Timothy J. Skone, PE

National EnergyTechnology Laboratory

OFFICE OF FOSSIL ENERGY

Timothy J. Skone, PESenior Environmental EngineerStrategic Energy Analysis & PlanningApril 30, 2014

Life Cycle Analysis at the National Energy Technology Laboratory

22 OFFICE OF FOSSIL ENERGY

MISSIONAdvancing energy options

to fuel our economy,strengthen our security, and

improve our environment

National Energy Technology LaboratoryPittsburgh, PA

Morgantown,WV

Albany,OR

Fairbanks, AKSugar Land,TX

West VirginiaPennsylvaniaOregon


• Draws a more complete picture than one focused solely on stack or tailpipe emissions

• Allows direct comparison of dramatically different options based on function or service

• Includes methods for evaluating a wide variety of emissions and impacts on a common basis

• Brings clarity to results through systematic definition of goals and boundaries

LCA is well suited for energy analysis


• Purpose of the analysis– Comparing two technology options– Evaluating impact of a policy on entire system

• Boundaries and function considered– Coal: production of feedstock vs. delivered electricity– Natural gas: all annual domestic or marginal shale only

• Metrics evaluated– Greenhouses gases: 20 or 100 year GWPs, inclusion of timing and

feedback effects– Economic, environmental, and human health metric results may

favor different options; and relative importance of each may differ among technologies

LCA answers are sensitive to the question asked

Potential trade-off between usefulness and uncertaintyThe more complete the picture, the more uncertain it becomes


1. Produce LCAs of energy systems– Inform and defend technology programs, and

identify opportunities for R&D– Baseline different energy technologies– Understand technology strengths and

weaknesses from a life cycle perspective

2. Improve LCA methods– Expand environmental inventory– Characterize both variability and multiple types

of uncertainty– Build flexible models– Enhance interpretation and comparability of

inventory results without losing depth and transparency

3. Inform energy policy decision-makers

LCA at NETL meets both internal and external objectives


NETL approaches each LCA systematically to ensure comparability and transparency

• Compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs, and potential environmental impacts of a product or service throughout its life cycle, from raw material acquisition to final disposal

• Ability to compare different options depends on functional unit (denominator)– 1 MWh of electricity delivered to the end user– 1 MJ of fuel combusted

LC Stage #1Raw Material Acquisition

(RMA)

LC Stage #2Raw Material

Transport(RMT)

LC Stage #3Energy

Conversion Facility(ECF)

LC Stage #4Product

Transport(PT)

LC Stage #5End Use

(EU)

Upstream Emissions Downstream Emissions


Coal Extraction Coal Extraction T&DCoal Transport Coal Transport T&DPower Plant Construction Power Plant Construction T&DNatural Gas for Aux Boiler Natural Gas for Aux Boiler T&DPlant Operations Plant Operations T&DT&D

Direct Indirect Direct+Indirect0

50

100

150

200

250

300

135

0

135

g CO

₂e/k

Wh


50

100

150

200

250

300

135123

258

g CO

₂e/k

Wh


50

100

150

200

250

300

135117

251

g CO

₂e/k

Wh


50

100

150

200

250

300

135146

280

g CO

₂e/k

Wh

LCA shows the importance of each portion of the life cycle

+ =

(Combustion Stack Emissions)

(Upstream &Downstream)

(Full Life Cycle)


NETL uses Impact Assessment to map inventory to impact, increasing usefulness of study results

•GHGs: CO2, CH4, N2O, etc.•Smog: NOx, CO, etc.

EmissionsInventory

•Emissions put on a common basis

•GWP (CO2e)

MidpointImpact

•Convert impacts to damages or costs

•DALYs, Sea-level rise, etc.

