Mexico's growing energy demand necessitates exploring sustainable generation options. This study performs a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of various generation technologies in the Mexican context, assessing the environmental impact of photovoltaic, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric, nuclear, biogas, coal, gas, fuel oil, and diesel systems throughout their life cycle stages, from material extraction and manufacturing to operation and disposal. The LCA results are then integrated into an Optimal Unit Commitment method on the IEEE 39-bus test system in the PowerFactory software to analyze the economic and environmental viability of the generation plants. The analysis shows that the most economically and environmentally viable technologies are wind and solar, both with zero operating costs and zero polluting emissions. As a complementary alternative, hydropower stands out for its reduced operating cost, which is competitive when considering the pollution fines associated with other technologies. The results also recommend reducing the capacity of coal power plants from 1,224 MW to 157 MW, to mitigate 〖CO〗_2 emissions and avoid additional pollution costs. The findings aim to inform policymakers and stakeholders in selecting environmentally responsible generation solutions that contribute to a sustainable and diversified energy mix for Mexico.

The global energy transition to renewable energy sources requires a rigorous assessment of the environmental impacts of all system components, including power electronics converters (PECs), which play a critical role in adapting generated energy to grid and load requirements. This paper presents a comprehensive comparative assessment of conventional PECs used in renewable energy systems, with a focus on DC-AC, DC-DC, and AC-DC converters. The study combines life cycle assessment (LCA) with the Circular Energy Sustainability Index (CESI) to evaluate both environmental performance and material circularity. The LCA is conducted using a functional unit defined as a representative converter, within consistent system boundaries that encompass material extraction, manufacturing, and end-of-life stages. This approach enables comparability among converter topologies but introduces limitations related to the exclusion of application-specific design optimizations, such as maximum efficiency, spatial constraints, and thermal management. CESI is subsequently applied as a decision-support tool to rank converter technologies according to sustainability and circularity criteria. The results reveal substantial differences among converter types: the controlled rectifier exhibits the lowest environmental impact and the highest circularity score (95.3%), followed by the uncontrolled rectifier (69.3%), whereas the inverter shows the highest environmental burden and the lowest circularity performance (38.6%), primarily due to its higher structural complexity and the material and manufacturing intensity associated with its switching architecture.