scholarly journals Application of LCA to Determine Environmental Impact of Concentrated Photovoltaic Solar Panels—State-of-the-Art

Energies ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (11) ◽  
pp. 3143
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Ziemińska-Stolarska ◽  
Monika Pietrzak ◽  
Ireneusz Zbiciński
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Tracking System ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Photovoltaic Systems ◽  
Solar Panels ◽  
High Concentration ◽  
Management Scenarios ◽  
Record System ◽  
Energy Payback

Photovoltaic systems represent a leading part of the market in the renewable energies sector. Contemporary technology offers possibilities to improve systems converting sun energy, especially for the efficiency of modules. The paper focuses on current concentrated photovoltaic (CPV) technologies, presenting data for solar cells and modules working under lab conditions as well as in a real environment. In this paper, we consider up-to-date solutions for two types of concentrating photovoltaic systems: high-concentration photovoltaics (HCPV) and low-concentration photovoltaics (LCPV). The current status of CPV solar modules was complemented by the preliminary results of new hybrid photovoltaic technology achieving records in efficiency. Compared to traditional Si-PV panels, CPV modules achieve greater conversion efficiency as a result of the concentrator optics applied. Specific CPV technologies were described in terms of efficiency, new approaches of a multijunction solar cell, a tracking system, and durability. The results of the analysis prove intensive development in the field of CPV modules and the potential of achieving record system efficiency. The paper also presents methods for the determination of the environmental impact of CPV during the entire life cycle by life cycle assessment (LCA) analysis and possible waste management scenarios. Environmental performance is generally assessed based on standard indicators, such as energy payback time, CO2 footprint, or GHG emission.

scholarly journals Life Cycle Assessment of the Use of Phase Change Material in an Evacuated Solar Tube Collector

Energies ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (14) ◽  
pp. 4146
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Jachura ◽  
Robert Sekret
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Phase Change ◽  
Phase Change Material ◽  
Solar Collector ◽  
Hot Water ◽  
Production Operation ◽  
Management Scenarios ◽  
Change Material

This paper presents an environmental impact assessment of the entire cycle of existence of the tube-vacuum solar collector prototype. The innovativeness of the solution involved using a phase change material as a heat-storing material, which was placed inside the collector’s tubes-vacuum. The PCM used in this study was paraffin. The system boundaries contained three phases: production, operation (use phase), and disposal. An ecological life cycle assessment was carried out using the SimaPro software. To compare the environmental impact of heat storage, the amount of heat generated for 15 years, starting from the beginning of a solar installation for preparing domestic hot water for a single-family residential building, was considered the functional unit. Assuming comparable production methods for individual elements of the ETC and waste management scenarios, the reduction in harmful effects on the environment by introducing a PCM that stores heat inside the ETC ranges from 17 to 24%. The performed analyses have also shown that the method itself of manufacturing the materials used for the construction of the solar collector and the choice of the scenario of the disposal of waste during decommissioning the solar collector all play an important role in its environmental assessment. With an increase in the application of the advanced technologies of materials manufacturing and an increase in the amount of waste subjected to recycling, the degree of the solar collector’s environmental impact decreased by 82% compared to its standard manufacture and disposal.

scholarly journals Wind Power Generator Embodied Energy Payback Analysis for Rural Area in Paraná-Brazil

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 437
Author(s):  
Amauri Ghellere Garcia Miranda ◽  
Samuel Nelson Melegari de Souza ◽  
Jair Antonio Cruz Siqueira ◽  
Luciene Kazue Tokura ◽  
Natalia Pereira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Wind Power ◽  
Rural Area ◽  
Electrical Power ◽  
Electrical Energy ◽  
Payback Period ◽  
Embodied Energy ◽  
Energy Payback ◽  
Wind Power Generator

Over the last decades, wind energy has been named as a clean method to generate electrical power. But, to claim this argument many aspects must be evaluated. On one hand, wind power, as an electrical energy source, generates minimum environmental impact when in operation. On the other side, the material extraction for the manufacturing process does create environmental impact and require electrical energy usage. Therefore, when claiming the sustainability of wind power, as a method of electrical power generation, many aspects must be evaluated, such as the Life Cycle Analysis of the turbine. This study has been taken to evaluate the energy cost and its payback period off the wind power turbine S-600, manufactured by Greatwatt, has being evaluated. This evaluation has covered the embodied energy in the gross material present on the final product and its energetic payback period, for the specific case of working in a rural area in the state of Paraná, Brazil. The ISO 14040 methodology, for life cycle analyses, has being applied to estimate the embodied energy in the gross material present on the generator. The annual average energetic production estimation has considered 4 cases, varying the voltage output and hub height, and the nominal capacity, claimed by the manufacturing company. To assess the embodied energy payback period, the theoretical generation capacity has been estimated. Thus, by this analysis, this article has concluded that the embodied energy in the gross material is 803.39MJ. The energetic payback period for this product, at 10 meters hub height, is 11.6 months, if operating on 12 V, and 12.6 months, if operation on 24 V. Furthermore, in the situation of installed at 30 meters from the ground, the energy payback period drops down to 5.3 and 5.5 months, operating on 12 or 24 V respectively. In the situation of nominal generation, the energetic payback period would dropdown to 4.6 and 3.1 months, operating on 12 or 24 V respectively.

