Environmental implications of United States coal exports: A comparative life cycle assessment of future power system scenarios

Environmental Science and Technology

Volumn 48, Issue 16, 2014, Pages 9908-9916

  Bohnengel, Barrett ^a   Patiño Echeverri, Dalia ^a   Bergerson, Joule ^b  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AIR POLLUTION; CARBON DIOXIDE; COAL FUELED FURNACES; COMMERCE; ENERGY EFFICIENCY; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY; FOSSIL FUEL POWER PLANTS; GREENHOUSE GASES; LIFE CYCLE; NATURAL GAS; NITROGEN OXIDES; SHIPS;

COAL-FIRED POWER PLANT; COMPARATIVE LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT; ELECTRICITY GENERATION; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS; GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTIONS; LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT (LCA); NUCLEAR GENERATION; POWDER RIVER BASIN COALS;

COAL;

COAL; NATURAL GAS; SULFUR OXIDE;

CARBON DIOXIDE; COAL-FIRED POWER PLANT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DEMAND ANALYSIS; ELECTRICITY GENERATION; EMISSION CONTROL; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; GREENHOUSE GAS; INDUSTRIAL POLICY; LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS; MARKET SYSTEM; NATURAL GAS; POLICY MAKING;

ARTICLE; CARBON FOOTPRINT; COMMERCIAL PHENOMENA; ELECTRIC POWER PLANT; ELECTRICITY; ENERGY RESOURCE; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; EXHAUST GAS; GREENHOUSE GAS; LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT; MARKET; NUCLEAR ENERGY; RAILWAY; RIVER; SEA; SHIPPING; SOUTH KOREA; TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT; UNITED STATES; COMPARATIVE STUDY; ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENT; GREENHOUSE EFFECT;

ASIA; UNITED STATES;

