Impact assessment of CO2 mitigation options in Korea using energy system analysis model

AbstractThe Korea Electric Power Research Institute (KEPRI) has performed a study to analyze the deployment impact of CO2 mitigation options in the power generation sector in Korea, with IEA Clean Coal Centre. The goal of this study is the identification of the viable technology and legal options for CO2 mitigation, and the impact assessment of the options for the Korean power generation sector.The MARKAL modeling package of IEA/ETSAP was used as an appropriate tool to make the database of Korean energy system in the model and assess the effects of the options. Several scenarios were made to study the effect of CO2 emission reductions on the Korean power generation sector, and these were classified as the Base Scenario, New Technology Scenario, Carbon Tax Scenario, Total Carbon Emission Cap Scenario, and mixtures of the scenarios.Under the base scenario based on the National Electricity Plan of Korea, the future power generation will be dominated by nuclear and coal power plants, with some of natural gas fired plant and a very small proportion of renewables. However, with increasing pressure to mitigate CO2 emissions, the analysis results of all four scenarios and combination of the scenarios showed that Korea would have to adopt a little different approach. An extensive modeling work was, therefore, undertaken to analyze the impact of various measures on introduction of new technologies and policies in order to achieve significant CO2 emissions reduction. As results of this work, we found estimated average cost for a ton carbon mitigation and estimated amount of CO2 emission reduction by application of each scenario including constraint of lower limit of coal power generation for security of energy supplies in Korea. The results obtained are to be suggested as recommendation in establishing a sustainable energy portfolio within the Korean power generation sector

Protective ventilation with high versus low positive end-expiratory pressure during one-lung ventilation for thoracic surgery (PROTHOR): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) may result in longer duration of in-hospital stay and even mortality. Both thoracic surgery and intraoperative mechanical ventilation settings add considerably to the risk of PPC. It is unclear if one-lung ventilation (OLV) for thoracic surgery with a strategy of intraoperative high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and recruitment maneuvers (RM) reduces PPC, compared to low PEEP without RM. Methods: PROTHOR is an international, multicenter, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded, two-arm trial initiated by investigators of the PROtective VEntilation NETwork. In total, 2378 patients will be randomly assigned to one of two different intraoperative mechanical ventilation strategies. Investigators screen patients aged 18 years or older, scheduled for open thoracic or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery under general anesthesia requiring OLV, with a maximal body mass index of 35 kg/m2, and a planned duration of surgery of more than 60 min. Further, the expected duration of OLV shall be longer than two-lung ventilation, and lung separation is planned with a double lumen tube. Patients will be randomly assigned to PEEP of 10 cmH2O with lung RM, or PEEP of 5 cmH2O without RM. During two-lung ventilation tidal volume is set at 7 mL/kg predicted body weight and, during OLV, it will be decreased to 5 mL/kg. The occurrence of PPC will be recorded as a collapsed composite of single adverse pulmonary events and represents the primary endpoint. Discussion: PROTHOR is the first randomized controlled trial in patients undergoing thoracic surgery with OLV that is adequately powered to compare the effects of intraoperative high PEEP with RM versus low PEEP without RM on PPC. The results of the PROTHOR trial will support anesthesiologists in their decision to set intraoperative PEEP during protective ventilation for OLV in thoracic surgery. Trial registration: The trial was registered in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02963025) on 15 November 2016