IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

A constructive technology assessment of stationary energy storage systems: prospective life cycle orientated analysis

  • Manuel Johann Baumann

    ()

    (ITAS, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology and IET/CESNOVA, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia)

Environmental concerns over the use of fossil fuels and their resource constraints have increased the interest in generating electric energy from renewable energy sources (RES) to provide a sustainable electricity supply. A main problem of those technologies (wind or solar power generation) is that they are not constant and reliable sources of power. This results inter alia in an increased demand of energy storage technologies. Related stake holders show a big interest in the technical, economic and ecologic aspects of new emerging energy storage systems. This comes especially true for electrochemical energy storage systems as different Li-Ion batteries, Sodium Sulfur or Redox Flow batteries which can be utilized in all grid voltage levels, a wide range of grid applications as well as end user groups (e.g. private households, industry). A prospective and active Constructive Technology Assessment (CTA) can help to minimize potential mismatches, wrong investments, possible social conflicts, and environmental impacts of new energy storage technologies in an early development stage. It is insufficient to exclusively look at the operation phase to assess a technology. Such an approach can lead to misleading interpretations and can furthermore disregard social or ecological impact factors over the whole life cycle. Different energy storage technologies have to be evaluated in a prospective manner with a full integrated sustainability and life cycle approach to form a base for decision making and to support technology developers in order to allow distinctions between more or less sustainable battery technology variations. Therefore CTA is used as a scientific approach using several “neighbouring” engineering orientated disciplines e.g. Life Cycle Analysis (LCA), Social Life Cycle Assessment (SLCA) or Life Cycle Costs (LCC) and their methodologies which were initially developed for other purposes.The aim of the presented PhD Thesis is to make an economic, technological and ecological comparison of Energy storage technologies based on a life cycle sustainability Analysis (LCSA), multi criteria Analysis (or evaluation) (MCA) and to develop a suitable LCSA-MCA model through a new combined highly interdisciplinary approach in frame of CTA.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10362/10858
File Function: First version, 2013
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Universidade Nova de Lisboa, IET/CICS.NOVA-Interdisciplinary Centre on Social Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology in its series IET Working Papers Series with number 01/2013.

as
in new window

Length: 29 pages
Date of creation: Jan 2013
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ieu:wpaper:50
Contact details of provider: Phone: 212948503 ext.10401
Fax: 212948326
Web page: http://www.cics.nova.fcsh.unl.pt/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is featured on the following reading lists or Wikipedia pages:

  1. Technology Assessment

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ieu:wpaper:50. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (António Brandão Moniz)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.