SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “LCA method”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

103 records · Page 6

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2025

Impact of a dynamic grid mix and climate on operational carbon emissions modeling for different building typologies and climate zones

Calculating operational carbon emissions through a building’s lifecycle is complex due to the dynamic nature of influencing factors such as climate and energy grid mix. This paper introduces a novel methodology for modeling 30-year operational carbon impacts of buildings and applies this method to mid-rise office and residential typologies across various US climate zones. The method accounts for these temporal variabilities using new and scarcely cited data sources. Key findings indicate that future changes in the climate, while impactful, play a relatively modest role in operational carbon emissions compared to significant reductions with modeling scenarios using the projected decarbonization of the electricity grid. Here, the study also finds that using annual, month-hourly, or hourly grid emission factors have a minimal impact on carbon accounting, except in certain climates and program types where emission patterns do not align with a building’s energy consumption. Warmer climates like Miami, Florida and Tucson, Arizona, which rely heavily on cooling, demonstrate larger variations in carbon emissions when using higher temporal resolution emission factors. Ultimately, this study underscores the critical role of grid decarbonization in reducing long-term emissions and the importance of incorporating this variable in life cycle assessment (LCA) modeling.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Life-cycle analysis of microalgae-based polyurethane foams

Polyurethane plastics are essential in many consumer and commercial products such as insulation, furniture, automotive interiors, and clothing. Pathways for producing polyurethane from microalgae offer an opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental impacts and can incorporate processes that avoid the use of toxic isocyanates typically used in conventional polyurethane production processes. In this study, the greenhouse gas emissions, fossil energy, and water consumption of biobased polyurethane and biobased non-isocyanate polyurethane were evaluated via life-cycle analysis using the R&D Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Technologies model. Microalgae-based polyurethane foam was found to achieve greenhouse gas emission reductions of up to 79% compared with conventional polyurethane foam production. The greenhouse gas reductions for the non-isocyanate microalgae polyurethane pathway are slightly lower at 58% compared with conventional polyurethane foam. However, it offers additional benefits by reducing toxicity potential compared to the isocyanate polyurethane pathway. The analysis also included a biorefinery-level analysis to evaluate the impact of incorporating polyurethane production into fuel-processing microalgae biorefineries. The sensitivity analyses conducted in this study reveal that improved algae cultivation strategies can lead to decreases of up to 127% and 80% in GHG emissions from the baseline process of Bio-PU and Bio-NIPU, respectively. Likewise, implementation of renewable electricity can result in up to 128% and 74% lower GHG emissions compared to the baseline production of Bio-PU and Bio-NIPU, respectively. Finally, the analysis evaluated different coproduct handling methods including displacement and allocation (based on mass, energy, and market-value). The results suggest that it is important to consider both the displacement and allocation methods as these led to significant differences in the environmental impacts.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2020

Task 12 PV Sustainability - Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Residential PV and Battery Storage Systems

