IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i7p2786-d340088.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life Cycle Analysis of a Geothermal Power Plant: Comparison of the Environmental Performance with Other Renewable Energy Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Riccardo Basosi

    (RES Lab, Department of Biotechnology, Chemistry and Pharmacy, University of Siena, 53100 Siena, Italy
    Center for Colloid and Surface Science, 50019 Firenze, Italy)

  • Roberto Bonciani

    (Enel Green Power, 56122 Pisa, Italy)

  • Dario Frosali

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Florence, 50135 Florence, Italy)

  • Giampaolo Manfrida

    (Center for Colloid and Surface Science, 50019 Firenze, Italy
    Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Florence, 50135 Florence, Italy)

  • Maria Laura Parisi

    (RES Lab, Department of Biotechnology, Chemistry and Pharmacy, University of Siena, 53100 Siena, Italy
    Center for Colloid and Surface Science, 50019 Firenze, Italy)

  • Franco Sansone

    (Enel Green Power, 56122 Pisa, Italy)

Abstract

A life cycle analysis was performed for the assessment of the environmental performances of three existing Italian power plants of comparable nominal power operating with different sources of renewable energy: Geothermal, solar, and wind. Primary data were used for building the life cycle inventories. The results are characterized by employing a wide portfolio of environmental indicators employing the ReCiPe 2016 and the ILCD 2011 Midpoint+ methods; normalization and weighting are also applied using the ReCiPe 2016 method at the endpoint level. The midpoint results demonstrate a good eco-profile of the geothermal power plant compared to other renewable energy systems and a definite step forward over the performance of the national energy mix. The Eco-Point single score calculation showed that wind energy is the best technology with a value of 0.0012 Eco-points/kWh, a result in line with previously documented life cycle analysis studies. Nevertheless, the geothermal power plant achieved a value of 0.0177 Eco-points/kWh which is close to that calculated for the photovoltaic plant (0.0087 Eco-points/kWh) and much lower than the national energy mix one (0.1240 Eco-points/kWh). Also, a scenario analysis allowed for a critical discussion about potential improvements to the environmental performance of the geothermal power plant.