EndpointImpact

Characterization Factor (e.g. GWPs)

DamageFunction

More certain More

useful

• Global Warming Potential (CO2e)– Increase in Earth’s average temperature

• Ozone Depletion (CFC-11e)– Thinning of ozone layer in the

stratosphere• Acidification (SO2e)

– Increased concentration of H ions• Photochemical Smog Formation (O3e)

– Ground-level ozone (smog)• Respiratory Effects (PM2.5e)

– Health impacts caused by inhalation of PM

• Toxicity – Impacts to human health (cancer and

non-cancer) and ecosystem• Ionizing Radiation

– Impacts on health, due to discharges of radioactive material

• Resource Depletion– Reduced future availability of a

resource, due to use now•Eutrophication (Ne)

– Increase in nutrients (primarily N and P) in an aquatic system

Impact Categories


• Emissions from Natural Gas Extraction, Processing and Transmission

• Comparison of Climate Impacts of Natural Gas and Coal-fired Power

• Integration & Expansion of Detailed Petroleum Extraction and Refining Models

• Development of Co-product Management Strategies for Large-scale Energy Systems

• Comparative Analysis of Energy Systems• Energy System Environmental Inventory Data

Expansion to Support LCIA• Adoption of OpenLCA Modeling Platform & Transition

to LCA Digital Commons

Recent and ongoing work spans a variety of energy-related areas


Detailed modeling and analysis of greenhouse gas emissions from conventional and unconventional natural gas extraction

10.4 g CO₂e/MJ 9.24011.476

9.542

11.638

11.311

10.818

11.50311.675

10.916

Cradle-to-GatePipeline Fugitives

Pipeline CompressorsPipeline Construction

TransportCompressors

Valve FugitivesOther Point Sources

Other FugitivesDehydration

Acid Gas RemovalProcessing

Water TreatmentWater DeliveryValve Fugitives

Other Point SourcesOther Fugitives

WorkoversWell Completion

Well ConstructionExtraction

7.20 g CO₂e/MJ9.24011.476

10.136

11.638

11.311

11.516

12

8

4

0

0

4

8

12

g CO₂e/MJ

Current Practice Reduced Methane


Analyzing gas- and coal-fired electricity generation in the context of uncertain methane leakage

-5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20%0

500

1,000

1,500

Adv. Coal11.9%

Adv. Coal4.5%

Fleet Coal15.8%

Fleet Coal5.9%

20-yr GWP

100-yr GWP

Coal-Gas Breakeven

Current Practice (1.2%)

Reduced CH₄ (0.8%)

CH₄ Leakage Rate

g CO

₂e/k

Wh


• Oil Production Greenhouse Gas Emissions Estimator (OPGEE)

– Created by Stanford University Dept. of Energy Resources Engr. (Adam Brandt)

– Based on bottom-up engineering calculations to capture variability in crude extraction emissions

• Create modular unit processes based on the stages in OPGEE

– Seven main stages: (1) Exploration, (2) Drilling and Development, (3) Production and Extraction, (4) Separation and Surface Processing, (5) Maintenance and Workovers, (6) Waste Treatment and Disposal, (7) Crude Product Transport

– Augment with NETL CO2 EOR work– Addition of non-GHG emissions to provide

a more complete inventory

Improvements to NETL Petroleum Baseline – Translation of Crude Extraction Processes

ExtractionDrilling & Development

Separation Unit

Downhole Pump

Water/Gas Injection

Water/Gas/Steam

Flood

Heater-Treater

Stabilizer Unit

Acid Gas Removal

Glycol Dehydrator

De-methanizer

Natural Gas

OilCrude Oil Transport

Natural Gas

Pipeline


Integrated energy systems often produce a mix of material and energy co-products

• Examples– Thermochemical conversion plants (GTL, CTL, CBTL) produce fuels and electricity– CO2-EOR systems produce electricity (when power plants are the CO2 source) and

fuels (from refined EOR crude)

• Allocation?– Mass allocation is not possible with electricity as a co-product– Economic allocation is possible, but costs are relative and societal values reflected

by prices do not necessary indicate relative environmental burdens of co-products– Energy allocation is possible if all co-products can be expressed on an energy basis,

but does not account for differences in useful energy

• Displacement?– Large scale energy systems can affect demand for competing products– Displacement considers broader consequences of co-production

Displacement is more appropriate than allocation for large scale energy systems because they affect conventional routes to energy production.


