Life Cycle Energy Consumption and Environmental Impact

Summary Holistic understanding of nanotechnology using systems analysis tools is essential for evaluating claims about the potential benefits of this emerging technology. This article presents one of the first assessments of the life cycle energy requirements and environmental impact of carbon nanofibers (CNFs) synthesis. Life cycle inventory data are compiled with data reported in the open literature. The results of the study indicate relatively higher life cycle energy requirements and higher environmental impact of CNFs as compared to traditional materials, like primary aluminum, steel, and polypropylene, on an equal mass basis. Life cycle energy requirements for CNFs from a range of feedstock materials are found to be 13 to 50 times that of primary aluminum on an equal mass basis. Similar trends are observed from the results of process life cycle assessment (LCA), as conveyed by different midpoint and endpoint damage indicators. Savings in life cycle energy consumption and, hence, reductions in environmental burden are envisaged if higher process yields of these fibers can be achieved in continuous operations. Since the comparison of CNFs is performed on an equal mass basis with traditional materials, these results cannot be generalized for CNF-based nanoproducts. Quantity of use of these engineered nanomaterials and resulting benefits will decide their energy and environmental impact. Nevertheless, the life cycle inventory and the results of the study can be used for evaluating the environmental performance of specific CNF-based nanoproducts.

[1]  Michel Touzeau,et al.  Room temperature synthesis of carbon nanofibers containing nitrogen by plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition , 2004 .

[2]  E. Boellaard,et al.  The formation of filamentous carbon on iron and nickel catalysts : I. Thermodynamics , 1985 .

[3]  Alan Chambers,et al.  Catalytic Engineering of Carbon Nanostructures , 1995 .

[4]  E. Boellaard,et al.  The formation of filamentous carbon on iron and nickel catalysts : II. Mechanism , 1985 .

[5]  K. D. de Jong,et al.  Carbon Nanofibers: Catalytic Synthesis and Applications , 2000 .

[6]  H. Herring Does energy efficiency save energy? The debate and its consequences , 1999 .

[7]  E. Williams,et al.  The 1.7 kilogram microchip: energy and material use in the production of semiconductor devices. , 2002, Environmental science & technology.

[8]  Robert U. Ayres,et al.  Exergy, power and work in the US economy, 1900–1998 , 2003 .

[9]  Igor Linkov,et al.  Coupling Multicriteria Decision Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment for Nanomaterials , 2008 .

[10]  W. Choi,et al.  Purification of carbon nanofibers with hydrogen peroxide , 2003 .

[11]  M. Meyyappan,et al.  Purification process for vertically aligned carbon nanofibers. , 2003, Journal of nanoscience and nanotechnology.

[12]  Vladimir Zalmanovich Mordkovich,et al.  Carbon Nanofibers: A New Ultrahigh-Strength Material for Chemical Technology , 2003 .

[13]  V. Colvin The potential environmental impact of engineered nanomaterials , 2003, Nature Biotechnology.

[14]  M. Goedkoop,et al.  The Eco-indicator 99, A damage oriented method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment , 1999 .

[15]  H Scott Matthews,et al.  Life cycle benefits of using nanotechnology to stabilize platinum-group metal particles in automotive catalysts. , 2005, Environmental science & technology.

[16]  L. Forró,et al.  Cellular toxicity of carbon-based nanomaterials. , 2006, Nano letters.

[17]  J.A. Isaacs,et al.  Environmental Assessment of SWNT Production , 2006, Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment, 2006..

[18]  Gary G. Tibbetts,et al.  A new reactor for growing carbon fibers from liquid- and vapor-phase hydrocarbons , 1993 .

[19]  L.J. Lee,et al.  Life Cycle Energy Analysis and Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Carbon Nanofibers Production , 2007, Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE International Symposium on Electronics and the Environment.

[20]  Hui‐Ming Cheng,et al.  The influence of preparation parameters on the mass production of vapor-grown carbon nanofibers , 2000 .

[21]  T. MacCormack,et al.  Identifying and Predicting Biological Risks Associated With Manufactured Nanoparticles in Aquatic Ecosystems , 2008 .

[22]  Seong-Ho Yoon,et al.  Selective synthesis of thin carbon nanofibers: I. Over nickel–iron alloys supported on carbon black , 2004 .

[23]  Gary G. Tibbetts,et al.  Role of sulfur in the production of carbon fibers in the vapor phase , 1994 .

[24]  J. Bare,et al.  Critical analysis of the mathematical relationships and comprehensiveness of life cycle impact assessment approaches. , 2006, Environmental science & technology.

[25]  M. Kim,et al.  The interaction of hydrocarbons with copper-nickel and nickel in the formation of carbon filaments , 1991 .

[26]  I. Alstrup,et al.  A new model explaining carbon filament growth on nickel, iron, and NiCu alloy catalysts , 1988 .

[27]  R. T. Yang,et al.  Mechanism of carbon filament growth on metal catalysts , 1989 .

[28]  Christian Capello,et al.  Energy Consumption During Nanoparticle Production: How Economic is Dry Synthesis? , 2006 .

[29]  Lester B Lave,et al.  Life cycle economic and environmental implications of using nanocomposites in automobiles. , 2003, Environmental science & technology.

[30]  Hui-Ming Cheng,et al.  Tailoring the diameters of vapor-grown carbon nanofibers , 2000 .

[31]  K. Takehira,et al.  Catalytic growth of carbon fibers from methane and ethylene on carbon-supported Ni catalysts , 2005 .

[32]  N. Rodriguez,et al.  A review of catalytically grown carbon nanofibers , 1993 .

[33]  R. Baker,et al.  CATALYTIC BEHAVIOR OF GRAPHITE NANOFIBER SUPPORTED NICKEL PARTICLES. 3. THE EFFECT OF CHEMICAL BLOCKING ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE SYSTEM , 1999 .