Next Article in Journal
Water-Induced Corrosion Damage of Carbon Steel in Sulfolane
Previous Article in Journal
Energy Analyses of Serbian Buildings with Horizontal Overhangs: A Case Study
Article

Life Cycle Assessment of Synthetic Natural Gas Production from Different CO2 Sources: A Cradle-to-Gate Study

1
Department of Energy, Systems, Territory and Construction Engineering (DESTeC), University of Pisa, 56122 Pisa, Italy
2
Fraunhofer Institute for Environmental, Safety, and Energy Technology, UMSICHT, 46047 Oberhausen, Germany
3
Business Administration and Production Management, University of Duisburg-Essen, 47057 Duisburg, Germany
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2020, 13(17), 4579; https://doi.org/10.3390/en13174579
Received: 30 June 2020 / Revised: 13 August 2020 / Accepted: 25 August 2020 / Published: 3 September 2020
Fuel production from hydrogen and carbon dioxide is considered an attractive solution as long-term storage of electric energy and as temporary storage of carbon dioxide. A large variety of CO2 sources are suitable for Carbon Capture Utilization (CCU), and the process energy intensity depends on the separation technology and, ultimately, on the CO2 concentration in the flue gas. Since the carbon capture process emits more CO2 than the expected demand for CO2 utilization, the most sustainable CO2 sources must be selected. This work aimed at modeling a Power-to-Gas (PtG) plant and assessing the most suitable carbon sources from a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) perspective. The PtG plant was supplied by electricity from a 2030 scenario for Italian electricity generation. The plant impacts were assessed using data from the ecoinvent database version 3.5, for different CO2 sources (e.g., air, cement, iron, and steel plants). A detailed discussion on how to handle multi-functionality was also carried out. The results showed that capturing CO2 from hydrogen production plants and integrated pulp and paper mills led to the lowest impacts concerning all investigated indicators. The choice of how to handle multi-functional activities had a crucial impact on the assessment. View Full-Text
Keywords: Carbon Capture Utilization; energy storage; Life Cycle Assessment; Power-to-Gas Carbon Capture Utilization; energy storage; Life Cycle Assessment; Power-to-Gas
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Bargiacchi, E.; Thonemann, N.; Geldermann, J.; Antonelli, M.; Desideri, U. Life Cycle Assessment of Synthetic Natural Gas Production from Different CO2 Sources: A Cradle-to-Gate Study. Energies 2020, 13, 4579. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13174579

AMA Style

Bargiacchi E, Thonemann N, Geldermann J, Antonelli M, Desideri U. Life Cycle Assessment of Synthetic Natural Gas Production from Different CO2 Sources: A Cradle-to-Gate Study. Energies. 2020; 13(17):4579. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13174579

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bargiacchi, Eleonora, Nils Thonemann, Jutta Geldermann, Marco Antonelli, and Umberto Desideri. 2020. "Life Cycle Assessment of Synthetic Natural Gas Production from Different CO2 Sources: A Cradle-to-Gate Study" Energies 13, no. 17: 4579. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13174579

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

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop