Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “life cycle carbon intensity”

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.

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

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Assessing the Additional Carbon Savings with Biofuel

A recent study claims that corn used for ethanol should not be considered to be inherently biogenically carbon-neutral because not all that corn was grown additional to the level otherwise. By assessing the extent of carbon neutrality of corn for ethanol using the reference point baseline approach and historical data that study concluded that the carbon intensity of US corn ethanol is 27% higher than that of gasoline. We develop a framework to determine the carbon neutrality of corn for ethanol by assessing the additional carbon uptake by crops using an anticipated baseline approach. We also apply this framework to determine the additional corn produced for ethanol and include the direct life cycle carbon emissions of only that portion of corn in the direct life cycle carbon intensity of corn ethanol. We implement this framework by integrating an economic model of the agricultural sector in the USA with a biogenic carbon model and life cycle analysis to quantify biogenic carbon uptake and direct life cycle emissions with and without corn ethanol expansion over the 2007–2027 period. We find that the combined biogenic carbon emissions and direct life cycle carbon emission intensity of corn ethanol (not including indirect land use related emissions) is 21% lower than gasoline. In conclusion, the lower value of this carbon intensity of corn ethanol compared with gasoline is robust to a wide range of parametric assumptions.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Sources of Propane Consumed in California

Project Scope: The objective of this study is to specify the sources of propane consumed in California. It answers the questions, where does the propane used in California come from and how was it produced? The results of this study provide comprehensive, transparent, and verifiable estimates, based on the 2018 market. The information provided in this report is suitable for use to assess the life cycle carbon intensity of propane used as a transportation fuel in California. As the 2009 Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) aims to reduce California’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other smog-forming and toxic air pollutants, the appropriate designation of carbon intensity for propane as a transportation fuel is important for evaluating propane’s potential to contribute to GHG goals and understandings in the context of various actions. This study focuses on estimating the shares of total propane consumed in the state of California produced from petroleum refineries, natural gas plants, and bituminous sands sources inside California and elsewhere. Results: An estimated 590 million gallons of propane were consumed in California in 2018, of which, 59.5% originated from refinery production and 40.5% originated from natural gas plants. The majority of this was sourced from refinery production in California, 334 million gallons. Most of the propane imported to California for consumption was sourced from natural gas plants, 113 million gallons, with over half of the imported volume sourced from Canada. The volume sourced from bituminous sand upgrader and fractionator operations was negligible. Details from this analysis are presented in the table below which provides an overview of the propane flows estimated in this study by region and production method. The shares and volumes presented here represent a snapshot for 2018. A significant increase in propane demand, such as could be caused by increased use of propane as a transportation fuel in the state, would affect California’s propane production, imports, and exports. The method and data sources used for the estimates provided in this report also provide the framework which could be used for future updates. Key Method Considerations: The values presented here are based on a two-step approach where the first step was to determine the flows of propane into and out of California from different regions and the second step was to estimate the propane production methods in each region. A volume balance approach is used as the primary method for tracking the volume of propane in and out of California as propane production and import volumes are available by Petroleum Administration of Defense District (PADD) from EIA and neither inter-PADD propane transfers nor state-specific non-prime supplier consumption are available from a public data source. The volume balance performed for this study covered PADD 5 (the West Coast), which includes Arizona, California, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. The volume balance used all available public datasets to determine propane production, imports, exports, and consumption. Volumes unaccounted for by these datasets were estimated using the resulting volume balance by assuming market equilibrium. Consumption within each state in PADD 5 was estimated based on known import, export, and production volumes and this amount was used to develop the volume balance. EIA only tracks consumption at the state level by prime supplier sales. The volume balance approach provides the basis to correct for additional propane consumed in-states where propane is transferred to California. To determine the California propane sources and trade in 2018. volume of propane consumed in California, the volume balance approach is again used where it was estimated all imported volumes not specifically flagged for re-export were consumed, and the remaining consumption was produced in-state. The California Energy Commission (CEC) provided the total volume of propane imported and exported from California in 2018; this volume data set along with commodity tracking from the Canada Energy Regulator (CER) and the International Trade Commission (ITC) which tracks port of entry and final destination was used to determine where propane originated from and where it was ultimately consumed. For example, the CER tracks propane leaving Canada and entering each state within the U.S. Imported propane from Canada to California – marked for California – is assumed to be consumed in California. When no further data were available, import volumes were assumed to be consumed in California without pass-through (i.e., no propane imported to California was directly sold and exported). In most cases, the production method for each propane source region was applied to the volume of propane transferred to California. In other words, the shares of propane sourced from natural gas and refineries for each production region was assigned to California imports based on their contribution to the total volume flows into California to determine the production method for propane consumed in-state. For volumes imported into California from PADD 4, Washington State, Canada, and the rest of the world (Argentina, Chile, Norway, Peru, South Korea, and Trinidad and Tobago), the volumes sourced from petroleum refineries and natural gas plants reflect the either production ratio for the region or, in cases where the sources specific to the amounts exported to California could be determined, the sources specific to the volumes transferred to California.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Performance analysis of hybrid power configurations: Impact on primary energy intensity, carbon dioxide emissions, and life cycle costs

