The 68th LCA forum was held on 16 April, 2018, to discuss current and future developments in the electricity network as well as recent life cycle assessment work on key technologies, such as batteries, photovoltaic panels and geothermal power plants. Several countries adjusted their energy policy after the three core meltdowns in Fukushima Daiichi, Japan, in March 2011 and are redefining their climate policy as a consequence of the Paris Agreement in 2015. Method: During the one-day workshop, the current state of the Swiss energy and climate policy and key technologies suited to support the shift towards a renewable electricity mix were explored. Photovoltaics are considered a key technology for power generation in the Swiss electricity mix. It was shown how much an increase in PV production entails investments in the electricity networks and how such investments can be minimised. Batteries were named as one promising option. Several presentations showed the environmental footprints of current and future battery technologies and manufacturing. Recent LCA work on batteries using industry data showed that in the past; the environmental impacts of lithium-ion battery manufacture were often underestimated. However, the potential to reduce its current environmental footprint is rather huge and achievable with only a few measures. The day was concluded with presentations on the LCA of geothermal power production. This technology is particularly of interest as it delivers base load electricity. While the environmental footprint of geothermal power is comparable to hydroelectric and wind power, seismic risks and earthquakes may cause damage to buildings and infrastructure which are non-negligible. Results: The day revealed the following three key insights: (1) The Swiss (and other nations’) climate policy measures are not sufficient for reaching the 2 °C target of the Paris Agreement; (2) photovoltaic electricity combinedwith battery storage is one solution to increase the share of renewables in the grid. Like with any self-sufficiency measures, this comes along with significant additional environmental impacts; (3) more and more companies are starting to green their supply chains. Conclusion: National governments are encouraged to significantly strengthen their climate policy. Households should carefully evaluate the optimal level of self-sufficiency, taking into account the environmental impacts of storage facilities. Companies should invest in and use renewable energy, such
[1]
Manuel Baumann,et al.
The environmental impact of Li-Ion batteries and the role of key parameters – A review
,
2017
.
[2]
S. Passerini,et al.
A cost and resource analysis of sodium-ion batteries
,
2018
.
[3]
Stefan Hirschberg,et al.
Energy from the earth: Deep geothermal as a resource for the future?
,
2015
.
[4]
M. Stucki,et al.
Highly Efficient 3rd Generation Multi-Junction Solar Cells Using Silicon Heterojunction and Perovskite Tandem: Prospective Life Cycle Environmental Impacts
,
2017
.
[5]
Laura Vanoli,et al.
Integrating life cycle assessment and emergy synthesis for the evaluation of a dry steam geothermal power plant in Italy
,
2015
.
[6]
Jens F. Peters,et al.
Life cycle assessment of sodium-ion batteries
,
2016
.
[7]
Jens F. Peters,et al.
Aqueous hybrid ion batteries – An environmentally friendly alternative for stationary energy storage?
,
2017
.
[8]
R. Bertani.
Geothermal power generation in the world 2010–2014 update report
,
2016
.
[9]
Halldór Pálsson,et al.
Life cycle inventory of a flash geothermal combined heat and power plant located in Iceland
,
2015,
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.
[11]
Manuel Baumann,et al.
CO2 Footprint and Life‐Cycle Costs of Electrochemical Energy Storage for Stationary Grid Applications
,
2017
.
[12]
Ruggero Bertani,et al.
Geothermal power generation in the world 2005–2010 update report
,
2012
.