GHG emissions analyses

Life Cycle Energy and GHG Emissions Analyses 6.1 Life Cycle Analysis Methods... 

This Section investigates life cycle energy and GHG emissions of a PV electrolytic H2 system. The boundaries of the life cycle energy and GHG emissions analyses are cradle to grave. Five life cycle stages are evaluated ... 

Martinez-Hemandez, E., Martinez-Herrera, J., Campbell, G.M., and Sadhnkhan, J. (2014). Process integration, energy and GHG emission analyses of Jatropha-based biorefinery systems. Biomass Comers. Bioref, 4(2), 105-124. 

The aim of this work is to analyse processes for determination and removal (or reducing) greenhouse gases (GHG NO, SO, and CO) from air and make the comparative study of GHG emission and with production of electricity. Among various analytical methods green analytical techniques were analysed and tested for GHC determination. 

Figure 2.4 compares the GHG emissions in different sectors of the fluid milk process from three LCA analyses performed for U.S. dairy farms. The Cashman et al. (2009) study was conducted using primary data from farmers and processors for organic operations. The Thoma et al. (2010) study utilized... 

FIGURE 2.4 Comparison of GHG emissions from LCA analyses of U.S. dairy operations. The FAO results are reported for North America and were not available for all sectors. 

The organization of the study is as follows. In the first Section, a H2 production and distribution system is described. Secondly, capital and levelized H2 price estimates are investigated for each of the H2 system components. Thirdly, a life cycle evaluation of primary energy and GHG emissions in the H2 fuel cycle is performed. Sensitivity analyses are performed for the H2 price and the life cycle energy and GHG emissions estimates. The study concludes with a summary of findings and suggestions for future research. 

For biomass plants, GHG emissions vary with the biomass properties, the energy intensity of the fuel cycle, the plant technology and its efficiency. Life-cycle analyses of different biomass technologies report emissions between 10 and 100 g COj-eq/kWh (Pehnt, 2006 Weisser, 2007 Koroneos et ah, 2008). 

For the end-of-Ufe phase of the product, two scenarios were analysed within the scope of this study. The best case assumed direct release of the carbon sequestered in the product. Regardless of whether the product had one or more users, if the use phase was 10 years or less, all GHG emissions were treated as if they occurred at the beginning of the assessment period (i.e. in the first year). This approach was consistent with that recommended in ISO 14067 (ISO, 2013). A worst case scenario assumed that the products were landfilled. In this case, anaerobic decomposition of wool occurred, producing methane as well as CO2. Methane has 25 times the GWP of CO2 (IPCC, 2007) and landfill disposal produced a higher climate change impact as modelled based on a textile landfill dataset (PE, 2013). 

---