A life cycle assessment study of a Canadian post-combustion carbon dioxide capture process system

  • Jarotwan Koiwanit
  • Lakkana Piewkhaow
  • Qing Zhou
  • Anastassia Manuilova
  • Christine W. Chan
  • Malcolm Wilson
  • Paitoon Tontiwachwuthikul
LIFE CYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (LCIA)

Abstract

Purpose

While carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) has been widely recognized as a useful technology for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions, it is necessary to evaluate the environmental performance of CCS from a full life cycle perspective to comprehensively understand its environmental impacts. The primary research objective is to conduct a study on life cycle assessment of the post-combustion carbon dioxide capture process based on data from SaskPower’s electricity generation station at the Boundary Dam in Saskatchewan, Canada. A secondary objective of this study is to identify the life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) methodology which is most suitable for the assessment of carbon dioxide capture technology integrated with the power generation system in the Canadian context.

Methods

The study takes a comparative approach by including three scenarios of carbon dioxide capture at the electricity generation station: no carbon dioxide capture (“no capture”), partial capture (“retrofit”), and fully integrated carbon dioxide capture of the entire facility (“capture”). The four LCIA methods of EDIP 97, CML2001, IMPACT2002+, and TRACI are used to convert existing inventory data into environmental impacts. The LCIA results from the four methods are compared and interpreted based on midpoint categories.

Results and discussion

The LCA results showed an increase in the retrofit and capture scenarios compared to the no capture scenario in the impact categories of eutrophication air, ecotoxicity water, ecotoxicity ground surface soil, eutrophication water, human health cancer ground surface soil, human health cancer water, human health noncancer ground surface soil, ozone depletion air, human health noncancer water, and ionizing radiation. The reductions were observed in the retrofit and capture scenarios in the impact categories of acidification, human health criteria air-point source, human health noncancer air, ecotoxicity air, global warming, human health cancer air, and respiratory effects.

Conclusions

Although the four LCIA methodologies significantly differ in terms of reference substances used for individual impact categories, all (TRACI, IMPACT2002+, CML2001, and EDIP 97) showed similar results in all impact categories.

Keywords

Carbon dioxide (CO2) post-combustion capture CML2001 EDIP 97 IMPACT2002+ Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) Midpoint approach TRACI 

Supplementary material

11367_2013_649_MOESM1_ESM.doc (47 kb)
ESM 1(DOC 47 kb)

References

  1. Althaus H-J, Chudacoff M, Hellweg S, Hischier R, Jungbluth N, Osses M, Primas A (2004) Life cycle inventories of chemicals. Ecoinvent Report No. 8. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories, DübendorfGoogle Scholar
  2. ISO 14040 (2006) Environmental management–life cycle assessment–principles and framework. International Standard ISO 14040. Geneva: International Organization for StandardizationGoogle Scholar
  3. ISO 14044 (2006) Environmental management–life cycle assessment–requirements and guidelines. ISO 14044. Geneva: International Organization for StandardizationGoogle Scholar
  4. Koornneef J, Keulen T, Faaij A, Turkenburg W (2008) Life cycle assessment of a pulverized coal power plant with post-combustion capture, transport and storage of CO2. Int J Greenh Gas Con 2(4):448–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Manuilova A (2011) Evaluation of environmental performance of carbon capture and storage project in Canada using life cycle assessment methodology. PhD. Thesis, University of Regina, Regina, SKGoogle Scholar
  6. Nie Z, Korre A, Durucan S (2011) Life cycle modelling and comparative assessment of the environmental impacts of oxy-fuel and post-combustion CO2 capture, transport and injection processes. Energy Procedia 4(10):2510–2517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Pehnt M, Henkel J (2009) Life cycle assessment of carbon dioxide capture and storage from lignite power plants. Int J Greenh Gas Con 3(2):49–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Schreiber A, Zapp P, Kuckshinrichs W (2009) Environmental assessment of German electricity generation from coal-fired power plants with amine-based carbon capture. Int J Life Cycle Assess 14(6):547–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Singh B, Strømman AH, Hertwich EG (2011) Comparative life cycle environmental assessment of CCS technologies. Int J Greenh Gas Con 5(4):911–921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Spath P, Mann M, Kerr D (1999) Life cycle assessment of coal-fired power production. Tech. Rep. NREL/TP-570-27715, US National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, COGoogle Scholar
  11. Suebsiri J (2010) An environmental model of carbon capture and storage with demonstration to carbon footprint and resource deletion evaluation. PhD. Thesis, University of Regina, Regina, SKGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jarotwan Koiwanit
    • 1
  • Lakkana Piewkhaow
    • 1
  • Qing Zhou
    • 1
  • Anastassia Manuilova
    • 2
  • Christine W. Chan
    • 1
  • Malcolm Wilson
    • 3
  • Paitoon Tontiwachwuthikul
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering and Applied ScienceUniversity of ReginaReginaCanada
  2. 2.ArticCan Energy ServicesReginaCanada
  3. 3.Petroleum Technology Research CentreReginaCanada

Personalised recommendations