Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Resource depletion assessment of renewable electricity generation technologies—comparison of life cycle impact assessment methods with focus on mineral resources

  • LCA FOR ENERGY SYSTEMS AND FOOD PRODUCTS
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Renewable energies are promoted in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the depletion of fossil fuels. However, plants for renewable electricity production incorporate specifically higher amounts of materials being rated as potentially scarce. Therefore, it is in question which (mineral) resources contribute to the overall resource consumption and which of the manifold impact assessment methods can be recommended to cover an accurate and complete investigation of resource use for renewable energy technologies.

Methods

Life cycle assessment is conducted for different renewable electricity production technologies (wind, photovoltaics, and biomass) under German conditions and compared to fossil electricity generation from a coal-fired power plant. Focus is given on mineral resource depletion for these technologies. As no consensus has been reached so far as to which impact assessment method is recommended, different established as well as recently developed impact assessment methods (CML, ReCiPe, Swiss Ecoscarcity, and economic scarcity potential (ESP)) are compared. The contribution of mineral resources to the overall resource depletion as well as potential scarcity are identified.

Results and discussion

Overall resource depletion of electricity generation technologies tends to be dominated by fossil fuel depletion; therefore, most renewable technologies reduce the overall resource depletion compared to a coal-fired power plant. But, in comparison to fossil electricity generation from coal, mineral resource depletion is increased by wind and solar power. The investigated methods rate different materials as major contributors to mineral resource depletion, such as gallium used in photovoltaic plants (Swiss Ecoscarcity), gold and copper incorporated in electrical circuits and in cables (CML and ReCiPe), and nickel (Swiss Ecoscarcity and ReCiPe) and chromium (ESP) for stainless steel production. However, some methods lack characterization factors for potentially important materials.

Conclusions

If mineral resource use is investigated for technologies using a wider spectrum of potentially scarce minerals, practitioners need to choose the impact assessment method carefully according to their scope and check if all important materials are covered. Further research is needed for an overall assessment of different resource compartments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a fellowship within the Postdoc Program of the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jana Lieberei.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Steven B. Young

Electronic supplementary materials

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

 (PDF 91 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lieberei, J., Gheewala, S.H. Resource depletion assessment of renewable electricity generation technologies—comparison of life cycle impact assessment methods with focus on mineral resources. Int J Life Cycle Assess 22, 185–198 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1152-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1152-3

Keywords

Navigation