Life cycle analysis of UK coal fired power plants

This paper examines the life cycle GHG emissions from existing UK pulverized coal power plants. The life cycle of the electricity Generation plant includes construction, operation and decommissioning. The operation phase is extended to upstream and downstream processes. Upstream processes include the mining and transport of coal including methane leakage and the production and transport of limestone and ammonia, which are necessary for flue gas clean up. Downstream processes, on the other hand, include waste disposal and the recovery of land used for surface mining. The methodology used is material based process analysis that allows calculation of the total emissions for each process involved. A simple model for predicting the energy and material requirements of the power plant is developed. Preliminary calculations reveal that for a typical UK coal fired plant, the life cycle emissions amount to 990 g CO2-e/kWh of electricity generated, which compares well with previous UK studies. The majority of these emissions result from direct fuel combustion (882 g/kWh 89%) with methane leakage from mining operations accounting for 60% of indirect emissions. In total, mining operations (including methane leakage) account for 67.4% of indirect emissions, while limestone and other material production and transport account for 31.5%. The methodology developed is also applied to a typical IGCC power plant. It is found that IGCC life cycle emissions are 15% less than those from PC power plants. Furthermore, upon investigating the influence of power plant parameters on life cycle emissions, it is determined that, while the effect of changing the load factor is negligible, increasing efficiency from 35% to 38% can reduce emissions by 7.6%. The current study is funded by the UK National Environment Research Council (NERC) and is undertaken as part of the UK Carbon Capture and Storage Consortium (UKCCSC). Future work will investigate the life cycle emissions from other power generation technologies with and without carbon capture and storage. The current paper reveals that it might be possible that, when CCS is employed. the emissions during generation decrease to a level where the emissions from upstream processes (i.e. coal production and transport) become dominant, and so, the life cycle efficiency of the CCS system can be significantly reduced. The location of coal, coal composition and mining method are important in determining the overall impacts. In addition to studying the net emissions from CCS systems, future work will also investigate the feasibility and technoeconomics of these systems as a means of carbon abatement.

Life cycle GHG assessment of fossil fuel power plants with carbon capture and storage

The evaluation of life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from power generation with carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a critical factor in energy and policy analysis. The current paper examines life cycle emissions from three types of fossil-fuel-based power plants, namely supercritical pulverized coal (super-PC), natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) and integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC), with and without CCS. Results show that, for a 90% CO2 capture efficiency, life cycle GHG emissions are reduced by 75-84% depending on what technology is used. With GHG emissions less than 170 g/kWh, IGCC technology is found to be favorable to NGCC with CCS. Sensitivity analysis reveals that, for coal power plants, varying the CO2 capture efficiency and the coal transport distance has a more pronounced effect on life cycle GHG emissions than changing the length of CO2 transport pipeline. Finally, it is concluded from the current study that while the global warming potential is reduced when MEA-based CO2 capture is employed, the increase in other air pollutants such as NOx and NH3 leads to higher eutrophication and acidification potentials.

Model-based life cycle cost and assessment tool for sustainable building design decision

There is a growing concern in reducing greenhouse gas emissions all over the world. The U.K. has set 34% target reduction of emission before 2020 and 80% before 2050 compared to 1990 recently in Post Copenhagen Report on Climate Change. In practise, Life Cycle Cost (LCC) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) tools have been introduced to construction industry in order to achieve this such as. However, there is clear a disconnection between costs and environmental impacts over the life cycle of a built asset when using these two tools. Besides, the changes in Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) lead to a change in the way information is represented, in particular, information is being fed more easily and distributed more quickly to different stakeholders by the use of tool such as the Building Information Modelling (BIM), with little consideration on incorporating LCC and LCA and their maximised usage within the BIM environment. The aim of this paper is to propose the development of a model-based LCC and LCA tool in order to provide sustainable building design decisions for clients, architects and quantity surveyors, by then an optimal investment decision can be made by studying the trade-off between costs and environmental impacts. An application framework is also proposed finally as the future work that shows how the proposed model can be incorporated into the BIM environment in practise.

A case study to investigate the life cycle carbon emissions and carbon storage capacity of a cross laminated timber, multi-storey residential building

Forests are a store of carbon and an eco-system that continually removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. If they are sustainably managed, the carbon store can be maintained at a constant level, while the trees removed and converted to timber products can form an additional long term carbon store. The total carbon store in the forest and associated ‘wood chain’ therefore increases over time, given appropriate management. This increasing carbon store can be further enhanced with afforestation. The UK’s forest area has increased continually since the early 1900s, although the rate of increase has declined since its peak in the late 1980s, and it is a similar picture in the rest of Europe. The increased sustainable use of timber in construction is a key market incentive for afforestation, which can make a significant contribution to reducing carbon emissions. The case study presented in this paper demonstrates the carbon benefits of a Cross Laminated Timber (CLT) solution for a multi-storey residential building in comparison with a more conventional reinforced concrete solution. The embodied carbon of the building up to completion of construction is considered, together with the stored carbon during the life of the building and the impact of different end of life scenarios. The results of the study show that the total stored carbon in the CLT structural frame is 1215tCO2 (30tCO2 per housing unit). The choice of treatment at end of life has a significant effect on the whole life embodied carbon of the CLT frame, which ranges from -1017 tCO2e for re-use to +153tCO2e for incinerate without energy recovery. All end of life scenarios considered result in lower total CO2e emissions for the CLT frame building compared with the reinforced concrete frame solution.

Time valued life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from buildings

The UK has adopted legally binding carbon reduction targets of 34% by 2020 and 80% by 2050 (measured against the 1990 baseline). Buildings are estimated to be responsible for more than 50% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the UK. These consist of both operational, produced during use, and embodied, produced during manufacture of materials and components, and during construction, refurbishments and demolition. A brief assessment suggests that it is unlikely that UK emission reduction targets can be met without substantial reductions in both Oc and Ec. Oc occurs over the lifetime of a building whereas the bulk of Ec occurs at the start of a building’s life. A time value for emissions could influence the decision making process when it comes to comparing mitigation measures which have benefits that occur at different times. An example might be the choice between building construction using low Ec construction materials versus building construction using high Ec construction materials but with lower Oc, although the use of high Ec materials does not necessarily imply a lower Oc. Particular time related issues examined here are: the urgency of the need to achieve large emissions reductions during the next 10 to 20 years; the earlier effective action is taken, the less costly it will be; future reduction in carbon intensity of energy supply; the carbon cycle and relationship between the release of GHG’s and their subsequent concentrations in the atmosphere. An equation is proposed, which weights emissions according to when they occur during the building life cycle, and which effectively increases Ec as a proportion of the total, suggesting that reducing Ec is likely to be more beneficial, in terms of climate change, for most new buildings. Thus, giving higher priority to Ec reductions is likely to result in a bigger positive impact on climate change and mitigation costs.

Case study on the whole life carbon cycle in buildings

Global temperatures are expected to rise by between 1.1 and 6.4oC this century, depending, to a large extent, on the amount of carbon we emit to the atmosphere from now onwards. This warming is expected to have very negative effects on many peoples and ecosystems and, therefore, minimising our carbon emissions is a priority. Buildings are estimated to be responsible for around 50% of carbon emissions in the UK. Potential reductions involve both operational emissions, produced during use, and embodied emissions, produced during manufacture of materials and components, and during construction, refurbishments and demolition. To date the major effort has focused on reducing the, apparently, larger operational element, which is more readily quantifiable and reduction measures are relatively straightforward to identify and implement. Various studies have compared the magnitude of embodied and operational emissions, but have shown considerable variation in the relative values. This illustrates the difficulties in quantifying embodied, as it requires a detailed knowledge of the processes involved in the different life cycle phases, and requires the use of consistent system boundaries. However, other studies have established the interaction between operational and embodied, which demonstrates the importance of considering both elements together in order to maximise potential reductions. This is borne out in statements from both the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and The Low Carbon Construction Innovation and Growth Team of the UK Government. In terms of meeting the 2020 and 2050 timeframes for carbon reductions it appears to be equally, if not more, important to consider early embodied carbon reductions, rather than just future operational reductions. Future decarbonisation of energy supply and more efficient lighting and M&E equipment installed in future refits is likely to significantly reduce operational emissions, lending further weight to this argument. A method of discounting to evaluate the present value of future carbon emissions would allow more realistic comparisons to be made on the relative importance of the embodied and operational elements. This paper describes the results of case studies on carbon emissions over the whole lifecycle of three buildings in the UK, compares four available software packages for determining embodied carbon and suggests a method of carbon discounting to obtain present values for future emissions. These form the initial stages of a research project aimed at producing information on embodied carbon for different types of building, components and forms of construction, in a simplified form, which can be readily used by building designers in optimising building design in terms of minimising overall carbon emissions. Keywords: Embodied carbon; carbon emission; building; operational carbon.

The diurnal cycle in the tropics

A global archive of high-resolution (3-hourly, 0.58 latitude–longitude grid) window (11–12 mm) brightness temperature (Tb) data from multiple satellites is being developed by the European Union Cloud Archive User Service (CLAUS) project. It has been used to construct a climatology of the diurnal cycle in convection, cloudiness, and surface temperature for all regions of the Tropics. An example of the application of the climatology to the evaluation of the climate version of the U.K. Met. Office Unified Model (UM), version HadAM3, is presented. The characteristics of the diurnal cycle described by the CLAUS data agree with previous observational studies, demonstrating the universality of the characteristics of the diurnal cycle for land versus ocean, clear sky versus convective regimes. It is shown that oceanic deep convection tends to reach its maximum in the early morning. Continental convection generally peaks in the evening, although there are interesting regional variations, indicative of the effects of complex land–sea and mountain–valley breezes, as well as the life cycle of mesoscale convective systems. A striking result from the analysis of the CLAUS data has been the extent to which the strong diurnal signal over land is spread out over the adjacent oceans, probably through gravity waves of varying depths. These coherent signals can be seen for several hundred kilometers and in some instances, such as over the Bay of Bengal, can lead to substantial diurnal variations in convection and precipitation. The example of the use of the CLAUS data in the evaluation of the Met. Office UM has demonstrated that the model has considerable difficulty in capturing the observed phase of the diurnal cycle in convection, which suggests some fundamental difficulties in the model’s physical parameterizations. Analysis of the diurnal cycle represents a powerful tool for identifying and correcting model deficiencies.