(433a) Life Cycle Analysis and Techno-Economic Analysis Tools to Evaluate Carbon Conversion Technologies

Conversion of captured carbon dioxide (CO₂) emitted from power and industrial sources into environmentally responsible and economically valuable products can reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and enable the achievement of a decarbonized economy by 2050. Rigorous and structured technology analysis, such as life cycle- and technoeconomic analysis, are crucial to determining these technologies’ potential role in decarbonization. Life cycle assessment/analysis (LCA) as a tool and framework can help to determine the potential environmental impacts and carbon footprint of conversion technologies and evaluate policy options from a consistent and unbiased viewpoint. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the federal government are increasingly requiring LCA as a condition for funding primary research, grant programs such as Utilization Procurement Grants (UPGrants) for eligible entities to procure and use carbon conversion products, and tax incentives such as “45Q” for carbon oxide utilization projects (Treasury Regulations Section 1.45Q-4 (26 C.F.R. § 1.45Q-4), 2021).

The DOE National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) has developed a CO2U LCA Toolkit to support the creation of useful and consistent LCAs of carbon conversion projects funded by the DOE Carbon Dioxide Conversion Program and specific addenda to support the development of LCAs for UPGrants and 45Q. The toolkit has also been used to guide a wider audience outside the Carbon Conversion Program in conducting LCAs on carbon conversion systems and advance the global discussion on carbon conversion LCA. The Toolkit includes LCA guidance, life cycle inventory data, and other relevant tools to perform LCAs of both emerging and existing carbon conversion technologies and enable users to compare different products/pathways in terms of environmental performance. The guidance document should be considered a companion to the requirements established in ISO 14040/14044, providing specific guidance on methodological issues for scoping and completing the LCA. The guidance, data, and tools are publicly available and free.

Techno-economic analysis (TEA) can supplement LCA by assessing the technical and economic performance of conversion technologies as compared to established pathways. Recently, NETL has developed a CO2U TEA Toolkit to enable users to create useful and consistent TEAs of carbon conversion technologies. The toolkit includes TEA guidance for carbon conversion studies, example TEAs of established carbon conversion pathways, training videos to support TEA development, a spreadsheet tool to compare results from completed TEAs, a spreadsheet tool to support capital cost scaling, and other ancillary tools and templates. The guidance, data, and tools will be publicly available and free.

This presentation will provide an overview of both the LCA and TEA Toolkit, the utility of these tools to the LCA and TEA community, and the value of the toolkits in assessing emerging and existing carbon conversion technologies.

References:

Treasury Regulations Section 1.45Q-4 (26 C.F.R. § 1.45Q-4) (2021). Retrieved from https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/td-9944.pdf on November 18, 2021

Disclaimer: This project was funded by the Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory an agency of the United States Government, through a support contract. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of its employees, nor the support contractor, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressor implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.