 

2,0 . 10 -14 

3,9 . 10 -8 

2,9 . 10 -10 

4,5 . 10 -11 

8,6 . 10 -6 

3,9 . 10 -9 

5,5 . 10 -8 

1,3 . 10 -7 

6,7 . 10 -9 

7,6 . 10 -9 

2,1 . 10 -7 

2,1 . 10 -12 

3,1 . 10 -5 

1,7 . 10 -10 

1,3 . 10 -10 

1,5 . 10 -7 

1,8 . 10 -8 

3,3 . 10 -12 1,2 . 10 -3 

1,2 . 10 -4 

7,2 . 10 -5 

2,5 . 10 -3 

4,2 . 10 -3 

5,8 . 10 -3 

1,8 . 10 -10 

2,3 . 10 -5 

36 

4,6 . 10 -8 

4,9 . 10 -1 

5,3 . 10 -4 

4,0 . 10 -4 

1,9 . 10 -4 

3,7 . 10 -4 

4,5 . 10 -4 

1,7 . 10 -3 

6,3 . 10 -9 

2,1 . 10 -3 

21 

1,4 . 10 -5 

2,7 . 10 -7 

1,2 . 10 -5 

9,2 . 10 -4 

1,7 . 10 -9 1,2 . 10 -3 

1,2 . 10 -4 

7,4 . 10 -5 

2,5 . 10 -3 

4,2 . 10 -3 

5,8 . 10 -3 

1,8 . 10 -10 

2,4 . 10 -5 

36 

4,6 . 10 -8 

4,9 . 10 -1 

5,3 . 10 -4 

4,0 . 10 -4 

1,9 . 10 -4 

3,7 . 10 -4 

4,5 . 10 -4 

1,7 . 10 -3 

6,3 . 10 -9 

2,1 . 10 -3 

21 

1,4 . 10 -5 

2,7 . 10 -7 

1,3 . 10 -5 

9,2 . 10 -4 

1,7 . 10 -9 3,8 . 10 -5 

4,1 . 10 -6 

9,2 . 10 -6 

7,6 . 10 -5 

1,3 . 10 -4 

1,7 . 10 -4 

5,6 . 10 -12 

2,2 . 10 -6 

1,1 

3,1 . 10 -9 

1,5 . 10 -2 

1,6 . 10 -5 

1,2 . 10 -5 

7,6 . 10 -6 

1,1 . 10 -5 

1,4 . 10 -5 

5,3 . 10 -5 

3,9 . 10 -10 

7,6 . 10 -5 

6,2 . 10 -1 

4,2 . 10 -7 

9,0 . 10 -9 

1,3 . 10 -6 

2,8 . 10 -5 

7,4 . 10 -11 1,8 . 10 -2 

7,7 . 10 -5 

7,8 . 10 -3 

1,6 . 10 -4 

6,8 . 10 -3 

1,5 . 10 -3 

1,1 . 10 -9 

1,0 . 10 -4 

5,7 . 10 -7 

3,3 . 10 -7 

6,4 . 10 -1 

3,0 . 10 -4 

2,9 . 10 -4 

1,9 . 10 -4 

2,0 . 10 -5 

1,2 . 10 -4 

6,0 . 10 -3 

2,4 . 10 -9 

4,2 . 10 -3 

5,1 . 10 -7 

4,5 . 10 -7 

3,1 . 10 -5 

2,1 . 10 -4 

1,1 . 10 -9 1,9 . 10 -2 

2,0 . 10 -4 

7,9 . 10 -3 

2,8 . 10 -3 

1,1 . 10 -2 

7,4 . 10 -3 

1,3 . 10 -9 

1,3 . 10 -4 

37 

3,8 . 10 -7 

1,1 

8,5 . 10 -4 

7,0 . 10 -4 

3,9 . 10 -4 

4,0 . 10 -4 

5,9 . 10 -4 

7,7 . 10 -3 

9,2 . 10 -9 

6,4 . 10 -3 

21 

1,5 . 10 -5 

7,2 . 10 -7 

4,5 . 10 -5 

1,2 . 10 -3 

2,9 . 10 -9 

Renewable material resources 

Wood g 1,5 . 10 -1 1,5 . 10 -1 4,5 . 10 -3 1,5 . 10 -1 

Non-renewable energy resources 

Crude oil (resource) 

Hard coal (resource) 

Lignite (resource) 

Natural gas (resource) 

Peat (resource) 

Uranium (resource) 

Renewable energy resources 

Biomass 

Potential energy through 

hydropower plant 2 

Electricity use in the power 

station 

Water use 

Ground water 

Sea water 

Water, specified natural origin 

Water, unspecified origin 

Use of recycled material 

Aluminium 

Copper 

Steel 

Input of material from the technosphere 

(agglomeration of app. 

30 substances) 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

kWh 

kWh 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

4,9 . 10 -3 

1,6 . 10 -4 

2,1 . 10 -4 

2,8 . 10 -4 

9,1 . 10 -9 

8,7 . 10 -9 2,4 . 10 -4 

2,1 . 10 -5 

2,2 . 10 -5 

2,6 . 10 -5 

1,9 . 10 -9 

9,9 . 10 -10 7,2 . 10 -2 

2,3 . 10 -1 

3,5 . 10 -2 

3,5 . 10 -2 

6,5 . 10 -4 

1,1 . 10 -5 7,7 . 10 -2 

2,3 . 10 -1 

3,6 . 10 -2 

3,5 . 10 -2 

6,5 . 10 -4 

1,1 . 10 -5 2,0 . 10 -2 

7,4 . 10 -3 

1,7 . 10 -3 

1,9 . 10 -3 

1,9 . 10 -5 

3,5 . 10 -7 5,4 . 10 -2 

5,3 . 10 -1 

5,5 . 10 -2 

2,9 . 10 -2 

2,2 . 10 -6 

2,5 . 10 -6 1,5 . 10 -1 

7,7 . 10 -1 

9,2 . 10 -2 

6,6 . 10 -2 

6,7 . 10 -4 

1,4 . 10 -5 

2,3 . 10 -3 2,3 . 10 -3 6,8 . 10 -5 2,6 . 10 -8 2,3 . 10 -3 

1,1 . 10 -10 1,2 . 10 -11 

3,2 . 10 -3 3,2 . 10 -3 9,6 . 10 -5 3,3 . 10 -3 

1,1 

1,2 

1,2 . 10 -3 

2,1 . 10 -3 

7,4 . 10 -6 

5,3 . 10 -2 1,3 . 10 -4 

1,5 . 10 -4 

6,5 . 10 -6 

7,0 . 10 -3 8,3 . 10 -1 

1,8 . 10 -1 

2,3 . 10 -3 

12 

8,4 . 10 -1 

1,8 . 10 -1 

2,3 . 10 -3 

12 

2,9 . 10 -2 

1,3 . 9,3 . 10 -1 

10 -2 

9,2 . 1,9 . 10 -1 

10 -5 

5,4 . 2,1 . 10 -3 

10 -1 15 

1,8 

3,8 . 10 -1 

4,5 . 10 -3 

28 

2,0 . 10 -5 2,0 . 10 -5 6,0 . 10 -7 

2,1 . 10 -5 

6,1 . 10 -2 6,1 . 10 -2 1,8 . 10 -3 6,3 . 10 -2 

5,7 . 10 -3 5,7 . 10 -3 1,7 . 10 -4 

5,9 . 10 -3 

2,5 . 10 -5 1,3 . 10 -6 3,9 . 10 -4 4,2 . 10 -4 1,0 . 10 -4 3,0 . 10 -4 8,2 . 10 -4 

1 

Includes the extra generation in Vattenfall´s hydropower stations, which compensates for distribution losses 

in the networks. 

2 

This electricity is assumed to be generated in the hydropower stations and the environmental impact is 

included since the amount was substracted from the reference flow.


ECOPROFIlE 

Output 

Pollutant emissions 

Greenhouse gases 

Ozone-depleting potential 

Unit/kWh 

g CO 2 eq.- 

(100 y) 

g CFC-11 

eq. (20 y) 

Upstream 

process 

Core 

process 

Total 

generated 

Core 

process 


Downstream 

process 1 

Downstream 

process 


Total 

distributed 

2,9 . 10 -3 2,0 . 10 -2 4,5 4,5 2,7 . 10 -1 1,2 6,0 

1,5 . 10 -9 4,2 . 10 -10 3,1 . 10 -8 3,3 . 10 -8 7,6 . 10 -9 3,8 . 10 -8 7,8 . 10 -8 

Acidifying potential g SO 2 eq. 2,6 . 10 -5 1,8 . 10 -5 4,5 . 10 -3 4,6 . 10 -3 2,8 . 10 -4 4,9 . 10 -3 9,8 . 10 -3 

Photochem. ozone creation 

potential 

g ethene 

eq. 

Eutrophication potential g PO 

3- 4 

eq. 

Emissions contributiong to given 

emission categories 

Ammonia to air 

Butane 

Carbon dioxide 2 

Carbon monoxide 

Carbon tetra chloride 

COD 

Ethene 

Halon 1211 

Halon 1301 

HCFC-22 

Hexane 

Hydrocarbons unspecified 

Hydrogen chloride 

Hydrogen fluoride 

Hydrogen sulphide 

Methane 

Nitrogen oxides 

Nitrous oxide 

NMVOC (unspecified) 

Pentane 

Phosphor 

Sulphur dioxide 

Sulphur hexafluoride 

Sulphuric acid 

VOC (unspecified) 

Xylene 

Emissions of toxic and other substances 

to air, water and ground 

Ammonia 

Arsenic 

Carbon dioxide (biotic) 3 

Dioxine to air 

Lead 

Oil to ground 

Oil to water 

Particles to air 

Polyaromatic hydrocarbons 

C-14 to air 

Kr-85 to air 

Rn-222 to air 

Deposition of phosphor in 

river sediment 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

g 

kBq 

kBq 

kBq 

g 

1,7 . 10 -5 6,3 . 10 -6 8,1 . 10 -4 8,4 . 10 -4 8,6 . 10 -5 1,1 . 10 -3 2,0 . 10 -3 

2,3 . 10 -6 8,0 . 10 -6 4,9 . 10 -2 4,9 . 10 -2 1,5 . 10 -3 8,5 . 10 -4 5,1 . 10 -2 

4,9 . 10 -8 

2,9 . 10 -7 

2,6 . 10 -3 

3,8 . 10 -6 

3,2 . 10 -12 

6,8 . 10 -5 

1,2 . 10 -7 

7,1 . 10 -12 

1,7 . 10 -10 

2,8 . 10 -11 

1,5 . 10 -7 

3,9 . 10 -7 

5,9 . 10 -8 

1,0 . 10 -8 

5,7 . 10 -9 

9,1 . 10 -6 

8,6 . 10 -6 

4,7 . 10 -8 

1,4 . 10 -5 

3,6 . 10 -7 

9,2 . 10 -9 

2,1 . 10 -5 

1,6 . 10 -9 

1,2 . 10 -12 

1,0 . 10 -7 6,4 . 10 -8 

1,5 . 10 -8 

1,3 . 10 -2 

7,7 . 10 -5 

1,8 . 10 -12 

1,1 . 10 -4 

8,4 . 10 -9 

1,1 . 10 -12 

8,5 . 10 -12 

4,2 . 10 -12 

7,0 . 10 -9 

7,4 . 10 -6 

6,2 . 10 -9 

1,2 . 10 -9 

1,7 . 10 -7 

6,9 . 10 -7 

3,3 . 10 -5 

7,9 . 10 -8 

6,8 . 10 -7 

1,8 . 10 -8 

5,6 . 10 -9 

1,2 . 10 -6 

3,1 . 10 -7 

8,1 . 10 -14 

1,8 . 10 -9 3,8 . 10 -5 

4,0 . 10 -6 

4,5 

8,8 . 10 -3 

1,7 . 10 -10 

2,3 

5,6 . 10 -6 

1,2 . 10 -9 

1,8 . 10 -9 

5,2 . 10 -9 

1,8 . 10 -6 

1,9 . 10 -4 

2,4 . 10 -5 

2,1 . 10 -6 

2,2 . 10 -5 

6,8 . 10 -4 

4,3 . 10 -3 

7,6 . 10 -5 

2,3 . 10 -4 

6,1 . 10 -6 

8,6 . 10 -7 

2,7 . 10 -3 

4,0 . 10 -8 

5,1 . 10 -5 

1,7 . 10 -5 

9,4 . 10 -7 3,8 . 10 -5 

4,3 . 10 -6 

4,5 

8,8 . 10 -3 

1,8 . 10 -10 

2,3 

5,7 . 10 -6 

1,2 . 10 -9 

2,0 . 10 -9 

5,2 . 10 -9 

1,9 . 10 -6 

2,0 . 10 -4 

2,4 . 10 -5 

2,1 . 10 -6 

2,2 . 10 -5 

6,9 . 10 -4 

4,4 . 10 -3 

7,6 . 10 -5 

2,4 . 10 -4 

6,5 . 10 -6 

8,8 . 10 -7 

2,7 . 10 -3 

3,5 . 10 -7 

5,1 . 10 -5 

1,7 . 10 -5 

1,0 . 10 -6 4,8 . 10 -6 

1,2 . 10 -6 

1,9 . 10 -1 

7,7 . 10 -4 

1,8 . 10 -11 

3,4 . 10 -4 

5,7 . 10 -7 

5,0 . 10 -11 

6,7 . 10 -10 

2,1 . 10 -10 

6,4 . 10 -7 

5,3 . 10 -5 

9,1 . 10 -7 

9,1 . 10 -8 

6,7 . 10 -7 

5,3 . 10 -5 

2,5 . 10 -4 

2,4 . 10 -6 

2,7 . 10 -5 

1,5 . 10 -6 

6,0 . 10 -8 

1,6 . 10 -4 

3,5 . 10 -6 

1,5 . 10 -6 

5,1 . 10 -7 

7,1 . 10 -7 8,8 . 10 -5 

4,1 . 10 -6 

1,1 

1,7 . 10 -2 

1,7 . 10 -9 

2,4 . 10 -3 

1,0 . 10 -5 

1,4 . 10 -9 

2,1 . 10 -9 

5,5 . 10 -9 

2,0 . 10 -6 

7,7 . 10 -5 

4,7 . 10 -5 

1,7 . 10 -5 

1,7 . 10 -5 

3,2 . 10 -3 

2,5 . 10 -3 

1,3 . 10 -5 

2,8 . 10 -4 

5,5 . 10 -6 

7,5 . 10 -7 

3,4 . 10 -3 

3,4 . 10 -7 

2,8 . 10 -11 

1,8 . 10 -6 1,3 . 10 -4 

9,6 . 10 -6 

5,7 

2,7 . 10 -2 

1,9 . 10 -9 

2,3 

1,7 . 10 -5 

2,6 . 10 -9 

4,8 . 10 -9 

1,1 . 10 -8 

4,6 . 10 -6 

3,2 . 10 -4 

7,2 . 10 -5 

1,9 . 10 -5 

3,9 . 10 -5 

4,0 . 10 -3 

7,1 . 10 -3 

9,2 . 10 -5 

5,5 . 10 -4 

1,4 . 10 -5 

1,7 . 10 -6 

6,3 . 10 -3 

4,2 . 10 -6 

5,2 . 10 -5 

1,7 . 10 -5 

3,6 . 10 -6 

7,5 . 10 -8 

1,3 . 10 -9 

5,1 . 10 -8 

3,7 . 10 -9 

2,2 . 10 -5 

2,1 . 10 -5 

2,1 . 10 -6 

2,6 . 10 -10 

1,5 . 10 -8 

6,2 . 10 -9 

2,8 . 10 -4 6,7 . 10 -8 

5,5 . 10 -9 

7,8 . 10 -7 

1,3 . 10 -6 

2,2 . 10 -5 

4,1 . 10 -5 

2,8 . 10 -6 

3,0 . 10 -11 

1,8 . 10 -9 

6,7 . 10 -10 

3,2 . 10 -5 5,6 . 10 -5 

2,7 . 10 -7 

1,2 . 10 -4 

7,3 . 10 -12 

6,4 . 10 -6 

2,3 . 10 -4 

2,2 . 10 -4 

1,0 . 10 -3 

9,2 . 10 -8 

3,1 . 10 -6 

1,7 . 10 -7 

5,9 . 10 -2 

1,4 . 10 -3 5,6 . 10 -5 

2,8 . 10 -7 

1,2 . 10 -4 

7,3 . 10 -12 

7,7 . 10 -6 

2,7 . 10 -4 

2,8 . 10 -4 

1,1 . 10 -3 

9,2 . 10 -8 

3,1 . 10 -6 

1,7 . 10 -7 

5,9 . 10 -2 

1,4 . 10 -3 1,9 . 10 -6 

6,1 . 10 -7 

3,8 . 10 -6 

2,2 . 10 -13 

2,6 . 10 -6 

9,0 . 10 -5 

8,6 . 10 -5 

4,4 . 10 -5 

3,5 . 10 -9 

1,3 . 10 -7 

2,2 . 10 -8 

2,5 . 10 -3 

4,2 . 10 -5 9,3 . 10 -5 

2,9 . 10 -6 

1,4 . 10 -3 

7,7 . 10 -6 

1,9 . 10 -4 

1,9 . 10 -4 

6,4 . 10 -3 

1,6 . 10 -6 

4,5 . 10 -6 

1,2 . 10 -6 

1,5 . 10 -4 

3,8 . 10 -6 

1,5 . 10 -3 

7,5 . 10 -12 

1,8 . 10 -5 

5,5 . 10 -4 

5,5 . 10 -4 

7,5 . 10 -3 

1,7 . 10 -6 

7,7 . 10 -6 

8,2 . 10 -2 

1,4 . 10 -6 

1,4 . 10 -1 

1,4 . 10 -3 

1 



2 Emissions due to inundation of land are included under Core process - infrastructure. 

3 Carbon dioxide emissions from combustion of biomass. 

NOTE! The summed up values in the Ecoprofile do not always comply fully with the sum of the individual 

values due to rounding. 


11


ECOPROFIlE 

Output 

Other information 

Hazardous waste, non fuel 

related 

1 



Unit/ 

kWh 

Upstream 

process 

Core 

process 

Total 

generated 

Core 

process 


Downstream 

process 1 

Downstream 

process 


All wastes have been followed to the grave, i.e. resource use and emissions emnating from 

waste treatment through incineration or deposition are included in the Ecoprofile; no crediting 

has been performed. Selected generic data do not include information on waste 

amounts since these have been followed to the grave, except for the necessary amount of 

storage volumes for radioactive wastes in final repositories. 

3.3.1 Ecoprofile quality 

In the Ecoprofile the result is given with two value digits. It should be noted that data 

quality does not always motivate two significant digits. 

3.3.1.1 Emission categories, the 1 % rule 

General Programme Instructions require that


The conclusion is that the flows excluded from Core process and Upstream process contribute 

less than 1 % to reported emission categories. 


Downstream process comprises construction, operation and dismantling of the power 

networks as well as the distribution losses in terms of the extra generation necessary as 

compensation. 

No data gaps have been reported in the documentation of the selected generic data used 

for construction and dismantling of the networks. 

Operational data represent the conditions in the Vattenfall power network in the late nineties 

and comprise fuels and emissions from clearing of power lanes, and from transportation 

during maintenance and inspections, consumption of oils, and specific emissions from 

pylons. There are more underground cables and less overhead power lines today and the 

latter require more maintenance for example in connection with clearing of power lanes and 

repair related to storms. Hence used data for operation of the networks are conservative. 

For included processes (excluding gravel, sand, soil, water, and energy resources) all resource 

flows from nature aggregate to app. 1,0 g/kWh electricity. The sum of all identified 

flows not tracked from the cradle is 95 % 

Ozone-depleting gases >95 % 

Acidifying substances >95 % 

Substances contributing to ground-level ozone >95 % 

Eutrophying substances >95 % 


13


CO 2 g/kWh 

5,0 

4,5 

4,0 

3,5 

3,0 

2,5 

2,0 

1,5 

1,0 

0,5 

0 


Core process 

CO 2 emissions, total of 5,7 g/kWh 

(Core process 0,013 g/kWh) 

Core process – 

infrastructure 


Downstream process – 


Downstream – 

distribution losses 

The green portion of the core process infrastructure illustrates the emissions due to 

inundation of land. The blue portion illustrates the CO 2 emissions of fossil origin. 

NO X emissions, total of 0,0071 g/kWh 


0,0045 

0,0040 

0,0035 

0,0030 

g NO X /kWh 

0,0025 

0,0020 

0,0015 

0,0010 

0,0005 

0 


Core process 









15


0,0040 

0,0035 

0,0030 

SO 2 emissions, total of 0,0063 g/kWh 


SO 2 g/kWh 

0,0025 

0,0020 

0,0015 

0,0010 

0,0005 

0 


Core process 








3.3.3.2 Emissions of greenhouse gases 

4,5 

4,0 

3,5 

Emissions of greenhouse gases, total of 6,0 g CO 2 -eq./kWh 

(Core process 0,020 g CO 2 -eq./kWh) 

g CO 2 -eq./kWh 

3,0 

2,5 

2,0 

1,5 

1,0 

0,5 

0,0 


Core process 








The green portion of the core process infrastructure illustrates the emissions due to inundation 

of land. Emissions of greenhouse gases with system boundaries corresponding 

to the Greenhouse Gas Protocol Scope 1, i.e. the part of the lifecycle where Vattenfall 

has management control is 0,018 g CO 2 /kWh. 

Carbon dioxide is the dominating greenhouse gas, contributing 96 %. 

Core process: About 0,39 % of the total emissions, emanating mainly from inspection 

trips during operation and incineration of operational waste. 

Core process – infrastructure: Emissions of CO 2 from inundated land contributes 52 %. 

Damming causes inundated land to release organic matter, which is decomposed to CO 2 

when subjected to oxygen in the water. Because the reservoirs are deep and the climate 

cool, no methane is formed. The new biomass generated in the water consumes CO 2 . 

The net effect, i.e. emissions due to decomposing of organic matter minus the binding in 


16


biomass is calculated and reported for the lifetime of 100 years (for reservoirs), and distributed 

over electricity generation in the same amount of time. 

Concrete production, groundwork and transportation in conjunction with construction 

and reinvestments in dams, waterways and powerhouses cause app. 17 % of the greenhouse 

gas emissions and construction and reinvestment of machinery about 8 %. 

Downstream process contribute less than 1 %, caused by inspection trips. 

Downstream process – infrastructure contribute app. 20 % of total greenhouse gas 

emissions. 

Downstream – distribution losses contribute 3 %. 

3.3.3.3 Emissions of ozone-depleting substances 

The use of ozone depleting coolants has been phased out from all Vattenfall’s hydropower 

stations and the emissions from the Core process are related to the incineration of operational 

waste. 

The main lifecycle emissions (46 %) emanate during construction of power networks, 

downstream process – infrastructure. Manufacturing of advanced components such as 

generators and turbines contribute app. 8 %. Remaining emissions occur during electricity 

generation, production of mould wood, oils and explosives and during incineration of 

mould wood and waste oil. 

These emissions are probably overestimated, because the applied selected generic data 

on electricity generation and production of materials and fuels are a couple of years 

old and ozone-depleting substances have been and are being phased out throughout the 

western world. 

4,0 . 10 -8 

Emissions av ozone-depleting gases, 

total of 7,8.10 -8 g CFC-11-eq./kWh 

(Core process 4,2.10 -10 g CFC-11-eq./kWh) 

3,5 . 10 -8 

g CFC-11-eq./kWh 

3,0 . 10 -8 

2,5 . 10 -8 

2,0 . 10 -8 

1,5 . 10 -8 

1,0 . 10 -8 

0,5 . 10 -8 0 


Core process 








3.3.3.4 Emissions of acidifying substances 

Emissions of NO X and SO 2 are the main contributors to acidification, accounting for app. 

42 % and app. 54 %, respectively. Emissions occur mainly during construction of power 

stations, dams and distribution networks. 


17


0,006 

Emissions of acidifying substances, total of 0,0098 g SO 2 -eq./kWh 

(Core process 0,00018 g SO 2 -eq./kWh) 

0,005 

g SO 2 -eq./kWh 

0,004 

0,003 

0,002 

0,001 

0 


Core process 








3.3.3.5 Emissions of substances potentially contributing to ground-level ozone 

In the presence of nitrogen oxides and sunlight various types of hydrocarbons in the air may 

give rise to photochemical oxidants, primarily ozone. The main contribution is related to 

the construction of power networks, app. 57 %. Other large contributions are related to the 

Core process - infrastructure, app. 39 %, where the production of steel dominates. 

0,0012 

Emissions of substances contributing to ground-level ozone, 

total of 0,0020 g ethene-eq./kWh 

(Core process 0,0000063 g ethene-eq./kWh) 

0,0010 

g ethene-eq./kWh 

0,0008 

0,0006 

0,0004 

0,0002 

0 


Core process 









18


3.3.3.6 Emissions of eutrophying substances 

Oxygen consuming and nutrifying substances (cause of eutrophication) are primarily formed 

in conjunction with inundation, as the carbon released from the inundated soils react 

with the oxygen in the water. Inundation also leads to the release of nutrients. Phosphorous 

and nitrogen are nutrients that influence the production of plant life both on land and in 

water. In freshwater, phosphorous is the substance that limits production, while nitrogen 

is the limiting substance in the sea. Regulation causes an increase in the sedimentation 

of phosphorous, thus making it inaccessible to the flora and fauna. Retention exceeds 

release, i.e. regulated rivers contain less phosphor than natural rivers, and this negative 

emission of phosphor has been included in the calculations. 

Other contributions come from NO X emissions related to manufacturing of materials and 

to transportation. 

COD (organic matter from inundated land) 100 % 

Phosphorous emissions minus phosphorous retention -2 % 

NO x emissions 2 % 

0,06 

Emissions of eutrophying substances, total of 0,051 g PO 4 3- -eq./kWh 

(Core process 0,0000080 g PO 4 3- -eq./kWh) 

0,05 

g PO 4 

3- -eq./kWh 

0,04 

0,03 

0,02 

0,01 

0 


Core process 








The green portion of the Core process - infrastructure illustrates the emissions due to 

inundation of land. 

3.3.3.7 Emissions contributing to given emission categories (chapters 3.3.5.2–3.3.5.6) 

The 22 parameters given under this heading in the Ecoprofile constitute 99–100 % of 

the emissions contributing to the reported emission categories: greenhouse gases, 

ozone-depleting substances, acidifying substances, substances contributing to the 

formation of ground level ozone, and eutrophying substances. 

3.3.5.8 Emissions of toxic and other substances to air, water, and ground 

Arsenic, lead, dioxins, polyaromatic hydrocarbons, and oil to water and ground, are toxic 

substances which are reported as inventory results in the Ecoprofile, as are emissions of 

particulate matter and radioactive isotopes required by PCR-CPC17. These emissions are 

relatively speaking, limited and occur above all in conjunction with mining and processing 

of metals, production of cement, incineration, and electricity generation. App. 9 % of the 

emissions of oil to water emanate from the hydropower stations whereas the main part 

occurs during oil extraction and fuel production. The hydropower stations cause 4 % of 

oil spills to ground and oil extraction causes the remainder. 


19


Minor, long-term leakages of oil from turbines are difficult to detect. These emissions are 

very small in relation to the amount of electricity generated, at most 0,1 μl/kWh. Seitevare, 

has one of the lowest discharges (58 m 3 /s) of the selected stations and an assumed 

oil seepage of 100 litres during a month results in a mean amount of oil in the water of 

0,00000007 %. The emissions applied in the calculations are estimated by the operating 

staff based on experiences of machinery/equipment in 2007. 

Additional emissions occur from salt impregnated power poles (no new salt impregnated 

poles are set up today) and cables that cause small emissions of heavy metals. As an example 

salt impregnated poles emit arsenic, and galvanised steel emits zinc and cadmium. 

Older cables can emit some lead. Such emissions are, however, quite local, within 0,2 

metres of source. 

Emissions of particulate matter emanate mainly from production of metals (mining) and 

digging (as during construction of distribution systems) but also from combustion of fuels. 

Half of the dust particles have a size of >10 μ, 29 % are medium sized, and 11 % are 

fine particles


The Core process produces three categories of waste, hazardous waste, waste to recycling, 

and waste to incineration. Hazardous waste comprises oil residues, fluorescent tubes etc. 

Waste to recycling consists mainly of batteries and waste to incineration is mainly oil. 

A number of different kinds of waste are reported for the Core process – infrastructure 

but the amounts have gaps since used selected generic data do not include waste amounts 

as all waste treatment processes are included i.e. have been followed to the grave. Reported 

hazardous waste consists mainly of filter dust and chemicals from subcontractors’ 

processes. Waste to recycling consists of metal scrap emanating from the manufacturing 

of generators and turbines and from scrapped components, which are assumed to be 

stripped down and recycled to 90 %. Other waste to recycling consists of batteries, plastic 

and chemicals. Waste to landfill emanate from suppliers’ processes and from scrapped 

components. Stone and gravel are the deposited excess amounts that could not be used 

in the construction of power stations, waterways, and dams. 

Upstream process is calculated with selected generic data where waste flows are not reported 

since the impact from treatment is included as resource use emissions. 

Construction of power networks in the Downstream process has been calculated with 

selected generic data where waste flows are not reported. Reported wastes mainly arise 

during the extra electricity generation compensating for distribution losses. 

3.3.4.1 Inputs and outputs not tracked from cradle or to grave 

Some minor inflows have not been tracked from the cradle due to lacking data. The effect 

is an underestimation of environmental impact; also see chapter 3.3.1.1 regarding the 1 % 

rule. By-products are not followed to the grave, and no environmental impact has been 

allocated to such by-products. The effect is an overestimation of environmental impact. 

3.3.4.2 Other 

In wintertime, closed dam gates must be sealed or heated in order to prevent icing. Bark 

mixed with various types of silt and soil, sometimes with the addition of rags or strips of 

plastic are used as sealant. The sealant is not included due to the small volumes involved 

(ca. 1 cubic meter per turbine per year). 

3.3.5 Dominance analysis and conclusions 

Contributions to studied emission categories are distributed over the lifecycle as follows. 