Suggested Citation

  • Riccardo Basosi & Roberto Bonciani & Dario Frosali & Giampaolo Manfrida & Maria Laura Parisi & Franco Sansone, 2020. "Life Cycle Analysis of a Geothermal Power Plant: Comparison of the Environmental Performance with Other Renewable Energy Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-29, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2786-:d:340088
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2786/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2786/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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. 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.
    3. Atilgan, Burcin & Azapagic, Adisa, 2016. "Renewable electricity in Turkey: Life cycle environmental impacts," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 649-657.
    4. Frick, Stephanie & Kaltschmitt, Martin & Schröder, Gerd, 2010. "Life cycle assessment of geothermal binary power plants using enhanced low-temperature reservoirs," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2281-2294.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Ciriaco, Anthony E. & Zarrouk, Sadiq J. & Zakeri, Golbon, 2020. "Geothermal resource and reserve assessment methodology: Overview, analysis and future directions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    8. Trumpy, Eugenio & Bertani, Ruggero & Manzella, Adele & Sander, Marietta, 2015. "The web-oriented framework of the world geothermal production database: A business intelligence platform for wide data distribution and analysis," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 379-389.
    9. Lu, Shyi-Min, 2018. "A global review of enhanced geothermal system (EGS)," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 2902-2921.
    10. Shortall, Ruth & Davidsdottir, Brynhildur & Axelsson, Guðni, 2015. "A sustainability assessment framework for geothermal energy projects: Development in Iceland, New Zealand and Kenya," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 372-407.
    11. Vincenzo Muteri & Maurizio Cellura & Domenico Curto & Vincenzo Franzitta & Sonia Longo & Marina Mistretta & Maria Laura Parisi, 2020. "Review on Life Cycle Assessment of Solar Photovoltaic Panels," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-38, January.
    12. Guezuraga, Begoña & Zauner, Rudolf & Pölz, Werner, 2012. "Life cycle assessment of two different 2 MW class wind turbines," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 37-44.
    13. Stoppato, A., 2008. "Life cycle assessment of photovoltaic electricity generation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 224-232.
    14. Pehnt, Martin, 2006. "Dynamic life cycle assessment (LCA) of renewable energy technologies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 55-71.
    15. Ardente, Fulvio & Beccali, Marco & Cellura, Maurizio & Lo Brano, Valerio, 2008. "Energy performances and life cycle assessment of an Italian wind farm," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 200-217, January.
    16. Bayer, Peter & Rybach, Ladislaus & Blum, Philipp & Brauchler, Ralf, 2013. "Review on life cycle environmental effects of geothermal power generation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 446-463.
    17. Mendecka, Barbara & Lombardi, Lidia, 2019. "Life cycle environmental impacts of wind energy technologies: A review of simplified models and harmonization of the results," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 462-480.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Gerbinet, Saïcha & Belboom, Sandra & Léonard, Angélique, 2014. "Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) of photovoltaic panels: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 747-753.
    21. Simone Maranghi & Maria Laura Parisi & Riccardo Basosi & Adalgisa Sinicropi, 2019. "Environmental Profile of the Manufacturing Process of Perovskite Photovoltaics: Harmonization of Life Cycle Assessment Studies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-19, September.
    22. Weinzettel, Jan & Reenaas, Marte & Solli, Christian & Hertwich, Edgar G., 2009. "Life cycle assessment of a floating offshore wind turbine," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 742-747.
    23. Anderson, Austin & Rezaie, Behnaz, 2019. "Geothermal technology: Trends and potential role in a sustainable future," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 248(C), pages 18-34.
    24. Raugei, Marco & Bargigli, Silvia & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2007. "Life cycle assessment and energy pay-back time of advanced photovoltaic modules: CdTe and CIS compared to poly-Si," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1310-1318.
    25. 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.
    26. Barbier, Enrico, 2002. "Geothermal energy technology and current status: an overview," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 6(1-2), pages 3-65.
    27. Lacirignola, Martino & Blanc, Isabelle, 2013. "Environmental analysis of practical design options for enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) through life-cycle assessment," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 901-914.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Lorenzo Tosti & Nicola Ferrara & Riccardo Basosi & Maria Laura Parisi, 2020. "Complete Data Inventory of a Geothermal Power Plant for Robust Cradle-to-Grave Life Cycle Assessment Results," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, June.
    2. Alejandro García-Gil & Miguel Mejías Moreno & Eduardo Garrido Schneider & Miguel Ángel Marazuela & Corinna Abesser & Jesús Mateo Lázaro & José Ángel Sánchez Navarro, 2020. "Nested Shallow Geothermal Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-13, June.
    3. Sigurjónsson, Hafþór Ægir & Cook, David & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Bogason, Sigurður G., 2021. "A life-cycle analysis of deep enhanced geothermal systems – The case studies of Reykjanes, Iceland and Vendenheim, France," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 1076-1086.
    4. Milousi, Maria & Souliotis, Manolis, 2023. "A circular economy approach to residential solar thermal systems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 242-252.
    5. Gkousis, Spiros & Thomassen, Gwenny & Welkenhuysen, Kris & Compernolle, Tine, 2022. "Dynamic life cycle assessment of geothermal heat production from medium enthalpy hydrothermal resources," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 328(C).
    6. Vaccari, Marco & Pannocchia, Gabriele & Tognotti, Leonardo & Paci, Marco, 2023. "Rigorous simulation of geothermal power plants to evaluate environmental performance of alternative configurations," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 471-483.
