Life cycle assessment of a pulverized coal power plant with post-combustion capture , transport and storage of CO 2

In this study the methodology of life cycle assessment has been used to assess the environmental impacts of three pulverized coal fired electricity supply chains with and without carbon capture and storage (CCS) on a cradle to grave basis. The chain with CCS comprises post-combustion CO2 capture with monoethanolamine, compression, transport by pipeline and storage in a geological reservoir. The two reference chains represent subcritical and state-of-the-art ultra supercritical pulverized coal fired electricity generation. For the three chains we have constructed a detailed greenhouse gas (GHG) balance, and disclosed environmental trade-offs and co-benefits due to CO2 capture, transport and storage. Results show that, due to CCS, the GHG emissions per kWh are reduced substantially to 243 g/kWh. This is a reduction of 78 and 71% compared to the sub-critical and stateof-the-art power plant, respectively. The removal of CO2 is partially offset by increased GHG emissions in upand downstream processes, to a small extent (0.7 g/kWh) caused by the CCS infrastructure. An environmental co-benefit is expected following from the deeper reduction of hydrogen fluoride and hydrogen chloride emissions. Most notable environmental trade-offs are the increase in human toxicity, ozone layer depletion and fresh water ecotoxicity potential for which the CCS chain is outperformed by both other chains. The state-of-the-art power plant without CCS also shows a better score for the eutrophication, acidification and photochemical oxidation potential despite the deeper reduction of SOx and NOx in the CCS power plant. These reductions are offset by increased emissions in the life cycle due to the energy penalty and a factor five increase in NH3 emissions. # 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. * Corresponding author at: Department of Science, Technology and Society, Copernicus Institute for Sustainable Development and Innovation, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, Willem C. Van Unnikgebouw, Room 925, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands. Tel. : +31 30 253 3544/7600; fax: +31 30 253 7601. E-mail address: j.m. koornneef@uu.nl (J. Koornneef). Abbreviations: ADP, abiotic depletion potential; AP, acidification potential; BAT, best available technology; CCS, CO2 capture and storage; CO2 equiv. , carbon dioxide equivalents; EP, eutrophication potential; ESP, electrostatic precipitator; FGD, flue gas desulphurization; FWAETP, fresh water aquatic ecotoxicity potential; GHG, greenhouse gas; GWP, global warming potential; HSS, heat stable salt; HTP, human toxicity potential; HWI, hazardous waste incinerator; IPCC, intergovernmental panel on climate change; kt, kilo tonne (metric); LCA, life cycle assessment; LCI, life cycle inventory; LCIA, life cycle impacts assessment; MAETP, marine aquatic ecotoxicity potential; MEA, monoethanolamine; Mt, mega tonne (metric); ODP, ozone layer depletion potential; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; PM, avai lab le at www.sc iencedi rec t . com journal homepage: www.e lsev ier . com/ locate / i jggc particulate matter; POP, photochemical oxidation potential; SCR, selective catalytic reduction; TEP, terrestrial ecotoxicity potential. Please cite this article in press as: Koornneef J, et al., Life cycle assessment of a pulverized coal power plant with post-combustion capture, transport and storage of CO2, Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control (2008), doi:10.1016/j.ijggc. 2008.06. 008 1750-5836/$ – see front matter # 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ijggc. 2008.06. 008 IJGGC-117; No of Pages 20 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f g r e e n h o u s e g a s c o n t r o l x x x ( 2 0 0 8 ) x x x – x x x 2