• Energy Research
• Embargo close
• other engineering and technologies close
• NL close
• IT close
• EU close

In industrialized countries, large amounts of mineral wastes are produced. They are re-used in various ways, particularly in road and earth constructions, substituting primary resources such as gravel. However, they may also contain pollutants, such as heavy metals, which may be leached to the groundwater. The toxic impacts of these emissions are so far often neglected within Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) of products or waste treatment services and thus, potentially large environmental impacts are currently missed. This study aims at closing this gap by assessing the ecotoxic impacts of heavy metal leaching from industrial mineral wastes in road and earth constructions. The flows of metals such as Sb, As, Pb, Cd, Cr, Cu, Mo, Ni, V and Zn originating from three typical constructions to the environment are quantified, their fate in the environment is assessed and potential ecotoxic effects evaluated. For our reference country, Germany, the industrial wastes that are applied as Granular Secondary Construction Material (GSCM) carry more than 45,000 t of diverse heavy metals per year. Depending on the material quality and construction type applied, up to 150 t of heavy metals may leach to the environment within the first 100 years after construction. Heavy metal retardation in subsoil can potentially reduce the fate to groundwater by up to 100%. One major challenge of integrating leaching from constructions into macro-scale LCA frameworks is the high variability in micro-scale technical and geographical factors, such as material qualities, construction types and soil types. In our work, we consider a broad range of parameter values in the modeling of leaching and fate. This allows distinguishing between the impacts of various road constructions, as well as sites with different soil properties. The findings of this study promote the quantitative consideration of environmental impacts of long-term leaching in Life Cycle Assessment, complementing site-specific risk assessment, for the design of waste management strategies, particularly in the construction sector.

In industrialized countries, large amounts of mineral wastes are produced. They are re-used in various ways, particularly in road and earth constructions, substituting primary resources such as gravel. However, they may also contain pollutants, such as heavy metals, which may be leached to the groundwater. The toxic impacts of these emissions are so far often neglected within Life Cycle Assessments (LCA) of products or waste treatment services and thus, potentially large environmental impacts are currently missed. This study aims at closing this gap by assessing the ecotoxic impacts of heavy metal leaching from industrial mineral wastes in road and earth constructions. The flows of metals such as Sb, As, Pb, Cd, Cr, Cu, Mo, Ni, V and Zn originating from three typical constructions to the environment are quantified, their fate in the environment is assessed and potential ecotoxic effects evaluated. For our reference country, Germany, the industrial wastes that are applied as Granular Secondary Construction Material (GSCM) carry more than 45,000 t of diverse heavy metals per year. Depending on the material quality and construction type applied, up to 150 t of heavy metals may leach to the environment within the first 100 years after construction. Heavy metal retardation in subsoil can potentially reduce the fate to groundwater by up to 100%. One major challenge of integrating leaching from constructions into macro-scale LCA frameworks is the high variability in micro-scale technical and geographical factors, such as material qualities, construction types and soil types. In our work, we consider a broad range of parameter values in the modeling of leaching and fate. This allows distinguishing between the impacts of various road constructions, as well as sites with different soil properties. The findings of this study promote the quantitative consideration of environmental impacts of long-term leaching in Life Cycle Assessment, complementing site-specific risk assessment, for the design of waste management strategies, particularly in the construction sector.

Abstract As main contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, power and transportation are crucial sectors for energy system decarbonization. Their interaction is expected to increase significantly: plug-in electric vehicles add a new electric load, increasing grid demand and potentially requiring substantial grid upgrade; hydrogen production for fuel cell electric vehicles or for clean fuels synthesis could exploit the projected massive power overgeneration by intermittent and seasonally-dependent renewable sources via Power-to-Hydrogen. This work investigates the infrastructural needs involved with a broad diffusion of clean mobility, adopting a sector integration perspective at the national scale. The analysis combines a multi-node energy system balance simulation and a techno-economic assessment of the infrastructure to deliver energy vectors for mobility. The article explores the long-term case of Italy, considering a massive increase of renewable power generation capacity and investigating different mobility scenarios, where low-emission vehicles account for 50% of the stock. First, the model solves the energy balances, integrating the consumption related to mobility energy vectors and taking into account power grid constraints. Then, an optimal infrastructure is identified, composed of both a hydrogen delivery network and a widespread installation of charging points. Results show that the infrastructural requirements bring about investment costs in the range of 43–63 G€. Lower specific costs are associated with the exclusive presence of FCEVs, whereas the full reliance on BEVs leads to the most significant costs. Scenarios that combine FCEVs and BEVs lie in between, suggesting that the overall power + mobility system benefits from the presence of both drivetrain options.

Abstract As main contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, power and transportation are crucial sectors for energy system decarbonization. Their interaction is expected to increase significantly: plug-in electric vehicles add a new electric load, increasing grid demand and potentially requiring substantial grid upgrade; hydrogen production for fuel cell electric vehicles or for clean fuels synthesis could exploit the projected massive power overgeneration by intermittent and seasonally-dependent renewable sources via Power-to-Hydrogen. This work investigates the infrastructural needs involved with a broad diffusion of clean mobility, adopting a sector integration perspective at the national scale. The analysis combines a multi-node energy system balance simulation and a techno-economic assessment of the infrastructure to deliver energy vectors for mobility. The article explores the long-term case of Italy, considering a massive increase of renewable power generation capacity and investigating different mobility scenarios, where low-emission vehicles account for 50% of the stock. First, the model solves the energy balances, integrating the consumption related to mobility energy vectors and taking into account power grid constraints. Then, an optimal infrastructure is identified, composed of both a hydrogen delivery network and a widespread installation of charging points. Results show that the infrastructural requirements bring about investment costs in the range of 43–63 G€. Lower specific costs are associated with the exclusive presence of FCEVs, whereas the full reliance on BEVs leads to the most significant costs. Scenarios that combine FCEVs and BEVs lie in between, suggesting that the overall power + mobility system benefits from the presence of both drivetrain options.

