Integration of techno-economic and life cycle assessment: Defining and applying integration types for chemical technology development

被引:49
作者
Wunderlich, Johannes [1 ]
Armstrong, Katy [2 ]
Buchner, Georg A. [3 ]
Styring, Peter [2 ]
Schomaecker, Reinhard [1 ]
机构
[1] Tech Univ Berlin, Dept Chem, Str 17 Juni 124, D-10623 Berlin, Germany
[2] Univ Sheffield, UK Ctr Carbon Dioxide Utilisat, Dept Chem & Biol Engn, Sir Robert Hadfield Bldg, Sheffield S1 3JD, S Yorkshire, England
[3] Tech Univ Munich, TUM Campus Straubing Biotechnol & Sustainabil, Essigberg 3, D-94315 Straubing, Germany
基金
芬兰科学院; 英国工程与自然科学研究理事会;
关键词
MULTICRITERIA DECISION-ANALYSIS; SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT; FRAMEWORK; SYSTEMS; LCA; DESIGN; ROUTES; ENERGY; MCDA;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125021
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Both an environmental and an economic assessment are needed to judge the potential of sustainable chemical technologies. However, decision-makers may be challenged by conflicting conclusions. The integration of life cycle assessment (LCA) and techno-economic assessment (TEA) can enhance decision making, as integrated assessments provide more information than a simple reporting of separate TEA and LCA results. The analysis of integration approaches reveals a lack of consistency in terms of defining criteria and methodological aspects for integration. A gap remains where guidance for practitioners is needed on how to select a suitable integration type for their different purposes. To fill this gap, we conclude that a one-size-fits-all solution of integration cannot adequately serve all purposes along the technology development phases. Therefore, a framework to guide through integration in three distinct parts is proposed. In Part I, a four-phase approach for every integrated assessment to link the results from TEA and LCA is defined. Part II develops three integration types classified by their core characteristics: qualitative discussion-based (Type A), quantitative combined indicator-based (Type B), and quantitative preference-based (Type C). Finally, in Part III, a step-by-step method to select the appropriate integration type according to the assessment purpose, while considering restrictions imposed by technology maturity and resource availability is introduced. Thus, the framework is a basis for increasing the number of integrated assessments by guiding practitioners towards tailored studies. Crown Copyright (C) 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 57 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2010, INT REFERENCE LIFE C, DOI DOI 10.2788/38479
[2]  
Azapagic A, 2006, CHEM ENG RES DES, V84, P439, DOI 10.1205/cherd.05007
[3]   Multi-objective design optimization of a natural gas-combined cycle with carbon dioxide capture in a life cycle perspective [J].
Bernier, Etienne ;
Marechal, Francois ;
Samson, Rejean .
ENERGY, 2010, 35 (02) :1121-1128
[4]   Specifying Technology Readiness Levels for the Chemical Industry [J].
Buchner, Georg A. ;
Stepputat, Kai J. ;
Zimmermann, Arno W. ;
Schomaecker, Reinhard .
INDUSTRIAL & ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY RESEARCH, 2019, 58 (17) :6957-6969
[5]   Techno-economic Assessment Framework for the Chemical Industry-Based on Technology Readiness Levels [J].
Buchner, Georg A. ;
Zimmermann, Arno W. ;
Hohgraeve, Arian E. ;
Schomaecker, Reinhard .
INDUSTRIAL & ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY RESEARCH, 2018, 57 (25) :8502-8517
[6]   The potential impacts of Emissions Trading Scheme and biofuel options to carbon emissions of US airlines [J].
Chao, Hsun ;
Agusdinata, Datu Buyung ;
DeLaurentis, Daniel A. .
ENERGY POLICY, 2019, 134
[7]  
CWRT, 1999, TOT COST ASS METH IN
[8]  
de Bruijn Hans., 2002, Handbook on life cycle assessment-operational guide to the ISO standards Series editor: Jeroen B. Guinee, V7
[9]   Downcycling versus recycling of construction and demolition waste: Combining LCA and LCC to support sustainable policy making [J].
Di Maria, Andrea ;
Eyckmans, Johan ;
Van Acker, Karel .
WASTE MANAGEMENT, 2018, 75 :3-21
[10]  
Finkbeiner Matthias, 2010, Sustainability, V2, P3309, DOI 10.3390/su2103309