    7. Violeta Motuzienė & Kęstutis Čiuprinskas & Artur Rogoža & Vilūnė Lapinskienė, 2022. "A Review of the Life Cycle Analysis Results for Different Energy Conversion Technologies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-26, November.
    8. Rahman, Abidur & Farrok, Omar & Haque, Md Mejbaul, 2022. "Environmental impact of renewable energy source based electrical power plants: Solar, wind, hydroelectric, biomass, geothermal, tidal, ocean, and osmotic," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    9. Maria Laura Parisi & Melanie Douziech & Lorenzo Tosti & Paula Pérez-López & Barbara Mendecka & Sergio Ulgiati & Daniele Fiaschi & Giampaolo Manfrida & Isabelle Blanc, 2020. "Definition of LCA Guidelines in the Geothermal Sector to Enhance Result Comparability," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-18, July.
    10. Menberg, Kathrin & Heberle, Florian & Uhrmann, Hannah & Bott, Christoph & Grünäugl, Sebastian & Brüggemann, Dieter & Bayer, Peter, 2023. "Environmental impact of cogeneration in binary geothermal plants," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    11. Daniele Fiaschi & Giampaolo Manfrida & Barbara Mendecka & Lorenzo Tosti & Maria Laura Parisi, 2021. "A Comparison of Different Approaches for Assessing Energy Outputs of Combined Heat and Power Geothermal Plants," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-13, April.
    12. Solano-Olivares, K. & Santoyo, E. & Santoyo-Castelazo, E., 2024. "Integrated sustainability assessment framework for geothermal energy technologies: A literature review and a new proposal of sustainability indicators for Mexico," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    13. Giambattista Guidi & Anna Carmela Violante & Simona De Iuliis, 2023. "Environmental Impact of Electricity Generation Technologies: A Comparison between Conventional, Nuclear, and Renewable Technologies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-33, November.
    14. Gkousis, Spiros & Welkenhuysen, Kris & Compernolle, Tine, 2022. "Deep geothermal energy extraction, a review on environmental hotspots with focus on geo-technical site conditions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    15. Maryori Díaz-Ramírez & Snorri Jokull & Claudio Zuffi & María Dolores Mainar-Toledo & Giampaolo Manfrida, 2023. "Environmental Assessment of Hellisheidi Geothermal Power Plant based on Exergy Allocation Factors for Heat and Electricity Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-17, April.
    16. Vitantonio Colucci & Giampaolo Manfrida & Barbara Mendecka & Lorenzo Talluri & Claudio Zuffi, 2021. "LCA and Exergo-Environmental Evaluation of a Combined Heat and Power Double-Flash Geothermal Power Plant," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-23, February.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Campos-Guzmán, Verónica & García-Cáscales, M. Socorro & Espinosa, Nieves & Urbina, Antonio, 2019. "Life Cycle Analysis with Multi-Criteria Decision Making: A review of approaches for the sustainability evaluation of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 343-366.
    5. Ludin, Norasikin Ahmad & Mustafa, Nur Ifthitah & Hanafiah, Marlia M. & Ibrahim, Mohd Adib & Asri Mat Teridi, Mohd & Sepeai, Suhaila & Zaharim, Azami & Sopian, Kamaruzzaman, 2018. "Prospects of life cycle assessment of renewable energy from solar photovoltaic technologies: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 11-28.
    6. Soltani, M. & Moradi Kashkooli, Farshad & Souri, Mohammad & Rafiei, Behnam & Jabarifar, Mohammad & Gharali, Kobra & Nathwani, Jatin S., 2021. "Environmental, economic, and social impacts of geothermal energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    7. Gkousis, Spiros & Welkenhuysen, Kris & Compernolle, Tine, 2022. "Deep geothermal energy extraction, a review on environmental hotspots with focus on geo-technical site conditions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    8. Gkousis, Spiros & Thomassen, Gwenny & Welkenhuysen, Kris & Compernolle, Tine, 2022. "Dynamic life cycle assessment of geothermal heat production from medium enthalpy hydrothermal resources," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 328(C).
    9. Mendecka, Barbara & Lombardi, Lidia, 2019. "Life cycle environmental impacts of wind energy technologies: A review of simplified models and harmonization of the results," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 462-480.
    10. Gao, Cheng-kang & Na, Hong-ming & Song, Kai-hui & Dyer, Noel & Tian, Fan & Xu, Qing-jiang & Xing, Yu-hong, 2019. "Environmental impact analysis of power generation from biomass and wind farms in different locations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 307-317.
    11. 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.
    12. Mahmud, M.A. Parvez & Huda, Nazmul & Farjana, Shahjadi Hisan & Lang, Candace, 2020. "Life-cycle impact assessment of renewable electricity generation systems in the United States," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 1028-1045.
    13. Mahmud, M.A. Parvez & Farjana, Shahjadi Hisan, 2022. "Comparative life cycle environmental impact assessment of renewable electricity generation systems: A practical approach towards Europe, North America and Oceania," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 1106-1120.
    14. Cao, Yijia & Wang, Xifan & Li, Yong & Tan, Yi & Xing, Jianbo & Fan, Ruixiang, 2016. "A comprehensive study on low-carbon impact of distributed generations on regional power grids: A case of Jiangxi provincial power grid in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 766-778.
    15. Ling-Chin, J. & Heidrich, O. & Roskilly, A.P., 2016. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) – from analysing methodology development to introducing an LCA framework for marine photovoltaic (PV) systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 352-378.
    16. Summerfield-Ryan, Oliver & Park, Susan, 2023. "The power of wind: The global wind energy industry's successes and failures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    17. Emblemsvåg, Jan, 2022. "Wind energy is not sustainable when balanced by fossil energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    18. Niklas Andersen & Ola Eriksson & Karl Hillman & Marita Wallhagen, 2016. "Wind Turbines’ End-of-Life: Quantification and Characterisation of Future Waste Materials on a National Level," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-24, November.
    19. 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.
    20. Alizadeh, Sadegh & Avami, Akram, 2021. "Development of a framework for the sustainability evaluation of renewable and fossil fuel power plants using integrated LCA-emergy analysis: A case study in Iran," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1548-1564.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2786-:d:340088. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.