Using a life cycle assessment (LCA), the environmental impacts from generating 1 kWh of electricity for self-consumption via a photovoltaic-battery system are determined. The system includes a 10 kWp multicrystalline-silicon photovoltaic (PV) system (solar irradiation about 1350 kWh/m2/year and annual yield 1000 kWh/kWp), an iron phosphate lithium-ion (LiFePO4) battery, and other components such as the control system, battery housing, and two inverters (one for the PV system and one for the battery system). Three options for the AC-coupled system with changing battery capacities (5, 10, or 20 kWh nominal capacity) are investigated. The environmental impacts are assessed using the indicators greenhouse gas emissions and cumulative energy demand (separated into total and non-renewable cumulative energy demand). In addition, the four most important impact categories for PV electricity - respiratory inorganics (particulate matter), acidification, energy carrier resource use, and minerals and metals resource use - are assessed according to the environmental footprint (EF) method. Data are drawn from the DETEC data DQRv2:2018, recent literature, and product details provided by manufacturers. The results show larger environmental impacts of PV-battery systems with increasing battery capacity; for capacities of 5, 10, and 20 kWh, the cumulative greenhouse gas emissions from 1 kWh of electricity generation for self-consumption via a PV-battery system are 80, 84, and 88 g CO 2- eq/kWh, respectively. The cumulative greenhouse gas emissions of PV electricity consumed directly or fed into the grid are 54 g CO 2 -eq/kWh. The corresponding total cumulative energy demands are 5.27, 5.40, and 5.50 MJ oil-eq/kWh, with non-renewable energy carriers contributing 1.16, 1.22, and 1.29 MJ oil-eq/kWh. In the investigated EF impact categories, we similarly observe a larger environmental burden with increasing battery capacity, except in the use of minerals and metals. Our sensitivity analyses show that using a nickel cobalt manganese oxide (NCM) lithium-ion battery, instead of an LiFePO 4 battery, leads to a comparable environmental impact in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and cumulative energy demand. However, the NCM battery increases the impact in the EF categories of acidification and respiratory inorganics by 7 and 10%, respectively, whereas energy carrier resource use decreases by 4% and minerals and metals resource use decrease by 1%. Using a copper indium selenium (CIS) PV panel instead of a multicrystalline-silicon decreases greenhouse gas emissions by 24%, non-renewable cumulative energy demand by 13%, and particulate matter emissions by 60% (the largest decrease). Furthermore, the calculated environmental impacts are sensitive to the assumed battery lifetime. A decrease from 5000 to 3000 charge cycles increases non-renewable cumulative energy demand by 24% and greenhouse gas emissions by 16%. Increasing from 5000 to 7000 charge cycles decreases the environmental impacts by 6% and 7% in terms of non-renewable cumulative energy demand and greenhouse gas emissions, respectively. A utility-scale battery system case study shows that using batteries to store PV electricity overproduction reduces greenhouse gas emissions compared to using natural gas backup electricity generation.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2026

Forest residue harvest optimization: spanning the bridge between plant biology and biorefinery performance

Forestry residues have immense potential as alternative feedstocks to petroleum, yet their inherent complexity remains a major challenge to widespread use. Pairing the temporal rhythms of plant biology with biorefinery performance is critical to industrial-scale biorefinery development. Here, we provide the first report of a techno-economic analysis (TEA) and life cycle assessment (LCA) for a model integrated reductive catalytic fractionation (RCF)–molten salt hydrolysis process for forestry residues varying in tree part, species, and phenophase. All forestry residues resulted in net-negative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions vs. comparable petroleum feedstocks, with GHG emissions potentially reduced >4.0× through composition-based feedstock selection (e.g., harvesting American beech bark in spring vs. summer). Moreover, American beech twigs/branchlets and bark in leafed and emergence phenophases, respectively, had 7.9× lower predicted phenolic minimum selling prices (MSPs) vs. other feedstocks and MSPs within the current global phenolic market range. Hemicellulose content and RCF yield emerged as key parameters impacting GHG emissions and biorefinery revenue, identifying hardwood twigs/branchlets in the leafed phenophase as optimal biofeedstocks. Biorefinery expenses were dominated by purchased equipment, raw materials, and utility costs, highlighting essential areas for future study. Notably, RCF reactor pressures drove 85–90% of equipment costs, but sensitivity analysis revealed that decreasing the pressure 20% could reduce the phenol MSP 4-fold. Structural carbohydrate dynamics were also investigated using a two-step acid hydrolysis method to resolve tissue- and species-level patterns in biomass composition throughout the year to enable harvest optimization based on TEA/LCA findings. Ultimately, elucidating the impact of biofeedstock dynamics on biorefinery performance enables harvest optimization, informed engineering design, and progress towards an expanded bioeconomy.

Shapiro, Alison J. [University of Delaware, Newark↗

DOE OSTI2025

Projected Operational Energy Life Cycle Data Development: 2025 Update

This report documents the data sources and methods used to develop the energy life cycle data for use by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Engineering Laboratory (EL) to be used for the development of measurement science and incorporation into decision-support tools for evaluating building and facility capital investments. The data are posted separately under DOI 10.18141/2575194.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Circular Economy for Photovoltaics in Service of Energy Transition

