Connect with us

Published

on

Life-cycle assessments are ways to gauge the impact of any product or process. What is the cost of a system over a defined period of time? Life-cycle assessments are really important as we consider the transition to renewable energy sources, especially as we share insights into a zero emissions future with newbies or cynics.

Life-cycle assessments provide an exhaustive overview of the upstream (material sourcing and delivery) and downstream (product distribution, use, and disposal) impacts associated with any given system. Originally designed to focus on environmental impacts by scientists, they now have been extended to examine social and economic impacts, sometimes called life-cycle costing, by policymakers and decision-makers. The most comprehensive evaluations begin with the extraction of raw material; move to the various steps of production, implementation, and operation; and extend all the way to the energy use of carriers to perform work.

Life-cycle analysis considers both upfront cost of production and incremental costs of operation and depreciation. As a data-intensive methodology, it incorporates all inputs and outputs, requires detailed information, and is organized into databases known as life-cycle inventories.

What Do the Scientists Say about Energy Resources & their Life-Cycle Assessments?

life-cycle assessmentsExecutive summaries from a variety of scientific white papers can offer us life cycle insights into different energy sources. Here are a few to peruse.

Active Transportation: Life-cycle analysis provides a comprehensive view of the environmental impact of transportation infrastructure due to processes involving construction, operation, and maintenance.

  • Airplanes show the highest GHG emissions — 3 times that of cars and 6 times that of buses.
  • Cars or buses show higher GHG emissions when considering life-cycle impacts than the results without the life-cycle impacts because the GHG impact of manufacturing and operating automobiles and buses could be greater than that of other modes.
  • Walking does not require any tools, so its life-cycle impact is minimal compared to other modes.
  • The GHG impact of producing and maintaining bicycles is much smaller than that of automobiles or public transportation vehicles.
  • On balance, active transportation modes produce far less emissions than other modes even after taking into account all the life-cycle impacts.

Biomass: Co-firing biomass as a means of GHG abatement becomes economically competitive with traditional carbon capture and sequestration only after an incentive is in place to mitigate emissions.

  • The point at which co-firing becomes an attractive option depends on the potential value of CO2, the level of an emissions penalty, and the type of plant.
  • The break-even value would either represent the amount required on the sale of the captured CO2 in the capture cases, or a benefit received for the use of biomass as a fuel source in the non-capture cases, when compared to the economics of a supercritical (SC) PC plant without capture or co-firing.
  • This value would need to be reached before incentivizing either CO2 capture or biomass co-firing. The emissions penalty would be the minimum value required to encourage the use of capture technology or abatement using biomass.

Hydropower: The assessment considers various ecological influence groups which could be generally categorized as — global warming, ozone formation, acidification, eutrophication, ecotoxicity, human toxicity, water consumption, stratospheric ozone depletion, ionizing radiation, and land use.

  • Though water itself is not lethal, the electricity production process involves many stages, which creates environmental issues.
  • Furthermore, the transportation medium of these elements to the plant location releases hazardous particles i.e., carbon monoxide, dust, and carcinogenic particles.
  • Among the key impact groups, the whole outcomes show that a substantial ecological influence occurred at non-alpine region plants over alpine region plants. The reason behind this is that the long distance transportation of raw materials in non-alpine region hydropower plants due to unavailability at nearby locations where raw materials of the alpine based plants is available at nearby locations.
  • The maximum impact is occurred at fine particulate matter formation impact category due to freshwater eutrophication category by both types of hydropower plants. The reason behind these impacts is the amount of toxic materials present as constituent of plant structure and its electricity production steps.

Natural Gas: This analysis takes into account a wide range of performance variability across different assumptions of climate impact timing.

  • Natural gas-fired baseload power production has life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 35% to 66 % lower than those for coal-fired baseload electricity.
  • The lower emissions for natural gas are primarily due to the differences in average power plant efficiencies (46% efficiency for the natural gas power fleet versus 33% for the coal power fleet) and a higher carbon content per unit of energy for coal in comparison to natural gas.
  • Natural gas-fired electricity has 57% lower GHG emissions than coal per delivered megawatt-hour (MWh) using current technology when compared with a 100-year global warming potential (GWP) using unconventional natural gas from tight gas, shale, and coal beds.

Petroleum: Petroleum is produced from crude oil, a complex mixture of hydrocarbons, various organic compounds, and associated impurities.

