Life cycle impacts of concentrated solar power generation on land resources and soil carbon losses in the United States

被引:3
作者
Rangarajan, Shreya [1 ]
Hernandez, Rebecca R. [2 ,3 ]
Jordaan, Sarah M. [1 ,4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Univ, Sch Adv Int Studies, Washington, DC 21218 USA
[2] Univ Calif Davis, Dept Land & Air & Water Resources, Davis, CA USA
[3] Univ Calif Davis, Wild Energy Ctr, Davis, CA USA
[4] Johns Hopkins Univ, Environm Hlth & Engn, Baltimore, MD 21218 USA
[5] McGill Univ, Dept Civil Engn, Montreal, PQ, Canada
来源
FRONTIERS IN SUSTAINABILITY | 2022年 / 3卷
关键词
concentrated solar power (CSP); life cycle assessment; land-use and land-cover change (LULCC); soil carbon; ecosystem services; GREENHOUSE-GAS EMISSIONS; MOJAVE-DESERT; WARM DESERTS; ENERGY;
D O I
10.3389/frsus.2022.1021971
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Endpoint impacts related to the transformation of land-including that related to energy infrastructure-have yet to be fully quantified and understood in life cycle assessment (LCA). Concentrated solar power (CSP) which generates electricity by using mirrors to concentrate incoming shortwave radiation onto a receiver, may serve as an alternate source of reliable baseload power in the coming years. As of 2019 (baseline year of the study), the United States (U.S.) had 1.7 GW of installed capacity across a total of eight CSP sites. In this study, we (1) develop an empirical, spatially explicit methodology to categorize physical elements embodied in energy infrastructure using a LCA approach and manual image annotation, (2) use this categorization scheme to quantify land- and ecosystem service-related endpoint impacts, notably potential losses in soil carbon, owing to energy infrastructure development and as a function of electricity generated (i.e., megawatt-hour, MWh); and (3) validate and apply this method to CSP power plants within the U.S. In the Western U.S., CSP projects are sited in Arizona, California, and Nevada. Project infrastructure can be disaggregated into the following physical elements: mirrors ("heliostats"), generators, internal roads, external roads, substations, and water bodies. Of these elements, results reveal that mirrors are the most land intensive element of CSP infrastructure (>90%). Median land transformation and capacity-based land-use efficiency are 0.4 (range of 0.3-6.8) m(2)/MWh and 40 (range of 11-48) W/m(2), respectively. Soil grading and other site preparation disturbances may result in the release of both organic and inorganic carbon-the latter representing the majority stocks in deeper caliche layers-thus leading to potentially significant losses of stored carbon. We estimate three scenarios of soil carbon loss into the atmosphere across 30 years, based on land transformation in m(2) per megawatt-hour (m(2)/MWh) and carbon stock in kilograms of carbon per megawatt-hour (kg C/MWh). Results reveal that potential belowground CO2 released may range from 7 to 137% of total life cycle CO2 emissions. While this study takes a simplistic approach to estimating loss of carbon, the broad methodology provides a valuable baseline for improving comparative analyses of land-related endpoint impacts across energy technologies and other product systems.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Life Cycle Assessment of a Power Tower Concentrating Solar Plant and the Impacts of Key Design Alternatives
    Whitaker, Michael B.
    Heath, Garvin A.
    Burkhardt, John J., III
    Turchi, Craig S.
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2013, 47 (11) : 5896 - 5903
  • [32] Life cycle assessment and cost benefit analysis of concentrated solar thermal gasification of biomass for continuous electricity generation
    Fang, Yi
    Li, Xian
    Ascher, Simon
    Li, Yize
    Dai, Leilei
    Ruan, Roger
    You, Siming
    ENERGY, 2023, 284
  • [33] Life cycle air quality impacts on human health from potential switchgrass production in the United States
    Thakrar, Sumil K.
    Goodkind, Andrew L.
    Tessum, Christopher W.
    Marshall, Julian D.
    Hill, Jason D.
    BIOMASS & BIOENERGY, 2018, 114 : 73 - 82
  • [34] Understanding the Contribution of Mining and Transportation to the Total Life Cycle Impacts of Coal Exported from the United States
    Mutchek, Michele
    Cooney, Gregory
    Pickenpaugh, Gavin
    Marriott, Joe
    Skone, Timothy
    ENERGIES, 2016, 9 (07):
  • [35] Comparative life cycle assessment of biomass utilization for electricity generation in the European Union and the United States
    Beagle, E.
    Belmont, E.
    ENERGY POLICY, 2019, 128 : 267 - 275
  • [36] COMPARATIVE LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF BIOMASS UTILIZATION FOR ELECTRICITY GENERATION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE UNITED STATES
    Beagle, E.
    Belmont, E.
    PAPERS OF THE 25TH EUROPEAN BIOMASS CONFERENCE, 2017, : 1498 - 1510
  • [37] Life cycle carbon emission accounting of a typical coastal wind power generation project in Hebei Province, China
    Gao, Wei
    Han, Mengyao
    Chen, Lijuan
    Ai, Chao
    Liu, Siyuan
    Cao, Shengwei
    Wei, Longzheng
    ENERGY CONVERSION AND MANAGEMENT, 2025, 324
  • [38] Comparison of carbon capture system and concentrated solar power in natural gas combined cycle: Exergetic and exergoenvironmental analyses
    Cavalcanti, Eduardo J. C.
    Lima, Matheus S. R.
    de Souza, Gabriel F.
    RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2020, 156 (156) : 1336 - 1347
  • [39] Life cycle analysis on carbon emissions from power generation - The nuclear energy example
    Nian, Victor
    Chou, S. K.
    Su, Bin
    Bauly, John
    APPLIED ENERGY, 2014, 118 : 68 - 82
  • [40] Life cycle water consumption for oxyfuel combustion power generation with carbon capture and storage
    Zhu, Yuli
    Chen, Mengxi
    Yang, Qing
    Alshwaikh, Mohammed J. M.
    Zhou, Hewen
    Li, Jianlan
    Liu, Zhaohui
    Zhao, Haibo
    Zheng, Chuguang
    Bartocci, Pietro
    Fantozzi, Francesco
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2021, 281