Next Article in Journal
A Sustainable Agricultural Future Relies on the Transition to Organic Agroecological Pest Management
Previous Article in Journal
Linkages Between acequia Farming and Rangeland Grazing in Traditional Agropastoral Communities of the Southwestern USA
Article Menu
Issue 6 (June) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Sustainability 2018, 10(6), 2022; https://doi.org/10.3390/su10062022

Life Cycle Environmental Impact of Onshore and Offshore Wind Farms in Texas

1
Center for Energy & Environmental Sustainability, Prairie View A&M University, Prairie View, TX 77446, USA
2
Center for Energy & Environmental Sustainability, Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Prairie View A&M University, Prairie View, TX 77446, USA
3
Center for Energy & Environmental Sustainability, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Prairie View A & M University, Prairie View, TX 77446, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 21 May 2018 / Revised: 11 June 2018 / Accepted: 12 June 2018 / Published: 14 June 2018
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [1716 KB, uploaded 14 June 2018]   |  

Abstract

The last decade witnessed a quantum increase in wind energy contribution to the U.S. renewable electricity mix. Although the overall environmental impact of wind energy is miniscule in comparison to fossil-fuel energy, the early stages of the wind energy life cycle have potential for a higher environmental impact. This study attempts to quantify the relative contribution of individual stages toward life cycle impacts by conducting a life cycle assessment with SimaPro® and the Impact 2002+ impact assessment method. A comparative analysis of individual stages at three locations, onshore, shallow-water, and deep-water, in Texas and the gulf coast indicates that material extraction/processing would be the dominant stage with an average impact contribution of 72% for onshore, 58% for shallow-water, and 82% for deep-water across the 15 midpoint impact categories. The payback times for CO2 and energy consumption range from 6 to 14 and 6 to 17 months, respectively, with onshore farms having shorter payback times. The greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) were in the range of 5–7 gCO2eq/kWh for the onshore location, 6–9 CO2eq/kWh for the shallow-water location, and 6–8 CO2eq/kWh for the deep-water location. A sensitivity analysis of the material extraction/processing stage to the electricity sourcing stage indicates that replacement of lignite coal with natural gas or wind would lead to marginal improvements in midpoint impact categories. View Full-Text
Keywords: SimaPro; midpoint impact categories; environmental impact; payback time; material extraction/processing SimaPro; midpoint impact categories; environmental impact; payback time; material extraction/processing
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Chipindula, J.; Botlaguduru, V.S.V.; Du, H.; Kommalapati, R.R.; Huque, Z. Life Cycle Environmental Impact of Onshore and Offshore Wind Farms in Texas. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2022.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Sustainability EISSN 2071-1050 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top