  • The crude product exists as deposits in the earth’s crust, and the composition varies by geographic location and deposit formation contributors. Its physical consistency varies from a free flowing liquid to nearly solid. Crude oil is extracted from geological deposits by a number of different techniques.
  • When comparing transportation GHG emissions, both the tailpipe or tank-to-wheel (TTW) emissions, and the upstream or well-to-tank (WTT) emissions are considered in the full well to wheel (WTW) life cycle.
  • Extracting, transporting, and refining crude oil and bio-based alternatives on average account for approximately 20-30% of well-to-wheels (WTW) greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions with the majority of emissions generated during end use combustion in the vehicle phase (TTW).
  • GHG emissions in the generic cases range from ≈105 to 120 g of CO2/MJ [gasoline basis, full fuel cycle, lower heating value (LHV) basis] when co-produced electricity displaces natural-gas-fired combined-cycle electricity.
  • The carbon intensity varies with the energy demand of TEOR, the fuel combusted for steam generation, the amount of electric power co-generated, and the electricity mix. The emission range for co-generation-based TEOR systems is larger (≈70−120 g of CO2/MJ) when coal is displaced from the electricity grid (low) or coal is used for steam generation (high). The emission range for the California-specific cases is similar to that for the generic cases.

Solar: Life-cycle assessment is now a standardized tool to evaluate the environmental impact of photovoltaic technologies from the cradle to the grave.

  • The carbon footprint emission from PV systems was found to be in the range of 14–73 g CO2-eq/kWh, which is 10 to 53 orders of magnitude lower than emission reported from the burning of oil (742 g CO2-eq/kWh from oil).
  • Negative environmental impacts of PV systems could be substantially mitigated using optimized design, development of novel materials, minimize the use of hazardous materials, recycling whenever possible, and careful site selection. Such mitigation actions will reduce the emissions of GHG to the environment, decrease the accumulation of solid wastes, and preserve valuable water resources.
  • Following a report published by the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), the volume of PV panel waste could globally yield a value of up to 60–78 million tons by 2050. Recycling solar cell materials can also contribute up to a 42% reduction in GHG emissions.

Wind: Wind power presents minimal emissions and environmental impacts during the working phase, being considered as a “cleaner” generation source. But not all stages of wind power are so efficient.

  • The extraction of raw materials, manufacturing, and transportation as part of wind power construction have significant emissions of CO2 and environmental impacts.
  • Not only will improvements in logistics, transportation, a mixed electricity supplement, and a more efficient equipment production reduce CO2 emissions from wind power construction, new basic materials and innovative built techniques may decrease CO2 emissions and energy demand.
  • Decommissioning stage may present a reduction of the energy consumption and CO2 emissions through reusing equipment, recycling critical materials in the end of life cycle, reducing the extraction of raw materials and the total consumption of resources.
  • Such changes may create unexpected fluctuations in the market, such as shortages of supplies and dependence on exporters.

Of course, there are many other types of energy sources and other data analyses to consult to consider life cycle assessments. For more ideas, try Life Cycle Analysis of Energy for a good starting point.

Infographic retrieved from Department of Energy

Image retrieved from NASA

 

Appreciate CleanTechnica’s originality? Consider becoming a CleanTechnica Member, Supporter, Technician, or Ambassador — or a patron on Patreon.

 

 


Advertisement



 


Have a tip for CleanTechnica, want to advertise, or want to suggest a guest for our CleanTech Talk podcast? Contact us here.

Continue Reading

Environment

Kia’s EV3 is the best-selling retail EV in the UK right now

Published

on

By

Kia's EV3 is the best-selling retail EV in the UK right now

Kia’s electric SUVs are taking over. The EV3 is the best-selling retail EV in the UK this year, giving Kia its strongest sales start since it arrived 34 years ago. And it’s not just in the UK. Kia just had its best first quarter globally since it started selling cars in 1962.

Kia EV3 is the best-selling EV in the UK through March

In March, Kia sold a record nearly 20,000 vehicles in the UK, making it the fourth best-selling brand. It was also the second top-seller of electrified vehicles (EVs, PHEVs, and HEVs), accounting for over 55% of sales.

The EV3 remained the best-selling retail EV in the UK last month. Including the EV6, three-row EV9, and Niro EV, electric vehicles represented 21% of Kia’s UK sales in March.

Kia said the EV3 “started with a bang” in January, darting out as the UK’s most popular EV in retail sales. Through March, Kia’s electric SUV has held on to the crown. With the EV3 rolling out, Kia sold over 7,000 electric cars through March, nearly 50% more than in Q1 2024.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

The EV3 was the best-selling retail EV in the UK in the first quarter and the fourth best-selling EV overall, including commercial vehicles.

Kia-EV3-best-selling-EV
Kia EV3 Air 91.48 kWh in Frost Blue (Source: Kia UK)

Starting at £33,005 ($42,500), Kia said it’s the “brand’s most affordable EV yet.” It’s available with two battery packs, 58.3 kWh or 81.48 kWh, good for 430 km (270 miles) and 599 km (375 miles) of WLTP range, respectively.

Kia-EV3-best-selling-EV
From left to right: Kia EV6, EV3, and EV9 (Source: Kia UK)

With new EVs on the way, this could be just the start. Kia is launching several new EVs in the UK this year, including the EV4 sedan (and hatchback) and EV5 SUV. It also confirmed that the first PV5 electric vans will be delivered to customers by the end of the year.

