Advertisement

Life-Cycle Assessment

  • İbrahim Dinçer
  • Calin Zamfirescu
Chapter

Abstract

Development of sustainable energy systems implies comprehensive analyses that go beyond thermodynamics. The environmental impact, resource depletion, cost, and societal impact must be accounted for in addition to the efficiency and effectiveness defined according to the first and second laws of thermodynamics. The method of life-cycle assessment (LCA) is commonly used to analyze the life cycle of a system from cradle to grave. This method is defined by International Standards Organization norm ISO 14040 as the “compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs, and potential environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life cycle.” In general, LCA, when applied to energy systems, defines, on a case-by-case base, an integrated efficiency of the whole process by considering final outputs over the lifetime and initial material inputs and the associated energy and exergy flows. This kind of cradle-to-grave analysis is extremely important for policy elaboration and decision making for sustainable development. Sustainability often leads authorities to incorporate environmental considerations into planning. The need to satisfy basic human needs and aspirations, combined with the increasing world population, is a driver toward successful implementation of sustainable development. LCA is a key tool for identifying the best paths leading to sustainable development.

Keywords

Hydrogen Production Global Warming Potential Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Internal Combustion Engine Inventory Analysis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Nomenclature

A

Acidification indicator, kg SO2 equivalent

ACP

Acidification potential, kg SO2 equivalent per kg

AD

Abiotic depletion, kg antimony equivalent

ADP

Abiotic depletion potential, antimony equivalent per kg

AP

Air pollution indicator, kg NOx equivalent

APP

Air pollution potential, kg NOx equivalent per kg

Bd

Discharge burn-up, MJ/kg

EEQ

Total exergy equivalents

EOP

Exergy associated with manufacturing

Ex

Exergy, MJ

GW

Global warming indicator, kg CO2 equivalent

GWP

Global warming potential, kg CO2 equivalent per kg

HHV

Higher heating value, MJ/kg

LFT

Life-cycle time

LHV

Lower heating value, MJ/kg

m

Mass, kg

NInd

Normalized indicator

ODP

Ozone depletion potential

P

Pressure, Pa

PO

Photo-oxidant formation indicator, kg ethylene equivalent

POCP

Photochemical ozone creation potential, kg ethylene equivalent per kg

Q

Heat, MJ

R

Universal gas constant, J/molċK

T

Toxicity indicator, kg DCB equivalent

TP

Toxicity potential, kg DCB equivalent per kg

W

Shaft work, MJ

Greek Letters

α

Cost ratio

γ

Capital investment efficiency factor

ψ

Exergy efficiency

η

Energy efficiency

Subscripts

cmp

Compression

dir

Direct

e

Environment

el

Electric

ENG

Engine

f

Fossil fuel

g

Gasoline

i

Index

ind

Indirect

LFC

Life-cycle

max

Maximum

min

Minimum

VLC

Vehicle life-cycle

Superscripts

(˙)

Rate (per unit of time)

i

Index

LFC

Life-cycle

ng

Natural gas

References

  1. Dincer I. 2007. Environmental and sustainability aspects of hydrogen and fuel cell systems. International Journal of Energy Research 31:29–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dincer I., Rosen M.A. 2007. Exergy: Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development. Elsevier, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  3. Dincer I., Rosen M.A., Zamfirescu C. 2010. Economic and environmental comparison of conventional, hybrid, electric and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. In: Electric and Hybrid Vehicles: Power Sources, Models, Sustainability, Infrastructure and Market, Pistoia G., eds., Elsevier, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  4. GaBi 2010. LCA software databases, http://www.gabi-software.com/gabi/databases1/. Internet source (accessed on January 20, 2010).
  5. Granovskii M., Dincer I., Rosen M.A. 2006a. Environmental and economic aspects of hydrogen production and utilization in fuel cell vehicles. Journal of Power Sources 157:411–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Granovskii M., Dincer I., Rosen M.A. 2006b. Economic and environmental comparison of conventional, hybrid, electric and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. Journal of Power Sources 159:1186–1193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Granovskii M., Dincer I., Rosen M.A. 2006c. Life cycle assessment of hydrogen fuel cell and gasoline vehicles. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 31:337–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Granovskii M., Dincer I., Rosen M.A. 2007a. Exergetic life cycle assessment of hydrogen production from renewables. Journal of Power Sources 167:461–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Granovskii M., Dincer I., Rosen M.A. 2007b. Greenhouse gas emissions reduction by use of wind and solar energies for hydrogen and electricity production: economic factors. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 32:927–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Guinee J.B. 2004. Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment. Operational Guide to the ISO Standards. Kluwer Academic Publishing, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Hussain M.M., Dincer I., Li X. 2007. A preliminary life cycle assessment of PEM fuel cell powered automobiles. Applied Thermal Engineering 27:2294–2299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. ISO International Standard 14040. 1997E. Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework. International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO), Geneva.Google Scholar
  13. ISO International Standard 14041. 1998E. Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Goal and scope definition and Inventory analysis. International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO), Geneva.Google Scholar
  14. ISO International Standard 14042. 2000E. Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Life cycle Impact assessment. International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO), Geneva.Google Scholar
  15. ISO International Standard 14043. 2000E. Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Life cycle Interpretation. International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO), Geneva.Google Scholar
  16. Lubis L.I., Dincer I., Rosen M.A. 2008. Life cycle assessment of nuclear-based hydrogen production using thermochemical water decomposition: extension of previous work and future needs. Canadian Nuclear Society 29th Annual Conference 2:686–697.Google Scholar
  17. Lubis L.I., Dincer I., Rosen M.A. 2010. Life cycle assessment of hydrogen production using nuclear energy: an application based on thermochemical water splitting. Journal of Energy Resources Technology 132:021004/1-6.Google Scholar
  18. Rosen M.A., Dincer I. 2003. Exergy–cost–energy–mass analysis of thermal systems and processes. Energy Conversion and Management 44:1633–1651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rubin E.S., Davidson C.I. 2001. Introduction to Engineering and the Environment. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering & Applied ScienceUniversity of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT)OshawaCanada

Personalised recommendations