Life Cycle Analysis to estimate the environmental impact of residential photovoltaic systems in regions with a low solar irradiation

被引:96
作者
Laleman, Ruben [1 ]
Albrecht, Johan [1 ]
Dewulf, Jo [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Ghent, Fac Econ & Business Adm, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
[2] Univ Ghent, Res Grp ENVOC, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
关键词
LCA; Solar energy; Photovoltaic; Eco-Indicator; Environmental impact; Low irradiation; ENERGY DEMAND; PV SYSTEMS; TECHNOLOGIES; PERFORMANCE; GENERATION; TIME; LCA;
D O I
10.1016/j.rser.2010.09.025
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Photovoltaic installations (PV-systems) are heavily promoted in Europe. In this paper, the Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) method is used to find out whether the high subsidy cost can be justified by the environmental benefits. Most existing LCAs of PV only use one-dimensional indicators and are only valid for regions with a high solar irradiation. This paper, however, presents a broad environmental evaluation of residential PV-systems for regions with a rather low solar irradiation of 900-1000 kWh/m(2)/year, a value typical for Northern Europe and Canada. Based on the Ecoinvent LCA database, six Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) methods were considered for six different PV-technologies; the comprehensive Eco-Indicator 99 (EI 99) with its three perspectives (Hierarchist, Egalitarian and Individualistic) next to three one-dimensional indicators, namely Cumulative Energy Demand (CED), Global Warming Potential (GWP) and the Energy Payback Time (EPT). For regions with low solar irradiation, we found that the EPT is less than 5 years. The Global Warming Potential of PV-electricity is about 10 times lower than that of electricity from a coal fired plant, but 4 times higher when compared to a nuclear power plant or a wind farm. Surprisingly, our results from the more comprehensive EI 99 assessment method do not correlate at all with our findings based on EPT and GWP. The results from the Individualist perspective are strongly influenced by the weighting of the different environmental aspects, which can be misleading. Therefore, to obtain a well-balanced environmental assessment of energy technologies, we recommend a carefully evaluated combination of various impact assessment methods. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:267 / 281
页数:15
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]  
Alsema E., 1998, Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, V2, P387, DOI 10.1016/S1364-0321(98)00019-7
[2]   Energy viability of photovoltaic systems [J].
Alsema, EA ;
Nieuwlaar, E .
ENERGY POLICY, 2000, 28 (14) :999-1010
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2001, Third Assessment Report: Climate Change 2001 TAR, DOI DOI 10.1016/S1058-2746(02)86826-4
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2010, Projected Costs of Generating Electricity
[5]   Cradle-to-Gate study of red clay for use in the ceramic industry [J].
Bovea, Maria-Dolores ;
Saura, Ursula ;
Ferrero, Jose Luis ;
Giner, Josep .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2007, 12 (06) :439-447
[6]   LCA of an Italian lager beer [J].
Cordella, Mauro ;
Tugnoli, Alessandro ;
Spadoni, Gighola ;
Santarelli, Francesco ;
Zangrando, Tullio .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2008, 13 (02) :133-139
[7]   Comparison of three different LCIA methods: EDIP97, CML2001 and Eco-indicator 99 - Does it matter which one you choose? [J].
Dreyer, LC ;
Niemann, AL ;
Hauschild, MZ .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2003, 8 (04) :191-200
[8]   Life cycle assessment study of a Chinese desktop personal computer [J].
Duan, Huabo ;
Eugster, Martin ;
Hischier, Roland ;
Streicher-Porte, Martin ;
Li, Jinhui .
SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2009, 407 (05) :1755-1764
[9]  
Frischkneicht R, 2007, 3 EC
[10]   Germany's solar cell promotion: Dark clouds on the horizon [J].
Frondel, Manuel ;
Ritter, Nolan ;
Schmidt, Christoph M. .
ENERGY POLICY, 2008, 36 (11) :4198-4204