Literature DB >> 25798660

Comparative life cycle assessment of battery storage systems for stationary applications.

Mitavachan Hiremath1,2, Karen Derendorf1, Thomas Vogt1.   

Abstract

This paper presents a comparative life cycle assessment of cumulative energy demand (CED) and global warming potential (GWP) of four stationary battery technologies: lithium-ion, lead-acid, sodium-sulfur, and vanadium-redox-flow. The analyses were carried out for a complete utilization of their cycle life and for six different stationary applications. Due to its lower CED and GWP impacts, a qualitative analysis of lithium-ion was carried out to assess the impacts of its process chains on 17 midpoint impact categories using ReCiPe-2008 methodology. It was found that in general the use stage of batteries dominates their life cycle impacts significantly. It is therefore misleading to compare the environmental performance of batteries only on a mass or capacity basis at the manufacturing outlet ("cradle-to-gate analyses") while neglecting their use stage impacts, especially when they have different characteristic parameters. Furthermore, the relative ranking of batteries does not show a significant dependency on the investigated stationary application scenarios in most cases. Based on the results obtained, the authors go on to recommend the deployment of batteries with higher round-trip efficiency, such as lithium-ion, for stationary grid operation in the first instance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25798660     DOI: 10.1021/es504572q

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Sci Technol        ISSN: 0013-936X            Impact factor:   9.028


  6 in total

Review 1.  Artificial Intelligence Applied to Battery Research: Hype or Reality?

Authors:  Teo Lombardo; Marc Duquesnoy; Hassna El-Bouysidy; Fabian Årén; Alfonso Gallo-Bueno; Peter Bjørn Jørgensen; Arghya Bhowmik; Arnaud Demortière; Elixabete Ayerbe; Francisco Alcaide; Marine Reynaud; Javier Carrasco; Alexis Grimaud; Chao Zhang; Tejs Vegge; Patrik Johansson; Alejandro A Franco
Journal:  Chem Rev       Date:  2021-09-16       Impact factor: 72.087

2.  The role of energy storage in deep decarbonization of electricity production.

Authors:  Maryam Arbabzadeh; Ramteen Sioshansi; Jeremiah X Johnson; Gregory A Keoleian
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2019-07-30       Impact factor: 14.919

3.  Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of a Novel Al-Ion and a Li-Ion Battery for Stationary Applications.

Authors:  Mario Amin Salgado Delgado; Lorenzo Usai; Qiaoyan Pan; Anders Hammer Strømman
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2019-10-08       Impact factor: 3.623

4.  Second life and recycling: Energy and environmental sustainability perspectives for high-performance lithium-ion batteries.

Authors:  Yanqiu Tao; Christopher D Rahn; Lynden A Archer; Fengqi You
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2021-11-05       Impact factor: 14.136

Review 5.  High and intermediate temperature sodium-sulfur batteries for energy storage: development, challenges and perspectives.

Authors:  Georgios Nikiforidis; M C M van de Sanden; Michail N Tsampas
Journal:  RSC Adv       Date:  2019-02-14       Impact factor: 4.036

6.  New Technique for Probing the Protecting Character of the Solid Electrolyte Interphase as a Critical but Elusive Property for Pursuing Long Cycle Life Lithium-Ion Batteries.

Authors:  Enrique Garcia-Quismondo; Sandra Alvarez-Conde; Guzmán Garcia; Jesús I Medina-Santos; Jesús Palma; Edgar Ventosa
Journal:  ACS Appl Mater Interfaces       Date:  2022-09-16       Impact factor: 10.383

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.