Systems Analysis Unit, IMDEA Energy. 28935 Móstoles, Spain; Chemical and Environmental Engineering Group, Rey Juan Carlos University, 28933 Móstoles, Spain.
Systems Analysis Unit, IMDEA Energy. 28935 Móstoles, Spain.
Sci Total Environ. 2019 Feb 10;650(Pt 1):1465-1475. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.089. Epub 2018 Sep 8.
Hydrogen is a key product for the decarbonisation of the energy sector. Nevertheless, because of the high number of technical options available for hydrogen production, their suitability needs to be thoroughly evaluated from a life-cycle perspective. The standardised concept of eco-efficiency is suitable for this purpose since it relates, with a life-cycle perspective, the environmental performance of a product system to its value. Hence, this work benchmarks the eco-efficiency performance of renewable hydrogen produced through biomass gasification against conventional hydrogen from the steam reforming of natural gas. For the eco-efficiency assessment, the harmonised environmental indicators of global warming, acidification and cumulative non-renewable energy demand were individually used, while the product system value was based on the levelised cost of hydrogen with/without internalisation of the external socio-environmental costs associated with climate change and human health. On the one hand, when the environmental and economic performances are separately considered, hydrogen from biomass gasification performs significantly better than hydrogen from steam methane reforming under environmental aspects (e.g., greenhouse gas emissions saving of 98%), whereas the opposite conclusion was found from an economic standpoint (levelised cost of 3.59 € and 2.17 € per kilogramme of renewable and fossil hydrogen, respectively). On the other hand, when combining life-cycle environmental and economic indicators under the umbrella of the eco-efficiency assessment, it is concluded that the renewable hydrogen option outperforms the conventional one, which is further remarked when implementing socio-environmental externalities. In this regard, a relative eco-efficiency score above 14 was estimated for the renewable hydrogen option when benchmarked against conventional hydrogen.
氢气是能源部门脱碳的关键产品。然而,由于可供选择的制氢技术很多,因此需要从生命周期的角度对其适用性进行彻底评估。标准化的生态效率概念适用于此目的,因为它从生命周期的角度将产品系统的环境绩效与其价值联系起来。因此,这项工作将生物质气化生产的可再生氢气的生态效率与传统的天然气蒸汽重整制氢进行了基准比较。在生态效率评估中,分别使用了全球变暖、酸化和累积不可再生能源需求等综合环境指标,而产品系统的价值则基于氢气的平准化成本,其中包括与气候变化和人类健康相关的外部社会环境成本的内部化。一方面,当分别考虑环境和经济绩效时,生物质气化制氢在环境方面的表现明显优于蒸汽甲烷重整制氢(例如,温室气体排放减少 98%),而从经济角度来看,则得出相反的结论(可再生和化石氢气的平准化成本分别为 3.59 欧元和 2.17 欧元/公斤)。另一方面,当在生态效率评估的框架下将生命周期的环境和经济指标结合起来时,可再生氢气的选择优于传统氢气,而当实施社会环境外部性时,这一结论更加明显。在这方面,与传统氢气相比,可再生氢气的相对生态效率得分估计在 14 以上。