Electrek’s Take

Globally, Kia sold a record 772,351 vehicles in the first quarter, its best since it started selling cars in 1962. With the new EV4, the brand’s first electric sedan and hatchback, launching this year, Kia looks to build on its momentum in 2025.

Kia has also made it very clear that it wants to be a global leader in the electric van market with its new Platform Beyond Vehicle (PBV) business, starting with the PV5 later this year.

Earlier today, we learned Kia’s midsize electric SUV, the EV5, is the fourth best-selling EV in Australia through March, outselling every BYD vehicle (at least for now). The EV5 is rolling out to new markets this year, including Canada, the UK, South Korea, and Mexico. However, it will not arrive in the US.

For those in the US, there are still a few Kia EVs to look forward to. Kia is launching the EV4 globally, including in the US, later this year. Although no date has been set, Kia confirmed the EV3 is also coming. It’s expected to arrive in mid-2026.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Podcast: Tesla’s disastrous deliveries, more Trump tariffs, EV delivery numbers, and more

Published

on

By

Podcast: Tesla's disastrous deliveries, more Trump tariffs, EV delivery numbers, and more

In the Electrek Podcast, we discuss the most popular news in the world of sustainable transport and energy. In this week’s episode, we discuss Tesla’s disastrous deliveries, more Trump tariffs, EV delivery numbers, and more.

The show is live every Friday at 4 p.m. ET on Electrek’s YouTube channel.

As a reminder, we’ll have an accompanying post, like this one, on the site with an embedded link to the live stream. Head to the YouTube channel to get your questions and comments in.

After the show ends at around 5 p.m. ET, the video will be archived on YouTube and the audio on all your favorite podcast apps:

Advertisement – scroll for more content

We now have a Patreon if you want to help us avoid more ads and invest more in our content. We have some awesome gifts for our Patreons and more coming.

Here are a few of the articles that we will discuss during the podcast:

Here’s the live stream for today’s episode starting at 4:00 p.m. ET (or the video after 5 p.m. ET):

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

University of Michigan cracks rapid EV charging in freezing temps

Published

on

By

University of Michigan cracks rapid EV charging in freezing temps

Charging your EV in freezing weather could soon become dramatically faster, thanks to a big breakthrough from the University of Michigan engineers.

Neil Dasgupta, U-M associate professor of mechanical engineering and materials science and engineering and corresponding author of a study published in Joule, and his team have developed an innovative battery structure and coating that can boost lithium-ion EV battery charging speeds by a whopping 500%, even at frigid temperatures as low as 14F (-10C). “Charging an EV battery takes 30 to 40 minutes even for aggressive fast charging, and that time increases to over an hour in the winter,” Dasgupta explained. “This is the pain point we want to address.”

Freezing weather has traditionally been harsh on EV batteries because it slows down the movement of lithium ions, resulting in slower charging speeds and reduced battery life. Automakers have tried thickening battery electrodes to extend driving range, but this makes some of the lithium hard to access, making charging even slower.

Previously, Dasgupta’s group sped up battery charging using lasers to carve pathways around 40 microns in size into the graphite anode. This allowed lithium ions to reach deeper into the battery more quickly. However, cold-weather performance still lagged because a chemical layer formed on the electrodes, blocking the ions. Dasgupta compares this barrier to “trying to cut cold butter,” making charging inefficient.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

To solve this, the team coated the battery with a thin, glassy material made of lithium borate-carbonate—only 20 nanometers thick—which prevented the problematic chemical layer from forming. Combined with the microscopic channels, the results were groundbreaking: the modified batteries retained 97% of their capacity even after 100 fast-charging cycles in freezing temperatures.

“We envision this approach as something that EV battery manufacturers could adopt without major changes to existing factories,” Dasgupta noted. “For the first time, we’ve shown a pathway to simultaneously achieve extreme fast charging at low temperatures, without sacrificing the energy density of the lithium-ion battery.”

This innovation could tackle one of the biggest concerns holding potential EV buyers back.

The new battery tech is moving closer to commercialization, supported by the Michigan Economic Development Corporation’s Michigan Translational Research and Commercialization (MTRAC) Advanced Transportation Innovation Hub. The research devices were built at U-M’s Battery Lab and studied with help from the Michigan Center for Materials Characterization.

U-M Innovation Partnerships assisted the team in applying for patents, and Arbor Battery Innovations has licensed the technology for market deployment. Dasgupta and the University of Michigan hold financial stakes in Arbor Battery Innovations.

Read more: California now has nearly 50% more EV chargers than gas nozzles


If you live in an area that has frequent natural disaster events, and are interested in making your home more resilient to power outages, consider going solar and adding a battery storage system. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here. –trusted affiliate link*

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending