IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jcltec/v5y2023i1p10-189d1052886.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Literature Review on Existing Methods and Indicators for Evaluating the Efficiency of Power-to-X Processes

Author

Listed:
  • Natascha Eggers

    (Institute of Power Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Science and Engineering, Technische Universität Dresden, 01069 Dresden, Germany
    Department of Information and Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science, University of Applied Life Sciences Hamburg, 20099 Hamburg, Germany
    Energy- and Resource-Efficient Systems, Energy Systems and Infrastructures, Fraunhofer Institute for Factory Operation and Automation IFF, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany)

  • Torsten Birth

    (Department of Information and Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science, University of Applied Life Sciences Hamburg, 20099 Hamburg, Germany
    Energy- and Resource-Efficient Systems, Energy Systems and Infrastructures, Fraunhofer Institute for Factory Operation and Automation IFF, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany)

  • Bernd Sankol

    (Department of Information and Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science, University of Applied Life Sciences Hamburg, 20099 Hamburg, Germany)

  • Lukas Kerpen

    (Energy- and Resource-Efficient Systems, Energy Systems and Infrastructures, Fraunhofer Institute for Factory Operation and Automation IFF, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany)

  • Antonio Hurtado

    (Institute of Power Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Science and Engineering, Technische Universität Dresden, 01069 Dresden, Germany)

Abstract

The challenges posed by climate change have prompted significant growth in efficiency evaluation and optimization research, especially in recent years. This has spawned a variety of heterogeneous methods and approaches to the assessment of technical processes. These methods and approaches are rarely comparable and are usually only applicable to specific sectors. This paper provides an overview of the literature on efficiency assessment methods and KPIs, leading to a more manageable selection of an appropriate method with special regard to energy system integration technologies. In addition to reviewing the literature systematically, this paper examines existing methods and indicators’ applicability to and significance for efficiency optimization. In this context, a holistic approach to process design, evaluation, and improvement is given with particular regard to power-to-X systems. Within the framework of the study, three overarching goals could be defined as levels of efficiency evaluation of power-to-X systems: 1. identification of the process (steps) with the most significant optimization potential, 2. identification of the process phases with the greatest optimization potential (timewise considered), and 3. derivation of specific recommendations for action for the improvement of a process. For each of these levels, the most suitable evaluation methods were identified. While various methods, such as life cycle assessment and physical optimum, are particularly suitable for Level 1 and Level 2, for Level 3, even the best-identified methods have to be extended on a case-by-case basis. To address this challenge, a new approach to a holistic evaluation of power-to-X systems was developed based on the study’s findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Natascha Eggers & Torsten Birth & Bernd Sankol & Lukas Kerpen & Antonio Hurtado, 2023. "A Literature Review on Existing Methods and Indicators for Evaluating the Efficiency of Power-to-X Processes," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-23, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jcltec:v:5:y:2023:i:1:p:10-189:d:1052886
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2571-8797/5/1/10/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2571-8797/5/1/10/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Phylipsen, G. J. M. & Blok, K. & Worrell, E., 1997. "International comparisons of energy efficiency-Methodologies for the manufacturing industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(7-9), pages 715-725.
    2. P. Zhou & F. Wu & D. Q. Zhou, 2017. "Total-factor energy efficiency with congestion," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 255(1), pages 241-256, August.
    3. Prasad Tallapragada V.S.N. & Maria Shkaratan & Ada Karina Izaguirre & Jaakko Helleranta & Saifur Rahman & Sten Bergman, 2009. "Monitoring Performance of Electric Utilities : Indicators and Benchmarking in Sub-Saharan Africa," World Bank Publications - Reports 13030, The World Bank Group.
    4. Song, Chenxi & Li, Mingjia & Wen, Zhexi & He, Ya-Ling & Tao, Wen-Quan & Li, Yangzhe & Wei, Xiangyang & Yin, Xiaolan & Huang, Xing, 2014. "Research on energy efficiency evaluation based on indicators for industry sectors in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 550-562.
    5. Pereira, Helga & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2017. "An analytical review of irrigation efficiency measured using deterministic and stochastic models," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 28-35.
    6. Aleksander Banasik & Jacqueline M. Bloemhof-Ruwaard & Argyris Kanellopoulos & G. D. H. Claassen & Jack G. A. J. Vorst, 2018. "Multi-criteria decision making approaches for green supply chains: a review," Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 366-396, September.
    7. Colla, Martin & Ioannou, Anastasia & Falcone, Gioia, 2020. "Critical review of competitiveness indicators for energy projects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    8. Kumar, Abhishek & Sah, Bikash & Singh, Arvind R. & Deng, Yan & He, Xiangning & Kumar, Praveen & Bansal, R.C., 2017. "A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 596-609.
    9. Mette Asmild & Jens Hougaard & Dorte Kronborg, 2013. "Do efficiency scores depend on input mix? A statistical test and empirical illustration," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 211(1), pages 37-48, December.
    10. Ness, Barry & Urbel-Piirsalu, Evelin & Anderberg, Stefan & Olsson, Lennart, 2007. "Categorising tools for sustainability assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 498-508, January.
    11. Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffe, Laure, 2016. "Modelling pollution-generating technologies in performance benchmarking: Recent developments, limits and future prospects in the nonparametric frameworkAuthor-Name: Dakpo, K. Hervé," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 347-359.
    12. Chung, William, 2011. "Review of building energy-use performance benchmarking methodologies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(5), pages 1470-1479, May.
    13. Li, Ming-Jia & Tao, Wen-Quan, 2017. "Review of methodologies and polices for evaluation of energy efficiency in high energy-consuming industry," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 203-215.
    14. Abu Bakar, Nur Najihah & Hassan, Mohammad Yusri & Abdullah, Hayati & Rahman, Hasimah Abdul & Abdullah, Md Pauzi & Hussin, Faridah & Bandi, Masilah, 2015. "Energy efficiency index as an indicator for measuring building energy performance: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 1-11.
    15. McKenna, Russell & Herbes, Carsten & Fichtner, Wolf, 2015. "Energieautarkie: Definitionen, Für- bzw. Gegenargumente, und entstehende Forschungsbedarfe," Working Paper Series in Production and Energy 6, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute for Industrial Production (IIP).
    16. Gilbert Kwabena Amoako & Anokye M. Adam & Clement Lamboi Arthur & George Tackie, 2021. "Institutional isomorphism, environmental management accounting and environmental accountability: a review," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 11201-11216, August.
    17. Kylili, Angeliki & Fokaides, Paris A. & Lopez Jimenez, Petra Amparo, 2016. "Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) approach in buildings renovation for the sustainability of the built environment: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 906-915.
    18. Kourkoumpas, Dimitrios-Sotirios & Benekos, Georgios & Nikolopoulos, Nikolaos & Karellas, Sotirios & Grammelis, Panagiotis & Kakaras, Emmanouel, 2018. "A review of key environmental and energy performance indicators for the case of renewable energy systems when integrated with storage solutions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C), pages 380-398.
    19. Stefan Hajkowicz & Kerry Collins, 2007. "A Review of Multiple Criteria Analysis for Water Resource Planning and Management," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 21(9), pages 1553-1566, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paula M. Wenzel & Eva Fensterle & Peter Radgen, 2023. "Catalyzing Cooling Tower Efficiency: A Novel Energy Performance Indicator and Functional Unit including Climate and Cooling Demand Normalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-24, October.

