IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v28y2013icp555-565.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: Overview, comparability and limitations

Author

Listed:
  • Turconi, Roberto
  • Boldrin, Alessio
  • Astrup, Thomas

Abstract

Electricity generation is a key contributor to global emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), NOx and SO2 and their related environmental impact. A critical review of 167 case studies involving the life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation based on hard coal, lignite, natural gas, oil, nuclear, biomass, hydroelectric, solar photovoltaic (PV) and wind was carried out to identify ranges of emission data for GHG, NOx and SO2 related to individual technologies. It was shown that GHG emissions could not be used as a single indicator to represent the environmental performance of a system or technology. Emission data were evaluated with respect to three life cycle phases (fuel provision, plant operation, and infrastructure). Direct emissions from plant operation represented the majority of the life cycle emissions for fossil fuel technologies, whereas fuel provision represented the largest contribution for biomass technologies (71% for GHG, 54% for NOx and 61% for SO2) and nuclear power (60% for GHG, 82% for NOx and 92% for SO2); infrastructures provided the highest impact for renewables. These data indicated that all three phases should be included for completeness and to avoid problem shifting. The most critical methodological aspects in relation to LCA studies were identified as follows: definition of the functional unit, the LCA method employed (e.g., IOA, PCA and hybrid), the emission allocation principle and/or system boundary expansion. The most important technological aspects were identified as follows: the energy recovery efficiency and the flue gas cleaning system for fossil fuel technologies; the electricity mix used during both the manufacturing and the construction phases for nuclear and renewable technologies; and the type, quality and origin of feedstock, as well as the amount and type of co-products, for biomass-based systems. This review demonstrates that the variability of existing LCA results for electricity generation can give rise to conflicting decisions regarding the environmental consequences of implementing new technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Turconi, Roberto & Boldrin, Alessio & Astrup, Thomas, 2013. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: Overview, comparability and limitations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 555-565.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:28:y:2013:i:c:p:555-565
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2013.08.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032113005534
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2013.08.013?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stacey L. Dolan & Garvin A. Heath, 2012. "Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Utility‐Scale Wind Power," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 16(s1), pages 136-154, April.
    2. Fthenakis, Vasilis M. & Kim, Hyung Chul, 2007. "Greenhouse-gas emissions from solar electric- and nuclear power: A life-cycle study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 2549-2557, April.
    3. Hondo, Hiroki, 2005. "Life cycle GHG emission analysis of power generation systems: Japanese case," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 30(11), pages 2042-2056.
    4. van de Vate, Joop F., 1997. "Comparison of energy sources in terms of their full energy chain emission factors of greenhouse gases," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-6, January.
    5. Sebastián, F. & Royo, J. & Gómez, M., 2011. "Cofiring versus biomass-fired power plants: GHG (Greenhouse Gases) emissions savings comparison by means of LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) methodology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 2029-2037.
    6. Sherwani, A.F. & Usmani, J.A. & Varun, 2010. "Life cycle assessment of solar PV based electricity generation systems: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 540-544, January.
    7. Ethan S. Warner & Garvin A. Heath, 2012. "Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Nuclear Electricity Generation," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 16(s1), pages 73-92, April.
    8. Krauter, S & Rüther, R, 2004. "Considerations for the calculation of greenhouse gas reduction by photovoltaic solar energy," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 345-355.
    9. Kannan, R. & Leong, K.C. & Osman, R. & Ho, H.K., 2007. "Life cycle energy, emissions and cost inventory of power generation technologies in Singapore," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 702-715, May.
    10. Meier, Paul J. & Wilson, Paul P. H. & Kulcinski, Gerald L. & Denholm, Paul L., 2005. "US electric industry response to carbon constraint: a life-cycle assessment of supply side alternatives," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1099-1108, June.
    11. Raadal, Hanne Lerche & Gagnon, Luc & Modahl, Ingunn Saur & Hanssen, Ole Jørgen, 2011. "Life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the generation of wind and hydro power," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(7), pages 3417-3422, September.
    12. Schleisner, L, 2000. "Life cycle assessment of a wind farm and related externalities," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 279-288.
    13. Pierryves Padey & Isabelle Blanc & Denis Le Boulch & Zhao Xiusheng, 2012. "A Simplified Life Cycle Approach for Assessing Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Wind Electricity," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 16(s1), pages 28-38, April.
    14. Reinout Heijungs & Arjan de Koning & Sangwon Suh & Gjalt Huppes, 2006. "Toward an Information Tool for Integrated Product Policy: Requirements for Data and Computation," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 10(3), pages 147-158, July.
    15. Tonini, Davide & Astrup, Thomas, 2012. "LCA of biomass-based energy systems: A case study for Denmark," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 234-246.
    16. Arvesen, Anders & Hertwich, Edgar G., 2012. "Assessing the life cycle environmental impacts of wind power: A review of present knowledge and research needs," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(8), pages 5994-6006.
    17. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2008. "Valuing the greenhouse gas emissions from nuclear power: A critical survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 2940-2953, August.
    18. Lenzen, Manfred & Munksgaard, Jesper, 2002. "Energy and CO2 life-cycle analyses of wind turbines—review and applications," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 339-362.
    19. Voorspools, Kris R. & Brouwers, Els A. & D'haeseleer, William D., 2000. "Energy content and indirect greenhouse gas emissions embedded in [`]emission-free' power plants: results for the Low Countries," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 307-330, November.
    20. Gagnon, Luc & Belanger, Camille & Uchiyama, Yohji, 2002. "Life-cycle assessment of electricity generation options: The status of research in year 2001," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(14), pages 1267-1278, November.
