Anzeige
Erschienen in:
01.11.2013 | LCA FOR ENERGY SYSTEMS
Life cycle optimization of energy-intensive processes using eco-costs
Erschienen in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment | Ausgabe 9/2013
EinloggenAktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.
Wählen Sie Textabschnitte aus um mit Künstlicher Intelligenz passenden Patente zu finden. powered by
Markieren Sie Textabschnitte, um KI-gestützt weitere passende Inhalte zu finden. powered by
Abstract
Purpose
This study provides a general methodology to integrate LCA into a single- or multi-objective process design optimization context. It uses specific weightings for foreground emissions, for preventable background emissions and for unpreventable background emissions, for each impact category. It is illustrated for a natural gas combined cycle power plant with three scenarios to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions: CO2 capture and sequestration, fuel substitution with biogas or fuel substitution with synthetic gas from wood.
Methods
Assuming that the opportunity to prevent emissions elsewhere is an implicit part of the process design decision space, the optimal solution cannot waste such opportunities and is shown to minimize total life cycle costs, including emission avoidance costs based on the optimal combination of prevention and compensation measures in the background system. In the case study, background emissions are inventoried from the ecoinvent database, their compensation costs are derived from the Ecocosts 2007 impact assessment method and their prevention costs are estimated from the literature. The calculated avoidance costs (weightings) then show how the background system affects the final choice of CO2 reduction scenario.
Results and discussion
In the case study, all three options partially shift environmental burdens to the background system, which can be prevented or compensated. The corresponding minimum avoidance cost is highest overall for the biogas option, thus putting it at a disadvantage. For a vast majority of ecoinvent processes, energy efficiency is important to minimize total avoidance costs because they are dominated by background CO2. Furthermore, prevention cost data gathering can be simplified in some cases, without distorting design decisions, using a CO2-only background inventory. The non-CO2 background inventory is more useful after process design, for procurement decisions.
Conclusions
Over-investing in design modifications cannot achieve the same background impact reductions as a sensible green procurement policy. Thus, the proposed weighting methodology ensures that all types of design decisions integrate LCA without incorrectly assuming that emissions are necessarily unavoidable when in the background. Within a context of future emission taxes or tradable permits, the weightings can also anticipate the after-tax cost passed on by suppliers—a marketable benefit of LCA.
Recommendations
Since many LCA studies are equivalent to design optimization problems, the proposed weighting methodology provides a single-score impact method relevant to decision-making as well as a straightforward approach to LCA interpretation in terms of detailing the optimal combination of applicable design modifications, prevention measures and compensation measures.