The challenge of energy transition is immediate and immense; current projections target 75 TW of photovoltaics (PV) capacity by 2050. While any transition to renewable energy technology is preferable to the current fossil-based system, it is ideal to improve the sustainability of PV to minimize negative environmental and social impacts. Circular economy (CE) has been proposed as a method to improve the sustainability of PV, especially for emerging materials like perovskites. CE is a set of actions, principles, and systems which aim to design out waste and keep products and materials in use, to reduce environmental impacts and enable sustainable development. At the most basic level, CE is "reduce, reuse, recycle", the R-actions, in ranked order. CE of a PV technology can be metricized in a variety of ways, such as the Material Circularity Indicator (Smith and Jones, Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2019) or recycling rates. Unfortunately, standard CE metrics have several shortcomings for measuring renewable energy technologies in the context of deployment for energy transition (Figge 2018, Saidani 2019): 1) Only measure mass flows; 2) De-prioritization of the use phase in favor of mass circularity when scoring; and 3) Tight focus on a single product scale The use phase and energy flows of PV are key to energy transition, and therefore need to be quantified. Additionally, correlating product-scale to system-scale is necessary for quantifying the environmental impacts of energy transition. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) can address some of these concerns, but also focuses on a single product scale and has trouble capturing the dynamics of system-scale energy transition, such as the interaction of module lifetime with manufacturing demands for energy transition deployment schedules. Therefore, we developed an open-source Python-based system dynamics model to quantify the mass, energy and carbon impacts of CE R-actions for PV technologies in the energy transition; PV in the CE (PV ICE) (Ovaitt & Mirletz 2021). The tool captures supply chains from material extraction through end of life, incorporating 5 circular end of life pathways. PV ICE takes in any evolving bill of materials, module properties and deployment schedule to support researchers and decision makers with data-backed insights. In this work, we quantify and compare proposed CE sustainable PV module designs and lifecycle management strategies, spanning currently commercialized technologies, government and industry technology targets, and several low Technology Readiness Level (TRL) emerging PV technologies, including perovskites. Our analyses capture the projected evolutions of lifetime, efficiency and material circularity of these PV technologies, as well as their material supply chains. Our analyses emphasize the importance of examining a suite of metrics to identify priorities and tradeoffs, and inform design or lifecycle management decisions holistically. Previous analyses have demonstrated the central importance of PV module lifetime to support energy transition while minimizing impacts. High levels of material circularity (>90%) enable minimizing lifecycle wastes, can reduce virgin material demands if paired with improving efficiency, but demonstrate tradeoffs in energy return on investment. In the fervor of new material and technology development, it is important to remember that CE is not the end goal; decarbonization and energy transition are the end goal. CE should be used in service to improve the sustainability of PV, and R-actions evaluated for their usefulness and efficacy to this end.

carbon↗

DOE OSTI2021

Task 12 Sustainability - Methodological Guidelines on Net Energy Analysis of Photovoltaic Electricity (2nd Edition)

Net Energy Analysis (NEA) is a structured, comprehensive method of quantifying the extent to which a given energy source is able to provide a net energy gain (i.e., an energy surplus) to the end user, after accounting for all the energy losses occurring along the chain of processes that are required to exploit it (i.e., for its extraction, processing and transformation into a usable energy carrier, and delivery to the end user), as well as for all the additional energy 'investments' that are required in order to carry out the same chain of processes. However, this general framework leaves the individual practitioner with a range of choices that can affect the results and thus, the conclusions of a NEA study. The current IEA PVPS guidelines were developed to provide guidance on assuring consistency, balance, and quality to enhance the credibility and reliability of the results from photovoltaic (PV) NEAs. The guidelines represent a consensus among the authors - PV NEA experts in North America and Europe - for assumptions made on PV performance, process inputs and outputs, methods of analysis, and reporting of the results. Guidance is given on photovoltaic-specific parameters used as inputs in NEA and on choices and assumptions in inventory data analysis and on implementation of modelling approaches. A consistent approach towards system modelling, the functional unit, the system boundaries and allocation aspects enhance the credibility of PV electricity NEA studies and enables balanced NEA-based comparisons. Specifically, "apples-to-oranges" comparisons of different energy carriers (e.g., fuels vs. electricity) are not methodologically sound and are to be avoided in all cases; also, any comparison across renewable and non-renewable electricity generation technologies must clearly point out the intrinsically short-term nature of the NEA viewpoint, which does not capture the long-term sustainability implications of renewable vs. non-renewable primary energy harvesting and use: non-renewable primary energy resources are depleted and finally exhausted (irrespective of the size of the EROI), while renewable primary energy resources are not. This document provides an in-depth discussion of a common metric of NEA, namely the energy return on investment (EROI), and how this is to be interpreted vis-a-vis the deceptively similar-sounding metrics in the field of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): cumulative energy demand (CED) and non-renewable cumulative energy demand (nr-CED) per unit output. Specifically, a number of key differences are highlighted between these metrics as applied to electricity production systems, which are listed in Table S-1.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Evaluation of Rail Decarbonization Alternatives: Framework and Application