In this work, utilization of Natural gas and Hydrogen to support current and future building energy needs to offset the total electric demand while improving the grid resiliency and energy efficiency was investigated. Demand side energy management will play an important role in efficiently managing the available energy resources. Performance assessment of different power generation and energy management configurations is presented in this paper. Development of solutions in addressing grid resiliency by providing the ability to design suitable configurations for meeting individual building energy needs is discussed. Primary movers (PM) such as internal combustion engines (ICE) and fuel cells (FC) along with small scale auxiliary renewable energy source such as photovoltaics (PV) were considered. Key attributes of total carbon foot-print, life cycle costs including capital and operational expenditure, electric grid offset or peak shaving capability, thermal energy availability and its further potential to offset total electric demand, and primary energy intensity are analyzed and discussed in detail.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2025

Carbon‐negative hydrogen from ethanol via catalytic oxidative reforming

Abstract This study evaluated a commercial technology for producing low‐ or negative‐carbon hydrogen through ethanol catalytic oxidative reforming, focusing on the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions, or carbon intensity (CI). Various scenarios were analyzed: (a) comparing corn ethanol (first‐generation or Gen1 ethanol) and cellulosic ethanol (second‐generation or Gen2 ethanol) as feedstocks; (b) assessing carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) for CO 2 from upstream fermentation; and (c) evaluating oxygen sourcing via air separation units vs. on‐site or off‐site water electrolysis using a proton exchange membrane. Findings indicate that the CI for hydrogen production using Gen2 ethanol from corn stover is lower than that of Gen1 corn ethanol. Additionally, using proton exchange membrane‐generated oxygen results in a lower CI than air separation unit‐generated oxygen, regardless of the sourcing method. Implementing CCS for the hydrogen production plant's evolved CO 2 is essential for achieving a net‐negative CI for hydrogen from Gen1 ethanol. All examined scenarios, including both ethanol generations, oxygen sources, and CCS applications, demonstrated a net‐negative carbon intensity, surpassing the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions threshold of 0.45 kg CO 2 e/kg to enable policy credits as outlined in the Inflation Reduction Act §45V. In comparison, the CI for hydrogen from steam methane reforming stands at 3.4 kg CO 2 e/kg with CCS and 9.4 kg CO 2 e/kg without CCS.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2025

Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions and carbon intensity of U.S. fuel use and projection for the next 10 years-based on built capacity and expansion plans

The U.S. Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 supports biofuel production expansion through the 45Z clean fuel production tax credit, replacing previous 40A and 40B credits. This follows on the Renewable Fuel Standard from the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and its expansion in 2007. States like California, Oregon, and Washington also offer clean fuel credits. Meanwhile, federal agencies, including the U.S. Department of Energy, have advanced alternative fuel technologies through research and development funding. The surging interest in the biofuel industry has spurred the demand for biofuel supplies in the markets, although achieving profitability for advanced biofuels and low-carbon e-fuels remains challenging. This study aims to track U.S. alternative fuel production capacity expansion plans over the next 10 years and estimate impacts on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. By tracking built capacity and industry announcements of planned expansion, this study complements other studies which use models to predict changes in energy technologies and the associated GHG implications. Modeled projections of future technologies are often criticized for over or underestimating the cost and potential role of new technologies. The study focuses on sustainable aviation fuel, renewable diesel, ethanol, biodiesel, and renewable natural gas. Using facility-level data, we conducted a bottom-up analysis linking biofuel production pathways with corresponding pathways and parameterizations in the Argonne R&D GREET model. Results indicate that biofuel capacity could reach 3.8 exajoules in 2035, potentially reducing U.S. GHG emissions by 179 million tonnes, including the full life cycle. This corresponds to a 20% reduction in transportation and 5% in industry sector emissions by 2035, or a 3.6% reduction in economy-wide emissions. Overall, this study shows that while biofuel production capacity in the U.S. is expanding, the capacities remain limited compared to fuel demand. Uncertainty regarding the durability and extension of incentives may be dampening the pace of growth. Meanwhile, demonstrating the commercial potential for alternative fuels and climbing the learning curve for new technologies could lead to an increased pace of expansion in later years. This study offers insights for bioenergy stakeholders, highlighting biofuel technologies' contribution to U.S. energy system and emissions reduction over time based on producers' plans.

Biofuel Producers↗
DOE OSTI2025

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Associated with Pretreatment Techniques Utilized for Biosugar Production

Less carbon-intensive production of biosugars from lignocellulosic materials can lead to improved manufacturing of biofuels and bioproducts. In this study, the production of biosugars is analyzed to understand the potential of producing bioproducts from biosugars with a low carbon intensity. Life-cycle assessment is conducted on five lignocellulosic feedstocks along with seven pretreatment techniques to produce biosugars as an important platform intermediate for producing bioproducts. The production of electricity using lignin with and without heat integration was also incorporated. In addition, seven bioproducts are analyzed for the estimation of the GHG emissions budget, which represents the emissions available to convert, separate, and upgrade biosugars into bioproducts within the 70% emissions reduction target. Corn stover-deacetylation and dilute acid pretreatment (CS-DDA) provide the lowest GHG emissions for biosugar (0.03 kg CO 2 eq/kg biosugar) and thereby the highest GHG emissions budget for the case of lactic acid production (3.76 kg CO 2 eq/kg lactic acid). Natural gas and chemicals are the major contributors to all of the pretreatment techniques under study. The outcomes from this study can benefit the advancement of upcoming biobased processes that meet decarbonization targets.

Biopolymers↗
DOE OSTI2020

Using waste CO 2 from corn ethanol biorefineries for additional ethanol production: life‐cycle analysis

Abstract Corn ethanol plants generate high‐purity carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) while producing ethanol. If that CO 2 could be converted into ethanol by carbon capture and utilization technologies it would be possible to increase ethanol production more than 37% without additional corn grain inputs. Gas fermentation processes use microbes to convert carbon‐containing gases into ethanol and so have the potential to be used with the CO 2 from biorefineries for this purpose. However, as CO 2 utilization technologies for converting thermodynamically stable CO 2 are typically energy intensive, it is necessary to evaluate the related life‐cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (carbon intensities or CIs) to see whether there are actual emission reduction benefits. In this study, we evaluate the CIs of ethanol produced from high‐purity CO 2 in corn ethanol plants by gas fermentation plus electrochemical reduction. Our analysis shows that the sources of electricity and hydrogen are key drivers of CO 2 ‐based ethanol's GHG emissions. With wind electricity, the design cases show the potential of near‐zero CI ethanol (1.1 g CO 2 e/MJ), but that can increase to up to 331–531 g CO 2 e/MJ when today's U.S. Midwest electricity mix is used. To avoid the renewable electricity intermittency issue, we considered a power purchase agreement option using wind electricity 40% of the time and using the regional mix for the rest, which provides a 42% GHG emission reduction from the CI of gasoline. © 2020 The Authors and UChicago Argonne, LLC, Operator of Argonne National Laboratory. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining published by Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Carbon Intensities of Refining Products in Petroleum Refineries with Co-Processed Biofeedstocks

Petroleum refineries increasingly seek to generate fuels with lower carbon intensities (CIs; a measure of life cycle greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions per unit of energy of fuel; well-to-wheel [WTW]) to meet growing demand. Co-processing refers to a process that adds biomass-derived feedstocks to the fossil-based feedstocks of existing petroleum refinery process units. With the use of biofeedstocks, it is expected that co-processed fuels would have lower CIs than their petroleum counterparts without requiring changes in the existing infrastructure for producing, transporting, and using fuels. To quantify the GHG emissions reduction benefits of co-processing, this study uses a linear programming model to simulate petroleum refinery conditions with and without co-processing. The co-processing cases include three biofeedstocks (soy oil, tallow, and used cooking oil or UCO) used as 10 vol.% of the feedstock to a hydrotreater or hydrocracker since these lipid-based feedstocks have favorable properties to be treated in a hydrotreater or hydrocracker. In addition, we considered pyrolysis oil used as 10 vol.% of the feedstock to a fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) unit in the modeled refinery due to its higher oxygen content compared to other lipid-based feedstocks. Life cycle analysis (LCA) using two distinct approaches—process-level energy allocation and a refinery-level marginal approach—has been conducted for each case. The LCA results using process-level allocation show that there are no noticeable changes in emissions or energy use impacts at the facility level. The life cycle GHG emission reductions of co-processing cases are mainly related to the fraction of biogenic carbon embedded in each fuel product. For example, co-processed jet fuels (a mixture of fossil and biogenic fuels) made via hydrotreating or hydrocracking have higher biogenic carbon, which results in jet fuel CI reductions of 3.9%–8.6% compared to the CI of baseline petroleum jet fuels on a WTW basis. However, analysis of co-processed pyrolysis oil in an FCC shows that a higher fraction of biofeedstocks (29%) becomes process emissions (i.e., CO and CO 2 ), mainly due to the oxygenates in pyrolysis oil, and so it generates less renewable fuel than biofeedstocks co-processed via hydrotreating or hydrocracking. Using the refinery-level marginal approach, the changes in energy use and emissions of co-processing cases compared to the petroleum-only baseline case are allocated to the changes in fuel production (assuming renewable fuels). This approach generates the life cycle GHG emission values of co-processed renewable fuels, which are comparable to the CIs of standalone biofuel production pathways. However, as this approach relies on a rough assumption that product yields and emissions from co-processing units on fossil feedstocks remain the same with and without biofeedstock inputs, co-processing cases like FCC pyrolysis oil may generate quite skewed results.

02 PETROLEUM↗
DOE OSTI2021

Dynamic life-cycle carbon analysis for fast pyrolysis biofuel produced from pine residues: implications of carbon temporal effects

Abstract Background Woody biomass has been considered as a promising feedstock for biofuel production via thermochemical conversion technologies such as fast pyrolysis. Extensive Life Cycle Assessment studies have been completed to evaluate the carbon intensity of woody biomass-derived biofuels via fast pyrolysis. However, most studies assumed that woody biomass such as forest residues is a carbon–neutral feedstock like annual crops, despite a distinctive timeframe it takes to grow woody biomass. Besides, few studies have investigated the impacts of forest dynamics and the temporal effects of carbon on the overall carbon intensity of woody-derived biofuels. This study addressed such gaps by developing a life-cycle carbon analysis framework integrating dynamic modeling for forest and biorefinery systems with a time-based discounted Global Warming Potential (GWP) method developed in this work. The framework analyzed dynamic carbon and energy flows of a supply chain for biofuel production from pine residues via fast pyrolysis. Results The mean carbon intensity of biofuel given by Monte Carlo simulation across three pine growth cases ranges from 40.8–41.2 g CO 2 e MJ −1 (static method) to 51.0–65.2 g CO 2 e MJ −1 (using the time-based discounted GWP method) when combusting biochar for energy recovery. If biochar is utilized as soil amendment, the carbon intensity reduces to 19.0–19.7 g CO 2 e MJ −1 (static method) and 29.6–43.4 g CO 2 e MJ −1 in the time-based method. Forest growth and yields (controlled by forest management strategies) show more significant impacts on biofuel carbon intensity when the temporal effect of carbon is taken into consideration. Variation in forest operations and management (e.g., energy consumption of thinning and harvesting), on the other hand, has little impact on the biofuel carbon intensity. Conclusions The carbon temporal effect, particularly the time lag of carbon sequestration during pine growth, has direct impacts on the carbon intensity of biofuels produced from pine residues from a stand-level pine growth and management point of view. The carbon implications are also significantly impacted by the assumptions of biochar end-of-life cases and forest management strategies.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Environmental life-cycle analysis of hydrogen technology pathways in the United States

Hydrogen is a zero-carbon energy carrier with potential to decarbonize industrial and transportation sectors, but its life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions depend on its energy supply chain and carbon management measures (e.g., carbon capture and storage). Global support for clean hydrogen production and use has recently intensified. In the United States, Congress passed several laws that incentivize the production and use of renewable and low-carbon hydrogen, such as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) in 2021 and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) in 2022, which provides tax credits of up to $3/kg depending on the carbon intensity of the produced hydrogen. A comprehensive life-cycle accounting of GHG emissions associated with hydrogen production is needed to determine the carbon intensity of hydrogen throughout its value chain. In the United States, Argonne’s R&D GREET ® (Greenhouse Gases, Regulated emissions, and Energy use in Technologies) model has been widely used for hydrogen carbon intensity calculations. This paper describes the major hydrogen technology pathways considered in the United States and provides data sources and carbon intensity results for each of the hydrogen production and delivery pathways using consistent system boundaries and most recent technology performance and supply chain data.