Life Cycle Analysis of Linear Fresnel Solar Power Technology

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yin Hang ◽  
Kevin Balkoski ◽  
Phani Meduri
Keyword(s):  
Power Generation ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Life Cycle Analysis ◽  
Solar Power ◽  
Solar Power Generation ◽  
Energy Payback ◽  
Payback Time ◽  
Greenhouse Gas Intensity ◽  
Energy Payback Time

Solar power generation technologies are categorized as Concentrated Solar Thermal Power (CSP) and PhotoVoltaic (PV). AREVA’s Compact Linear Fresnel Reflector (CLFR) system is a CSP power generation technology which compares favorably with other technologies in terms of its land efficiency and environmental impact. Analysis of the costs and benefits of solar technologies can inform their design and influence environmental and economic policies. This paper reports a comprehensive “cradle to grave” life cycle analysis (LCA) of AREVA’s CLFR technology. A unique element of this study is the availability of comprehensive inventory data from AREVA’s Reliance project, a 125 MWe Solar CLFR power plant under construction in India. Using actual project data showed the energy payback time was about 8.2 months and the greenhouse gas intensity was about 31 g-CO2/kWhe. Sensitivity analysis identified that the environmental performance is most sensitive to the solar intensity represented by direct normal irradiance. This study also compares AREVA’s CLFR technology with other leading solar power generation technologies. AREVA’s CLFR has the similar energy payback time and greenhouse gas intensity as other CSP technologies, and it has lower environmental impact compared to flat-plate PV systems.

scholarly journals Evaluating the Environmental Impacts and Energy Performance of a Wind Farm System Utilizing the Life-Cycle Assessment Method: A Practical Case Study

Energies ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (17) ◽  
pp. 3263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed R. Gomaa ◽  
Hegazy Rezk ◽  
Ramadan J. Mustafa ◽  
Mujahed Al-Dhaifallah
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Wind Turbine ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Wind Farm ◽  
Wind Farms ◽  
Energy Performance ◽  
Practical Case ◽  
Energy Payback

The ever-increasing popularity of finding alternative forms of renewable energy has seen an increased interest and utilization of wind energy. The objective of this research therefore, is to evaluate the environmental impacts and energy performance of wind farms. This study was operationalized in Jordan using a life-cycle assessment (LCA) method. The environmental impact is evaluated through lifecycle emissions that include all emissions during various phases of the project. The energy performance is illustrated by the energy indicators. The latter is the energy payback ratio (EPR) and the energy payback time (EPT). This study was conducted on a 38 Vestas V112 3-MW wind turbine located in the southern region of Tafilah in Jordan that is host to the country’s first wind farm. SimaPro 7.1 software was used as the modeling platform. Data for this study were collated from various sources, including, manufacturers, the wind turbine farm, and local subcontractors. A software database was used for the modeling process, and the data obtained modeled in accordance with ISO 14040 standards. The findings of this study indicate that the impacts of the transportation and installation phases were moderate, with the largest negative environmental impact deriving from the manufacturing phase. To remedy some of the negative impacts in these phases, green cement was used for the turbine foundation to limit the environmental impacts to be had during the installation phase, while the transportation phase saw the utilization of locally-manufactured turbines. Furthermore, an evaluation of the study’s results revealed that the energy payback period of the wind farm is approximately 0.69 year (8 months), while the payback ratio is 29, and the annual CO2 saving estimated to be at 2.23 × 108 kg, 3.02 × 108 kg, 3.10 × 108 kg for an annual generated power of 371, 501, and 515 GWh/year.

Excellent environmental performance of beet sugar production in the Netherlands

2020 ◽  
pp. 161-165
Author(s):  
Bertram de Crom ◽  
Jasper Scholten ◽  
Janjoris van Diepen
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Land Use ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Water Consumption ◽  
Environmental Performance ◽  
Cane Sugar ◽  
Sugar Production ◽  
Beet Sugar ◽  
Glucose Syrup

To get more insight in the environmental performance of the Suiker Unie beet sugar, Blonk Consultants performed a comparative Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) study on beet sugar, cane sugar and glucose syrup. The system boundaries of the sugar life cycle are set from cradle to regional storage at the Dutch market. For this study 8 different scenarios were evaluated. The first scenario is the actual sugar production at Suiker Unie. Scenario 2 until 7 are different cane sugar scenarios (different countries of origin, surplus electricity production and pre-harvest burning of leaves are considered). Scenario 8 concerns the glucose syrup scenario. An important factor in the environmental impact of 1kg of sugar is the sugar yield per ha. Total sugar yield per ha differs from 9t/ha sugar for sugarcane to 15t/ha sugar for sugar beet (in 2017). Main conclusion is that the production of beet sugar at Suiker Unie has in general a lower impact on climate change, fine particulate matter, land use and water consumption, compared to cane sugar production (in Brazil and India) and glucose syrup. The impact of cane sugar production on climate change and water consumption is highly dependent on the country of origin, especially when land use change is taken into account. The environmental impact of sugar production is highly dependent on the co-production of bioenergy, both for beet and cane sugar.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document