## 2 Literature Analysis about the Life Cycle Assessment of Carbon Supply Chains
### Life Cycle Assessment of Carbon Capture and Storage Supply Chains  
A first picture of the environmental analysis developed for carbon capture and storage supply chains is presented by [PERSON] [50], considering the power generation site, carbon dioxide capture technology/material, carbon dioxide transportation, and making some considerations about carbon dioxide storage and life cycle inventory. It is evident that a few works consider a complete carbon supply chain, also with a carbon dioxide storage and transportation section. Some aspects that should be considered within the storage are wells, carbon dioxide storage geological formations, geological zones surrounding the carbon dioxide storage formations, and potential carbon dioxide leakages from the storage. Geographical differences of power plants have not always been considered. In another work, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [51] (2006) develop a life cycle assessment for a carbon capture and storage supply chain, considering different capture technologies (chemical absorption, membrane separation, cryogenic, pressure swing adsorption). In addition, different storage options in ocean and geological sequestration are evaluated. SimaPro software is used to analyze the following eight environmental impact categories: global warming potential, acidification, human toxicity to air, human toxicity to water, eutrophication, ecotoxicity, wastes, and fossil fuels. The condition with a lower environmental impact is ensured by using chemical absorption as the capture technology. A comparison of different capture technologies is also reported by [PERSON] and [PERSON] [52] The authors develop a life cycle assessment of the carbon capture supply chain located in Germany (Lausitz region), storing carbon dioxide in a depleted gas field. A lignite power plant is a carbon dioxide source. Post-combustion, pre-combustion, and oxyfuel capture technologies are compared and analyzed. The results show that in the carbon capture and storage supply chain with post-combustion capture technology, there is a sharp increase in all categories of impact, except for acidification. In the carbon capture and storage supply chain with pre-combustion capture technology, there is a decrease in all categories of impact. In the carbon capture and storage supply chain with oxyfuel capture, there is a near-zero emission if carbon monoxide is captured. The considered categories of impact are the following: cumulative energy demand, global warming, summer smog, eutrophication, acidification, and health impact. The environmental advantages of a CCS supply chain are reported in other works in the literature. [PERSON] et al. [53] consider a life cycle assessment for a carbon capture storage supply chain. The author considers three pulverized coal power plants with/without post-combustion capture and storage. This capture system allows a reduction in global warming potential of about 70%, but an increase in human toxicity, ozone layer depletion, and freshwater ecotoxicity is obtained. Other analyses with similar results are carried out by [PERSON] et al. [54] and [PERSON] and [PERSON] [55]. In [PERSON] et al. [54], a CCS results in a net reduction in the global warming potential of power plants through their life cycle in the order of 65-84% (pulverized coal-fired power plant), 68-87% (integrated gasification combined cycle), 47-80% (natural gas-fired combined cycle), and 76-97% (oxyfuel). The benefits of a CCS framework in the transition to net-zero energy systems beyond emission reduction are reported by [PERSON] et al. [56] considering the German (as a representative highly-developed economy) energy system until 2045.