Part3 LCA GF

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 50

Energy Management MBA

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of


Energy Projects

Prof. Gioia Falcone

October 2023

1
Summary

▪ Key points from prep material


▪ Project vs. Asset
▪ Life Cycle Assessment
▪ Sustainability KPIs
▪ Group activity

2
PROJECT, ASSET, LIFETIME

3
Energy Project:‘Project-Based’
conventional System

Oil/Gas
project

A Project is the level at which a


decision is made on whether or not
to proceed (i.e. spend money or not)

Uranium/Coal project

© 2023 by G. Falcone 4
Energy Project: renewables
UNFC for ‘Renewables’

A Project is the link between the Source and marketable quantities of Products.
A Project provides the basis for economic evaluation and decision-making.

© 2023 by G. Falcone 5
Energy Project: integrated systems

(Stopford, 2021)
(Bilfinger, 2021)

(NZTC, 2021)
© 2023 by G. Falcone (after Boesten et al. 2019) 6
Project # Asset

• What is an Energy Project for your company?


• What is an Energy Asset for your company?
• Where do you need Assurance/Insurance?
• What are your Liabilities? (incl. third-party)
• Does your Project/Asset carries in-perpetuity liabilities?
• Do you have the Social License to Operate?
• Are data/workflows your Asset?
• Would you define your company as Operator, Partner, Contractor,
Subcontractor, or other?

© 2023 by G. Falcone 7
Energy Project Lifetime

• Economic Limit? Date beyond which the remaining cumulative net


operating cash flows from the Project are negative.
• Determined from the design basis of the facilities or key
components of those facilities? Routine maintenance vs. a new
Project investment decision and/or regulatory approval.
• Entitlement? Governed by applicable contracts.

© 2023 by G. Falcone 8
Project/Product vs. Lifetime (‘in operation’)
PRODUCT (if produced)

PROJECT

Quantity produced (or injected)


SOURCE
(OR SINK) RESOURCE

Project year with respect to present

© 2023 by G. Falcone (after Ussher, 2019) 9


Example of CCS Project Lifetime

Baseline Operation Decommissioning Stewardship


1 - 10 years 10 - 50 years 10 - 20 years at least 30 years?

Site selection
Regulatory Monitoring progress of storage, mass CO2 injected – crediting, Injection ceased, facilities Ongoing monitoring and
characterisation & risk management via contingency and
review & matching to simulation (SPF), ongoing regulatory reporting decommissioning, monitoring continues,
assessment long-term monitoring fund
permitting MMV data match performance criteria
– liability transfer from operator

© 2023 by G. Falcone 10
LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT

11
Life Cycle of Energy Projects

© 2023 by G. Falcone 12
What is LCA?

• LCA is a standardised method of tracking and reporting the


environmental impacts of a product or process throughout its full
life cycle (ISO, 2006a: 8).
• LCA aims to quantify the overall impacts associated with energy
and materials, and to provide information on trade-offs among
different impacts in the life cycle.
• LCA helps decision-makers to understand the environmental
performance associated with specific products, processes, or
activities.

© 2023 by G. Falcone 13
LCA ISO-Standards

© 2023 by G. Falcone 14
LCA System Boundaries

© 2023 by G. Falcone 15
LCA Cradle-to-Cradle

© 2023 by G. Falcone 16
LCA Phases

(ISO 14040)

© 2023 by G. Falcone 17
LCA Phases & Standards

© 2023 by G. Falcone 18
Example of Product System for LCA

(ISO 14040)

© 2023 by G. Falcone 19
LCA – Impact Assessment

(ISO 14040)

© 2023 by G. Falcone 20
LCA Software

…and more

© 2023 by G. Falcone 21
CRADLE-TO-CRADLE EXAMPLES

22
Wind
UK total operational capacity: ~ 11 GW
2022 British Energy Security Strategy set ambition to deliver up to 50
GW by 2030.

Estimated decom cost of OWFs in UK:


£1.28-£3.64bn for 37 OWFs, but more developments
& bigger structures planned (Arup, 2018)
(Crown Estate/Scotland, 2020)
Cradle-to-cradle if infrastructure can be reused? For how long?
© 2023 by G. Falcone 23
In the UK, ~14,000 turbine blades will be decommissioned by 2023 and
Wind this amount will continue to grow.
Non-recyclable materials end up in national and international landfill,
with associated post-‘activity’ socio-economic-environmental
implications.