The Northwestern University Freight Rail Infrastructure & Energy Network Decarbonization (NUFRIEND) framework is a comprehensive industry-oriented tool for simulating the deployment of new energy technologies including biofuels, e-fuels, battery-electric, and hydrogen locomotives. By classifying fuel types into two categories based on deployment requirements, the associated optimal charging/fueling facility location and sizing problem are solved with a five-step framework. Life-cycle analysis (LCA) and techno-economic analysis (TEA) are used to estimate carbon reduction, capital investments, cost of carbon reduction, and operational impacts, enabling sensitivity analysis with operational and technological parameters. Here, the framework is illustrated on lower-carbon drop-in fuels as well as battery-electric technology deployments for the US Eastern and Western Class I railroad networks. Drop-in fuel deployments are modeled as admixtures with diesel in existing locomotives, while battery-electric deployments are shown for varying technology penetration levels and locomotive ranges. When mixed in a 50% ratio with diesel, results show biodiesel’s capacity to reduce emissions at 36% with a cost of $\$$ 0.13 per kilogram of CO 2 reduced, while e-fuels offer a potential reduction of 50% of emissions at a cost of $\$$ 0.22 per kilogram of CO 2 reduced. Battery-electric results for 50% deployment over all ton-miles highlight the value of future innovations in battery energy densities as scenarios assuming 800-mi range locomotives show an estimated emissions reduction of 46% with a cost of $\$$ 0.06 per kilogram of CO 2 reduced, compared with 16% emissions reduction at a cost of $\$$ 0.11 per kilogram of CO 2 reduced for 400-mi range locomotives. The NUFRIEND framework provides a systematic method for comparing different alternative energy technologies and identifying potential challenges and benefits in their future deployments.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Site-specific Design Case Study for Wet Waste Hydrothermal Liquefaction and Biocrude Upgrading to Hydrocarbon Fuels

Hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) is a thermal process that converts wet biomass to renewable hydrocarbon fuel blendstocks (i.e., renewable naphtha, renewable diesel, and sustainable aviation fuel (SAF)). It can utilize a wide range of pure and blended wet feedstocks, including sewage sludge from water resource recovery facilities (WRRF), food and agriculture wastes, algae, fats, oils and greases (FOG) and blends of dry and wet wastes/feedstocks. Historically, techno-economic analysis (TEA) and annual state of technology (SOT) assessments with standard economic assumptions used by the Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) were conducted for the wet waste HTL pathway leveraging experimental data collected from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory’s (PNNL) continuous flow reactor systems. The objective of the SOT assessment has been to guide and track progress of BETO’s HTL research and development (R&D) toward reduced cost and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the pathway. However, gaps exist between BETO’s traditional SOT updates and the needs of key external stakeholders that – if addressed – will accelerate technology adoption. This Business Case Study aims to bridge this gap by providing an updated design, TEA, and LCA based on PNNL’s FY23 R&D with added analyses and information that provide enhanced relevance for stakeholders of the HTL technology. This includes specific siting, regional wet waste resource inventory and transportation cost analyses, fuel market information, sustainable fuel policy impacts, economic metrics of net present value (NPV) and internal rate of return (IRR), greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions analysis, and statistical analysis of cost and technical uncertainties of the HTL plant design. The study focuses on the “Detroit combined statistical area (CSA)” region for siting of a wet waste HTL plant adjacent to the Great Lakes Water Authority (GLWA) facility with guidance from industry participants. Regional resource and siting analyses were conducted to identify feedstock availability, scale, and cost, as well as a beneficial site location. TEA with detailed rigorous capital cost estimation for the specific site application was conducted to evaluate the key economic metrics of most value to industrial partners. These include total capital investment, operating costs, minimum fuel selling price (MFSP) of the biocrude and fuel blendstock, and NPV and internal rate of return IRR with sustainable fuel credits. Life cycle analysis was conducted to evaluate the supply chain greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the wet waste HTL process as compared with petroleum derived diesel. This study is also informed by years of R&D and process de-risking learnings and was conducted with a basic engineering HTL plant design and costing that akin to a “first-of-a-kind” plant economics. This differs from our conventional “nth plant ” SOT assessments. Specifically, the HTL process model has been updated with more operationally reliable methods for feed heating and phase separations. Further, we have implemented additional spare equipment for redundancy, a more rigorous installed equipment cost estimation approach, and additional costs associated with feed formatting and delivery, building, piping and site development. An Excel-based cost sheet based on the basic engineering design is also released alongside the report that allows users to conduct customized TEA with their own feed composition and financial assumptions.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Supporting data for Site-specific Design Case Study for Wet Waste Hydrothermal Liquefaction and Biocrude Upgrading to Hydrocarbon Fuels

Li, Shuyun↗

DOE OSTI2024

An Updated Life Cycle Assessment of Utility-Scale Solar Photovoltaic Systems Installed in the United States

Given the high deployment targets for solar photovoltaics (PV) needed to meet U.S. decarbonization goals, and the limited carbon budget remaining to limit global temperature rise, accurate accounting of the energy-use and greenhouse-gas emissions over the life-cycle of PV systems is needed. In the United States, most PV systems are large utility-scale systems which use single-axis trackers and central inverters, which are not commonly examined in existing life-cycle assessment (LCA) literature. In this study, we present a cradle-to-grave LCA of a typical silicon U.S. utility PV (UPV) installation which is consistent with the utility system features documented in the annual NREL PV system cost benchmark reports. We analyze and present results for four main metrics: cumulative energy demand (CED), greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, energy payback time (EPBT), and carbon payback time (CPBT). We consider six primary manufacturing options: three based on an imported PV module supply chain (comparing low-carbon imports, high-carbon imports, and average imports), and three based on a potential domestic PV module supply chain (comparing low-carbon U.S. regions, high-carbon U.S. regions, and average U.S. regions). These manufacturing options were then paired with installation locations to create six main cases: low-carbon options were installed in Phoenix (Arizona), high-carbon options were installed in Seattle (Washington), and average options were installed in Fredonia (Kansas). These locations were selected to represent a range of irradiance and grid mixes in the United States, in order to illustrate the likely range of EPBTs and CPBTs possible across the United States. For all six cases, a sensitivity analysis for end-of-life (EOL) handling was explored to capture current and future management options: landfilling, partial recycling, and high-quality recycling. For the purposes of this report, the benchmark system was defined to use an average imported supply chain with partial recycling, installed in Fredonia (Kansas). CED results show ratios at or below 0.1 MJ oil-eq /MJgenerated which demonstrates efficient use of primary energy resources (below a 1:1 ratio), and represents a slight improvement over previous results in literature. GHG emissions per kWh range from 10-36 g CO 2 e, which are consistent with or lower than previous results published by NREL and IEA-PVPS. We use a graphical approach for calculating EPBT and CPBT in this report, which improves upon methods typically used in literature by accounting for non-linearity and avoiding data quality issues associated with long-term projections. EPBT was determined to vary from 0.5 to 1.2 years, with a benchmark EPBT of 0.6 years; CPBT was shown to vary from 0.8 to 20 years, with benchmark CPBT of 2.1 years, which is lower than other estimates from recent literature (typically >2 years).

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Hawaii Wave Surge Energy Converter (HAWSEC) OSU O.H. Hinsdale Basin

