IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v131y2014icp1-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Emissions from cycling of thermal power plants in electricity systems with high penetration of wind power: Life cycle assessment for Ireland

Author

Listed:
  • Turconi, R.
  • O’Dwyer, C.
  • Flynn, D.
  • Astrup, T.

Abstract

The increase of renewable sources in the power sector is an important step towards more sustainable electricity production. However, introducing high shares of variable renewables, such as wind and solar, cause dispatchable power plants to vary their output to fulfill the remaining electrical demand. The environmental impacts related to potential future energy systems in Ireland for 2025 with high shares of wind power were evaluated using life cycle assessment (LCA), focusing on cycling emissions (due to part-load operation and start-ups) from dispatchable generators. Part-load operations significantly affect the average power plant efficiency, with all units seeing an average yearly efficiency noticeably less than optimal. In particular, load following units, on average, saw an 11% reduction. Given that production technologies are typically modeled assuming steady-state operation at full load, as part of LCA of electricity generation, the efficiency reduction would result in large underestimation of emissions, e.g. up to 65% for an oil power plant. Overall, cycling emissions accounted for less than 7% of lifecycle CO2, NOx and SO2 emissions in the five scenarios considered: while not overbalancing the benefits from increasing wind energy, cycling emissions are not negligible and should be systematically included (i.e. by using emission factors per unit of fuel input rather than per unit of power generated). As the ability to cycle is an additional service provided by a power plant, it is also recommended that only units with similar roles (load following, mid merit, or base load) should be compared. The results showed that cycling emissions increased with the installed wind capacity, but decreased with the addition of storage. The latter benefits can, however, only be obtained if base-load electricity production shifts to a cleaner source than coal. Finally, the present study indicates that, in terms of emission reductions, the priority for Ireland is to phase out coal-based power plants. While investing in new storage capacity reduces system operating costs at high wind penetrations and limits cycling, the emissions reductions are somewhat negated when coupled with base load coal.