Upstream 

process 

Core 

process 

Core 

process 


Downstream 

process 

Downstream 

process 


Distribution 

losses 

Greenhouse gases 1 % 4 % 1 83 % 1 3 % 6 % 3 % 100 % 

Ozon-depleting gases 39 % 10 % 16 % 14 % 19 % 2 % 100 % 

Acidifying substances 6 % 2 % 64 % 2 % 25 % 2 % 100 % 

Total 

Substances contributing 

to ground-level ozone 

7 % 9 % 54 % 4 % 24 % 2 % 100 % 

Eutrophying substances 0 % 0 % 2 96 % 2 0 % 1 % 3 % 100 % 

1 

55 % emanate from inundation. 

2 

>99 % emanate from inundation 

Inundation in reservoirs dominates regarding the emissions of greenhouse gases and 

eutrophying substances. If the facilities were to be used beyond the assumed 100 years, 

the emission per generated kWh would decrease since there would be same amount of 

carbon in inundated land but a larger amount of kWh generated. 


21


Small-scale hydropower stations are generally so called run-of-river stations, i.e. they 

have no reservoir. Small-scale hydropower is mainly located south of the river Dalälven 

in watercourses that have streaming water all year round, i.e. a reservoir is not required 

to maintain relatively constant generation. One of the selected power stations, Upperud, 

is a small-scale power station. The absence of reservoirs means that no emissions from 

inundated land occur. The net effect is considerably lower emissions of greenhouse gases 

and eutrophying substances than for a station with a reservoir. Environmental impact 

per kWh due to construction, reinvestment, and operation is consistently higher from 

the selected small-scale hydropower station than from average large-scale hydropower 

stations. Investment cost per MW and Ecoprofile go hand-in-hand. 

3.3.6 Differences vs. previous EPD ® s 

There are several differences between this EPD ® and previous EPD ® s for Vattenfall’s hydropower. 

In the table below a comparison between the results of this EPD ® and the EPD ® for 

Vattenfall’s hydropower, certified 2005 and the weighted results for the EPD ® s for the 

rivers Ume älv and Lule älv, certified 2000 and 2002, is shown. Distribution of electricity 

is included in this EPD ® but has been excluded here to make the values comparable with 

the earlier EPDs. 

Emissions of 

Unit 

Vattenfall´s 

Nordic hydropower 

2008 

(incl. distribution) 

Vattenfall´s 

Nordic hydropower 

2005 

(excl. distribution) 

Weighted results 

for EPD 

Ume älv 2000 and 

Lule älv 2002 

(excl. distribution) 

Greenhouse gases g CO 2 -q. 4,5 4,2 4,9 

Ozone-depleting 

gases 

Acidifying 

substances 

Gases contributing 

to the formation of 

ground-level ozone 

Eutrophying 

substances 

g CFC-11-q. 3,3 . 10 -8 3,8 . 10 -8 9,0 . 10 -9 

g SO 2 -eq. (Mol H + ) 4,6 . 10 -3 9,8 . 10 -3 (3,1 . 10 -4 ) 4,5 . 10 -3 (1,4 . 10 -4 ) 

g ethene-eq. 8,4 . 10 -4 6,6 . 10 -4 4,7 . 10 -4 

g PO 4 3- -eq. (g O 2 ) 4,9 . 10 -2 4,6 . 10 -2 (2,1) 5,9 . 10 -2 (2,7) 

Oil to water g 2,5 . 10 -4 5,0 . 10 -5 5,0 . 10 -5 

Oil to water from 

core process alone 

g 4,1 . 10 -5 4,2 . 10 -5 4,2 . 10 -5 

The main contributions to the emission categories in the table above are cause in the construction 

phase of the hydropower stations. Operation causes small emissions. Used selected generic 

data for production of electricity, material, and fuels, have been updated between the EPD ® s. 

Newer data tend to have tend to have fewer data gaps resulting in a higher impact. 

Another trend is that newer data mirror newer processes that actually have a lower environmental 

impact, like for instance the copper industry, which considerably has reduced 

its sulphur emissions. 

Concerning emissions of oil to water in the Core process, the hydropower stations, a 

weak positive trend can be seen since 2005. Systematic environmental efforts have been 

made: improved supervision systems, investments in new technology containing smaller 

quantity of oils, installation of oil separation etc. The comparison with the weighted value 

from 2003 limps since that EPD ® only comprises the rivers Ume älv and Lule älv. 

Following comparison concerns the difference between the two latest EPD ® s: EPD ® for 

Vattenfall´s Nordic hydropower 2005 and the EPD ® in case. The latter EPD ® has been 

carried out according to a later PCR with changed regulations. 


22


Selected generic data have been updated. These are in general more complete than earlier data, 

which results in higher environmental impact, not for emissions of carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide, 

and nitrogen oxides, but e.g. for emissions of sulphur hexa fluoride or emissions to water. 

The international copper industry has delivered new data for copper manufacturing. The 

industry has improved its environmental performance and among other things reduced 

its emissions of sulphur dioxide with app. 95 % by using scrubber technology but have 

increased its COD emissions with 10 %. 

Constructions and reinvestments in the power network have been considered in the calculations 

presented in this EPD ® . This results in a larger environmental impact than earlier. The 

characterisation factors used for aggregation of different emissions to emission categories 

have been updated. In general, the environmental input of the emissions has increased. for 

example, the global warming potential of methane has increased from 21 to 23. 


23

4 Additional environmental 

information 

4.1 Land Use and Impact on Biodiversity 

4.1.1 The Biotope Method 

The Biotope Method 2005 (Kyläkorpi et al., 2005) is a systematic procedure developed 

by Vattenfall for the quantification of impact on biodiversity following the exploitation of 

land and water. It is based on comparisons of the extent of various types of biotope before 

and after project development. According to the Biotope Method before is the situation 

before the start of the construction work and after is a selected time when the biotope 

has stabilised in relation to the new conditions. The fundamental assumption is that the 

changes in biodiversity, which are caused by the utilisation of land and water, are reflected 

in losses and gains of the various types of biotope. Affected areas are identified, measured 

and characterised based on biological value. 

The Biotope Method 2005 considers impacts on biodiversity that can be directly related 

to a specific activity. Indirect or derived impacts, e.g. fragmentation 1 and barrier effects 2 

are outside the scope of the method. 

Biotopes are divided into the following categories: 

• Critical Biotope, CB – A critical biotope is an area, which by its structure, species content, 

history and physical environment has very high significance for flora and fauna. 

It harbours, or can be expected to harbour red-listed species. 

• Rare Biotope, RB – Biotope, which differs from its surroundings through high species 

richness or the existence of regionally rare species or key features. 

• General Biotope, GB – Other biotopes, i.e. those that cannot be assigned to any of the 

other categories. 

• Technotope, T – Areas without preconditions for biological production (e.g. hard-made 

surfaces and buildings). 

The quality of the results depends on the quantity and quality of the underlying data. 

The method is designed to result in a higher reported impact if input data is of lower 

quality (no biotope inventory on site + meagre data as for the rest = higher impact). If 

there is a lack of information, various tools such as area-specific standard charts and 

assignation keys may be used. The highest quality level is A, and the lowest is C5. The 

highest quality level justifies three significant digits whereas the lowest levels should 

only be reported with one significant digit. 

The figure below represents the changes in categories between the Before and the After 

situations in principle. 

Before 

Critical 

Biotope 

Rare 

Biotope 

General 

Biotope 

Technotope 

After 

1 

Fragmentation impacts may occur when a large area/biotope is subdivided into smaller 

units. This may create a situation where certain species have insufficiently large continuous 

areas, even though the total area remains satisfactory. 

2 

Barrier effects may occur when a physical barrier (e.g. a railway, transmission line corridor 

or road) prohibits contact between sub-populations. This may lead to insufficient 

genetic exchange between sub-populations. 

© Vattenfall AB Generation Nordic 2008 24

4 Additional environmental information 

4.1.2 Background 

As basis for this section there is a separate report in Swedish called ”Applikation av Biotopmetoden 

2005, Bilaga till Vattenfall AB Nordens certifierade miljövarudeklaration EPD 

för el från Vattenfalls vattenkraft i Norden” which can be ordered from Vattenfall. 

The 14 selected hydropower stations occupy an area of in total 74 850 hectares, predominantly 

river-, lake, and annual reservoirs, which amount to 70 320 hectares. This reservoir 

area constitutes 38 % of Vattenfall’s total reservoir area and the 14 stations generate 31 

% of Vattenfall’s hydro electricity. This means that selected hydropower stations have 

more reservoir area than Vattenfall average. 

Lule älv Ume älv Ångermanälven 

Indalsälven Dalälven Göta älv Upperudsälven 

Vuoksi 

Pamilo 

Total area (ha) 10 352 29 514 6 874 1 980 195 381 91 25 470 74 850 

% of total area 13,8 39,4 9,2 2,6 0,3 0,5 0,1 34,0 100 

Land use in studied rivers. 

It is important to note that studies of individual power stations do not provide a comprehensive 

picture of ecological effects in a river. It would be misleading to relate biotope changes to the 

electricity generated at a single power station. This would be to the disadvantage of stations with 

annual reservoirs, and to the advantage of stations with no or short-term reservoirs. Therefore, 

ecological effects for entire catchments should be quantified from a representative selection of 

power stations. Norra Norrland is represented by stations in the river Lule älv. Mellannorrland is 

represented by stations in the rivers Ume älv, Ångermanälven, and Indalsälven. Södra Norrland 

and Västsverige are represented by stations in the rivers Dalälven and Göta älv respectively. 

4.1.3 Results 

The land use and quality levels used at the various stations are specified in the table below. 

River region River Stations Area, ha Quality level 


Mellannorrland 

Lule älv 

Ume älv 

Seitevare 8 484 B2 

Harsprånget 258 C1 

Porsi 1 307 C2 

Boden 303 C5 

Juktan 9 433 B2 

Umluspen 18 774 C5 

Stornorrfors 1 306 C2 

Ångermanälven Stalon 6 874 C2 

Indalsälven Bergeforsen 1 980 C2 

Södra Norrland Dalälven Älvkarleby 195 C2 

Västsverige 

Göta älv 

Olidan 

Hojum 

Östra Finland Vuoksi Pamilo 25 470 C2 

Small scale 

hydropower 

Upperudsälven Upperud 91 A 

The approach is to achieve the highest possible quality level with a reasonable effort. Several 

stations have posed a problem because pre-exploitation data is missing due to lack of aerial 

photographs and inventories, particularly for stations built in the 1950´ies and earlier. The large 

proportion of quality level C2 reflects this. Note that biotope impact is overestimated when characterisation 

keys are applied in quality level C. The table below shows land use per quality level: 

381 

C2 

C2 

Total 

Quality level A B1 B2 B3 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 Total 

Total area (ha) 91 - 17 917 - 258 35 507 - - 19 077 74 850 

% of total area 0,1 - 23,9 - 0,3 50,1 - - 25,5 100 



The table below shows land use per application: 

Lule älv 

Ume älv 

Ångermanälven 

Indalsälven Dalälven Göta älv 

Upperudsälven 

Vuoksi 

Pamilo 

Dam 74 25 0,5 5,3 0,9 0,3 0,2 1 0,2 107 

Reservoir 9 761 27 119 6 000 1 850 150 350 90 25 000 70 320 

Dry river beds 71 482 74 4,0 2,4 99 731 

Distribution 

plant 

Buildings 

(permanent) 

incl. roads 

6,0 5,6 0,5 1,0 0,4 0,4 14 

75 68 5,5 4,0 4,8 1,2 0,3 159 

Tailrace 34 39 0,2 6,7 0,1 2,2 82 

Quarries 55 10 1,0 66 

Deposit 39 149 22 8,1 218 

Buildings 

(temporary) 

39 14 53 

Other 198 1 602 772 119 27 20 0,9 367 3 106 

Total area (ha) 10 350 29 515 6 875 1 980 195 380 91 25 470 74 850 

1 

Dam area includes buildings. 

Total 

(ha) 

Biotope category areas related to the electricity generation in the respective river region 

are given below: 

River region 


(Quality levels: 

B2, C1, C2 och C5) 

mellannorrland 

(Quality levels: 

B2, C2 och C5) 

Södra Norrland 

(Quality level: C2) 

Västsverige 


Östra Finland 


Category 

Area 

BEFORE 

(ha) 

Area 

AFTER 

(ha) 

Biotope 

change 

(ha) 

Change per 

kWh electricity 

(ha/kWh el) 

Critical biotope 5 797 0 -5 797 -128,3 . 10 -6 

Rare biotope 983 1,6 -983 -21,7 . 10 -6 

General biotope 3 571 3 454 -117 -2,6 . 10 -6 

Technotope 0 6 896 6 898 152,6 . 10 -6 

Critical biotope 12 201 331 -11 870 -379,7 . 10 -6 

Rare biotope 11 953 5 190 -6 763 -216,3 . 10 -6 

General biotope 14 214 20 884 6 670 213,4 . 10 -6 

Technotope 0 11 962 11 962 382,7 . 10 -6 

Critical biotope 78 5 -73 -14,3 . 10 -6 

Rare biotope 78 0 -78 -15,3 . 10 -6 

general biotope 40 175 135 26,5 . 10 -6 

Technotope 0 14 14 2,7 . 10 -6 

Critical biotope 153 0 -153 -1 530,0 . 10 -6 

Rare biotope 153 0,3 -153 -1 527,0 . 10 -6 

general biotope 76 371 295 2 950,0 . 10 -6 

Technotope 0 9 9 0,9 . 10 -6 

Critical biotope 10 188 197 -9 991 -3 902,7 . 10 -6 

Rare biotope 10 188 0 -10 188 -3 979,7 . 10 -6 

general biotope 5 094 25 160 20 066 7 838,3 . 10 -6 

Technotope 0 113 113 44,1 . 10 -6 


4 Additional environmental information0 

The table below is a condensation of biodiversity impact for the 14 selected power stations 

related to electricity generation over 100 years. 

The Biotope Method requires that the digit accuracy of the results mirror the uncertainty 

in underlying data. The site with the lowest quality level decides the digit accuracy in the 

aggregated result. In this case 76 % of the sites were studied with quality level C and consequently 

the aggregated result can be presented with one value digit accuracy. 

The aggregated biotope change at the 14 selected sites is a considerable but necessary simplification. 

The specific values in the table are nonetheless indicative of ecological effects of 

Vattenfall’s Nordic hydropower. The results should be interpreted based on the whole of this 

section. 

Category 

Biotope change 

(ha) 

Change per kWh electricity 

(m 2 /kWh el) 

Critical biotope -30 000 -3 . 10 -4 

Rare biotope -20 000 -2 . 10 -4 

General biotope 30 000 3 . 10 -4 

Technotope 20 000 2 . 10 -4 

4.2 Land and Water Use 

4.2.1 Description of land use in the river regions 

The following is a description of land and water exploitation in the different river regions 

caused by the selected stations. 

4.2.1.1 Norra Norrland 

In the river region Norra Norrland four stations have been studied in the river Lule älv. 

River region Norra Norrland is characterised by vast water reservoirs and a large annual 

average hydropower generation. The four stations exploit 14 % of the total land and water 

area that is exploited by the 14 selected stations and they contribute app. 47 % to the 

annual average generation. 

River Lule älv 

Area and biotope data have been compiled for and presented in previous EPD. The average 

annual generation data has however been updated. 

Seitevare, Tjaktjajaure (qualitiy level B2) 

The Tjaktjajaure annual reservoir at Seitevare represents more than 75 % of the area occupied 

by the four stations. Biotope classification before exploitation is largely based on 

aerial photographs. Biotope characterization is based on an area-specific standard list, 

and 60 % of the area harboured among other the following critical biotopes: streaming 

water, rapids, oxbow lakes, backwaters, and riverine grasslands. 

Post-exploitation condition assessment is based on actual biological data, and shows that 

78 % of the area constitutes technotope and that the remainder is general biotope. No 

critical biotope remains. The reservoir, one of five gravel pits, a water-filled quarry, and an 

area where buildings have been dismantled are characterised as general biotope. 

The maps below show biotope categories for Seitevare power station and the eastern 

part of Tjaktjajaure annual reservoir before and after exploitation. 


27


0 5 km 

N 

Critical biotope 

Rare biotope 

General biotope 

Östra Seitevare – Tjaktajaure, categories Before. 

0 5 km 

N 

79,5 % Technotope 

20,5 % General biotope 

Critical biotope 

Rare biotope 

General biotope 

Technotope 

Östra Seitevare – Tjaktajaure, categories After. 


28


Harsprånget (quality level C1) 

Biotope classification and characterisation before exploitation are based on aerial photographs, 

data inventories, descriptions in Vattenfall’s archives, and on documentation brought 

before the Vattendomstolen (Water Court). Critical biotope (streaming water and rapids) 

constituted 25 % of used area, whereas the remainder was general biotope. After exploitation 

conditions have not been inventoried, and a characterization key has been applied. 

Before exploitation data showed the presence of a number of red-listed species such as 

the moss Cinclidotus fontinaloides, the lichen Everina divaricata, and Calypso bulbosa. 

The existence of these species after exploitation is unknown and consequently a characterisation 

key was applied. General biotope is assigned to areas where no technotope is 

registered. 

Porsi (quality level C2) 

Before exploitation data from the area around Porsi power station is nonexistent, and a 

characterisation key has been applied. 

Assessment of after exploitation conditions is based on inventoried biological data and 

shows that app. 82 % of the area constitutes general biotope, while the slope of the dam 

(0,2 % of the area), after recently performed dam safety measures, is technotope. The 

slope used to harbour the red-listed moonwort species Botrychium matricariifolum and 

Botrychium multifidum was identified as a mix of rare and critical biotopes at the time. Before 

the dam was reinforced, the richest parts of the slope were dug up and transplanted 

to a nearby location, where the development of the red-listed species is being monitored. 

This new area constitutes critical biotope, because of the occurence of the moonwort species. 

The remaining area constitutes technotope, particularly in the reservoir drawdown 

zone, but also on dumps and built-up areas. 

Boden (quality level C5) 

Characterisation keys have been applied to before and after exploitation conditions at the 

Boden power station. The reservoir, built-up areas and spillways without vegetation are 

characterised as technotope, but constitute merely 1 % of the area. Virtually all the area 

related to Boden power station after exploitation is general biotope. 

4.2.1.2 Mellannorrland 

In the river region Mellannorrland four stations have been studied in the rivers Ume älv, 

Indalsälven, and Ångermanälven. River region Mellannorrland is characterised by vast 

water reservoirs and a large annual average hydropower generation. The four stations 

exploit 51 % of the total land and water area that is exploited by the 14 selected stations 

and they contribute app. 32 % to the annual average generation. 

River Ume älv 

Area and biotope data has been compiled for and presented in previous EPD. Input data 

regarding the dam at Umluspen power station as well as the average annual generation 

data has however been updated. 

Juktan (quality level B2) 

There is poor historical data from the area around the power station at Juktan, and an 

area-specific standard list has been applied to before exploitation conditions. The inundated 

area (predominantly coniferous forest on moraine) was characterised by Svenska Naturskyddsföreningen 

(1960) as having “meager vegetation”. With the exception of agricultural 

areas, the inundated area was a general biotope. 

The streaming water in the river Juktån is characterised as critical biotope both before 

and after exploitation. More than 40 % of critical biotopes remain after exploitation, but 

rare biotopes are nonexistent. Approximately 4 % of both critical and rare biotopes before 

exploitation have become general biotope or technotope after exploitation. 

During the timber-floating period Juktån underwent substantial river training that resulted 

in a canal-like bottom structure in large parts of the river, which in turn had negative 

impact on fish and other organisms. In addition, important reproduction areas for fish, 

e.g. by/side-runs were closed off by levees and similar constructions. 


29


In conjunction with the retrial of the regulation permits in the early 1990’s, Vattenfall implemented 

extensive restoration of biotopes, amounting to 144 ha (55 %) of streaming water in Juktån. 

In addition, 14,6 ha (almost 6 %) new biologically important area was created, mainly by opening 

previously closed off by/side-runs, etc. There are now vital populations of grayling and trout. 

Conclusions: 

• Despite reduced average annual discharge, the critical biotope area (i.e. the area covered by 

water during winter conditions) has only been marginally reduced. 

• As a result of biotope restoration, Juktån now provides improved conditions for biological life 

compared to the timber-floating period. 

• Reopening of previously closed off waterways has created important reproduction areas for fish. 

Umluspen (quality level C5) 

Historical data from the area around the power station at Umluspen is nonexistent, and a 

characterization key has been applied to before exploitation conditions. It is assumed that 

the area harboured 40 % critical biotope, 40 % rare biotope, and 20 % general biotope. 

A characterization key has been applied to the after exploitation conditions as well. Land 

and water areas after exploitation have been assumed to be 31 % technotope and 69 % 

general biotope. 

Stornorrfors (quality level C2) 

Historical data from the area around the power station at Stornorrfors is insufficient, and 

a characterisation key has been applied to before exploitation conditions. Characterisation 

of after exploitation conditions is based on data from fieldwork and literature. 

Technotopes existed even before Stornorrfors was constructed because of three older 

smaller power stations in the same area. The present reservoir inundated the older Norrfors 

reservoir drawdown zones, which were thus converted from technotope to general 

biotope. There was also a spillway within the area, which is now inundated upstream the 

present one. The reservoir and the stretch of the river with an ecological flow were influenced 

by timber-floating and fishing operations prior to the construction of Stornorrfors. 

One part of the river stretch is characterised as critical biotope today, and harbours migrating 

red-listed wild salmon. Vattenfall has implemented activities to facilitate fish migration. 

There remain 5,4 % critical biotopes and 2 % rare biotopes after exploitation. 

The following map show biotopes and biotope categories at Stornorrfors power station 

after exploitation. 


30


Biotopes 

Mixed forest 

Grass 

Agricultural land 

Slow-floating water 

Slow-floating water (lake with red-listed species) 

River stretch with ecological flow 

Buildings and paved areas 

Dam 

Deposit 

Distribution 

Roads 

0 500 1000 m 

N 

Stornorrfors, biotopes After. 

Spillway dam 

Biotope categories 

Critical biotope (CB) 

General biotope (GB) 

Technotope (T) 

Headrace canal 

0 500 1000 m 

Tailrace canal 

N 

Stornorrfors, biotope categories After. 


31


River Indalsälven: Bergeforsen (quality level C2) 

Historical data from the area around the power station at Bergeforsen is insufficient, and a 

characterization key has been applied to before exploitation conditions. Characterisation 

of after exploitation conditions is based on data from fieldwork and literature. Streaming 

water downstream the power station, 6 %, is characterised as rare biotope because this 

stretch harbours rich fish fauna and various key elements such as sand banks. No critical 

biotope is identified after exploitation, and the share of technotope is app. 55 %. 

River Ångermanälven: Stalon (quality level C2) 

The power station Stalon is located in the upper section of the river Ångermanälven, more 

specifically in the branch named Åseleälven. The station is underground and utilizes the 

height of fall of 199 meters between the lakes Kultsjön and Malgomaj. 

Historical data from the area around the power station at Stalon is insufficient, and a characterisation 

key has been applied to before exploitation conditions. Characterisation of after exploitation 

conditions is based on data from fieldwork and literature. Streaming water is characterised 

as rare biotope because of the trout population. The small lakes along river Kultsjöån, and 

the reservoir Kultsjön harbour vigorous populations of trout and char. More than 70 % of the 

exploited area is characterised as rare biotopes and the remainder as technotope. 

4.2.1.3 Södra Norrland 

Älvkarleby power station in river Dalälven has been selected in the river region Södra Norrland 

and it occupies app. 0,3 % of the total land and water area that is exploited by the 14 selected 

stations, whereas it contributes app. 5,3 % to average annual generation. 

River Dalälven: Älvkarleby (quality level C2) 

Historical data from the area around the power station at Älvkarleby is insufficient. It was was 

built in the beginning of the 20th century. Aerial photographs and biotope inventories from 

the before exploitation period are nonexistent, and a characterisation key has been applied. 

Characterisation of after exploitation conditions is based on biological data from fieldwork 

and literature. Kungsådran represents 3 % of the area and harbours migrating salmon, and is 

characterised as critical biotope. Vattenfall has implemented extensive activities to improve 

conditions for fish. Recreational fishing waters in Älvkarleby are among the best in Sweden 

for salmon and trout. No rare biotope is identified after exploitation, and 90 % is registered 

as general biotope. 

4.2.1.4 Västsverige 

In the river region Västsverige the stations Olidan/Hojum in the river Göta älv have been 

studied. The two stations occupy 0,5 % of the total land and water area that is exploited by 

the 14 selected stations and they contribute app. 13 % to the annual average generation. 

Göta älv: Olidan/Hojum (quality level C2) 

Historical data from the area around the power stations at Olidan/Hojum is insufficient. 

The first station was built in the beginning of the 20th century. Old maps reveal that the 

area was home to industrial operations, which caused extensive technotopes in the before 

exploitation period. Aerial photographs and inventories from the before exploitation 

period are nonexistent, and a characterisation key has been applied to before exploitation 

conditions. Characterisation of after exploitation conditions is based on data from 

fieldwork and literature. No critical biotopes and/or red-listed species exist within system 

boundaries, merely general biotopes. 

4.2.1.5 Östra Finland 

Pamilo power station in river Vuoksi has been selected for the river region Östra Finland. 

The river region Östra Finland is characterised by vast reservoirs and relatively low average 

annual generation. The Pamilo station exploit 34 % of the total land and water area 

that is exploited by the 14 selected stations and it contributes app. 3 % to the annual 

average generation. 


32


River Vuoksi: Pamilo (quality level C2) 

Pamilo is located in the catchment area of river Vuoksi, which runs up northeast of Pamilo 

in Russia and discharges into lake Ladoga, also in Russia. The catchment area comprises 

74 890 square kilometres, of which 6 390 upstream and 68 500 downstream. 

Historical data from the area around the power station at Pamilo is insufficient. Aerial 

photographs exist, inventoried data is nonexistent for the before exploitation period, i.e. 

before 1955, and a characterisation key has been applied. Characterisation of after exploitation 

conditions is based on data from inventory and fieldwork. The river Koitajoki 

represents 1 % of the area and harbours the red-listed (freshwater) Saima-salmon (Salmo 

salar saimaensis), and is characterised as critical biotope. The main part of the area is 

general biotope. 

4.2.1.6 Small-scale hydropower 

River Upperudsälven: Upperud (quality level A) 

Upperud power station in river Upperudsälven has been selected as an example of small-scale 

hydropower stations. 

The Upperud station occupies app. 0,1 % of the total land and water area that is exploited by 

the 14 selected stations and it contributes app. 0.1 % of average annual generation. 

Vattenfall acquired the site and constructed the present power station in the 1980’ies. Before 

that hydropower had been used in Upperud for at least 300 years. Biotope classification and 

characterisation before construction of the present station are based on aerial photographs 

and inventories. Characterisation of after exploitation conditions is based on data from inventories 

and fieldwork. The new station has not caused any major change in biotopes. Almost all 

biotope is critical. 

The reservoir Upperudshöljen harbours red-listed species freshwater crayfish (Astacus astacus 

L.) and a fish species (Cobitis taenia L.). Vattenfall implemented activities to improve 

biotopes in conjunction with the construction. 

The maps below show biotope categories at Upperud power station before and after exploitation. 





T (75 %) and GB (25 %) 


N 

0 50 m 

Upperud, categories Before. 




0 50 m 

N 

Upperud, categories After. 



4.2.2 Land use of Core process, Upstream and Downstream processes 

– classification according to Corine 

Land use before and after exploitation 

A classification according to Corine Land Cover Classes has been made (http://terrestrial. 

eionet.europa.eu/CLC2000/classes). Occupied areas are expressed in hectares. 

In the before situation it is not possible to classify the occupied areas in artificial areas, 

agricultural areas, forested areas, wetlands, and water bodies for the power stations Porsi, 

Boden, Umluspen, Stornorrforsen, Stalon, Bergeforsen, Älvkarleby, Olidan, Hojum, and 

Pamilo due to lack of data. Hence classification is not possible for 75 % of the total area 

occupied by the 14 selected power stations. 

In the after situation necessary data for Corine classification is missing for the power 

stations Harsprånget and Boden corresponding to 4 % of the total area occupied by the 

14 selected power stations. 

The large difference regarding the possibilities to classify the areas according to Corine 

between the before and after situation, is caused by the lack of available knowledge regarding 

the circumstances before the stations were built. For Harsprånget and Boden an 

assignation key has been used in the after situation for the area that is not artificial. 

Before (ha) 

After (ha) 

Artificial surfaces 483 1 430 

Agricultural areas 230 3 

Forests and semi natural areas 7 847 121 

Wetland 1 499 0,3 

Water bodies 8 148 70 320 

Unspecified 1 56 649 2 982 

TOTAL 74 850 74 850 

1 

For power stations with quality level C1, C2 and C5 complete data is missing. 

Occupied areas (hectare) in the Before and After situation in accordance with the Corine 

Land cover Classes. 

Time of area occupation 

Vattenfall’s hydropower reservoirs are assumed to have a technical lifetime of 100 years. 

Continuous reinvestments ensure further use and no deconstruction is assumed. 

Description of exploitative activities on occupied area 

The table is a compilation of the areas occupied by the 14 studied hydropower stations. 



Total (ha) Percent (%) 

Dam 107 0,1 

Reservoir 70 320 93,9 

Dry river beds 731 1,0 

Distribution plants 14 0,0 

Buildings (permanent) incl. roads 159 0,2 

Tailrace 82 0,1 

Quarries 66 0,1 

Deposits 218 0,3 

Buildings (temporary) 53 0,1 

Other 3 106 4,1 

TOTAL (ha) 74 856 100 

4.2.3 Land use in Downstream process – distribution of electricity 

The power grid also has an impact on biodiversity, but no quantitative results from application 

of the Biotope method are included in this study from the distribution stage and no 

classification of occupied areas according to Corine has been made. 

Lanes are regularly cleared creating possible habitats for species normally inhabiting meadows 

and pastures. In addition lanes constitute border zones, which are generally considered 

more bio-diverse than homogenous areas. Wider lanes may constitute barriers that 

may cause fragmentation for some woodland species. In a cultivated landscape the lanes 

do not have any particular impact on biodiversity, positive or negative. 