The following information and metadata applies to both the Phase I (Hydrodynamics) and Phase II (Full System Power Take-Off) zip folders which contain testing data from the OSU (Oregon State University) O.H. Hinsdale Wave Research Laboratory, from both OSU and the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UH). See zip folders provided further below in the downloads section. For experimental data of the full system, including PTO, see Phase II dataset. There are two main directories in each Phases's zip folder: "OSU_data" and "UH_data". The "OSU_data" directory contains data collected from their DAQ (data acquisition system), which includes all wave gauge observations, as well as body motions derived from their Qualisys motion tracking system. The organization of the directory follows OSU's convention. Detailed information on the instrument setup can be found under "OSU_data/docs/setup/instm_locations". The experiments conducted are documented in the "OSU_data/docs/daq_logs", which provides the trial number to the corresponding data located under "OSU_data/data" in several formats (e.g., ".mat" and ".txt"). Inside the trial directory, data is provided for each of the instruments defined in "OSU_data/docs/setup/instm_locations". The "UH_data" directory contains data collected from their DAQ. The data is stored in a ".tdms" file format. There are free plug-ins for Microsoft Excel and MathWorks MATLAB to read the ".tdms" format. Below are a few links providing methods to read in the data, but a Google search should identify alternatives sources if these no longer exist (valid as of January 2024): Excel: http://www.ni.com/example/27944/en/ MATLAB: https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/30023-tdms-reader The Excel plugin is recommend to get a quick overview of the data. The UH data is organized by directory name, in which the sub-directories for each experiment contains a directory whose name defines the wave height and period for the experimental data within. For example, a directory name "H02_T0275" corresponds to an experiment with wave height 0.1m and a period of 2.75s. For random wave data, the gamma value is also included in the directory name. For example, a directory name "H02_T0225_G18" corresponds to an experiment with a significant wave height of 0.2m, a peak period of 2.25s, and a gamma value of 1.8, with each spectra being a TMA spectrum. For the free decay experiments, the directory name is defined by the initial angular displacement. For example, a directory name "ang05_run01" corresponds to an experiment with an initial angular displacement of 5 degrees. There is a dataset in the UH data for each corresponding experiment defined in the OSU DAQ logs. The ".tdms" data is output from the DAQ at fixed intervals. Therefore, if multiple files are contained within the folder, the data will need to be stitched together. Within the UH dataset, there are two input channels from the OSU DAQ providing a random square wave signal for time synchronization ("ENV-WHT-0010") and a high/low signal ("ENV-WHT-0012") to identify when the wave maker is active (+5V). The UH data is logged as a collection of channel outputs. Channels not in use for the OSU testing (either Phase I or Phase II) are marked "nan" below. If the sensor is disconnected, it will record noise throughout the experiment. Below are the channel definitions in terms of what they measure: GPS Time = time CYL-POS-0001 = position between flap and fixed reference CYL-LCA-0001 = force between flap and hydraulic cylinder REC-LPT-0001 = nan REC-HPT-0001 = nan REC-HPT-0002 = nan REC-HPT-0003 = nan HHT-HPT-0001 = pressure at exhaust ("head" only) REC-FQC-0001 = nan REC-FQC-0002 = nan HHT-FQC-0001 = flow at exhaust ("head" only) ENV-WHT-0001 = nan ENV-WHT-0002 = nan ENV-WHT-0003 = nan ENV-WHT-0010 = random signal from OSU DAQ ENV-WHT-0012 = high/low signal from OSU DAQ Also included is a calibration curve to convert the string pot data to flap pi...

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗

DOE OSTI2025

Future grid mix impacts on whole-building life cycle assessment

Building construction and operation are a significant contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions, so understanding and mitigating emissions is crucial for reliable and realistic emissions accounting. Whole-building Life Cycle Assessment (WBLCA) is an emissions accounting method that considers lifetime environmental impacts of a building during its construction, operation, and eventual end-of-life. When performing WBLCAs, emission calculations from the building's operation over the entire building lifespan are typically based on today's energy grid mixes. This method does not consider changes or advancements in the clean energy proportion within the grid mix and can over or under-inflate results, skewing the ratio of embodied vs. operational environmental impacts. While a variety of prediction tools estimate what future grid emissions might be, predictions can vary widely. To predict the clean energy ratio within future grid mixes and the potential impact these changes might have on WBLCA, annual data from several existing U.S. grid models was averaged and probabilistic modeling was used to extend the usable projections of shorter forecasts. Results show that clean energy sources will likely continue to increase over time, although the rate of growth varies by model. On average, by 2085, the clean energy penetration of the grid is projected to reach ~81% and renewable energy is projected to reach ~71%, although no widespread consensus is reached. To understand how the future grid mix impacts lifetime building emissions within a WBLCA context, the team analyzed two 2021 IECC-compliant all-electric residential buildings: one built from traditional materials and construction processes and the other built with carbon sequestering materials and modular assembly, with a portion of energy generated on site. The results indicate that a moderate estimate of future electricity grid mixes shows a reduction of yearly operational emissions for traditional residential buildings of 55% between 2025 and 2085, and a corresponding reduction of 48% of total emissions over a 60 year building lifespan. This study offers a nuanced approach to account for the variability of future grid mix models and provides an average trend-line based on a robust collection of scenarios.

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)↗