© 2023 by G. Falcone 24
Oil & Gas
(OGA, 2020)

(UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982)


~320 fixed installations offshore
UK >44 bn boe recovered
(NAO, 2019)

Estimated cost of decom for


UKCS over next two decades:
£46bn (OGA, 2021)

Cradle-to-cradle if infrastructure can be reused? For how long?


© 2023 by G. Falcone 25
O&G: reusing pipelines to transport H2
UKCS pipelines’ material ▪ Ranking of material compatibility of UK pipeline infrastructure based on:
compatibility map for H2 Service
1. Fluid being transported.
i. Gas pipelines more suited to H2 as oil pipelines would have to undergo heavy cleaning to
remove traces of hydrocarbons and other impurities.

2. Age age.
Orange lines
are more i. Pipeline material grades X42 and X52 are recommended by ASME for H2 use.
suitable for H2
service ii. No public data on material grades, but trend in recent years towards higher grades;
pipelines built in1990s are more likely to be a suitable grade.

▪ If 40% of pipelines might be reusable, then removing 10% for integrity


challenges, leaves 30% of UKCS pipelines acceptable for H2 service.

OGTC, Delivery of an offshore hydrogen supply, 2019

© 2023 by G. Falcone 26
Compatibility of NG pipelines &
components for H2 service
▪ Are pipelines and components designed for NG fully compatible with a changeover to H2? What changes are required ?

▪ At standard conditions, methane has 3x times the calorific heating value of H2, yet in pipelines, H2 with its lower density flows 3x faster
than methane. The same pipeline can convey 3x as much H2 for a given period at the same pressure.

▪ Depending on steel quality and exposure to H2, embrittlement can accelerate propagation of cracks, reducing the pipeline’s service life
by 20% to 50%, but this is only likely if the pipeline already has fractures and is subjected to stresses due to fluctuating internal pressure
while at the same time being exposed to H2.

▪ To compress H2 to the operating pressure of the pipeline, compressor stations are required along the way. If H2 is mixed with methane
and the existing compressors for NG are kept in place, some parts might need to be adapted, depending on the admixture of H2. If the
share of H2 exceeds 40%, the compressors will need to be replaced. Switching to a 100% H2 pipeline requires installing new and more
powerful compressors to deliver the 3x volume flow of H2 compared to NG.

Siemens, repurposing gas infrastructure for hydrogen, 2020

© 2023 by G. Falcone 27
UKCS pipelines material
compatibility for H2 service
▪ Offshore pipelines made of carbon steel of different material grades, reflecting design codes, operating pressures and age

▪ Suitability of such pipelines for transporting H2 depends on embrittlement and degradation mechanisms attributed to H2.

▪ OGTC study into reusing pipelines for H2 service found:


1. Embrittlement of materials: reduction in yield strength and fracture toughness; increased crack growth rate, leading to reduced fatigue life

2. Embrittlement dependent on operating conditions and material properties and has a greater effect on steels with higher tensile strength

3. Blistering, sulphide stress cracking and H2-induced cracking are possible where H2 is blended with sour natural gas.

4. MAOP should be defined so that maximum stress in the pipeline walls is below 30-50% of the minimum specified yield strength

5. Recommended pipeline grades are API X42 and X52 (older pipelines); grades above X52 more likely to be severely affected by embrittlement

6. Limitations of stress and material grade equates to approximately 50 to 150 bar maximum pressures for typical sizes of X52 pipelines which appears feasible
for H2 storage and transportation

OGTC, Delivery of an offshore hydrogen supply, 2019

© 2023 by G. Falcone 28
Nuclear

8,923 MWe

(WNA, 2021)

(CCC, 2017) (NIA, 2018)


© 2023 by G. Falcone 29
The Nuclear Fuel Cycle

Radioactive waste in UK Inventory (NDA, 2020)

(NIA, 2018)

Is cradle-to-cradle possible?
© 2023 by G. Falcone 30
ENERGY AND EMISSIONS

31
UK emissions by ‘sector’

(BEIS, 2022)
© 2023 by G. Falcone 32
Energy emissions from source to use

?
Incomplete picture without considering also
embodied emissions and end-of-life
© 2023 by G. Falcone 33
Emissions, boundaries and carbon accounting

