Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Life cycle assessment of the Danish electricity distribution network



This article provides life cycle inventory data for electricity distribution networks and a life cycle assessment (LCA) of the Danish transmission and distribution networks. The aim of the study was to evaluate the potential importance of environmental impacts associated with distribution, in current and future electricity systems.


The functional unit was delivery of 1 kWh of electricity in Denmark. The focus of the assessment was distribution of electricity, and the related impacts were compared to the generation and transmission of electricity, in order to evaluate the importance of electricity distribution in Denmark. The 2010 Danish electricity distribution network was modeled, including power lines (50, 10, 0.4 kV), transformers (50/10 and 10/0.4 kV), and relevant auxiliary infrastructure (e.g., cable ditches, poles, and substations). Two types of 50 kV power lines (underground and overhead) and 0.4 kV (copper and aluminum) were modeled.

Results and discussion

Electricity transmission and distribution provided nonnegligible impacts, related mainly to power losses. Impacts from electricity distribution were larger than those from transmission because of higher losses and higher complexity and material consumption. Infrastructure provided important contributions to metal depletion and freshwater eutrophication (copper and aluminum for manufacturing of the cables and associated recycling being the most important). Underground 50-kV lines had larger impacts than overhead lines, and 0.4-kV aluminum lines had lower impacts than comparable copper lines.


A new specific dataset for infrastructure in the distribution network was provided and used to evaluate the role of electricity distribution in Denmark. Both transmission and distribution provided nonnegligible impacts. It was argued that the impacts from electricity distribution are likely to increase in the future, owing to more renewables and decentralized electricity generation, and that impacts from infrastructure may become significant compared to electricity generation itself. It was recommended that impacts from electricity distribution and related infrastructure are included in relevant LCA studies. The data provided here make this possible.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4


  1. ABB (2000) Environmental Product Declaration: Distribution transformer 315kVA

  2. ABB (2003) Environmental Product Declaration: Large Distribution Transformer 16/20 MVA (ONAN/ONAF)

  3. ABB Denmark (2002) Power IT Compact Secondary Substations (CSS): Technical catalogue for concrete substations

  4. ABB Poland (2012) ABB in Poland., accessed 19-04-2013

  5. Agency IE (2010) Electr Inform. doi:10.1016/0301-4215(90)90225-S

  6. Bolin CA, Smith ST (2011) Life cycle assessment of pentachlorophenol-treated wooden utility poles with comparisons to steel and concrete utility poles. Revew Sust Energ Rev 15(5):2475–2486

  7. Bumby S, Druzhinina E, Feraldi R, Werthmann D, Geyer R, Sahl J (2010) Life cycle assessment of overhead and underground primary power distribution. Environ Sci Technol 44(14):5587–5593

  8. Cigre (2004) Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for overhead lines. Cigre Working Group B2.15

  9. Danish Climate Energy and Building Ministry (2012) LBK no. 279, 21/03/2012. Retrieved from [in Danish]

  10. Danish Energy Regulatory Authority (2007) Effektiviseringskrav til elnetselskaber for 2008. Retrieved from [in Danish]

  11. Ecoinvent (2010) Ecoinvent data v.2.2

  12. (2010a) Environmental Report 2010

  13. (2010b) Dansk Elforsyning Statistik 2009. In Danish

  14. (2011) OmEnergi: From natiral gas to RE gas in 2050

  15. European Union (2008) Directive 2008/98/EC: Waste Framework Directive

  16. Gagnon L, Bélanger C, Uchiyama Y (2002) Life-cycle assessment of electricity generation options: the status of research in year 2001. Energ Policy 30(14):1267–1278

  17. Georgakellos DA (2012) Climate change external cost appraisal of electricity generation systems from a life cycle perspective: the case of Greece. J Clean Prod 32:124–140

  18. Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Huijbregts M, De Schryver A, Struijs J, Van Zelm R (2009) ReCiPe 2008

  19. Harrison GP, Maclean EJ, Karamanlis S, Ochoa LF (2010) Life cycle assessment of the transmission network in Great Britain. Energ Policy 38(7):3622–3631

  20. Jones CI, McManus MC (2010) Life-cycle assessment of 11kV electrical overhead lines and underground cables. J Clean Prod 18(14):1464–1477

  21. Jorge RS, Hawkins TR, Hertwich EG (2011a) Life cycle assessment of electricity transmission and distribution—part 1: power lines and cables. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(1):9–15

  22. Jorge RS, Hawkins TR, Hertwich EG (2011b) Life cycle assessment of electricity transmission and distribution, part 2: transformers and substation equipment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(2):184–191

  23. Jorge RS, Hertwich EG (2013) Environmental evaluation of power transmission in Norway. Appl Nereg 101:513–520

  24. NKT Cables (2010) Product Catalogue 2010

  25. PE International (2010) GaBi 4.4

  26. Tonini D, Astrup T (2012) LCA of biomass-based energy systems: a case study for Denmark. Appl Energ 99:234–246

  27. Turconi R, Boldrin A, Astrup T (2013) Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: overview, comparability and limitations. Submitted to Renew Sust Energ Rev

  28. Weisser D (2007) A guide to life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from electric supply technologies. Energy 32(9):1543–1559

Download references


The authors greatly appreciated the valuable involvement and interest of Allan Norsk Jensen (Dansk Energi) and Christian Friberg B. Nielsen ( and their assistance in defining power infrastructure. Assistance from ABB Denmark, DONG Energy, and NKT Cables in responding to queries and providing data regarding infrastructure production and composition was also very much appreciated. The authors would also like to express their gratitude to the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.

Author information

Correspondence to Roberto Turconi.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Christian Bauer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Turconi, R., Simonsen, C.G., Byriel, I.P. et al. Life cycle assessment of the Danish electricity distribution network. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19, 100–108 (2014).

Download citation


  • Decentralized generation
  • Electricity distribution
  • Electricity system
  • Electricity transmission
  • Life cycle assessment
  • Power lines
  • Renewable energy