    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. Daraio, Cinzia & Kerstens, Kristiaan & Nepomuceno, Thyago & Sickles, Robin C., 2019. "Empirical Surveys of Frontier Applications: A Meta-Review," Working Papers 19-005, Rice University, Department of Economics.
    2. Bompard, E.F. & Corgnati, S.P. & Grosso, D. & Huang, T. & Mietti, G. & Profumo, F., 2022. "Multidimensional assessment of the energy sustainability and carbon pricing impacts along the Belt and Road Initiative," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    3. Dyckhoff, Harald & Souren, Rainer, 2022. "Integrating multiple criteria decision analysis and production theory for performance evaluation: Framework and review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(3), pages 795-816.
    4. Bhadbhade, Navdeep & Yilmaz, Selin & Zuberi, Jibran S. & Eichhammer, Wolfgang & Patel, Martin K., 2020. "The evolution of energy efficiency in Switzerland in the period 2000–2016," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    5. Salvatori, Simone & Benedetti, Miriam & Bonfà, Francesca & Introna, Vito & Ubertini, Stefano, 2018. "Inter-sectorial benchmarking of compressed air generation energy performance: Methodology based on real data gathering in large and energy-intensive industrial firms," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 266-280.
    6. Irjayanti Maya & Azis Anton Mulyono, 2021. "Quality Management for Leather Industry to Increase Competitiveness in the Global Market," HOLISTICA – Journal of Business and Public Administration, Sciendo, vol. 12(2), pages 16-30, August.
    7. Wu, F. & Zhou, P. & Zhou, D.Q., 2020. "Modeling carbon emission performance under a new joint production technology with energy input," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    8. Zhou, Haibo & Yang, Yi & Chen, Yao & Zhu, Joe, 2018. "Data envelopment analysis application in sustainability: The origins, development and future directions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(1), pages 1-16.
    9. Md. Abdul Moktadir & Ashish Dwivedi & Akib Rahman & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour & Sanjoy Kumar Paul & Razia Sultana & Jitender Madaan, 2020. "An investigation of key performance indicators for operational excellence towards sustainability in the leather products industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3331-3351, December.
    10. Colla, Martin & Ioannou, Anastasia & Falcone, Gioia, 2020. "Critical review of competitiveness indicators for energy projects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    11. Wu, F. & Wang, S.Y. & Zhou, P., 2023. "Marginal abatement cost of carbon dioxide emissions: The role of abatement options," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 310(2), pages 891-901.
    12. Benedetti, Miriam & Bonfa', Francesca & Bertini, Ilaria & Introna, Vito & Ubertini, Stefano, 2018. "Explorative study on Compressed Air Systems’ energy efficiency in production and use: First steps towards the creation of a benchmarking system for large and energy-intensive industrial firms," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 227(C), pages 436-448.
    13. Wang, Ning & Wen, Zongguo & Liu, Mingqi & Guo, Jie, 2016. "Constructing an energy efficiency benchmarking system for coal production," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 301-308.
    14. Luthra, Sunil & Mangla, Sachin Kumar & Kharb, Ravinder K., 2015. "Sustainable assessment in energy planning and management in Indian perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 58-73.
    15. Vaisi, Salah & Varmazyari, Pouya & Esfandiari, Masoud & Sharbaf, Sara A., 2023. "Developing a multi-level energy benchmarking and certification system for office buildings in a cold climate region," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 336(C).
    16. Li, Ming-Jia & Tao, Wen-Quan, 2017. "Review of methodologies and polices for evaluation of energy efficiency in high energy-consuming industry," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 203-215.
    17. Walker, Shalika & Katic, Katarina & Maassen, Wim & Zeiler, Wim, 2019. "Multi-criteria feasibility assessment of cost-optimized alternatives to comply with heating demand of existing office buildings – A case study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    18. Yilan, Gülşah & Kadirgan, M.A. Neşet & Çiftçioğlu, Gökçen A., 2020. "Analysis of electricity generation options for sustainable energy decision making: The case of Turkey," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 519-529.
    19. Axel Lindfors & Roozbeh Feiz & Mats Eklund & Jonas Ammenberg, 2019. "Assessing the Potential, Performance and Feasibility of Urban Solutions: Methodological Considerations and Learnings from Biogas Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-20, July.
    20. Goh, Tian & Ang, B.W., 2020. "Four reasons why there is so much confusion about energy efficiency," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).

    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:gam:jcltec:v:5:y:2023:i:1:p:10-189:d:1052886. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.