AbstractThis study compared the economic and environmental impacts of torrefaction on bioenergy supply chains against conventional pellets for scenarios where biomass is produced in Mozambique, and undergoes pre‐processing before shipment to Rotterdam for conversion to power and Fischer‐Tropsch (FT) fuels. We also compared the impacts of using different land quality (productive and marginal) for feedstock production, feedstocks (eucalyptus and switchgrass), final conversion technologies (XtY and CXtY) and markets (the Netherlands and Mozambique). At current conditions, the torrefied pellets (TOPs) are delivered in Rotterdam at higher cost (7.3–7.5 $/GJ) than pellets (5.1–5.3 $/GJ). In the long term, TOPs costs could decline (4.7–5.8 $/GJ) and converge with pellets. TOPs supply chains also incur 20% lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than pellets. Due to improved logistics and lower conversion investment, fuel production costs from TOPs are lower (12.8–16.9 $/GJFT) than from pellets (12.9–18.7 $/GJFT). Co‐firing scenarios (CXtY) result in lower cost fuel (but a higher environmental penalty) than 100% biomass fired scenarios (XtY). In most cases, switchgrass and the productive region of Nampula provide the lowest fuel production cost compared to eucalyptus and the marginally productive Gaza region. Both FT and ion in Mozambique are more costly than in Rotterdam. For the Netherlands, both FT and power production are competitive against average energy costs in Western Europe. The analysis shows that large‐scale bioenergy production can become competitive against fossil fuels. While the benefits of TOPs are apparent in logistics and conversion, the current higher torrefaction costs contribute to higher biofuel costs. Improvements in torrefaction technology can result in significant performance improvements over the future chain. © 2013 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

AbstractThis study compared the economic and environmental impacts of torrefaction on bioenergy supply chains against conventional pellets for scenarios where biomass is produced in Mozambique, and undergoes pre‐processing before shipment to Rotterdam for conversion to power and Fischer‐Tropsch (FT) fuels. We also compared the impacts of using different land quality (productive and marginal) for feedstock production, feedstocks (eucalyptus and switchgrass), final conversion technologies (XtY and CXtY) and markets (the Netherlands and Mozambique). At current conditions, the torrefied pellets (TOPs) are delivered in Rotterdam at higher cost (7.3–7.5 $/GJ) than pellets (5.1–5.3 $/GJ). In the long term, TOPs costs could decline (4.7–5.8 $/GJ) and converge with pellets. TOPs supply chains also incur 20% lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than pellets. Due to improved logistics and lower conversion investment, fuel production costs from TOPs are lower (12.8–16.9 $/GJFT) than from pellets (12.9–18.7 $/GJFT). Co‐firing scenarios (CXtY) result in lower cost fuel (but a higher environmental penalty) than 100% biomass fired scenarios (XtY). In most cases, switchgrass and the productive region of Nampula provide the lowest fuel production cost compared to eucalyptus and the marginally productive Gaza region. Both FT and ion in Mozambique are more costly than in Rotterdam. For the Netherlands, both FT and power production are competitive against average energy costs in Western Europe. The analysis shows that large‐scale bioenergy production can become competitive against fossil fuels. While the benefits of TOPs are apparent in logistics and conversion, the current higher torrefaction costs contribute to higher biofuel costs. Improvements in torrefaction technology can result in significant performance improvements over the future chain. © 2013 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

The chemical and petrochemical sector is by far the largest industrial energy user, accounting for 30% of the industry's total final energy use. However, due to its complexity its energy efficiency potential is not well understood. This article analyses the energy efficiency potential on a country level if Best Practice Technologies (BPT) were implemented in chemical processes. Two approaches are applied and an improved dataset referring to Europe has been developed for BPT energy use. This methodology has been applied to 66 products in fifteen countries that represent 70% of chemical and petrochemical sector's energy use worldwide. The results suggest a global energy efficiency potential of 16% for this sector, excluding savings in electricity use and by higher levels of process integration, combined heat and power (CHP) and post-consumer plastic waste treatment. The results are more accurate than previous estimates. The results suggest significant differences between countries, but a cross-check based on two different methods shows that important methodological and data issues remain to be resolved. Further refinement is needed for target setting, monitoring and informing energy and climate negotiation processes. For the short and medium term, a combination of benchmarking and country level analysis is recommended.

The chemical and petrochemical sector is by far the largest industrial energy user, accounting for 30% of the industry's total final energy use. However, due to its complexity its energy efficiency potential is not well understood. This article analyses the energy efficiency potential on a country level if Best Practice Technologies (BPT) were implemented in chemical processes. Two approaches are applied and an improved dataset referring to Europe has been developed for BPT energy use. This methodology has been applied to 66 products in fifteen countries that represent 70% of chemical and petrochemical sector's energy use worldwide. The results suggest a global energy efficiency potential of 16% for this sector, excluding savings in electricity use and by higher levels of process integration, combined heat and power (CHP) and post-consumer plastic waste treatment. The results are more accurate than previous estimates. The results suggest significant differences between countries, but a cross-check based on two different methods shows that important methodological and data issues remain to be resolved. Further refinement is needed for target setting, monitoring and informing energy and climate negotiation processes. For the short and medium term, a combination of benchmarking and country level analysis is recommended.