COAL; COMMERCE; ELECTRICITY; ENVIRONMENT; GREENHOUSE EFFECT; NATURAL GAS; OREGON; POWER PLANTS; REPUBLIC OF KOREA; RIVERS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84906276863     PISSN: 0013936X     EISSN: 15205851     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/es5015828     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Net generation for all sectors, monthly. Electricity Data Browser; U.S. Energy Information Administration: Washington, DC, 2013; www.eia.gov/ electricity/data/browser/.
2. Monthly coal and natural gas-fired generation equal for first time in April 2012. Today in Energy; U.S. Energy Information Administration: Washington, DC, 2012, www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=6990#.
3. EIA projects lower coal use by U.S. power sector in 2012. Today in Energy; U.S. Energy Information Administration: Washington, DC, 2012; www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=5610.
4. International Energy Statistics-Total Coal Consumption-, Market Trends-Coal; Annual Energy Outlook 2013; U.S. Energy Information Administration: Washington, DC, 2013; www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/IEDIndex3.cfm?tid= 1&pid=1&aid=26.
5. Coal Exports by Country of Destination, Selected Years, 1960-2011 Table 7.5. Annual Energy Review 2011; U.S. Energy Information Administration: Washington, DC, 2011; www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/pdf/aer.pdf.
6. U.S. Domestic and Foreign Coal Distribution by State of Origin. Annual Coal Distribution Report 2011; U.S. Energy Information Administration: Washington, DC, 2011; www.eia.gov/coal/distribution/annual/pdf/o-11foreign.pdf.
7. Profita, C. "Desperate" To Export: A Coal Industry Close-Up. Oregon Public Broadcasting. Ecotrope, 3 Apr. 2012; www.opb.org/news/blog/ ecotrope/desperate-to-export-a-coal-industry-close-up.
8. Ambre Energy Website. http://www.ambreenergy.com/ (accessed Mar 2013).
9. eGRID version 1.0, 8th ed.; with year 2009 data (eGRID2012, version 1.0); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, 2012; www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/egrid/index.html.
10. Dirty Coal Export Targets the Columbia. Columbia Riverkeeper; http://columbiariverkeeper.org/our-work/coal-export/ (accessed Mar 2013).
11. Kelly, K. Comments on Public Notice for Permit Application under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act for a Coal Transloading Facility, Port of Morrow, Oregon. U.S.E.P. Agency, Seattle. Letter to Steve Gagnon. 5 Apr. 2012. Oregon Live. The Oregonian; http://media.oregonlive.com/environment-impact/ other/EPA%20letter%20about%20PEIS.PDF.
12. The Morrow Pacific Project Coyote Island Terminal Barge Loading Dock: Environmental Review; Anderson Perry & Associates: Walla Walla, Washington, 2012; http://morrowpacific.com/wp-content/uploads/large-files/ER%20Update- DSL%20Redacted-Volume%20I-RS.pdf.
13. The Economic Impacts of Proposed Coal Barging Operations; ECONorthwest: Portland, OR, 2012; http://morrowpacific.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Ambre- Econ-Impact-Study-Final.pdf.
14. The Morrow Pacific Project; http://morrowpacific.com (accessed Mar 2013).
15. Fuller, L.. Informational interview for the Morrow Pacific Project with Project Communications representative Liz Fuller of Gard Communications. Telephone interview, 20 Feb. 2013.
16. Hendrickson, C. T., Lave, L. B., and Matthews, S. H. Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Goods and Services: An Input-output Approach; Resources for the Future: Washington, D.C., 2006.
17. Bergerson, J. A.; Lave, L. B. Should we transport coal, gas, or electricity: Cost, efficiency, and environmental implications Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 39 (16) 5905-5910 10.1021/es048981t
18. Jaramillo, P.; Griffin, W. M.; Matthews, H. S. Comparative life-cycle air emissions of coal, domestic natural gas, LNG, and SNG for electricity generation Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 41 (17) 6290-6296 10.1021/es063031o
19. Samaras, C.; Meisterling, K. Life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from plug-in hybrid vehicles: Implications for policy Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42 (9) 3170-3176 10.1021/es702178s
20. Odeh, N. A.; Cockerill, T. T. Life cycle GHG assessment of fossil fuel power plants with carbon capture and storage Energy Policy. 2008, 36 (1) 367-380 10.1016/j.enpol.2007.09.026
21. Integrated Environmental Control Model Carbon Sequestration Edition, IECM Current Public version, 8.0.2(c) ed.; Center for Energy and Environmental Studies, Carnegie Mellon University: Pittsburgh, PA, 2013; www.iecm-online.com.
22. Available EIO-LCA Models. EIOCLA; Carnegie Mellon University: Pittsburgh, PA, www.eiolca.net/Models/index.html (accessed 24 Mar 2013).
23. NREL. U.S. LifecycleInventory Database Project. www.lcacommons.gov/nrel/ search (accessed Jan 2012).
24. Optional Emissions from Commuting, Business Travel and Product Transport in Greenhouse Gas Inventory Protocol Core Module Guidance 2008; Office of Air and Radiation; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, D.C., 2013; www.epa.gov/climateleadership/documents/resources/commute-travel-product.pdf.
25. Bergin, M. S.; Harrell, M.;; Janssen, M. Locomotive Emission Inventories for the United States from ERTAC Rail. In EPA 2012 International Emission Inventory Conference, Tampa, Florida, 2012; http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ conference/ei20/session8/mbergin.pdf.
26. Environ International Corporation. Commercial Marine Emission Inventory Development; Office of Air and Radiation; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, 2002; www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/marine/ci/420r02019.pdf.
27. NTUA. Ship Emissions Calculator. Laboratoryfor MaritimeTransport (NTUA). Martrans; http://www.martrans.org/emis/index.htm (accessed Mar 2013).
28. Maersk Line Environmental Brochure; Maersk Line: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2007; www.maerskline.com/globalfile/?path=/pdf/environmental-brochure.
29. Doctor, R. D.; Molburg, J. C.; Brockmeier, N. F.; Manfredo, L.; Gorokhov, V.; Ramezan, M.;; Stiegel, G. J. Life-cycle analysis of a shell gasification-based multi-product system with CO2 recovery. In Proceedings of the First National Conference on Carbon Sequestration, Washington, DC, USA, 2001. Citeseer.
30. Hatch, C. Environmental Evaluation of Fugitive Coal Dust Emission from Coal Trains Goonyella, Blackwater and Moura Coal Rail Systems, revision 1; Final Report; Queensland Rail Limited: Queensland, Australia, 31 March 2008; reference H327578.
31. Weber, C. L.; Clavin, C. C. Life cycle carbon foot print of shale gas: Review of evidence and implications Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46 (11) 5688-95 10.1021/es300375n
32. Jiang, M.; Griffin, W. M.; Hendrickson, C.; Jaramillo, P.; VanBriesen, J.; Venkatesh, A. Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Marcellus Shale Gas Environ. Res. Lett. 2011, 6 (3) 034014 10.1088/1748-9326/6/3/034014
33. Howarth, R.; Santoro, R.; Ingraffea, A. Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas from shale formations Clim. Change 2011, 106 (4) 679-690 10.1007/s10584-011-0061-5
34. Burnham, A.; Han, J.; Clark, C. E.; Wang, M.; Dunn, J. B.; Palou-Rivera, I. Life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions of shale gas, natural gas, coal, and petroleum Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46 (2) 619-627 10.1021/es201942m
35. Stephenson, T.; Valle, J. E.; Riera-Palou, X. Modeling the Relative GHG emissions of conventional and shale gas production Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45 (24) 10757-10764 10.1021/es2024115
36. Hultman, N.; Rebois, D.; Scholten, M.; Ramig, C. The greenhouse impact of unconventional gas for electricity generation Environ. Res. Lett. 2011, 6 (4) 044008 10.1088/1748-9326/6/4/049504
37. Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Inventory of Natural Gas Extraction, Delivery and Electricity Production; National Energy Technology Laboratory: Morgantown, WV, 2011.
38. Lee, K.-M.; Lee, S.-Y.; Hur, T. Life cycle inventory analysis for electricity in Korea Energy 2004, 29 (1) 87-101 10.1016/j.energy.2003.08.007
39. AP 42, Vol. I, 5th ed.; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, D.C., 2005; http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/index.html.
40. Complete Unit Process Library Listing; National Energy Technology Laboratory: Morgantown, WV, http://www.netl.doe.gov/research/energy-analysis/ life-cycle-analysis/unit-process-library/Complete-Unit-Process-Library-Listing (accessed Mar 2013).
41. Kumar, A.; Schei, T.; Ahenkorah, A.; R. Caceres Rodriguez; Devernay, J.-M.; Freitas, M.; Hall, D.; Killingtveit, A.; Liu, Z., Hydropower. In IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation; Edenhofer, O.; Pichs-Madruga, R.; Sokona, Y.; Seyboth, K.; Matschoss, P.; Kadner, S.; Zwickel, T.; Eickemeier, P.; Hansen, G.; Schlomer, S.; von Stechow, C., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA., 2011.
42. Summary of GHG Emissions for United States of America; UNFCCC, United Nations: Bonn, Germany; http://unfccc.int/files/ghg-emissions-data/application/ pdf/usa-ghg-profile.pdf (accessed Mar 2013).
43. Brander, M.; Tipper, R.; Hutchison, C.; Davis, G. Consequential and attributional approaches to LCA: A guide to policy makers with specific reference to greenhouse gas LCA of biofuels; Technical paper TP-090403-A, Ecometrica Press: London, UK, 2009.