IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/inecol/v27y2023i3p676-692.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scheme for generating upscaling scenarios of emerging functional materials based energy technologies in prospective LCA (UpFunMatLCA)

Author

Listed:
  • Steffi Weyand
  • Kotaro Kawajiri
  • Claudiu Mortan
  • Liselotte Schebek

Abstract

Upscaling scenarios are indispensable elements of prospective life cycle assessment (LCA). However, current studies reveal confusing terminology and a wide range of approaches in this area. Therefore, we first defined the term upscaling scenario as the description of a possible future target stage of emerging technology, including the development pathway from a current stage within the course of research and development to this future stage. Second, we developed the novel systematic scheme UpFunMatLCA for generating explorative scenarios based on possible development pathways of the specific group of emerging functional material (FunMat)‐based energy technologies, including status quo developments. UpFunMatLCA represents a three‐step extension of conventional LCAs to upscale the life cycle inventory of emerging FunMats. UpFunMatLCA is based on a clear definition of a current status quo (conceptual, lab, or pilot stage) and a target matured (fab) development stage. A core part of UpFunMatLCA is the so‐called upscaling module, providing specific modeling methods and data for the upscaling of FunMats. Using perovskite solar cells, photovoltaic devices based on several FunMats and attached with great expectations regarding the future efficient provision of solar energy, we demonstrate the application of UpFunMatLCA, focusing on the upstream greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the prospective manufacturing. In the discussion, we point out the application area of UpFunMatLCA and the possible extension to depict further environmental impacts beyond GHG to contribute to the sustainability assessment of emerging technologies in the early stages of development.

Suggested Citation

  • Steffi Weyand & Kotaro Kawajiri & Claudiu Mortan & Liselotte Schebek, 2023. "Scheme for generating upscaling scenarios of emerging functional materials based energy technologies in prospective LCA (UpFunMatLCA)," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(3), pages 676-692, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:27:y:2023:i:3:p:676-692
    DOI: 10.1111/jiec.13394
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13394
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jiec.13394?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Atse Louwen & Wilfried G. J. H. M. van Sark & André P. C. Faaij & Ruud E. I. Schropp, 2016. "Re-assessment of net energy production and greenhouse gas emissions avoidance after 40 years of photovoltaics development," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, December.
    2. Sheikh Moniruzzaman Moni & Roksana Mahmud & Karen High & Michael Carbajales‐Dale, 2020. "Life cycle assessment of emerging technologies: A review," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(1), pages 52-63, February.
    3. Han Chen & Fei Ye & Wentao Tang & Jinjin He & Maoshu Yin & Yanbo Wang & Fengxian Xie & Enbing Bi & Xudong Yang & Michael Grätzel & Liyuan Han, 2017. "A solvent- and vacuum-free route to large-area perovskite films for efficient solar modules," Nature, Nature, vol. 550(7674), pages 92-95, October.
    4. Nils Thonemann & Anna Schulte & Daniel Maga, 2020. "How to Conduct Prospective Life Cycle Assessment for Emerging Technologies? A Systematic Review and Methodological Guidance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, February.
    5. Bergesen, Joseph D. & Suh, Sangwon, 2016. "A framework for technological learning in the supply chain: A case study on CdTe photovoltaics," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 721-728.
    6. Grubler, Arnulf & Nakicenovic, Nebojsa & Victor, David G., 1999. "Dynamics of energy technologies and global change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 247-280, May.
    7. Steffi Weyand & Carolin Wittich & Liselotte Schebek, 2019. "Environmental Performance of Emerging Photovoltaic Technologies: Assessment of the Status Quo and Future Prospects Based on a Meta-Analysis of Life-Cycle Assessment Studies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-25, November.
    8. Ólafur Ögmundarson & Markus J. Herrgård & Jochen Forster & Michael Z. Hauschild & Peter Fantke, 2020. "Addressing environmental sustainability of biochemicals," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 3(3), pages 167-174, March.
    9. Sheetal Gavankar & Sangwon Suh & Arturo A. Keller, 2015. "The Role of Scale and Technology Maturity in Life Cycle Assessment of Emerging Technologies: A Case Study on Carbon Nanotubes," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 19(1), pages 51-60, February.
    10. Kosow, Hannah & Gaßner, Robert, 2008. "Methods of future and scenario analysis: overview, assessment, and selection criteria," IDOS Studies, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS), volume 39, number 39, March.
    11. Marloes Caduff & Mark A.J. Huijbregts & Annette Koehler & Hans-Jörg Althaus & Stefanie Hellweg, 2014. "Scaling Relationships in Life Cycle Assessment," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(3), pages 393-406, May.
    12. Mitchell K. van der Hulst & Mark A. J. Huijbregts & Niels van Loon & Mirjam Theelen & Lucinda Kootstra & Joseph D. Bergesen & Mara Hauck, 2020. "A systematic approach to assess the environmental impact of emerging technologies: A case study for the GHG footprint of CIGS solar photovoltaic laminate," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(6), pages 1234-1249, December.
    13. Smith, Lucy & Ibn-Mohammed, Taofeeq & Koh, S.C. Lenny & Reaney, Ian M., 2018. "Life cycle assessment and environmental profile evaluations of high volumetric efficiency capacitors," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 220(C), pages 496-513.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mitchell K. van der Hulst & Mark A. J. Huijbregts & Niels van Loon & Mirjam Theelen & Lucinda Kootstra & Joseph D. Bergesen & Mara Hauck, 2020. "A systematic approach to assess the environmental impact of emerging technologies: A case study for the GHG footprint of CIGS solar photovoltaic laminate," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(6), pages 1234-1249, December.
    2. Nils Thonemann & Anna Schulte & Daniel Maga, 2020. "How to Conduct Prospective Life Cycle Assessment for Emerging Technologies? A Systematic Review and Methodological Guidance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-23, February.
    3. Emma A. R. Zuiderveen & Koen J. J. Kuipers & Carla Caldeira & Steef V. Hanssen & Mitchell K. Hulst & Melinda M. J. Jonge & Anestis Vlysidis & Rosalie Zelm & Serenella Sala & Mark A. J. Huijbregts, 2023. "The potential of emerging bio-based products to reduce environmental impacts," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-7, December.
    4. Matthias Buyle & Amaryllis Audenaert & Pieter Billen & Katrien Boonen & Steven Van Passel, 2019. "The Future of Ex-Ante LCA? Lessons Learned and Practical Recommendations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-24, October.
    5. Mélanie Douziech & Romain Besseau & Raphaël Jolivet & Bianka Shoai‐Tehrani & Jean‐Yves Bourmaud & Guillaume Busato & Mathilde Gresset‐Bourgeois & Paula Pérez‐López, 2024. "Life cycle assessment of prospective trajectories: A parametric approach for tailor‐made inventories and its computational implementation," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 28(1), pages 25-40, February.
    6. Anna Furberg & Rickard Arvidsson & Sverker Molander, 2022. "A practice‐based framework for defining functional units in comparative life cycle assessments of materials," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(3), pages 718-730, June.
    7. Deidre Wolff & Svenja Weber & Tobias Graumann & Stefan Zebrowski & Nils Mainusch & Nikolas Dilger & Felipe Cerdas & Sabrina Zellmer, 2023. "An Environmental and Technical Evaluation of Vacuum-Based Thin Film Technologies: Lithium Niobate Coated Cathode Active Material for Use in All-Solid-State Battery Cells," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-22, January.
    8. Sacchi, R. & Terlouw, T. & Siala, K. & Dirnaichner, A. & Bauer, C. & Cox, B. & Mutel, C. & Daioglou, V. & Luderer, G., 2022. "PRospective EnvironMental Impact asSEment (premise): A streamlined approach to producing databases for prospective life cycle assessment using integrated assessment models," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    9. Thomassen, Gwenny & Van Passel, Steven & Dewulf, Jo, 2020. "A review on learning effects in prospective technology assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    10. Aikaterini Anastasopoulou & Robin Keijzer & Bhaskar Patil & Jürgen Lang & Gerard van Rooij & Volker Hessel, 2020. "Environmental impact assessment of plasma‐assisted and conventional ammonia synthesis routes," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(5), pages 1171-1185, October.
    11. Yang Qiu & Patrick Lamers & Vassilis Daioglou & Noah McQueen & Harmen-Sytze Boer & Mathijs Harmsen & Jennifer Wilcox & André Bardow & Sangwon Suh, 2022. "Environmental trade-offs of direct air capture technologies in climate change mitigation toward 2100," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, December.
    12. Bergesen, Joseph D. & Suh, Sangwon, 2016. "A framework for technological learning in the supply chain: A case study on CdTe photovoltaics," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 721-728.
    13. Jarvis, Andrew, 2018. "Energy Returns and The Long-run Growth of Global Industrial Society," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 722-729.
    14. Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2004. "Cost-effective environmental policy: implications of induced technological change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 1099-1121, November.
    15. Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Montini, Anna & Zoboli, Roberto, 2006. "Municipal Waste Production, Economic Drivers, and 'New' Waste Policies: EKC Evidence from Italian Regional and Provincial Panel Data," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 12053, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    16. Emblemsvåg, Jan, 2022. "Wind energy is not sustainable when balanced by fossil energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    17. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    18. Christiansen, Atle Christer, 2002. "New renewable energy developments and the climate change issue: a case study of Norwegian politics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 235-243, February.
    19. Di Zio, Simone & Bolzan, Mario & Marozzi, Marco, 2021. "Classification of Delphi outputs through robust ranking and fuzzy clustering for Delphi-based scenarios," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    20. Khalifa Mohammed Al-Sobai & Shaligram Pokharel & Galal M. Abdella, 2020. "Perspectives on the Capabilities for the Selection of Strategic Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-20, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:inecol:v:27:y:2023:i:3:p:676-692. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1088-1980 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.