IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v18y2025i11p2898-d1669736.html

Life Cycle Assessment of Electro-Submersible Pump Systems: Carbon Footprint Mitigation Using Improved Downhole Technology

Author

Listed:
  • Manolo Córdova-Suárez

    (Industrial Engineering, Universidad Nacional de Chimborazo, Av. Antonio José de Sucre, Riobamba 060108, Ecuador
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Juan Córdova-Suárez

    (Engineering Department, Baker Hughes, Quito OE4-360, Ecuador
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Ricardo Teves

    (Engineering Department, Baker Hughes, Quito OE4-360, Ecuador)

  • Enrique Barreno-Ávila

    (Faculty of Design and Architecture, Universidad Técnica de Ambato, Av. Los Chasquis & Río Payamino 12, Ambato 180150, Ecuador)

  • Fabian Silva-Frey

    (Industrial Engineering, Universidad Nacional de Chimborazo, Av. Antonio José de Sucre, Riobamba 060108, Ecuador)

Abstract

Climate change has driven global awareness of environmental issues, leading to the adoption of clean technologies aimed at reducing Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. An effective method to assess environmental mitigation is the quantification of the Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) in the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of production processes. In the oil extraction industry, artificial lift systems use electro submersible pumps (ESPs) that can now incorporate new operating principles based on permanent magnet motors (PMMs) and CanSystem (CS) as an alternative to traditional normal induction motors (NIMs) and can help lower the carbon footprint. This study compares the PCF of ESPs equipped with PMMs and CS versus NIMs, using LCA methodologies in accordance with ISO 14067:2018 for defining the Functional Unit (FU) and ISO 14064-1:2019 to calculate the GHG inventory and the amount of CO 2 equivalent per year. The analysis spans five key stages and 14 related activities. For ESPs with NIMs, this study calculated 999.9 kg of raw materials, 1491.66 kW/h for manufacturing and storage, and 5.77 × 10 4 kW/h for use. In contrast, ESPs with PMMs and CS required 656 kg of raw materials and consumed 4.44 × 10 4 kW/h during use, resulting in an 23% reduction in energy consumption. This contributed to an 21.9% decrease in the PCF. The findings suggest that PMMs and CS offer a sustainable solution for reducing GHG emissions in oil extraction processes globally.

Suggested Citation

  • Manolo Córdova-Suárez & Juan Córdova-Suárez & Ricardo Teves & Enrique Barreno-Ávila & Fabian Silva-Frey, 2025. "Life Cycle Assessment of Electro-Submersible Pump Systems: Carbon Footprint Mitigation Using Improved Downhole Technology," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-10, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:11:p:2898-:d:1669736
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/11/2898/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/11/2898/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matthew J. Gidden & Thomas Gasser & Giacomo Grassi & Nicklas Forsell & Iris Janssens & William F. Lamb & Jan Minx & Zebedee Nicholls & Jan Steinhauser & Keywan Riahi, 2023. "Aligning climate scenarios to emissions inventories shifts global benchmarks," Nature, Nature, vol. 624(7990), pages 102-108, December.
    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. Yue He & Shilong Piao & Philippe Ciais & Hao Xu & Thomas Gasser, 2024. "Future land carbon removals in China consistent with national inventory," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Magerl, Andreas & Erb, Karl-Heinz & Lauk, Christian & Roux, Nicolas & Gingrich, Simone, 2025. "Is decoupling enough to achieve the U.S. climate targets for agriculture and forestry? Historical greenhouse gas and biomass fluxes from AFOLU sector production in the United States, 1910–2022," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 238(C).
    3. Konstantin Weber & Cyril Brunner & Reto Knutti, 2026. "Tracking country-level mitigation progress using NGHGI-consistent carbon budgets," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 17(1), pages 1-14, December.
    4. Lea Dorgeist & Clemens Schwingshackl & Selma Bultan & Julia Pongratz, 2024. "A consistent budgeting of terrestrial carbon fluxes," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    5. Anne Merfort & Jessica Strefler & Gabriel Abrahão & Nico Bauer & Tabea Dorndorf & Elmar Kriegler & Gunnar Luderer & Leon Merfort & Ottmar Edenhofer, 2025. "Separating CO2 emission from removal targets comes with limited cost impacts," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 16(1), pages 1-10, December.
    6. Thaller, Lotta & Harding, Anthony & Saldivia Gonzatti, Ignacio & Schwingshackl, Clemens & O'Sullivan, Michael & Pongratz, Julia & Rickels, Wilfried, 2026. "Country social cost of carbon estimates and their application to assess the natural land sink," Kiel Working Papers 2316, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    7. Zhu, Bing & Hu, Simon & Chen, Xiqun (Michael) & Roncoli, Claudio & Lee, Der-Horng, 2024. "Uncovering driving factors and spatiotemporal patterns of urban passenger car CO2 emissions: A case study in Hangzhou, China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 375(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:11:p:2898-:d:1669736. 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.