    21. Varun & Bhat, I.K. & Prakash, Ravi, 2009. "LCA of renewable energy for electricity generation systems--A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 1067-1073, June.
    22. Corti, Andrea & Lombardi, Lidia, 2004. "Biomass integrated gasification combined cycle with reduced CO2 emissions: Performance analysis and life cycle assessment (LCA)," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(12), pages 2109-2124.
    23. Khan, Faisal I. & Hawboldt, Kelly & Iqbal, M.T., 2005. "Life Cycle Analysis of wind–fuel cell integrated system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 157-177.
    24. Peng, Jinqing & Lu, Lin & Yang, Hongxing, 2013. "Review on life cycle assessment of energy payback and greenhouse gas emission of solar photovoltaic systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 255-274.
    25. Belanger, Camille & Gagnon, Luc, 2002. "Adding wind energy to hydropower," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(14), pages 1279-1284, November.
    26. Gagnon, Luc & van de Vate, Joop F., 1997. "Greenhouse gas emissions from hydropower : The state of research in 1996," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 7-13, January.
    27. Weisser, Daniel, 2007. "A guide to life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from electric supply technologies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1543-1559.
    28. Nomura, Noboru & Inaba, Atsushi & Tonooka, Yutaka & Akai, Makoto, 2001. "Life-cycle emission of oxidic gases from power-generation systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 215-227, February.
    29. Pehnt, Martin, 2006. "Dynamic life cycle assessment (LCA) of renewable energy technologies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 55-71.
    30. Evans, Annette & Strezov, Vladimir & Evans, Tim J., 2009. "Assessment of sustainability indicators for renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 1082-1088, June.
    31. Heller, Martin C & Keoleian, Gregory A & Mann, Margaret K & Volk, Timothy A, 2004. "Life cycle energy and environmental benefits of generating electricity from willow biomass," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7), pages 1023-1042.
    32. David D. Hsu & Patrick O’Donoughue & Vasilis Fthenakis & Garvin A. Heath & Hyung Chul Kim & Pamala Sawyer & Jun‐Ki Choi & Damon E. Turney, 2012. "Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Electricity Generation," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 16(s1), pages 122-135, April.
    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. Nugent, Daniel & Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2014. "Assessing the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions from solar PV and wind energy: A critical meta-survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 229-244.
    2. Evans, Annette & Strezov, Vladimir & Evans, Tim J., 2009. "Assessment of sustainability indicators for renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 1082-1088, June.
    3. Amponsah, Nana Yaw & Troldborg, Mads & Kington, Bethany & Aalders, Inge & Hough, Rupert Lloyd, 2014. "Greenhouse gas emissions from renewable energy sources: A review of lifecycle considerations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 461-475.
    4. Feng, Kuishuang & Hubacek, Klaus & Siu, Yim Ling & Li, Xin, 2014. "The energy and water nexus in Chinese electricity production: A hybrid life cycle analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 342-355.
    5. Song, Cuihong & Gardner, Kevin H. & Klein, Sharon J.W. & Souza, Simone Pereira & Mo, Weiwei, 2018. "Cradle-to-grave greenhouse gas emissions from dams in the United States of America," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 945-956.
    6. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos, 2016. "Decision making in renewable energy investments: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 885-898.
    7. Asdrubali, Francesco & Baldinelli, Giorgio & D’Alessandro, Francesco & Scrucca, Flavio, 2015. "Life cycle assessment of electricity production from renewable energies: Review and results harmonization," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1113-1122.
    8. Yang, Jin & Chen, Bin, 2013. "Integrated evaluation of embodied energy, greenhouse gas emission and economic performance of a typical wind farm in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 559-568.
    9. Raadal, Hanne Lerche & Gagnon, Luc & Modahl, Ingunn Saur & Hanssen, Ole Jørgen, 2011. "Life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the generation of wind and hydro power," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(7), pages 3417-3422, September.
    10. Alvarez, Sergio & Sosa, María & Rubio, Agustín, 2015. "Product and corporate carbon footprint using the compound method based on financial accounts. The case of Osorio wind farms," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 196-204.
    11. Sokka, L. & Sinkko, T. & Holma, A. & Manninen, K. & Pasanen, K. & Rantala, M. & Leskinen, P., 2016. "Environmental impacts of the national renewable energy targets – A case study from Finland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 1599-1610.
    12. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2008. "Valuing the greenhouse gas emissions from nuclear power: A critical survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 2940-2953, August.
    13. Varun, & Prakash, Ravi & Bhat, I.K., 2012. "Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions estimation for small hydropower schemes in India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 498-508.
    14. Weisser, Daniel, 2007. "A guide to life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from electric supply technologies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1543-1559.
    15. Sarah Wettstein & Karen Muir & Deborah Scharfy & Matthias Stucki, 2017. "The Environmental Mitigation Potential of Photovoltaic-Powered Irrigation in the Production of South African Maize," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-20, September.
    16. Arvesen, Anders & Hertwich, Edgar G., 2012. "Assessing the life cycle environmental impacts of wind power: A review of present knowledge and research needs," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(8), pages 5994-6006.
    17. Varun & Prakash, Ravi & Bhat, Inder Krishnan, 2009. "Energy, economics and environmental impacts of renewable energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2716-2721, December.
    18. Nian, Victor & Chou, S.K. & Su, Bin & Bauly, John, 2014. "Life cycle analysis on carbon emissions from power generation – The nuclear energy example," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 68-82.
    19. Emblemsvåg, Jan, 2022. "Wind energy is not sustainable when balanced by fossil energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    20. Osmani, Atif & Zhang, Jun & Gonela, Vinay & Awudu, Iddrisu, 2013. "Electricity generation from renewables in the United States: Resource potential, current usage, technical status, challenges, strategies, policies, and future directions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 454-472.

    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:rensus:v:28:y:2013:i:c:p:555-565. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    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.