Issue
Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering,
Vol.30, No.10, 1882-1888, 2013
2D representation of life cycle greenhouse gas emission and life cycle cost of energy conversion for various energy resources
We suggest a 2D-plot representation combined with life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and life cycle cost for various energy conversion technologies. In general, life cycle assessment (LCA) not only analyzes at the use phase of a specific technology, but also covers widely related processes of before and after its use. We use life cycle GHG emissions and life cycle cost (LCC) to compare the energy conversion process for eight resources such as coal, natural gas, nuclear power, hydro power, geothermal power, wind power, solar thermal power, and solar photovoltaic (PV) power based on the reported LCA and LCC data. Among the eight sources, solar PV and nuclear power exhibit the highest and the lowest LCCs, respectively. On the other hand, coal and wind power locate the highest and the lowest life cycle GHG emissions. In addition, we used the 2D plot to show the life cycle performance of GHG emissions and LCCs simultaneously and realized a correlation that life cycle GHG emission is largely inversely proportional to the corresponding LCCs. It means that an expensive energy source with high LCC tends to have low life cycle GHG emissions, or is environmental friendly. For future study, we will measure the technological maturity of the energy sources to determine the direction of the specific technology development based on the 2D plot of LCCs versus life cycle GHG emissions.
[References]
  1. IEA, World Energy Outlook 2008, International Energy Agency, 2008
  2. IPCC, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, 2007
  3. LOHAS, Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability, Web Access URL: http://www.lohas.com/about (last accessed date: 26th May, 2013).
  4. ISO 14044, Environmental management - life cycle assessment - Requirements and guidelines, International Organization for Standardization, 2006
  5. Varun, Prakash R, Bhat IK, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev., 13(9), 2716, 2009
  6. Weisser D, Energy, 32(9), 1543, 2007
  7. NIST, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Handbook 135, 1995 Ed., National Institute of Standards and Technology, 1995
  8. Lenzen M, Energy Conv. Manag., 49(8), 2178, 2008
  9. Hammons TJ, Electr. Power Components and Syst., 32(5), 529, 2004
  10. Johansson TB, Turkenburg W, Energy for Sustainable Dev., 8(1), 5, 2004
  11. Hondo H, Energy, 30(11-12), 2042, 2005
  12. Gagnon L, Belanger C, Uchiyama Y, Energy Policy, 30(14), 1267, 2002
  13. Denholm P, Kulcinski GL, Energy Conv. Manag., 45(13-14), 2153, 2004
  14. Uchiyama Y, IEEJ Trans. on Electr. Electr. Eng., 2(1), 44, 2007
  15. WEC, Comparison of energy system using life cycle assessment, World Energy Council, 2004
  16. IPCC, Climate change 2007: mitigation of climate change. contribution of working group 3 to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate changes, Cambridge University Press, 2007