4.3 Environmental Risk Assessment 

4.3.1 Method 

In this EPD ® , risk is identified as the probability of an unwanted event multiplied by the consequence 

of the event. We illustrate this with an example regarding everyday use of an automobile: 

Assume that the probability of an accident where you receive minor injuries, petrol leaks out 

and the car needs repair is 0,5 in 10 000 km. This is multiplied by the consequences: 

• Euro 200 is lost due to repair costs and an increased insurance premium 

• 20 litres of gasoline leak into a ditch 

• 10 days of convalescence 

The risk is thus quantifiable as Euro 10 and 1 litre of spilled gasoline and 0.5 days convalescence 

per 1 000 km of driving. 

The risk over time is constant, meaning that the risk does not increase after 10 or 100 

driven kilometres. Every time you drive the risk per kilometre is the same. 

An environmental risk assessment is carried out in accordance with certain routines in 

order to ensure good quality. The following is a description of the procedure after the 

boundaries have been set and other methodological decisions have been made. Good 

general knowledge of, in this case, hydropower plants is a prerequisite. 

The first step is to acquire background data and material that describe the plant, such as 

design drawings, pictures, lists of the chemicals present, etc. A preliminary list of conceivable 

accident scenarios is compiled. 

The next step is a visit to the site to verify that reality matches the picture that emerged 

from background data and material. Operation and maintenance staff are interviewed to 

check whether further scenarios can be identified and to get an overall, rough assessment 

of the consequences and probabilities involved. 



A more detailed analysis of the consequences is carried out on the basis of the existing 

material. Historical material is reviewed in order to assess probabilities. If historical 

events are nonexistent, which may be the case regarding infrequent events, other sources 

are sought. 

Once all this has been done and the facts are compiled, the material is referred to and 

examined by persons with different backgrounds and experience, partly to identify any 

potential accidents that may have been overlooked, and partly to verify the assessments 

made. 

Probability forecasts are, by nature, always impaired by uncertainties. The degree of uncertainty 

is greatest for infrequent events, and for events caused by human error. Assessments 

of potential consequences may also be uncertain, e.g. it is difficult to quantify the 

content of flue gases in uncontrolled combustion. 

The values presented here should therefore be considered only as indicative of the order 

of magnitude of various emissions. 

4.3.2 System boundaries 

The environmental risk assessment comprises accidents in conjunction with: 

• The construction of dams and power stations 

• The manufacturing of large components for power stations 

• The transportation of material required for construction and operation 

• Operation, including maintenance 

Neither demolition of dams or power stations, nor environmental risks associated with 

sabotage or wars are included. 

An exceptional emission or accident may cause demand for more raw materials to replace 

what has been lost or to rebuild the plant, which in turn leads to new emissions. This 

has not been taken into account. 

Automobile accidents during travel to and from work have not been included. 

Chapter 4.3.9 below presents quantification of some emissions to air and water caused 

by accidents during the life cycle, and a comparison is made with emission levels during 

normal operation. Possible accident scenarios are described in chapters 4.3.3-4.3.8. 

4.3.3 Summary of risks 

The environmental risk assessment shows the potentially environmentally damaging emissions 

that may result from undesired events. Emissions in conjunction with accidents and 

breakdowns are generally small, in terms of total emissions as well as per generated kWh. 

Allocated over an extended period, only emissions of SF 6 , oil, diesel fuel, gasoline, and to a 

certain extent gasified copper, reach the same levels as emissions during normal operating 

conditions. 

The largest single potential emission is that of oil to the river from a breakdown in the hub 

of a Kaplan turbine (installed at 50 % of selected stations). The reason being that this type 

of turbine is equipped with hydraulically adjustable blades, which is not the case for Francis 

or Pelton turbines. 

Local environmental impact may result if a car or tractor is involved in an accident and fuel 

is discharged into a small watercourse. A major dam break has not been assessed in detail. 

This is a very low probability event, but it would have major consequences in the river valleys 

and vicinity. 



4.3.4 Natural phenomena 

The Swedish climate and associated natural phenomena are benign by international standards, 

but events relating to thunder and lightning, icing, and other ice phenomena are 

included in the statistics used. 

4.3.5 Transportation, general 

Large quantities of material are transported in conjunction with construction of power stations 

and particularly dams. This includes rock, soil and, cement but also deliveries of turbines, 

generators, batteries, etc. Transportation is on-road, off-road, and to a certain extent by 

sea. In the operating phase, inspection trips are made by car and snow clearing by tractor. 

Fuel may leak or ignite because of an accident, in which case lubrication/hydraulic oils, 

cables or cargo (e.g. lead batteries) also may catch fire. Every power station/dam probably 

has a stationary diesel fuel tank, which may spring a leak. 

The probability of truck accidents is expressed as accidents per kilometre, while dumper 

and tractor accidents are expressed per operating hour. The consequences are often personal 

injuries (including those suffered by a third party), and environmentally damaging 

emissions. Local environmental impact may result from fuel leaks, e.g., in or near a catchment 

area or watercourse with sensitive flora and fauna. 

4.3.6 Construction of plants and facilities 

4.3.6.1 Reservoirs and dams 

Accidents related to transportation and blasting (see above) have been identified as the 

only accidents of significance for the environment during construction of reservoirs and 

dams. Emissions would primarily consist of the spillage/leakage of oil/diesel fuel. 

4.3.6.2 Power station 

The construction of power stations involves large quantities of material and environmental 

impact may result from spillage of oils, solvents, etc. Handling of solid materials such 

as concrete, building materials, etc. causes negligible environmental impact. The quantities 

of solvent releases are small, as is the probability of this occurring, and such emissions 

are disregarded. Oil spills do occur, but the quantities are small on each occasion. 

4.3.6.3 Tunnels 

Construction of tunnels and provision of fill for the dam requires blasting. Blasting accidents 

may occur resulting in slides blocking the tunnel or landing in the wrong place. It is 

highly improbable that such events cause negative environmental impact. 

Tunnel construction involves sealing, normally with various types of mortar, but in exceptional 

cases synthetic compounds (epoxy and polyurethane foam) are used as well. Water 

may transport residue from these injection compounds. They would be very dilute and 

neither acute nor long-term toxic environmental impacts are anticipated. Personal injuries 

or environmental damage may occur when using these injection compounds but this is not 

considered here. 

4.3.6.4 Manufacturing of components 

One generator manufacturer has provided information about handling of oils and chemicals 

in conjunction with manufacturing and delivery of generators and transformers. The 

quantity of chemicals used in the manufacturing and delivery of a generator is reported 

to be in the range of 100–400 kg. No chemicals have ever leaked out, and there have been 

no serious fire. 

Fires in manufacturing facilities for generators, turbines, transformers, or batteries are 

excluded, partly because such events have a low probability, and partly because the potential 

environmental impact is very small. 



4.3.7 Operation of power stations 

4.3.7.1 Breakdowns, fires and spillage 

The relevant breakdowns in power stations that cause emissions to the surroundings are 

mainly damage to control systems, bearings, switches, etc. that result in leakage of oil or 

to emission of pyrolysis products. 

The hub of a Kaplan turbine may break down. This would result in turbine oil leaking into 

the river because this type of turbine is equipped with hydraulically adjustable blades, 

which is not the case for Francis or Pelton turbines. In case of a total breakdown, all the oil 

in the system could leak out. For Porsi, this would mean app. 50 cubic meters of oil, and 

for Boden app. 12 cubic meters. The implementation of high-pressure systems will lead to 

decreased quantities of oil in control systems. 

A fire could be initiated by a grounding fault or short-circuit in a generator, local power 

system, transformer, switchgear, etc., and would lead primarily to emissions of CO 2 . Burning 

insulation, cables, or chemicals would cause more toxic emissions. 

Electric arcing causes pyrolysis products from oils as well as from metals (Cu, Al). 

4.3.7.2 SF 6 

SF 6 is a gas frequently used as electric insulation, for example in switches, and it has a 

high GWP-factor. There are SF 6 -insulated switches in 11 of the selected power stations, 

and there are SF 6 -insulated cable conduits at two power stations. Emission of SF 6 may be 

caused by breakdowns of switches or in the case of fire. 

4.3.8 Large water flows and dam safety 

The Swedish power industry is carrying out extensive work around dam safety. Dams are 

continually being improved in order to cope with more extreme water flows, and safety 

risks are systematically eliminated. Methods for measuring and detecting beginning damage 

to dams, as well as the causes of such damage, are being developed. According 

to current estimates by the power industry, the probability of a significant dam break is 

around 0,00001 per year. 

The geological/geographical characteristics of watercourses change continually, and the 

extent depends on the quantity of water. A dam break would cause very high discharges 

and in narrow parts of a river, the channel could be stripped clean and large blocks of rock 

might be torn loose. Banks would be eroded, trees undermined and torn loose, and the 

material carried along by the water could form logjams damming the water. As a result, 

the river might try to find new paths. In flat areas, a lot of fine material could be deposited 

in meter thick layers on top of the original ground. Saturated and eroded banks could 

continue to collapse even after the discharge returned to normal levels. 

Once the composition of soils and landforms has been altered, there will be no return to 

original conditions. The water may be deeper or shallower. New, different varieties of vegetation 

more suited to the new water and nutrient conditions will establish themselves 

and re-population will begin immediately. 

The effects of a dam break are similar to those of natural extreme floods. Apart from damage 

to nature, man-made objects such as buildings etc. are also destroyed. People may 

also be injured or drown. Human activity often takes place closer to developed, regulated 

rivers than near natural rivers, because the water level varies less. Extreme water flows 

in natural rivers are normally not sudden, and there is time to get people to safety, and to 

move hazardous substances that may otherwise be carried away by the water. In the case 

of a dam failure, however, there is much less time to issue a warning, and the consequences 

will be greater. 



Events in conjunction with a dam break on the river Lule älv could be fierce, especially if 

it happened in the upper parts of the catchment, as the quantity of water involved would 

be huge. E.g. a dam break at Tjaktjajaure (upstream from Seitevare) would cause an enormous 

flood wave to sweep down the length of the river all the way to the coast. Such a 

flood wave would probably damage other dams in its path. The event would be limited in 

terms of time and would continue for up to a week. 