Suggested Citation

  • Turconi, R. & O’Dwyer, C. & Flynn, D. & Astrup, T., 2014. "Emissions from cycling of thermal power plants in electricity systems with high penetration of wind power: Life cycle assessment for Ireland," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 1-8.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:131:y:2014:i:c:p:1-8
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.06.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261914005807
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.06.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Seán Diffney & Laura Malaguzzi Valeri & Darragh Walsh, 2012. "Should Coal Replace Coal? Options for the Irish Electricity Market," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 43(4), pages 561-596.
    2. Tonini, Davide & Astrup, Thomas, 2012. "LCA of biomass-based energy systems: A case study for Denmark," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 234-246.
    3. Gagnon, Luc & Belanger, Camille & Uchiyama, Yohji, 2002. "Life-cycle assessment of electricity generation options: The status of research in year 2001," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(14), pages 1267-1278, November.
    4. Turconi, Roberto & Boldrin, Alessio & Astrup, Thomas, 2013. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: Overview, comparability and limitations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 555-565.
    5. Tuohy, A. & O'Malley, M., 2011. "Pumped storage in systems with very high wind penetration," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 1965-1974, April.
    6. Pehnt, Martin & Oeser, Michael & Swider, Derk J., 2008. "Consequential environmental system analysis of expected offshore wind electricity production in Germany," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 747-759.
    7. Nikolakakis, Thomas & Fthenakis, Vasilis, 2011. "The optimum mix of electricity from wind- and solar-sources in conventional power systems: Evaluating the case for New York State," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 6972-6980.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Turconi, Roberto & Tonini, Davide & Nielsen, Christian F.B. & Simonsen, Christian G. & Astrup, Thomas, 2014. "Environmental impacts of future low-carbon electricity systems: Detailed life cycle assessment of a Danish case study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 66-73.
    2. Song, Cuihong & Gardner, Kevin H. & Klein, Sharon J.W. & Souza, Simone Pereira & Mo, Weiwei, 2018. "Cradle-to-grave greenhouse gas emissions from dams in the United States of America," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 945-956.
    3. Turconi, Roberto & Boldrin, Alessio & Astrup, Thomas, 2013. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: Overview, comparability and limitations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 555-565.
    4. Jenniches, Simon & Worrell, Ernst & Fumagalli, Elena, 2019. "Regional economic and environmental impacts of wind power developments: A case study of a German region," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 499-514.
    5. Wiser, Ryan & Bolinger, Mark & Heath, Garvin & Keyser, David & Lantz, Eric & Macknick, Jordan & Mai, Trieu & Millstein, Dev, 2016. "Long-term implications of sustained wind power growth in the United States: Potential benefits and secondary impacts," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 146-158.
    6. Vance, C. & Sweeney, J. & Murphy, F., 2022. "Space, time, and sustainability: The status and future of life cycle assessment frameworks for novel biorefinery systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    7. Arvesen, Anders & Hauan, Ingrid Bjerke & Bolsøy, Bernhard Mikal & Hertwich, Edgar G., 2015. "Life cycle assessment of transport of electricity via different voltage levels: A case study for Nord-Trøndelag county in Norway," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 144-151.
    8. Amponsah, Nana Yaw & Troldborg, Mads & Kington, Bethany & Aalders, Inge & Hough, Rupert Lloyd, 2014. "Greenhouse gas emissions from renewable energy sources: A review of lifecycle considerations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 461-475.
    9. Gemechu, Eskinder & Kumar, Amit, 2022. "A review of how life cycle assessment has been used to assess the environmental impacts of hydropower energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    10. Sarah Wettstein & Karen Muir & Deborah Scharfy & Matthias Stucki, 2017. "The Environmental Mitigation Potential of Photovoltaic-Powered Irrigation in the Production of South African Maize," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-20, September.
    11. Messagie, Maarten & Mertens, Jan & Oliveira, Luis & Rangaraju, Surendraprabu & Sanfelix, Javier & Coosemans, Thierry & Van Mierlo, Joeri & Macharis, Cathy, 2014. "The hourly life cycle carbon footprint of electricity generation in Belgium, bringing a temporal resolution in life cycle assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 469-476.
    12. Troldborg, Mads & Heslop, Simon & Hough, Rupert L., 2014. "Assessing the sustainability of renewable energy technologies using multi-criteria analysis: Suitability of approach for national-scale assessments and associated uncertainties," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1173-1184.
    13. Xuerong Li & Faliang Gui & Qingpeng Li, 2019. "Can Hydropower Still Be Considered a Clean Energy Source? Compelling Evidence from a Middle-Sized Hydropower Station in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-13, August.
    14. Silva Ortiz, Pablo & Flórez-Orrego, Daniel & de Oliveira Junior, Silvio & Maciel Filho, Rubens & Osseweijer, Patricia & Posada, John, 2020. "Unit exergy cost and specific CO2 emissions of the electricity generation in the Netherlands," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    15. Kazemi, Abolghasem & Moreno, Jovita & Iribarren, Diego, 2023. "Economic optimization and comparative environmental assessment of natural gas combined cycle power plants with CO2 capture," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    16. Atsonios, Konstantinos & Kougioumtzis, Michael-Alexander & D. Panopoulos, Kyriakos & Kakaras, Emmanuel, 2015. "Alternative thermochemical routes for aviation biofuels via alcohols synthesis: Process modeling, techno-economic assessment and comparison," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 346-366.
    17. Durmaz, Tunç, 2016. "Precautionary Storage in Electricity Markets," Discussion Papers 2016/5, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    18. Østergaard, P.A. & Lund, H. & Thellufsen, J.Z. & Sorknæs, P. & Mathiesen, B.V., 2022. "Review and validation of EnergyPLAN," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    19. Meng, Wenliang & Wang, Dongliang & Zhou, Huairong & Yang, Yong & Li, Hongwei & Liao, Zuwei & Yang, Siyu & Hong, Xiaodong & Li, Guixian, 2023. "Carbon dioxide from oxy-fuel coal-fired power plant integrated green ammonia for urea synthesis: Process modeling, system analysis, and techno-economic evaluation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    20. Tomasz Jałowiec & Henryk Wojtaszek, 2021. "Analysis of the RES Potential in Accordance with the Energy Policy of the European Union," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-33, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:131:y:2014:i:c:p:1-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.