Elgowainy, Amgad↗
DOE OSTI2024

Decarbonizing Hydrogen Production: Assessing A Net-Negative Pathway

Hydrogen is gaining prominence as a key factor in the world's transition to a cleaner energy future. The International Energy Agency (IEA)'s Global Hydrogen Review 2023 reports that the number of low-emission hydrogen production projects is increasing rapidly. The potential for growth in new applications such as heavy industry, transportation, and power generation is significant. The IEA urges more decisive action to spur demand for low-emission hydrogen to achieve climate goals. While hydrogen is produced through various industrial methods, each with its own advantages and disadvantages, low-carbon hydrogen is critical for mitigating climate change and is incentivized by the Clean Hydrogen Production Tax Credit (45V). To this end, we have evaluated a commercial technology that can produce low- or negative-carbon hydrogen via ethanol catalytic oxidative reforming. This study assessed life cycle greenhouse gas emissions (carbon intensity or CI) associated with the hydrogen production technology. A total of 24 scenarios were evaluated, encompassing (a) Gen1 versus Gen2 ethanol inputs, (b) carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) of upstream fermentation CO2, and (c) oxygen sourcing via air separation unit (ASU) versus purchased or on-site production of oxygen as a byproduct of hydrogen electrolysis with a proton exchange membrane (PEM). Key findings include that the base case CI for hydrogen production using Gen2 ethanol from corn stover is lower than Gen1 dry mill corn ethanol. The study also points out that the CI for hydrogen production using PEM-O2 is lower than that using ASU-O2, whether the PEM-O2 is produced on-site or off-site (importing). When sourcing oxygen from on-site PEM-O2, the Gen1 and Gen2 ethanol-derived hydrogen exhibit favorable net-negative CI values for all evaluated scenarios, especially if the upstream ethanol CCS is included. As a reference, the 45V regulatory threshold for generating clean hydrogen tax credits is a CI below 0.45 kg CO2e/kg hydrogen.

BIOMASS FUELS,HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2024

Life-cycle analysis of offshore macroalgae production systems in the United States

Offshore macroalgae production offers the potential to provide valuable biomass for food, energy, and higher value products without the use of land or freshwater while using excess nutrients and carbon dioxide. To realize this potential, the Macroalgae Research Inspiring Novel Energy Resources program of the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy has initiated projects to develop advanced cultivation technologies that enable the cost- and energy-efficient production of macroalgal biomass. Here, this study addresses the life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions and energy return on investment for five U.S. offshore macroalgae production systems designed for deployment at the thousand-hectare scale using a detailed module developed within the GREET life-cycle analysis model for this study. The carbon intensity of macroalgae production system designs, expressed as kg of carbon dioxide equivalent per dry metric ton of algae harvested, vary widely from 49 to 220 and confirm that biomass productivity has the highest degree of sensitivity across the model parameters tested. Regardless of the system designs, the upstream and combustion emissions from fuel use are the key contributor (over 45 %) to carbon intensity, indicating that the use of low-carbon fuels (e.g., renewable diesel) could further reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Further studies need to specify the market opportunity and specific product slates for macroalgae to provide a complete picture of the environmental impacts of macroalgal feedstock.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Life-cycle analysis of hydrogen production from water electrolyzers

The United States' focus on decarbonization has spawned interest among policymakers in deploying water electrolysis technology for clean hydrogen production. However, water electrolyzers also raise concerns regarding their substantial use of carbon-intensive materials. Here, we conduct a comprehensive life-cycle analysis (LCA) of three prominent water electrolyzer technologies to investigate the environmental implications of their manufacturing and life cycles under different energy sources. All electrolyzer technologies employing low-carbon energy (nuclear, solar, or wind) exhibit life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of 0.3-2.4 kg-CO 2-eq /kg-H 2 . This is significantly lower than the corresponding GHG emissions for hydrogen production via both conventional steam methane reforming and alternative autothermal reforming with carbon capture and storage (by > 50%). The well-to-gate GHG emissions of low-carbon electrolyzers (0-0.36 kg-CO 2-eq / kg-H 2 ) qualify for Tier I of the production tax credit in the U.S.' Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, indicating their suitability for producing decarbonized hydrogen under this program.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2022

Life cycle analysis of gasification and Fischer-Tropsch conversion of municipal solid waste for transportation fuel production

