Consequential cradle-to-gate carbon footprint of water treatment chemicals using simple and complex marginal technologies for electricity supply

PurposeChemicals produced via chlor-alkali electrolysis are widely used throughout the water industry worldwide, with treatment chemicals often the second largest source of environmental impacts from potable water production after electricity use. Population-driven increases in the future demand for potable water will require concomitant increases in the production of water treatment chemicals, with the associated environmental impacts of chemicals production primarily arising from the additional demand for electricity. Due to the dominance of electricity in the environmental performance of chlor-alkali chemicals, assessment of the future environmental impacts of potable water production is largely dependent on proper identification of the marginal source of electricity. In this paper, we present a consequential cradle-to-gate carbon footprint (cCF) for the most widely used chlor-alkali-produced disinfectant (sodium hypochlorite (13 % w/w)) and coagulant (ferric chloride (42 % w/w)) in Australia, with special emphasis placed upon the identification of future marginal electricity supply and the substitution of hydrogen gas and sodium hydroxide during production. While this analysis is presented in an Australian context, commonalities in potable water and chlor-alkali chemical production processes internationally give the findings a broader relevance.MethodsConsequential models for sodium hypochlorite (13 % w/w) and ferric chloride (42 % w/w) production were developed, and the identification of the marginal source of electricity was modelled using a “simple marginal technology” approach via operationalisation of the Weidema framework and a “complex marginal technology” using a partial equilibrium model. For the simple marginal technology, the levelised cost of electricity was used to select the most competitive energy generation technologies and those most relevant for the Australian market. For the complex marginal technology, the energy sector model was used to simulate the most likely electricity supply mix. Details of the different paths taken in the substitution of hydrogen gas and sodium hydroxide are also presented. To allow for proper incorporation of uncertainties arising from these key factors in the cCF, several scenarios were developed covering fuel and carbon prices for identifying the marginal supply mix of electricity, as well as the likely production routes for sodium carbonate in the context of sodium hydroxide substitution.Results and discussioncCF results of sodium hypochlorite (13 % w/w) and ferric chloride (42 % w/w) are presented using simple and complex marginal technologies, and the implications of choosing one marginal technology over the other in the context of water treatment chemicals are presented. For the simple marginal technology approach, the global warming potential (GWP) per megagram of chemical varied from 68 to 429 kg CO2-eq for sodium hypochlorite (13 % w/w) and 59–1,020 kg CO2-eq for ferric chloride (42 % w/w). For the complex marginal technology approach, the GWP per megagram of chemical varied from 266 to 332 kg CO2-eq for sodium hypochlorite (13 % w/w) and 214–629 kg CO2-eq for ferric chloride (42 % w/w). Insights are given in relation to the impact of the price of fossil fuels, the carbon price, and the different substitution routes.ConclusionsThe use of a partial equilibrium model (PEM) has enabled a better understanding of the variability of the results in this study. For example, the use of PEM for the identification of the complex marginal source of electricity shows that, for the case of Australia, any benefit from a carbon price is lost with high prices of natural gas due to the incentive to use cheaper fuels such as black and brown coal. Likewise, the use of explorative scenarios was decisive to manage the inherent uncertainty of the parameters included in the model. In relation to substitution, the case of ferric chloride (42 % w/w) indicated that using only one substitution route was not enough to fully understand the potential continuum of cCF results. The simple marginal approach, where an exclusive marginal source of electricity or substitution route is considered, presents significant risks for the modelling accuracy of the cCF as shown here for sodium hypochlorite (13 % w/w) and ferric chloride (42 % w/w), therefore, it is not recommended.

[1]  Alexander Herr,et al.  AEMO 100% renewable energy study. Potential for electricity generation in Australia from biomass in 2010, 2030 and 2050 , 2012 .

[2]  André Bardow,et al.  Comparative LCA of multi-product processes with non-common products: a systematic approach applied to chlorine electrolysis technologies , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[3]  Colin F. Alie,et al.  An economic evaluation of the potential for distributed energy in Australia , 2012 .

[4]  Grecia R. Matos,et al.  Historical Statistics for Mineral and Material Commodities in the United States , 2005 .

[5]  Göran Finnveden,et al.  Scenarios in selected tools for environmental systems analysis , 2008 .

[6]  A. Owen The economic viability of nuclear power in a fossil-fuel-rich country: Australia , 2011 .

[7]  Alain Haurie,et al.  Application of three independent consequential LCA approaches to the agricultural sector in Luxembourg , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[8]  A. Marvuglia,et al.  Modelling approaches for consequential life-cycle assessment (C-LCA) of bioenergy: Critical review and proposed framework for biogas production , 2013 .

[9]  B. Weidema Market information in life cycle assessment , 2003 .

[10]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  Lights and shadows in consequential LCA , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[11]  Matthias Schulz,et al.  Understanding the impacts of allocation approaches during process‐based life cycle assessment of water treatment chemicals , 2014, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[12]  Gregory M Peters,et al.  Life cycle assessment for sustainable metropolitan water systems planning. , 2004, Environmental science & technology.

[13]  N. Halberg,et al.  LCA of soybean meal , 2008 .

[14]  Suwin Sandu,et al.  Australian Energy Resource Assessment , 2010 .

[15]  Michael D. Short,et al.  A hybrid life cycle assessment of water treatment chemicals: an Australian experience , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[16]  R. Heijungs,et al.  Guidelines for application of deepened and broadened LCA , 2009 .

[17]  Iain MacGill,et al.  Simulations of scenarios with 100% renewable electricity in the Australian National Electricity Market , 2012 .

[18]  Rodrigo Navia,et al.  Life cycle assessment of solid waste management strategies in a chlor-alkali production facility , 2011, Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA.

[19]  Réjean Samson,et al.  Energy decision making in a pulp and paper mill: selection of LCA system boundary , 2010 .

[20]  I. MacGill,et al.  Least cost 100% renewable electricity scenarios in the Australian National Electricity Market , 2013 .

[21]  Reinout Heijungs,et al.  Attributional and consequential LCA of milk production , 2008 .

[22]  B. Mathiesen,et al.  Energy system analysis of marginal electricity supply in consequential LCA , 2010 .

[23]  Henrik Wenzel,et al.  Environmental assessment of enzyme assisted processing in pulp and paper industry , 2007 .

[24]  Matthias Schulz,et al.  Sustainability of water and wastewater treatment chemicals: development of Australian life cycle inventory data , 2011 .

[25]  Almut Beate Heinrich,et al.  International reference life cycle data system handbook , 2010 .

[26]  Brian Vad Mathiesen,et al.  Uncertainties related to the identification of the marginal energy technology in consequential life cycle assessments , 2009 .

[27]  Peter Holm,et al.  Life cycle assessment of the waste hierarchy--a Danish case study on waste paper. , 2007, Waste management.

[28]  Mohan Yellishetty,et al.  Environmental life-cycle comparisons of steel production and recycling: Sustainability issues, problems and prospects , 2011 .

[29]  Rainer Zah,et al.  Global environmental consequences of increased biodiesel consumption in Switzerland: consequential life cycle assessment , 2009 .