166 g CO₂e/kWh

Attributional approach: Advanced coal power with sequestered CO₂

With consequential analysis, a change in perspective can change preferences

280 g CO₂e/kWh

487 g CO₂e/kWh

Consequential approach: Advanced coal power with CO₂ to EORReduces oil imports

Consequential approach: Advanced coal power with CO₂ to EOREOR already at maximum production


H₂O

GWP

COE

CF

Natural Gas,Simple Cycle

Lower GWP

Comparative Analysis of Energy Systems

H₂O

GWP

COE

CF

Natural Gas,Combined Cycle

H₂O

GWP

COE

CF

Natural Gas, Comb. Cyclew/ Carbon Capture

H₂O

GWP

COE

CF

Advanced CoalH₂O

GWP

COE

CF

Advanced Coal,w/ Carbon Capture

H₂O

GWP

COE

CF

New Nuclear

H₂O

GWP

COE

CF

Wind,Onshore

H₂O

GWP

COE

CF

Wind,Offshore

H₂O

GWP

COE

CF

Geothermal

H₂O

GWP

COE

CF

Solar Thermal

Spokes represent preferability of each metric relative to other technologies shown – the larger the shaded area, the more preferable the technology

Lower water use

Lower COE

Higher CF


• Reviewed TRACI, ReCiPe, Impact 2002+ and EDIP– NETL will use TRACI 2.1 with some modifications, may use ReCiPe as a second method

• Modifications and Additions– Modify Human Health Particulates

• Actual impacts vary by release height and population density• Factors are available from EPA

– Scale Water Use by Geography• Location of withdrawal/use is as important as quantity• NETL can increase internal capabilities with training by outside SMEs

– Remove Resource Depletion• Category doesn’t account for new oil/gas resources

– Expand GWP Inventory• Ozone precursors• Black carbon, sulfur and nitrate aerosols

– Add Cumulative Energy Demand Metric• Captures total energy use in system• Develop factors for new resources like tight oil and tar sands• At most 5% different from ReCiPe fossil depletion factors

– Include Significant Toxic Emissions• Report list of emissions and results separately due to high uncertainty

Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA)

TRACI is the only method with data

specific to the U.S.

In use by many U.S.-based institutions

and agencies


Smog Formation Potential0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.01.8

NOₓ CO CH₄ NMVOC

g O

₃e/M

J

Smog Precursor Mass0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.35

NOₓ CO CH₄ NMVOC

g/M

J

GWP0.0

3.0

6.0

9.0

12.0

9.1

CO₂ CH₄ N₂O SF₆

g CO

₂e/M

J

GHG Inventory Mass0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.03.2

CO₂ CH₄ N₂O SF₆

g/M

J

Results from impact assessment can change the importance of inventory items

Inventory Impact

CO₂e

O₃e

The impacts associated with certain inventory items, such as CH4 and NOX, are critical to understanding the complete environmental footprint of natural gas extraction

Natural Gas Extraction from Marcellus Shale


• Conducted an extensive review of available LCA software– Goal: Evaluate ways of making NETL’s LCA work, especially unit processes, models and tools,

more accessible and transparent to the public & more efficient to perform– Evaluation categories included: interoperability, features, ease of use, visualization, support,

cost, maintenance, analysis time, data, transparency, and LCA community integration and impact

• NETL’s evaluation of the key advantages of openLCA– Open Source

• Increased transparency for internal and external users• Ability to share models without worrying about licenses• Full access for key stakeholders

– Enhanced Analysis• Monte Carlo uncertainty analysis• Data pedigree matrix• LCIA sub-categories

– LCA Community of Practices• EPA, USDA, etc. • Drive tool development

• NETL plans to transition existing models to openLCA over the next year

NETL Transition to openLCA Modeling Platform

www.openlca.org

www.lcacommons.gov


Contact UsTimothy J. Skone, P.E.Senior Environmental Engineer • Strategic Energy Analysis and Planning Division • (412) 386-4495 • [email protected]

Joe Marriott, Ph.D.Lead Associate • Booz Allen Hamilton • (412) 386-7557 • [email protected]

James LittlefieldAssociate • Booz Allen Hamilton • (412) 386-7560 • [email protected]

netl.doe.gov/lca/ [email protected] @NETL_News

Timothy J. Skone, PE

Documents