Non-recyclable municipal solid waste (MSW) can be used as feedstock for liquid fuel production via gasification followed by Fischer-Tropsch (FT) processes. Given the heterogeneity of MSW material composition and variation in material properties, its convertibility to liquid hydrocarbon fuels could vary widely, affecting the sustainability of utilizing non-recyclable MSW for fuel production. This study evaluates the life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (carbon intensities [CIs]) of FT fuels from non-recyclable MSW. Key issues that could greatly affect the CIs were examined, including fossil carbon content of the MSW, emission implications of diverting non-recyclable MSW from landfills to fuel production, and conversion efficiency. Results show that the CIs of fuels produced from various waste streams range 80–105 gCO2e/MJ, which may exceed the CI of petroleum fuels. Higher fossil carbon content in the MSW feedstock tends to incur higher GHG emissions as biogenic carbon emissions are considered carbon neutral. Meanwhile, diverting different fractions of non-recyclable MSW, such as food waste and low-quality paper, from landfills may result in GHG emissions that may include the potential avoidance of methane emissions and potential sequestration of biogenic carbon that is foregone. To reduce GHG emissions, a carbon capture and sequestration option in the fuel production stage is considered, which could reduce the CI by 53–64 gCO2e/MJ. Carbon fates of different non-recyclable MSW in landfills are further evaluated to determine how they vary and impact the CIs of MSW-derived fuels.

02 PETROLEUM↗
DOE OSTI2026

Corn and Switchgrass Derived Sustainable Aviation Fuel Carbon Intensity

The production and use of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) could lower aviation's carbon footprint. Feedstock agricultural management can optimize—or potentially determine—SAF sustainability and profitability, but long-term SAF feedstock comparisons are limited. Life cycle assessments (LCA) are commonly used to estimate the carbon intensity of producing SAF from emerging feedstocks due to the limited availability of long-term, primary field data. We quantified the agricultural phase and well-to-wake (WTWa) carbon intensities of producing SAF from no-till, continuous corn (Zea mays L.) under 120 kg N ha−1 year−1 (120 N corn) and switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) under 60 or 120 kg N ha−1 year−1 (60 N and 120 N SWG, respectively) via LCAs based on measured data from a long-term (1998-present) field experiment on marginally productive cropland located in Eastern NE, USA. Measured data included crop productivity, long-term changes in soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks (0–150 cm), annual soil N2O emissions, and field management practices. Both 120 N corn (2078 L ha−1) and 120 N SWG (1752 L ha−1) produced more SAF than 60 N SWG (1229 L ha−1) (p < 0.0001). However, making SAF from corn had greater life cycle GHG emissions (i.e., WTWa carbon intensity) than making SAF from 120 N and 60 N SWG (61.5 > −14.5 and −27.5 g CO2e MJ−1 SAF, respectively; p = 0.0007), primarily due to SOC accrual during crop production. Here, we demonstrate that agricultural management (e.g., crop type, fertilizer use) can determine the sustainably and productivity of producing SAF by using long-term, measured field data in LCAs.

carbon intensity↗
DOE OSTI2024

Summary Report of the Carbon-Negative Hydrogen Workshop

This report summarizes the outcomes of the Carbon-Negative Hydrogen Workshop held at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado on June 22-23, 2023. The workshop was co-sponsored by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and the National Energy Technology Laboratory and focused on developing a shared understanding of the importance of and opportunities for generation and use of carbon-negative hydrogen in industrial decarbonization. For the purposes of this workshop, carbon-negative hydrogen was defined as hydrogen (H 2 ) produced in a manner that leads to net carbon dioxide removal from the atmosphere thus giving rise to a life cycle cradle-to-grave carbon intensity that is below zero.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2024

Life-Cycle Analysis Datasets for Regionalized Plastic Pathways

The carbon intensity (CI) of producing five different resins – polyethylene terephthalate (PET), high-density polyethylene (HDPE), low-density polyethylene (LDPE), polypropylene (PP), and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) – in four different international regions – United States of America (USA), Western Europe, Middle East and Northern Africa (MENA), and China – is calculated on a cradle-to-gate basis using the Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) model. The list of factors that can potentially vary the CI of the five resins in different international regions include the CI of electricity and natural gas (NG) production, steam cracking feedstock mix, propylene sourcing technology mix, terephthalic monomer (TM) mix, use of hydrogen co-product from steam cracking process, and vinyl chloride monomer (VCM) production technology mix.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