XA9846088
LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS OF PHOTOVOLTAIC CELL AND WIND POWER PLANTS
Yohji UCHIYAMA
Socioeconomic Research Center
Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry
Tokyo, Japan
Abstract
The paper presents life cycle analyses of net energy and CO 2 emissions on photovoltaic cell
and wind power generation plants. Energy requirements associated with a plant are estimated
for producing materials, manufacturing equipments, constructing facilities, and operating plants.
Energy ratio and net supplied energy are calculated by the process energy analysis that
examines the entire energy inventory of input and output during life time of a plant. Life
cycle CO 2 emission can also be calculated from the energy requirements obtained by the net
energy analysis. The emission also includes greenhouse effect equivalent to CO 2 emission of
methane gas leakage at a mining as well as CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion during
generating electricity, natural gas treatment at an extracting well and cement production in
industry. The commercially available and future-commercial technologies are dealt with in
the study. Regarding PV technologies, two different kinds of installation are investigated;
roof-top typed installation of residential houses and ground installation of electric utilities.
I. INTRODUCTION
Life cycle analysis is a tool that can be used to evaluate the environmental effects of a
product, process, or activity. The methodology is similar to the net energy analysis that was
popular twenty years ago. Where there are several variations, life cycle analysis is in theory
based on entire inventory of all energy and materials associated with a system or process in
order to estimate the environmental emissions such as CO -, , NOx, SOx, COD, BOD, etc.
In this study we focus on the life cycle inventory (LCI) of energy and CO2 for different
types of electricity generating technologies. The LCI quantifies the resource use, energy use,
and CO, releases associated with the system being evaluated. Energy and material
requirements are estimated in the process analysis on a 'cradle-to grave' basis for all stages of
plant construction and operation & maintenance.
We developed a methodology of life cycle analysis to evaluate energy consumption and
GHG emissions from the total electricity supply system including scope ranges from extraction
of energy resources through processing, power generation, transmission and distribution, to
dismantling of facilities and disposal of waste. We have already reported on net energy
analysis and CO 2 emissions of various electricity supply technologies [1],[2],[3]. This paper,
based on the above reports, has made further analysis to evaluate the effect of electricity
generating technologies of solar and wind energy. Amounts of CO 2 gas indirectly emitted from
constructing and operating solar and wind power plants are investigated in order to make the
effects of environmental technologies visible.
2. METHODOLOGY
2-1 Net energy analysis and energy payback time
Life cycle inventory analysis is one of the useful methods to analyze greenhouse gas
emissions from an energy supply system. The life cycle analysis in this study is the process
analysis based on a bottom-up process approach in which each energy system has been
subdivided into energy chain processes of fuel extraction, transportation, treatment, conversion
and waste disposal. The input energy is the total life cycle energy, i.e. the sum of the
construction including materials and equipments production, and the operation energy
consumed in all processes of the system. Regarding a renewable energy technology which
doesn't need to supply any fossil fuels to generate electricity, a power plant is only a process
to be investigated. The output energy is the total amount of electricity produced by the
system or supplied to consumers during the plant life.
Energy ratio is defined as the electrical output divided by the equivalent electrical input
during a plant life:
Energy ratio = O U T / ( I N t / a + INe)
where OUT is the electrical output, INt is the thermal input, INe is the electrical input, and a
is the conversion factor of electricity to primary energy(9.42 MJ/kWh).
Net supplied electricity is defined by subtracting the equivalent electrical input from the
electrical output during life time:
Net supplied electricity = O U T - ( I N t / a 4- INe)
Energy payback time is also calculated by the results of net energy analysis.
It is defined by the following equation.
Energy payback time = INeq./(OUTa X a — INa.op.)
where INeq. is the initial energy input required for producing raw materials, manufacturing
equipments and constructing a plant, OUTa is the annual electrical output, and INa.op. is the
annual energy input at operating and maintaining a plant.
2-2 Analysis of greenhouse gas emission
Based on net energy analysis, the life cycle CO 2 emission can be derived from the indirect
emissions associated with the energy consumed for construction and O&M of the electricity
supply system as well as the direct emissions from combustion of fossil fuel fired power plants.
The study also includes the CO, equivalent methane gas leakages at coal or natural gas mining
and the CO 2 emissions from the cement production. Potential impacts on greenhouse effect
from methane gas is 21 times larger than from CO 2 gas as the global warming potential
estimated from a time horizon of 100 years. The greenhouse effect of an electricity supply
system is expressed in terms of the CO 2 emission factor calculated by the following equation:
The CO 2 emission factor = (El + E2 + E3 + E4)/Out
where El + E2 + E3 + E4 is the total CO 2 emission from an electricity supply system during
the plant life, El is the direct emission from fossil fuel combustion at a power plant, E2 is the
indirect emission from construction and O&M. E3 is the indirect emission from cement
production, and E4 is the equivalent CO 2 emission from methane leakage. El is eliminated
from the analysis of renewable energy technologies.
3. RESULTS OF THE STUDY
3-1 Photovoltaic Cell Technologies
Energy requirements and CO 2 emissions of PV power plant are investigated on advanced
technologies expected to commercialize in the future. The process analysis approach is used for
analyzing two different PV technologies; polycrystalline silicon(p-Si) and amorphous silicons-
Si). In the study both technologies would be installed not only as roof materials on residential
roof but also as a large scale of power sources of electric utilities setting on the ground.
Total energy required for producing a PV technology includes some process energy
consumed by different industrial sectors such as materials production, equipment
manufacturing, transportation, and services. It seems that the consumed energy of materials
production is dominant among total energy consumed for material intensive products in
industry. However the amount of energy consumption in other processes is not ignored for
them.
What is evident on comparing direct and indirect CO, emissions from products of over 400
different sectors in the Japanese input/output table is that a CO 2 emission ratio of materials
production increases for materials intensive products such as food product machine, steel ship,
pump, compressor, etc.. In the attached figure A-l the ratio of CO 2 emission shows a
maximum value of 67 percent for a food product machine, 52 percent for a passenger car, and
23 percent for a semiconductor [4]. In general the value tends to increase for products with
highly additional value.
The energy requirements and CO 2 emission of PV technologies need to be derived on
different processes as shown in the following levels:
- silicon production
- cell foundation
- cell manufacture
- module production
- transportation of equipments and materials
- site materials and construction
- operation and maintenance
The energy requirements for decommissioning of the plant after its lifetime is not considered
in the study because of the limited information. Regarding the roof-top installation, energy
requirements for transportation, site construction and O&M are not included into the
calculation because a PV module is dealt with a part of roof materials.
A PV module consists of aluminum frame and a large number of solar cells which are
highly electricity-intensive materials. If advanced technologies to product thinner silicon cell
with high efficiency are developed, energy ratio and CO 2 emission factor could be highly
improved. Table I gives R&D targets of cell performance in Japan. Solar cell is produced
by polycrystal silicon for PV-1 to PV-3 and amorphous silicon for PV-4. The yearly
production of cell is assumed to reaches 10 MW for PV-1 and I GW for PV-2 to PV-4[5].
Cell efficiency is estimated to 17 percent of the conventional value for PV-1, 20 percent for
PV-2 and PV-3 and 12.6 percent for PV-4. Cell thickness of PV-3 is 150 n m, half of the
conventional one. In the table we also show the performance of the conventional PV
technology used in the investigation of the previous report[3].
TABLE I EVALUATED PV POWER TECHNOLOGIES
PV-1 PV-2 PV-3 PV-4 Conventional
Type of cell polycrystal polycrystal polycrystal amorphous polycrystal
Cell production[MW/y] 10 1,000 1,000 1,000 5
Cell efficiency[%] 17 20 20 12.6 17
Cell thickness[/z m] 300 300 150 0.3 300
System efficiency[%] 10 13 13 8.6 10
Material loss of silicon from the process of silicon ingot to module production is estimated to
74 percent for polycrystal silicon cell. The entire processes of silicon cell consumes primary
energy of 166.0 Gcal/ton for the polycrystal silicon of PV-1 which is produced by the advanced
cell production system to reduce the energy consumption of production processes. The energy
consumption of PV-1 is less than one third of 562.5 Gcal/ton for the conventional technology of
the previous report[3].
Life cycle energy consumption of PV-1 and its distribution ratio of processes are indicated in
the table II with comparison of the conventional technology. Energy requirement for
producing materials occupies the majority of the life cycle energy. Total energy of PV-1 is
highly improved by the advanced technology of cell production. In succession of materials
production O&M and equipments manufacturing share 21 and 19 percents of the total energy,
respectively.
TABLE II Life Cycle Energy Requirement of 1 MW PV system
Total Energy Distribution ratio of Processes [%]
[Gcal/y] Material Manufacture Constr. Transport. O&M
Conventional 1,107 61.9 11.3 3.0 0.7 23.1
PV-I 572 51.3 18.6 5.9 2.9 21.4
Based on the above performance in Table I , we estimated entire material and energy
requirements for different types of PV systems during lifetime of 30 years. The results are
indicated in Table HI for I MW PV plant of electric utility installation, and in Table IV for 3
kW plant of roof-top installation in residential houses. It is shown that the advanced
technologies of mass cell production can contribute to reduce the amount of material
requirements as well as energy consumption. Although development of amorphous silicon
cell is effective to reduce an amount of silicon which is one of the most energy intensive
materials, it still requires a large amount of steel, aluminum and cement of frame and base
materials because of lower cell efficiency.
TABLE El MATERIALS AND ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FOR MANUFACTURE &
CONSTRUCTION OF 1 MW PHOTOVOLTAIC CELL POWER PLANT
DURING LIFE OF 30 YEARS ( Utility installation )
PV-1 PV-2 PV-3 PV-4 Conventional
MATERIALS [ton/MW]
Steel 520 401.1 401.1 603.95 520
Aluminum 19 9.8 9.8 14.86 20
Copper 53.9 42.2 42.2 62.21 56
Cement 250 192.3 192.2 290.75 250
Glass 79.8 38.5 38.5 64.61 60
Insulation 32 25.1 25.1 36.89 47
Silicon 10.6 7.3 3.6 25
SiH4 0.05
TMT 0.35
Oxygen gas 1.15
Nitrogen gas 30.21
Hydrogen gas 0.01
EVA 6.33
Butyl rubber 1.1 0.8 0.8 1.28
Caulk 10.9 8.4 8.4
Tedra(PVF) 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.74
ENERGY (manufacturing, transportation and construction)
Electricity[MWh] 1,359 1,047 973 925.8 1695
Coal [ton] 33 24 22 31.78 29
Oil [ton] 145 108 96 126.2 100
TABLE IV MATERIALS AND ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FOR MANUFACTURE &
CONSTRUCTION OF ROOF-TOP PV POWER PLANT
DURING LIFE OF 30 YEARS ( Roof-top installation: Scale of 1 MW )
PV-1 PV-2 PV-3 PV-4
MATERIALS [ton/MW]
Steel 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Aluminum 19.0 9.8 9.8 14.86
Copper 53.9 42.2 42.2 62.21
Glass 79.8 38.5 38.5 64.61
Insulation 32.0 25.1 25.1 36.89
Silicon 10.6 7.3 3.6
SiH4 0.05
TMT 0.35
Oxygen gas 1.15
Nitrogen gas 30.21
Hydrogen gas 0.01
EVA 6.33
Butyl rubber 1.1 0.8 0.8 1.28
Caulk 10.9 8.4 8.4
Tedra(PVF) 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.74
ENERGY (manufacturing, transportation and construction)
Electricity[MWh] 743 492 418 210.56
Coal [ton] 10 10 9 5.65
Oil [ton] 56 39 27 22.72
Regarding the roof-top installation in which PV modules are used as roof materials,
amorphous silicon technologies can contribute highly to reduce amounts of material and energy
requirements. Higher cell efficiency of p-silicon can also reduce amounts of material and
energy in the processes of material production and plant construction.
Life cycle energy requirements can be calculated from the results of material and energy
requirements in the tables. Energy requirements as well as energy ratio, payback time and
C 0 2 emission factor are indicated for the utility installation and roof-top installation, in Table
V and VI, respectively.
TABLE V ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND CO2 EMISSIONS OF PV POWER
TECHNOLOGIES ( Utility installation )
PV-J PV-2 PV-3 PV-4 Conventional
Energy requirement
M, M & C [Gcal/y] 450.1 309.7 279.3 342.6 851.3
O & M [Gcal/y] 121.6 82.6 73.5 87.2 255.4
Total [Gcal/y] 571.7 392.3 352.7 429.9 1,106.7
Produced energy [Gcal/y] 2,809 2,809 2,809 2,809 2,809
(MWh/y) (1,248) (1,248) (1,248) (1,248) (1,248)
Energy ratio 4.91 7.16 7.96 6.53 2.54
Payback time[year] 5.03 3.41 3.06 3.78 10.0
CO2 emission factor
M, M & C [g-C/kWh] 27.22 19.25 17.72 23.05 40.64
O & M [g-C/kWh] 7.09 4.95 4.49 5.67 11.78
Total [g-C/kWh] 34.31 24.20 22.21 28.72 52.42
M, M & C: materials, manufacturing and construction
TABLE VI ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND CO2 EMISSIONS OF PV POWER
TECHNOLOGIES ( Roof-top installation .Scale of 1 MW)
PV-1 PV-2 PV-3 PV-4
Energy requirement
M, M & C [Gcal/y] 257.69 156.19 125.97 110.10
O & M [Gcal/y] 77.31 46.86 37.79 35.73
Total [Gcal/y] 335.00 203.05 163.76 154.82
Produced energy[Gcal/y] 2,956.50 2,956.50 2,956.50 2,956.50
Energy ratio 8.83 14.56 18.05 19.10
Payback timefyear] 2.69 1.61 1.29 1.13
CO2 emission factor
M, M & C [g-C/kWh] 12.32 7.69 6.26 6.17
O & M [g-C/kWh] 3.70 2.31 1.88 1.85
Total [g-C/kWh] 16.02 10.00 8.14 8.02
M. M & C: materials, manufacturing and construction
The energy ratio of a PV system can be improved in case of roof-top typed installation due
to eliminating fabrication of PV module frames and site construction. Development of new
ffi
silicon cell with high performance could also make the energy ratio increase. The value is
approximately twice larger than that of the conventional PV system.
Table V and VI also present the results of CO 2 emissions per unit of kWh, including the
methane leakages, for conventional electricity generation systems. The CO 2 emission factor
of PV system can be improved if higher efficient PV cell may be developed. As shown in the
table, advanced PV cell such as thinner silicon cell and amorphous silicon cell with higher
efficiency could make the CO, emission factor reduced up to half of that of the conventional
one in case of roof-top typed installation.
3-2 Wind Power Generation Technology
In the previous study[ref.3] we investigated life cycle analysis of conventional wind power
generation plant which was constructed as a demonstration plant in Japan 12 years ago.
Recent progress of PV technologies is so rapid that its performance characteristic has been
improved year by year. We tried to calculate energy ratio and CO, emission factor again for
advanced wind technologies installed in recent years. Table W shows improved performance
of Japanese wind machines produced by the Mitubishi Heavy Industry and of Danish one
produced by the MICON, and their annual capacity factors when they are installed at the best
area of wind flow in Japan.
TABLE VH EVALUATED WIND POWER TECHNOLOGIES
Mitubishi-1 Mitubishi-2 MICON Demo. plant[ref.3]
Power outputfkW] 300 170/50 400/100 100
Rotor diameter[m] 28 27 31 30
Generator type Asynchronous Asynchronous Asynchronous Asynchronous
(single-speed) (2-speed) (2-speed) (single-speed)
Capacity factor[%] 20 25 20 20
We investigated amounts of material requirements for different types of wind machines
based on the above technological performance of the table. Table VD1 indicates the results of
material requirements for main components and civil work. It is found that recent progress of
wind technologies makes total weight of main components reduce by the effort of design
improvement. Regarding construction materials required for civil work, amounts of concrete
and steel have also large change in material requirements between conventional and advanced
technologies; total weight of construction materials for advanced technologies is less by more
20 % than of the conventional one.
TABLE VID MATERIALS REQUIREMENTS OF WIND POWER TECHNOLOGIES
unit: ton
Mitubishi-1 Mitubishi-2 MICON Demo. plant[ref.3]
Blade 3.15 3.15 3.80 4.2
Nacelle 14.93 14.65 9.21 18.2
Tower 19.60 20.93 21.60 27.0
Generator, etc. 5.93 2.10 5.65 11.6
cement 42 42 41 50
steel 20 20 20 24
stone & sand 289 289 280 345
Total 394.6 388.7 381.3 480.0
Based on the performance characteristics in Table VII and material requirements in
Table VI, life cycle energy requirements, energy ratio and CO 2 emission factor can be
calculated as shown in the table DC. The advanced technology is effective to improve
energy ratio and CO 2 emission factor of wind power plant. The reduction rate is
larger than that of PV plant. Energy payback time of wind technology is less than a
year for Mitubishi-1 and MICON machines. Net energy ratio can be improved by
advanced technologies with higher performance characteristics. They can also reduce
CO 2 emission factor of power generation plants. The emission factors of the advanced
technologies are from one third to one fifth of the conventional value of demonstration
plant.
TABLE IX ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND CO2 EMISSIONS OF WIND
TECHNOLOGIES
Mitubishi-1 Mitubishi-2 MICON Demo, plant
Energy requirement
M, M & C [Gcal/y] 33.87 33.60 32.47 39.83
O & M [Gcal/y] 14.26 15.60 15.06 22.0
Total [Gcal/y] 48.14 49.20 47.53 61.8
Produced energy[Gcal/y] 1,064 754 1,419 355
Energy ratio 22.1 15.3 29.9 5.7
Payback time[year] 0.98 1.37 0.69 3.59
CO, emission factor
M, M & C [g-C/kWh] 6.99 9.19 4.68 22.63
O & M [g-C/kWh] 2.51 3.73 1.89 11.11
Total [g-C/kWh] 9.51 12.92 6.56 33.74
4. CONCLUSION
The study presents life cycle analysis of net energy, energy payback time and CO 2
emissions from PV and wind power generation technologies in Japan. Materials production,
manufacturing of equipments and site construction are evaluated as well as operation and
maintenance of plant facilities. Direct and indirect CO 2 emissions from life cycle of a plant are
analyzed with the process analysis. Both conventional and advanced generation technologies
of PV and wind energy are investigated in the study. The results of the comparative
assessment on different generation technologies can be summarized as follows:
(1) It is found that advanced PV technologies make net energy ratio improve by 30 to 40 % for
the utility installation and 65 to 110 % for the rooftop installation of residential houses.
In case of wind power plants, advanced technologies can achieve the large improvement of
energy ratio by 170 to 400 % of the demonstration plant.
(2) Energy payback time of PV technologies is 3.06 to 3.78 for the utility installation and 1.13
to 2.69 for the rooftop type. Advanced wind technologies can improve energy payback
time by 0.69 to 1.37 but cannot achieve the best value of 0.01 for fossil fuel fired and
nuclear plants as shown in the attached figure A-2.
(3) The CO 2 emission per unit of kWh of PV and wind technologies is much lower than that
of fossil fuel fired power plants. It is clear that PV and wind technologies can contribute
to improve CO2 emission factor of average electricity if they are installed into the national
electricity grid. The CO, emission factor can be reduced by developing advanced PV or
wind technologies. The factor of PV is reduced by 18 to 35 % for the utility installation
and 35 to 50 % for the roof-top type. Regarding the advanced wind machines higher
improvement can be expected ; the factor is improved by 60 to 80 % with comparing the
value of the demonstration plant.
References
[ 1 JUchiyama, Y., Yamamoto, H., "Energy analysis of power generation plants", CRIEPI, Rep.
No.Y90015(1991)
[2]L)chiyama, Y., Yamamoto, H., "Greenhouse effect analysis of power generation plants",
CRIEPI, Rep. No.Y91005(1992)
[3]Uchiyama, Y.,"Life cycle analysis on net energy, CO2 emission and environmental cost of
power generation plants", JASME-ASME international conference on power engineering
93(1993)
[4]Hondo,H., Nishimura,K., Uchiyama,Y.,"Derivation
[5]"Evaluation of Photovoltaic Cell Power Generation Technologies", the Society
of Chemical Engineering in Japan,( 1993.3)
(
60% k
*"~ •© — OL
50% - Material ^—a
y
40% -
p \* ; /
30% - ** • ^ * 1
* W * A|
Manufacture * * * V* ^
* * • • •/ *
n • vtf»
20% I* * •x *% • to i • •« '
0
• >
Transportation
/ • \ „ A/ \\£ '
v//B\'
4
i
10%'
•••" v
ft*
| I I I I 1
be
s I J I I I .1 1 I tt « e 0 a
eg
11 * 1 1 111 1 1a 1' 11 I j
I
a
B
a
•a
44
CO
23
1 I 1! I 1 •a
CO
a
5
I i I u
J
3 H §
a
I
FIGURE A-1 CO2 EMISSION RATE OF DIFFERENT PROCESSES
FOR COMMODITIES
fZP
FIGURE A-2 ENERGY PAYBACK TIME OF
DIFFERENT POWER GENERATION PLANTS
Plant Payback Time Plant Payback time
|year| [year]
Oil 0.09 PV (Utility)
LNG 0.09 Conventional 5.03
Coal 0.15 p.silicon(20%) 3.41
Nuclear(LWR) 0.11 p.silicon(150 p.) 3.06
Hydro 0.59 amorphous 3.78
Geothermal 3.39 PV (Roof-top)
OTEC 4.58 Conventional 2.69
Solar thermal 5.61 p.silicon(20%) 1.61
Wind p.silicon(150 n) 1.29
Conventional 3.59 amorphous 1.13
MHI-1 0.98
MHI-2 1.37
MICON 0.69
