Comparative LCA Between Current and Alternative Waste-Based TES for CSP

Alternative thermal energy storage (TES) materials are needed for the expected worldwide deployment of concentrated solar power (CSP) plants, and they should meet related criterion of technical, economical and ecological performances. This paper aims to quantify the environmental footprint of an alternative recycled ceramic made from industrial wastes by performing a comparative life cycle analysis. Compared to the conventional CSP TES technology based upon the two tank molten salt technique, the environmental impacts of the storage unit using recycled ceramics from industrial wastes are reduced by 40 % in terms of potential climate change, 30 % in primary energy demand and 60 % in water consumption. Those impacts are calculated for a scope of recycled ceramics promoting the use of secondary raw material and for which the inerting process is attached to the upstream lifecycle. If included, the energy payback time of the storage remains below 3 years before about 25–30 years of expected use. Such a low payback time represents a strong advantage toward further encouraging high added-value recovery, an issue which is often strongly constrained by its economical and environmental concerns.

[1]  Brian Norton,et al.  Full-energy-chain analysis of greenhouse gas emissions for solar thermal electric power generation systems , 1998 .

[2]  John J. Burkhardt,et al.  Life Cycle Assessment of Thermal Energy Storage: Two-Tank Indirect and Thermocline , 2009 .

[3]  Luisa F. Cabeza,et al.  Comparative life cycle assessment of thermal energy storage systems for solar power plants , 2012 .

[4]  Hans-Jürgen Dr. Klüppel,et al.  The Revision of ISO Standards 14040-3 - ISO 14040: Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework - ISO 14044: Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines , 2005 .

[5]  Alberto Giaconia,et al.  Life Cycle Assessment of a High Temperature Molten Salt Concentrated Solar Power Plant , 2011 .

[6]  X. Py,et al.  Thermomechanical Characterization of Waste Based TESM and Assessment of Their Resistance to Thermal Cycling up to 1000 °C , 2016 .

[7]  Frank R. Field,et al.  Explicit accounting methods for recycling in LCI , 1998 .

[8]  F. Trieb,et al.  Life Cycle Assessment of an 80 MW SEGS Plant and a 30 MW PHOEBUS Power Tower , 1998 .

[9]  John J Burkhardt,et al.  Life cycle assessment of a parabolic trough concentrating solar power plant and the impacts of key design alternatives. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[10]  J. J. Burkhardt,et al.  Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Trough and Tower Concentrating Solar Power Electricity Generation , 2012 .

[11]  Patrick Echegut,et al.  Recycled Material for Sensible Heat Based Thermal Energy Storage to be Used in Concentrated Solar Thermal Power Plants , 2011 .

[12]  Filip Johnsson,et al.  Material Constraints for Concentrating Solar Thermal Power , 2012 .

[13]  Gregory J. Kolb,et al.  Final Test and Evaluation Results from the Solar Two Project , 2002 .

[14]  Greg C. Glatzmaier,et al.  Compatibility of a post-industrial ceramic with nitrate molten salts for use as filler material in a thermocline storage system , 2013 .

[15]  Luisa F. Cabeza,et al.  Embodied energy in thermal energy storage (TES) systems for high temperature applications , 2015 .

[16]  Adisa Azapagic,et al.  Life cycle Assessment and its Application to Process Selection, Design and Optimisation , 1999 .

[17]  Yolanda Lechón,et al.  Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of Electricity Production by Solarthermal Power Plants in Spain , 2008 .

[18]  Eckhard Lüpfert,et al.  Advances in Parabolic Trough Solar Power Technology , 2002 .