Critical Review of Life Cycle Assessment of Hydrogen Production Pathways

M. Maniscalco, S. Longo, M. Cellura, Gabriele Miccichè, Marco Ferraro
{"title":"Critical Review of Life Cycle Assessment of Hydrogen Production Pathways","authors":"M. Maniscalco, S. Longo, M. Cellura, Gabriele Miccichè, Marco Ferraro","doi":"10.3390/environments11060108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In light of growing concerns regarding greenhouse gas emissions and the increasingly severe impacts of climate change, the global situation demands immediate action to transition towards sustainable energy solutions. In this sense, hydrogen could play a fundamental role in the energy transition, offering a potential clean and versatile energy carrier. This paper reviews the recent results of Life Cycle Assessment studies of different hydrogen production pathways, which are trying to define the routes that can guarantee the least environmental burdens. Steam methane reforming was considered as the benchmark for Global Warming Potential, with an average emission of 11 kgCO2eq/kgH2. Hydrogen produced from water electrolysis powered by renewable energy (green H2) or nuclear energy (pink H2) showed the average lowest impacts, with mean values of 2.02 kgCO2eq/kgH2 and 0.41 kgCO2eq/kgH2, respectively. The use of grid electricity to power the electrolyzer (yellow H2) raised the mean carbon footprint up to 17.2 kgCO2eq/kgH2, with a peak of 41.4 kgCO2eq/kgH2 in the case of countries with low renewable energy production. Waste pyrolysis and/or gasification presented average emissions three times higher than steam methane reforming, while the recourse to residual biomass and biowaste significantly lowered greenhouse gas emissions. The acidification potential presents comparable results for all the technologies studied, except for biomass gasification which showed significantly higher and more scattered values. Regarding the abiotic depletion potential (mineral), the main issue is the lack of an established recycling strategy, especially for electrolysis technologies that hamper the inclusion of the End of Life stage in LCA computation. Whenever data were available, hotspots for each hydrogen production process were identified.","PeriodicalId":11886,"journal":{"name":"Environments","volume":"14 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environments","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/environments11060108","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In light of growing concerns regarding greenhouse gas emissions and the increasingly severe impacts of climate change, the global situation demands immediate action to transition towards sustainable energy solutions. In this sense, hydrogen could play a fundamental role in the energy transition, offering a potential clean and versatile energy carrier. This paper reviews the recent results of Life Cycle Assessment studies of different hydrogen production pathways, which are trying to define the routes that can guarantee the least environmental burdens. Steam methane reforming was considered as the benchmark for Global Warming Potential, with an average emission of 11 kgCO2eq/kgH2. Hydrogen produced from water electrolysis powered by renewable energy (green H2) or nuclear energy (pink H2) showed the average lowest impacts, with mean values of 2.02 kgCO2eq/kgH2 and 0.41 kgCO2eq/kgH2, respectively. The use of grid electricity to power the electrolyzer (yellow H2) raised the mean carbon footprint up to 17.2 kgCO2eq/kgH2, with a peak of 41.4 kgCO2eq/kgH2 in the case of countries with low renewable energy production. Waste pyrolysis and/or gasification presented average emissions three times higher than steam methane reforming, while the recourse to residual biomass and biowaste significantly lowered greenhouse gas emissions. The acidification potential presents comparable results for all the technologies studied, except for biomass gasification which showed significantly higher and more scattered values. Regarding the abiotic depletion potential (mineral), the main issue is the lack of an established recycling strategy, especially for electrolysis technologies that hamper the inclusion of the End of Life stage in LCA computation. Whenever data were available, hotspots for each hydrogen production process were identified.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
氢气生产途径生命周期评估批判性评论
鉴于人们对温室气体排放和气候变化日益严重的影响日益关注,全球形势要求我们立即采取行动,向可持续能源解决方案过渡。从这个意义上说,氢气可以在能源转型中发挥重要作用,提供一种潜在的清洁和多功能能源载体。本文回顾了不同制氢途径的生命周期评估研究的最新结果,这些研究试图确定能够保证环境负担最小的途径。蒸汽甲烷转化被视为全球变暖潜能值的基准,其平均排放量为 11 kgCO2eq/kgH2。由可再生能源(绿色 H2)或核能(粉色 H2)驱动的水电解产生的氢对环境的影响最小,平均值分别为 2.02 kgCO2eq/kgH2 和 0.41 kgCO2eq/kgH2。使用电网电力为电解槽供电(黄色 H2)使平均碳足迹增加到 17.2 kgCO2eq/kgH2,在可再生能源产量较低的国家,碳足迹最高可达 41.4 kgCO2eq/kgH2。废物热解和/或气化的平均排放量是蒸汽甲烷转化的三倍,而利用残余生物质和生物废物则大大降低了温室气体排放量。除生物质气化技术的酸化潜能值明显更高且更分散外,其他所有研究技术的酸化潜能值结果相当。关于非生物损耗潜能值(矿物质),主要问题是缺乏既定的回收战略,尤其是电解技术,这妨碍了将生命末期阶段纳入生命周期评估计算。只要有数据,就会确定每种制氢工艺的热点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Ultimate Fate of Reactive Dyes Absorbed onto Polymer Beads: Feasibility and Optimization of Sorbent Bio-Regeneration Under Alternated Anaerobic–Aerobic Phases Initial Insights into Teleworking’s Effect on Air Quality in Madrid City Zinc Accumulation Pattern in Native Cortaderia nitida in High Andes (Ecuador) and Potential for Zinc Phytoremediation in Soil Steam Stripping for Recovery of Ammonia from Wastewater Using a High-Gravity Rotating Packed Bed Life Cycle Assessment of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Remediation Technologies: A Literature Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1