4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

An approach to prospective consequential life cycle assessment and net energy analysis of distributed electricity generation

期刊

ENERGY POLICY
卷 100, 期 -, 页码 350-358

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.08.030

关键词

Life cycle assessment; Net energy analysis; Distributed energy; Energy scenarios; Consequential assessment

资金

  1. UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) through the Supergen SuperSolar Hub [EP/K022229/1]
  2. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/K022229/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. EPSRC [EP/K022229/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Increasing distributed renewable electricity generation is one of a number of technology pathways available to policy makers to meet environmental and other sustainability goals. Determining the efficacy of such a pathway for a national electricity system implies evaluating whole system change in future scenarios. Life cycle assessment (LCA) and net energy analysis (NEA) are two methodologies suitable for prospective and consequential analysis of energy performance and associated impacts. This paper discusses the benefits and limitations of prospective and consequential LCA and NEA analysis of distributed generation. It concludes that a combined LCA and NEA approach is a valuable tool for decision makers if a number of recommendations are addressed. Static and dynamic temporal allocation are both needed for a fair comparison of distributed renewables with thermal power stations to account for their different impact profiles over time. The trade-offs between comprehensiveness and uncertainty in consequential analysis should be acknowledged, with system boundary expansion and system simulation models limited to those clearly justified by the research goal. The results of this approach are explorative, rather than for accounting purposes; this interpretive remit, and the assumptions in scenarios and system models on which results are contingent, must be clear to end users. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据