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
  • [41] Life Cycle Assessment of a Parabolic Trough Concentrating Solar Power Plant and the Impacts of Key Design Alternatives
    Burkhardt, John J., III
    Heath, Garvin A.
    Turchi, Craig S.
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2011, 45 (06) : 2457 - 2464
  • [42] A Comparison of the Life-Cycle Impacts of the Concentrating Solar Power with the Product Environmental Footprint and ReCiPe Methods
    Luu, Le Quyen
    Cellura, Maurizio
    Longo, Sonia
    Guarino, Francesco
    ENERGIES, 2024, 17 (17)
  • [43] Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Trough and Tower Concentrating Solar Power Electricity Generation
    Burkhardt, John J., III
    Heath, Garvin
    Cohen, Elliot
    JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY, 2012, 16 : S93 - S109
  • [44] Review of the Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Different Photovoltaic and Concentrating Solar Power Electricity Generation Systems
    Kommalapati, Raghava
    Kadiyala, Akhil
    Shahriar, Md Tarkik
    Huque, Ziaul
    ENERGIES, 2017, 10 (03):
  • [45] Life cycle assessment of grid-connected photovoltaic power generation from crystalline silicon solar modules in China
    Hou, Guofu
    Sun, Honghang
    Jiang, Ziying
    Pan, Ziqiang
    Wang, Yibo
    Zhang, Xiaodan
    Zhao, Ying
    Yao, Qiang
    APPLIED ENERGY, 2016, 164 : 882 - 890
  • [46] Land use for United States power generation: A critical review of existing metrics with suggestions for going forward
    Wachs, Elizabeth
    Engel, Bernard
    RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2021, 143
  • [47] Empirical Characterization Factors for Life Cycle Assessment of the Impacts of Reservoir Occupation on Macroinvertebrate Richness across the United States
    Trottier, Gabrielle
    Turgeon, Katrine
    Verones, Francesca
    Boisclair, Daniel
    Bulle, Cecile
    Margni, Manuele
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2021, 13 (05) : 1 - 26
  • [48] Selection of Sol-Gel Coatings by the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Life Cycle Assessment for Concentrated Solar Power Plants
    Guijarro-Gil, Maria Jose
    Botejara-Antunez, Manuel
    Diaz-Parralejo, Antonio
    Garcia-Sanz-Calcedo, Justo
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2025, 17 (06)
  • [49] Regionalized Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Forest Biomass Use for Electricity Generation in the United States
    Xu, Hui
    Latta, Gregory
    Lee, Uisung
    Lewandrowski, Jan
    Wang, Michael
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2021, 55 (21) : 14806 - 14816
  • [50] The importance of including soil carbon changes, ecotoxicity and biodiversity impacts in environmental life cycle assessments of organic and conventional milk in Western Europe
    Knudsen, Marie Trydeman
    Dorca-Preda, Teodora
    Djomo, Sylvestre Njakou
    Pena, Nancy
    Padel, Susanne
    Smith, Laurence G.
    Zollitsch, Werner
    Hoertenhuber, Stefan
    Hermansen, John E.
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2019, 215 : 433 - 443