Life Cycle Assessment of Power-to-Gas: Syngas vs Methane

ACS Sustainable Chemistry and Engineering

Volumn 4, Issue 8, 2016, Pages 4156-4165

  Sternberg, André ^a   Bardow, André ^a  

^a RWTH AACHEN UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

CO2 methanation; CO2 utilization; Dry reforming of methane; LCA; Power to Gas; Reverse water gas shift; Steam methane reforming

Indexed keywords

CARBON DIOXIDE; CHEMICAL INDUSTRY; CHEMICAL SHIFT; FEEDSTOCKS; GASES; LIFE CYCLE; METHANE; STEAM REFORMING; SYNTHESIS GAS;

COMPARATIVE LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT; DRY REFORMING-OF-METHANE; ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS; ENVIRONMENTAL THRESHOLD; LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT (LCA); RENEWABLE CARBON SOURCES; REVERSE WATER GAS SHIFT; SYNTHETIC NATURAL GAS;

WATER GAS SHIFT;

EID: 84980010025     PISSN: None     EISSN: 21680485     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b00644     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. REN21.2015. Renewables 2015 Global Status Report; REN21 Secretariat: Paris, 2015; http://www.ren21.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/REN12-GSR2015-Onlinebook-low1.pdf.
2. Gahleitner, G. Hydrogen from renewable electricity: An international review of power-to-gas pilot plants for stationary applications Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2013, 38 (5) 2039-2061 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.12.010
3. Walker, S. B.; Mukherjee, U.; Fowler, M.; Elkamel, A. Benchmarking and selection of power-to-gas utilizing electrolytic hydrogen as an energy storage alternative Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2016, 41 (19) 7717-7731 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.09.008
4. Sterner, M. Bioenergy and renewable power methane in integrated 100% renewable energy systems. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany, 2009.
5. Reiter, G.; Lindorfer, J. Global warming potential of hydrogen and methane production from renewable electricity via power-to-gas technology Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2015, 20 (4) 477-489 10.1007/s11367-015-0848-0
6. Rönsch, S.; Schneider, J.; Matthischke, S.; Schlüter, M.; Götz, M.; Lefebvre, J.; Prabhakaran, P.; Bajohr, S. Review on methanation-from fundamentals to current projects Fuel 2016, 166, 276-296 10.1016/j.fuel.2015.10.111
7. Götz, M.; Lefebvre, J.; Mörs, F.; Koch, A. M.; Graf, F.; Bajohr, S.; Reimert, R.; Kolb, T. Renewable power-to-gas: A technological and economic review Renewable Energy 2016, 85, 1371-1390 10.1016/j.renene.2015.07.066
8. Schiebahn, S.; Grube, T.; Robinius, M.; Tietze, V.; Kumar, B.; Stolten, D. Power to gas: Technological overview, systems analysis and economic assessment for a case study in Germany Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2015, 40 (12) 4285-4294 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.01.123
9. Sternberg, A.; Bardow, A. Power-to-what?-Environmental assessment of energy storage systems Energy Environ. Sci. 2015, 8 (2) 389-400 10.1039/C4EE03051F
10. Carr, S.; Premier, G. C.; Guwy, A. J.; Dinsdale, R. M.; Maddy, J. Hydrogen storage and demand to increase wind power onto electricity distribution networks Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2014, 39 (14) 10195-10207 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.04.145
11. Weitemeyer, S.; Kleinhans, D.; Vogt, T.; Agert, C. Integration of renewable energy sources in future power systems: The role of storage Renewable Energy 2015, 75, 14-20 10.1016/j.renene.2014.09.028
12. Rostrup-Nielsen, J. R. Natural Gas: Fuel or Feedstock? In Sustainable Strategies for the Upgrading of Natural Gas: Fundamentals, Challenges, and Opportunities; Derouane, E. G.; Parmon, V.; Lemos, F.; Ramôa Ribeiro, F., Eds.; NATO Science Series II: Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2005.
13. von der Assen, N.; Sternberg, A.; Katelhon, A.; Bardow, A. Environmental potential of carbon dioxide utilization in the polyurethane supply chain Faraday Discuss. 2015, 183, 291-307 10.1039/C5FD00067J
14. 2 as carbon source based on reverse water-gas shift and Fischer-Tropsch synthesis Chem. Ing. Tech. 2013, 85 (4) 489-499 10.1002/cite.201200179
15. Schwab, E.; Milanov, A.; Schunk, S. A.; Behrens, A.; Schödel, N. Dry reforming and reverse water gas shift: Alternatives for syngas production? Chem. Ing. Tech. 2015, 87 (4) 347-353 10.1002/cite.201400111
16. 2 reuse via dry methane reforming (DMR) cost competitive with SMR and ATR processes? ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2015, 3 (9) 2100-2111 10.1021/acssuschemeng.5b00368
17. 2 fixation through dry reforming ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2015, 3 (4) 625-636 10.1021/sc5007736
18. 2 for synthesis of CO, methanol and hydrocarbons: challenges and opportunities Energy Environ. Sci. 2016, 9 (1) 62-73 10.1039/C5EE02657A
19. Yuan, Z.; Eden, M. R.; Gani, R. Toward the development and deployment of large-scale carbon dioxide capture and conversion processes Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2016, 55 (12) 3383-3419 10.1021/acs.iecr.5b03277
20. 2RRECT (ref. no. 033RC1006B), 2014, (in German); https://doi.org/10.2314/GBV:792621247.
21. 2 capture and utilization: a tutorial review Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014, 43 (23) 7982-7994 10.1039/C3CS60373C
22. van der Giesen, C.; Kleijn, R.; Kramer, G. J. Energy and climate impacts of producing synthetic hydrocarbon fuels from CO2 Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48 (12) 7111-7121 10.1021/es500191g
23. ISO 14040:2009, Environmental management-Life cycle assessment-Principles and framework; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2009.
24. Chen, L.; Lu, Y.; Hong, Q.; Lin, J.; Dautzenberg, F. Catalytic partial oxidation of methane to syngas over Ca-decorated-Al2O3-supported Ni and Nib catalysts Appl. Catal., A 2005, 292, 295-304 10.1016/j.apcata.2005.06.010
25. von der Assen, N.; Müller, L. J.; Steingrube, A.; Voll, P.; Bardow, A. Selecting CO2 sources for CO2 utilization by environmental-merit-order curves Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50 (3) 1093-1101 10.1021/acs.est.5b03474
26. Jung, J.; von der Assen, N.; Bardow, A. Comparative LCA of multi-product processes with non-common products: a systematic approach applied to chlorine electrolysis technologies Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2013, 18 (4) 828-839 10.1007/s11367-012-0531-7
27. von der Assen, N.; Jung, J.; Bardow, A. Life-cycle assessment of carbon dioxide capture and utilization: avoiding the pitfalls Energy Environ. Sci. 2013, 6 (9) 2721-2734 10.1039/c3ee41151f
28. Goedkoop, M.; Heijungs, R.; Huijbregts, M.; Schryver, A. D.; Struijs, J.; Zelm, R. V. ReCiPe 2008, A life cycle impact assessment method which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint and the endpoint level; First ed.; Report I: Characterisation, 2009.
29. IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007, The Physical Science Basis; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Geneva, Switzerland, 2007.
30. Jafarbegloo, M.; Tarlani, A.; Mesbah, A. W.; Sahebdelfar, S. Thermodynamic analysis of carbon dioxide reforming of methane and its practical relevance Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2015, 40 (6) 2445-2451 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.12.103
31. Müller, B.; Müller, K.; Teichmann, D.; Arlt, W. Energiespeicherung mittels Methan und energietragenden Stoffen-Ein thermodynamischer Vergleich Chem. Ing. Tech. 2011, 83 (11) 2002-2013 (in German) 10.1002/cite.201100113
32. GaBi ts, Software-System and Database for Life Cycle Engineering; thinkstep AG: Leinfelden-Echterdingen, Germany, 2016.
33. Howarth, R. W. A bridge to nowhere: methane emissions and the greenhouse gas footprint of natural gas Energy Sci. Eng. 2014, 2 (2) 47-60 10.1002/ese3.35
34. Brandt, A. R. et al. Methane Leaks from North American Natural Gas Systems Science 2014, 343, 733-735 10.1126/science.1247045
35. Lelieveld, J.; Lechtenbohmer, S.; Assonov, S. S.; Brenninkmeijer, C. A. M.; Dienst, C.; Fischedick, M.; Hanke, T. Low methane leakage from gas pipelines Nature 2005, 434, 841-842 10.1038/434841a
36. PEM Electrolysis H2A Production Case Study-Documentation. Report NREL/TP-5400-61387; National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL): Golden, CO, 2013; http://dx.doi.org/10.2172/1214980.
37. Erneuerbare Energien-Systemtechnik, Wirtschaftlichkeit, Umweltaspekte, 5 th ed.; Kaltschmitt, M.; Streicher, W.; Wiese, A., Eds.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, 2013, (in German).
38. Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants-Vol. 1: Bituminous Coal and Natural Gas to Electricity (Revision 2a); Report DOE/NETL-2010/1397; U.S. Department of Energy (DOE): Washington, DC, 2013; https://www.netl.doe.gov/File%20Library/Research/Energy%20Analysis/OE/BitBase-FinRep-Rev2a-3-20130919-1.pdf.
39. Schreiber, A.; Zapp, P.; Kuckshinrichs, W. Environmental assessment of German electricity generation from coal-fired power plants with amine-based carbon capture Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2009, 14 (6) 547-559 10.1007/s11367-009-0102-8
40. Langfristszenarien und Strategien für den Ausbau der erneuerbaren Energien in Deutschland bei Berücksichtigung der Entwicklung in Europa und global; Report BMU-FKZ 03MAP146; Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR): Stuttgart, Germany, 2012, (in German); http://www.dlr.de/dlr/Portaldata/1/Resources/bilder/portal/portal-2012-1/leitstudie2011-bf.pdf.
41. ecoinvent Data, V 3.1.; Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories: Zurich, Switzerland; http://ecoinvent.org/.
42. Mori, M.; Jensterle, M.; Mržljak, T.; Drobnic, B. Life-cycle assessment of a hydrogen-based uninterruptible power supply system using renewable energy Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2014, 19 (11) 1810-1822 10.1007/s11367-014-0790-6
43. Heijungs, R.; Suh, S. The Computational Structure of Life Cycle Assessment; Springer Science & Business Media: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2002.
44. Hauschild, M.; Goedkoop, M.; Guinée, J.; Heijungs, R.; Huijbregts, M.; Jolliet, O.; Margni, M.; De Schryver, A.; Humbert, S.; Laurent, A.; Sala, S.; Pant, R. Identifying best existing practice for characterization modeling in life cycle impact assessment Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2013, 18 (3) 683-697 10.1007/s11367-012-0489-5