IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v182y2019icp535-543.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-dimensional life cycle assessment of decentralised energy storage systems

Author

Listed:
  • Stougie, Lydia
  • Del Santo, Giulia
  • Innocenti, Giulia
  • Goosen, Emil
  • Vermaas, David
  • van der Kooi, Hedzer
  • Lombardi, Lidia

Abstract

The intermittent nature of renewable energy sources like solar and wind energy stimulates the use of centralised and decentralised energy storage systems. The sustainability of lead acid, lithium-ion and concentration gradient flow batteries, compressed air and pumped hydro energy storage (PHES) systems is investigated by conducting a multi-dimensional life cycle assessment. The environmental, economic and exergetic sustainability are assessed by calculating ReCiPe 2016 indicators, the present worth ratio and the Total Cumulative Exergy Loss, respectively. The multi-dimensional sustainability assessment did not lead to one preferred system. The PHES causes the lowest damage to human health, ecosystem diversity and resource availability and results in the lowest global warming potential. The concentration gradient flow battery system named BBS is preferred from an economic viewpoint, while the PHES is second-best. The lithium-ion battery system causes the lowest exergy losses, followed by the PHES. It is recommended to pay attention to the exergetic sustainability of technological systems as exergy losses are independent of environmental models, weighting factors, market prices, subsidies etc. More research into the specifications of the energy storage systems is needed to be able to draw firm conclusions with regard to which system is preferred.

Suggested Citation

  • Stougie, Lydia & Del Santo, Giulia & Innocenti, Giulia & Goosen, Emil & Vermaas, David & van der Kooi, Hedzer & Lombardi, Lidia, 2019. "Multi-dimensional life cycle assessment of decentralised energy storage systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 535-543.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:182:y:2019:i:c:p:535-543
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2019.05.110
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544219309909
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2019.05.110?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lechón, Yolanda & Lago, Carmen & Herrera, Israel & Gamarra, Ana Rosa & Pérula, Alberto, 2023. "Carbon benefits of different energy storage alternative end uses. Application to the Spanish case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    2. Khojasteh, Meysam & Faria, Pedro & Vale, Zita, 2022. "A robust model for aggregated bidding of energy storages and wind resources in the joint energy and reserve markets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 238(PB).
    3. Minas, Angela Mae & García-Freites, Samira & Walsh, Christopher & Mukoro, Velma & Aberilla, Jhud Mikhail & April, Amanda & Kuriakose, Jaise & Gaete-Morales, Carlos & Gallego-Schmid, Alejandro & Mander, 2024. "Advancing Sustainable Development Goals through energy access: Lessons from the Global South," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    4. Le, Son Tay & Nguyen, Tuan Ngoc & Bui, Dac-Khuong & Teodosio, Birch & Ngo, Tuan Duc, 2024. "Comparative life cycle assessment of renewable energy storage systems for net-zero buildings with varying self-sufficient ratios," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
    5. Daniele Cocco & Lorenzo Lecis & Davide Micheletto, 2023. "Life Cycle Assessment of an Integrated PV-ACAES System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-18, February.

    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:eee:energy:v:182:y:2019:i:c:p:535-543. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    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.