Variations in water levels resulting from variations in precipitation are not considered as 

environmental risk in this context because increased precipitation does not constitute 

“undesired event” as defined in this context. 

4.3.9 Results and comparison with emissions under normal conditions 

The table below summarises the potential emissions identified in the environmental risk 

assessment, and the events that provide the predominant contribution to these emissions. 

Emissions, less than 0.1 kg per year and power station, are not presented. 

In order to get an idea of whether these emission levels are small or large, a comparison 

is also made with the emissions that occur under normal operating conditions. 

In the column Lifecycle emissions under normal conditions the LCA results from generation 

of electricity is shown, i.e. distribution is not included. 

Dominating events 

causing emissions of 

respective substance 

Fire in turbine, 

transformer, breaker 

and emission from 

carbon dioxide 

extinguishing 

Breakdown of magnetic 

transformer or breaker 

(arc), cable fire 

Breakdown of breaker, 

leakage or fire in breaker 

Turbine breakdown, 

breaker breakdown, 

control system leakage 

Substance 

to air 

Substance 

to ground or 

water 

Potential emissions 

due to 

accidents in the 

Core process 

Potential 

emissions 

caused by 

accidents during 

construction 

of the 

Core process 


Lifecycle 

emissions under 

normal conditions 

(excluding 

distribution of 

electricity) 

g/kWh g/kWh g/kWh 

Carbon dioxide 10 -5 10 -7 4,4 

Carbon 

monoxide 

Sulphur 

dioxide 

10 -7 0 8,8 . 10 -3 

10 -6 10 -6 2,5 . 10 -3 

Dust 10 -7 10 -7 1,0 . 10 -3 

Gasified 

copper 

10 -6 0 2,5 . 10 -7 

SF 6 10 -6 0 3,4 . 10 -7 

Oil/diesel/ 

petrol 

10 -4 10 -5 5,0 . 10 -4 

Emissions to air, ground, and water in conjunction with accidents at selected hydropower 

stations, compared to normal operation (LCI emissions). 

This comparison shows that, allocated over a long period of time, emissions related to accidents 

and breakdowns are smaller than emissions occurring under normal conditions, 

except for emissions of gasified copper. Lifecycle emissions of SF 6 , oil, diesel fuel, and 

petrol are about one tenth of emissions occurring under normal operating conditions. 

Another conclusion is that emission levels in conjunction with accidents and breakdowns 

are generally small in terms of total quantity as well as per generated kWh. 

Emissions might also occur due to accidents or breakdowns in the electricity distribution 

system. These risks have however not been quantified. 

It should be pointed out that there are uncertainties in the assessment of the probability of various 

breakdown scenarios, but these are not large enough to impair the conclusions above. 



4.3.10 ERM (Enterprise Risk Management) 

In addition to the risk assessment method described above which Vattenfall has applied 

in EPD context since 1999, the risks have been studied with a method that Vattenfall has 

decided to use in general for risk management. The method is called Enterprise Risk Management 

(ERM) and Vattenfall has developed an application suitable for its operations. 

ERM describes all risks in economical terms, which the EPD doesn’t. The basic method 

is the same though and especially with respect to the quantification of risks. The largest 

emissions caused by undesired events in Vattenfall’s hydropower are listed below: 

Substance 

Emissions per average year, kg/year 

Oil/diesel/petrol 800 

Carbon dioxide 100 

Sulphur hexafluoride SF 6 10 

Other emissions are small in comparison. 

The emissions in the table above come from a lot of different events but some of these 

dominate. More than 50 % are caused by three typical events. 

The method of quantification is central to the application of ERM in Vattenfall. For each 

identified risk event three scenarios are created with different levels of probability. Scenario 

number 1 is expected to occur every second year, number 2 every tenth year, and 

number 3 once in one hundred years. Based on this distribution the ”95-percentile” is 

calculated pointing out what can be expected to happen once in twenty years, which is 

now the basis for Vattenfall’s general risk reporting. 

The risk assessment is focused on the three dominating types of events: 

• Turbine breakdown with oil emissions 

• Fire in Kaplan turbine with emissions of CO 2 

• SF 6 breaker breakdown 

In a later stage also minor emissions might be assessed. The result of the assessment 

can be described as expected releases per year for all Vattenfall’s hydropower stations 

(Sweden) as average value, median value or as distributions. Note that the numbers in the 

table below represent a larger amount of plants than other results in this EPD ® . 

Median value 

(50-percentile) 

10-years value 


100-years value 


Oil app. 0 9 000 kg 20 000 kg 

CO 2 app. 0 app. 0 kg 20 000 kg 

SF 6 app. 0 1 kg 40 kg 

This means that most years (less than every second year) there are no emissions of these 

substances due to accidents or breakdowns. The emissions occur infrequently, oil app. 

once in 10 years and CO 2 app. once in 100 years. Most of the years (less than every second 

year) there are no emissions of SF 6 , but there is a small emission every tenth year and a 

large emission once in 100 years. 

4.4 EMF 

EMF (Electromagnetic Fields, or for power frequency, Electric and Magnetic Fields) appear 

in the vicinity of all electrical equipment and power lines. There are no binding limits 

regarding exposure to EMF. 



The International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), an independent 

body consisting of international experts, has however published recommendations 1 

regarding acute health problems. The recommendations are based on knowledge about 

acute health problems due to changing magnetic fields and propose a limit of 500 μT for 

working environment and for the general public a limit of 100 μT at 50 Hz. The EU Council 

of Ministers recommends a restriction of exposure to electro-magnetic fields in accordance 

with the ICNIRP:s recommendations. 

According to ICNIRP available research results on lesions due to long-range exposure, for 

example raised risk of cancer, do not suffice to establish limits. 

Vattenfall follows the precautionary principle, which implies reducing fields that deviate 

considerably from normality in each specific case. Vattenfall follows ICNIRP’s, WHO’s and 

OECD’s work and recommendations in the area. 

4.5 Noise 

Sound propagation depends on several factors such as medium, frequency, amplitude, 

temperature, humidity, wind, and geography. Consequently noise levels from one and the 

same source may vary from day to day. It also means that two identical sources of noise 

in different locations may give rise to completely different noise levels and propagation 

patterns and may be experienced differently. 

The most distinguishing outdoor noise from hydropower generation is the sound of streaming 

water at above ground stations. These sound levels are, however, lower than preregulation 

and more often than not considered pleasant. 

Noise levels from transformers are generally moderate (45–60 dB), but the frequencies 

are low (80 dB), which under unfavourable conditions can be disturbing at distances 

of up to 1 km. At Porjus, levels of 92 dB(A) 2 have been measured at 1 meter, and of 

42 dB(A) 2 at 800 meters from the transformer. 

Power lines over 70 kV may give rise to noise (corona noise). Sound levels are moderate - 

45 dB(A) 2 at 25 meters decreasing rapidly. 

1 

Guidelines for Limiting Exposure to Time-Varying Electric, Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields 

(up to 300 GHz), Health Physics Vol. 74, No 4, pp 494-522, 1998. 

2 

dB(A) indicates that a standard method of measurement has been used where the value has been 

corrected with respect to the sensitivity of the human ear at different frequencies. 


5 Information from the CERTIFICATION 

BODY and mandatory statements 

5.1 Information from the Certification Body 

The certification of the environmental product declaration, EPD ® , of electricity from 

Vattenfall’s Nordic Hydropower has been carried out by Bureau Veritas Certification, which 

confirms that the product fulfils relevant process- and product-related laws and regulations. 

The EPD ® has been made in accordance with General Programme Instructions for an 

environmental product declaration, EPD, published by International EPD Consortium (IEC) 

and PCR-CPC17, Product Category Rules (PCR) for preparing an Environmental Product 

Declaration (EPD ® ) for Electricity, Steam, and Hot and Cold Water Generation and Distribution). 

Bureau Veritas Certification has been accredited by SWEDAC, the Swedish Board for 

Accreditation and Conformity Assessment, to certify Environmental Product Declarations, 

EPD ® . This certification is valid until October 31st, 2011. 

5.2 Mandatory Statements 

5.2.1 General 

To be noted: EPDs from different EPD programmes may not be comparable. 

5.2.2 Omissions of life cycle stages 

The use stage of produced electricity has been omitted in accordance with the PCR since 

the use of electricity fulfills various functions in different contexts. 

5.2.3 Means of obtaining explanatory materials 

ISO 14025 prescribes that explanatory material must be available if the EPD ® is communicated 

to final customers. This EPD ® is aimed for industrial customers and not meant for 

B2C (=business to consumer) communication. 

5.2.4 Information on verification 

EPD programme: 

The EPD ® system is managed by International EPD Consortium (IEC), www.environdec.com 

Product Category Rules: 

PCR-CPC17 

PCR review, was conducted by: 

Sven-Olof Ryding, International EPD Consortium (IEC), www.environdec.com 

Independent verification of the declaration and data, according to ISO 14025: 

□ Internal 

□ x External 

Third party verifier: 

Bureau Veritas Certification 


6 Links and references 

www.vattenfall.se 

www.vattenfall.com 

www.environdec.com (The International EPD Consortium (IEC), EPD ® s, and PCRs (PCR-CPC17), 

and General Programme Instructions GPI, 2007) 

The following reports support this EPD ® . They can be read and downloaded at 

www.environdec.com if you have Adobe Acrobat Reader installed: 

Hydropower – Technology and Environment 

Description of selected plants (in Swedish only, Beskrivning av valda anläggningar) 

The Biotope Method 2005 

Contact Vattenfall for the following report: 

Application of the Biotope Method 2005, Appendix to Vattenfall AB Generation Nordic Certified 

Environmental Product Declaration EPD ® of Electricity from Vattenfall’s Nordic Hydropower. 

Data for production of steel has been retrieved from IISI: www.worldsteel.org/lca@iisi.be. 

Data for production of copper and semi fabrication: Life Cycle Assessment of Copper 

Products 2005, Deutsches Kupferinstitut, funded by the global copper industry, coordinated 

by the European Copper Institute (ECI). 

Generic data mainly stem from the database ecoinvent (2007).

Vattenfall aB GeneRatIOn nORDIC CeRtIfIeD enVIROnmental ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?