Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGibon, Thomas
dc.contributor.authorArvesen, Anders
dc.contributor.authorHertwich, Edgar G.
dc.date.accessioned2017-11-20T16:17:35Z
dc.date.available2017-11-20T16:17:35Z
dc.date.created2017-04-09T14:44:45Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.citationRenewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2017, 76 1283-1290.nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn1364-0321
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2467220
dc.description.abstractThe targeted transition towards an electricity system with low or even negative greenhouse gas emissions affords a chance to address other environmental concerns as well, but may potentially have to adjust to the limited availability of assorted non-fossil resources. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is widely recognized as a method appropriate to assess and compare product systems taking into account a wide range of environmental impacts. Yet, LCA could not inform the latest assessment of co-benefits and trade-offs of climate change mitigation by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change due to the lack of comparative assessments of different electricity generation technologies addressing a wide range of environmental impacts and using a consistent set of methods. This paper contributes to filling this gap. A consistent set of life cycle inventories of a wide range of electricity generation technologies is assessed using the Recipe midpoint methods. The life-cycle inventory modeling addresses the production and deployment of the technologies in nine different regions. The analysis shows that even though low-carbon power requires a larger amount of metals than conventional fossil power, renewable and nuclear power leads to a reduction of a wide range of environmental impacts, while CO2 capture and storage leads to increased non-GHG impacts. Biomass has relatively modest co-benefits, if at all. The manufacturing of low-carbon technologies is important compared to their operation, indicating that it is important to choose the most desirable technologies from the outset.nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.publisherElseviernb_NO
dc.relation.urihttp://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.078.
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleLife cycle assessment demonstrates environmental co-benefits and trade-offs of low-carbon electricity supply optionsnb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.description.versionacceptedVersionnb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber1283-1290nb_NO
dc.source.volume76nb_NO
dc.source.journalRenewable & Sustainable Energy Reviewsnb_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.078
dc.identifier.cristin1464575
dc.relation.projectNorges forskningsråd: 209697nb_NO
dc.description.localcode© 2017. This is the authors’ accepted and refereed manuscript to the article. LOCKED until 3.4.2019 due to copyright restrictions. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/nb_NO
cristin.unitcode194,64,25,0
cristin.unitnameInstitutt for energi- og prosessteknikk
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextpostprint
cristin.qualitycode1


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internasjonal