## 3 Results and Discussion
### Spatiotemporal to One-Year Operations
This depiction allows different numbers and implications for the processor and natural system to be seen than when looking only at the normalized processor or the parameters of the formal LCA process (CHP plant) for the FU (Flows/MWh) model. In contrast, Table 4 (b) shows the result when the quantitative LCI and LCIA of the CHP plant for the three scenarios cases (C1, C2, and C3) and for other timescales are scaled up. In this case, Table 4 (b) illustrates the internal inputs required by the technosphere for the CHP plant to function and produce heat (steam) and electricity. Over one year of operation, the CHP plant produces 985-1196 GWh of electricity and 1.5-1.6 Mt of CO\({}_{2}\) emissions (see output products/emissions of Table 4 (b)). The external inputs from the biosphere are 20.3 million m\({}^{3}\) (Mm\({}^{3}\)) of water and 1147.8 million normal cubic meter (MNm\({}^{3}\)) of natural gas (NG) for baseline scenario C1. Scenarios C2 and C3 require 14.2 Mm\({}^{3}\) of water and 800 MNm\({}^{3}\) of NG (Table 4 (b)). It is important to note that the consumption of PES and water for scenarios C2 and C3 are similar, and this is because the role that HRSG plays in C2, which allows supplying the steam required for the CO\({}_{2}\) capture unit of the C3 (see Figure 2b,c). According to [PERSON] et al. [3], in the CHP plant coupling PCC, no supplementary boiler is required to provide thermal energy for solvent regeneration to obtain CO\({}_{2}\)-rich and regenerated solvent streams, as in the case of the natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) plant with PCC. Hence, as it is shown \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{Outputs: products/emission (User: petrochemical plants)} \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Energy (EC)} & Electricity & GWh & 985.3 & 1196.4 & 1196 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Steam (45 kg/cm\({}^{2}\)) & Mt & 7.1 & 6.9 & 6.9 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Steam (19 kg/cm\({}^{2}\)) & Mt & 0.19 & 0.19 & 0.19 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Steam (4.5 kg/cm\({}^{2}\)) & Mt & 0 & 0.6937 & 0 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Emissions} & Flue gas (CO\({}_{2}\)) & Mt & 1.65 & 1.50 & 0.02 \\ \cline{2-6}  & CO\({}_{2}\) (As product by CO\({}_{2}\) capture) & Mt & 0 & 0 & 376,250 \\ \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{Outputs: modelling environmental load (LCIA)} \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Total Environmental Load} & Climate change & t CO\({}_{2}\) eq & 616,767 & 550,342 & 50,249 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Ozone depletion & t CFC-11 eq & \(3.9\times 10^{-4}\) & \(1.53\times 10^{-4}\) & 0 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Human toxicity & t 1,4-DB eq & 661.9 & 364,856.9 & 45,343.4 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Photochemical oxidant formation & t NMVOC & 2918.9 & 2293.2 & 299.1 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Particulate matter formation & t PM10 eq & 1235.0 & 969.4 & 478.6 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Ionising radiation & t U235 eq & 255.8 & 0.0 & 598.2 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Terrestrial acidification & t SO\({}_{2}\) eq & 5501.6 & 4320.1 & 2153.5 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Freshwater eutrophication & t P eq & 0.1 & 0.0 & 59.8 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Marine eutrophication & t N eq & 50.6 & 38.6 & 35.9 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Terrestrial ecotoxicity & t 1,4-DB eq & 0.6 & 13.0 & 47.9 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Freshwater ecotoxicity & t 1,4-DB eq & 85.2 & 4.2 & 3230.3 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Marine ecotoxicity & t 1,4-DB eq & 83.7 & 4.0 & 957.1 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Agricultural land occupation & m\({}^{2}\)a & 0.0 & 0.0 & 0.0 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Urban land occupation & m\({}^{2}\)a & 0.0 & 0.0 & 0.1 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Natural land transformation & m\({}^{2}\) & 0.0 & 0.0 & 0.0 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Water depletion & m\({}^{3}\) & 1,065,826 & 496,352 & 1,435,674 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Metal depletion & t Fe eq & 51.1 & 0.0 & 837.5 \\ \cline{2-6}  & Fossil depletion & t oil eq & 159,068 & 124,852 & 99,660 \\ \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{(Environmental load to local territory or region)} \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: _Cont._the Table 4 (b), the external requirement input from the biosphere, some internal material from the technosphere, and output as electricity and steam generation to CHP plant without and with PCC are almost similar.