Possibilities and consequences of the Total Cumulative Exergy Loss method in improving the sustainability of power generation

It is difficult to decide which power generation system is the most sustainable when environmental, economic and social sustainability aspects are taken into account. Problems with conventional environmental sustainability assessment methods are that no consensus exists about the applied models and weighting factors and that exergy losses are not considered. Economic sustainability assessment methods do not lead to results that are independent of time because they are influenced by market developments, while social sustainability assessment methods suffer from the availability and qualitative or semi-quantitative nature of data. Existing exergy analysis methods do not take into account all exergy losses and/or are extended with factors or equations that are not commonly accepted. The new Total Cumulative Exergy Loss (TCExL) method is based on fundamental thermodynamic equations and takes into account all exergy losses caused by a technological system during its life cycle, i.e. internal exergy losses, exergy losses caused by emission abatement and exergy losses related to land use. The development of the TCExL method is presented as well as the application of this method and environmental, economic and social sustainability assessment methods to two case studies: power generation in combination with LNG evaporation and Fossil versus renewable energy sources for power generation. According to the results of the assessments, large differences exist between the environmental sustainability assessment and TCExL methods in the sense that different parts of the systems contribute most to their overall scores. It is concluded from the case studies that involving the TCExL method in choices between power generation systems with the same energy sources has no consequences, i.e. it does not result in a different ranking of the systems, but can lead to the choice of a system that has a lower economic sustainability if the assessed systems use different energy sources. However, it must be noted that the economic sustainability changes over time, while the results of the TCExL method do not.

[1]  Andreas Ciroth,et al.  The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: just in time! , 2010 .

[2]  Jo Dewulf,et al.  Illustrations towards quantifying the sustainability of technology , 2000 .

[3]  Jo Dewulf,et al.  Thermodynamics and the Destruction of Resources: Developing Sustainable Technology: Metrics From Thermodynamics , 2011 .

[4]  Pascal Lesage,et al.  Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of Products. : Social and socio-economic LCA guidelines complementing environmental LCA and Life Cycle Costing, contributing to the full assessment of goods and services within the context of sustainable development. , 2009 .

[5]  L. Stougie,et al.  The sustainability of LNG evaporation , 2011 .

[6]  A. Witze,et al.  Energy alternatives: Electricity without carbon , 2008, Nature.

[7]  R. Cassen.  Our common future: report of the World Commission on Environment and Development , 1987 .

[8]  Jo Dewulf,et al.  Exergy-based accounting for land as a natural resource in life cycle assessment , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[9]  Reinerus Louwrentius Cornelissen,et al.  Thermodynamics and sustainable development; the use of exergy analysis and the reduction of irreversibility , 1997 .

[10]  Stefanie Hellweg,et al.  Applying cumulative exergy demand (CExD) indicators to the ecoinvent database , 2006 .

[11]  Antonio Valero,et al.  Thermodynamic Rarity and the Loss of Mineral Wealth , 2015 .

[12]  L. Stougie,et al.  Sustainability assessment of power generation in combination with lng evaporation : A comparison of lca methods and exergy analysis , 2013 .

[13]  H. J. Van Der Kooi,et al.  Exergy and sustainability , 2009 .

[14]  T. Roca,et al.  Human development Report 2013. The Rise of the South, Human Progress in a Diverse World , 2013 .

[15]  Jan Szargut,et al.  Exergy Analysis of Thermal, Chemical, and Metallurgical Processes , 1988 .

[16]  H. Haberl,et al.  Quantifying and mapping the human appropriation of net primary production in earth's terrestrial ecosystems , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  K. Malik,et al.  Human Development Report 2013. The Rise of the South: Human Progress in a Diverse World , 2013 .

[18]  David Pennington,et al.  Recent developments in Life Cycle Assessment. , 2009, Journal of environmental management.

[19]  R. M. Stikkelman,et al.  Electricity production from renewable and non-renewable energy sources: a comparison of environmental, economic and social sustainability indicators with exergy losses throughout the supply chain , 2012 .

[20]  H Van Langenhove,et al.  Exergy analysis in the assessment of the sustainability of waste gas treatment systems. , 2001, The Science of the total environment.

[21]  J Dewulf,et al.  Cumulative exergy extraction from the natural environment (CEENE): a comprehensive life cycle impact assessment method for resource accounting. , 2007, Environmental science & technology.

[22]  L. Stougie,et al.  Exergy and Sustainability: Insights into the Value of Exergy Analysis in Sustainability Assessment of Technological Systems , 2014 .

[23]  Jan Szargut,et al.  Cumulative exergy losses associated with the production of lead metal , 1990 .

[24]  E. Bautista,et al.  ECOS 2009 - 22nd International Conference on Efficiency, Cost, Optimization, Simulation and Environmental Impact of Energy Systems , 2009 .