(Kennedy, 2020)

(C40 Cities, 2021)


© 2023 by G. Falcone 34
Applying different measures of GHGs to the UK

(Defra, updated 2022)


(WWF, 2020)

Territorial: Only emissions that occur within the UK’s borders. Used as basis for reporting to EC and UNFCCC.
Production: “Residents” based, i.e. produced by UK residents/industry, whether in the UK or abroad, but excluding
emissions within the UK that are attributed to overseas residents and businesses. Reported in UK Environmental Accounts.
Consumption: Production minus exports plus imports.
© 2023 by G. Falcone 35
Greenhouse Gas Protocol

(Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard)

Must define System boundaries & project/activity lifetime.


© 2023 by G. Falcone 36
Life Cycle Emissions:
Electricity Generation

LULUC= Land use and land-use changes


CCS=carbon capture and sequestration
(NREL, 2013) BECCS
© 2023 by G. Falcone 37
Is it all just about Emissions?

© 2023 by G. Falcone (UNECE, 2017) 38


SUSTAINABILITY KPIs
(IS IT ALL ‘JUST’ ABOUT EMISSIONS?)

39
LCA – Environmental Footprint

© 2023 by G. Falcone 40
Energy Trilemma

(WEC/Oliver Wyman, 2016 )


© 2023 by G. Falcone 41
Sustainability Indicators

© 2023 by G. Falcone 42
Examples of Sustainability Indicators

(EC, 2018)
(Colla et al., 2019 )
© 2023 by G. Falcone 43
Social LCA

© 2023 by G. Falcone 44
LCA EXAMPLES FOR THE ENERGY
TRANSITION

45
LCA of blue hydrogen •

No UK CCS projects in operation yet.
Selected sites still under appraisal; E&A, not
storage licenses.
• First CO2 injection in 2025 (EIS), 2026/7 (SNS).
• Norwegian flagship CCS projects have issues too.
• Snøvhit has had to change its storage target and
was offline for 2 yrs.
• Sleipner 2020 seismic survey showed CO2 plume
migrating 3x faster than predicted into a new area.
Findings in ~25 yrs, a fraction of CO2 storage time
scale of IPCC, who concluded that reservoirs are
“very likely' to retain >99% of the sequestered
CO2 for >100 yrs”, pointing to greater than
New CO2 emissions.
anticipated subsurface containment risk.
< 90% capture efficiency.

HYDROGEN TRANSPORT,
Existing/new gas fields.
Time to first production.
STORAGE & DISTRIBUTION
Gas field lifetime.
Total reserves (not resources!).

PLATFORM
CONSTRUCTION
Workers paid 35p/hr.
Source/destiny of materials 137 fatalities in 2009-2019.

PLATFORM DECOMMISSIONING (Warwick et al., 2022)

© 2023 by G. Falcone 46
LCA of lithium: sourcing aspects

Mixed messages from the EC:

European Chemicals Agency


(ECHA) proposal to classify
lithium as a ‘reproductive toxin
category 1A’.

Announcement of upcoming
European Critical Raw
Materials Act in Sep-2022.

In Jul-2022, BEIS confirmed


support to domestic
exploration and extraction of (Source: GEO3)
critical minerals, incl. lithium.

(Source: Minviro)
Preliminary sampling in Cornwall indicates
© 2023 by G. Falcone lithium grades of 220-260 mg/L. 47
LCA of lithium ion batteries

(Tao et al., 2021)

© 2023 by G. Falcone 48
SUGGESTED GROUP ACTIVITY

49
Activity
• You are asked to work in groups to introduce a (real or notional) energy
project of your choice, based on single- or multi- energy sources, delivering
single- or multi-energy products, with or without CCS, and discuss:
• (a) how you would define the lifetime of the project;
• (b) how you would approach the Life Cycle Assessment of the project,
and within which boundaries;
• (c) what quantitative KPIs you would use to assess the 'sustainability' of
the project during its lifetime;
• (d) whether disclosure of quantitative sustainability KPIs will enhance or
hinder the chances of success of the project.

© 2023 by G. Falcone 50

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy