Life Cycle Analysis of Natural Gas Extraction and Power Generation

Littlefield, James; Augustine, D. Peter; Pegallapati, Ambica; Zaimes, George Ν.; Rai, Srijana; Cooney, Gregory J.

doi:10.2172/1529553

Cited by 15 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Well-to-city-gate LCA model of natural gas supply in China. In this study, the well-to-city-gate life-cycle assessment (LCA) model of natural gas supply was compiled by integrating efforts from the National Energy Technology Laboratory's modeling of natural gas extraction, processing, and transmission 20,21 with Argonne National Laboratory's GREET ® model for LNG storage, LNG shipping, and offsite generation of fuels and electricity 19 , as well as other studies on gas liquefaction 17,23,[34][35][36][37][38] , LNG regasification 38,39 , and model adjustments 7,9,23,26,[40][41][42][43][44] (see Supplementary Note 1 for details). The model applies field-specific inputs to empirical engineering modeling of each unit process (e.g., well drilling in the extraction stage, amine gas treatment in the gas processing stage, etc.)…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Significant differences in well-to-city-gate emissions occur between gas supplies from diverse sources with different characteristics 20,21 . These differences exist not only across countries or extraction techniques but also among individual fields with distinct geological conditions, raw gas composition, market distances, etc.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These differences exist not only across countries or extraction techniques but also among individual fields with distinct geological conditions, raw gas composition, market distances, etc. [20][21][22][23] . An engineering-based analysis considering the heterogeneity of individual fields is required to identify underlying drivers of the variability of emissions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Carbon footprint of global natural gas supplies to China

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As natural gas demand surges in China, driven by the coal-to-gas switching policy, widespread attention is focused on its impacts on global gas supply-demand rebalance and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Here, for the first time, we estimate well-to-city-gate GHG emissions of gas supplies for China, based on analyses of field-specific characteristics of 104 fields in 15 countries. Results show GHG intensities of supplies from 104 fields vary from 6.2 to 43.3 g CO 2 eq MJ −1 . Due to the increase of GHG-intensive gas supplies from Russia, Central Asia, and domestic shale gas fields, the supply-energy-weighted average GHG intensity is projected to increase from 21.7 in 2016 to 23.3 CO 2 eq MJ −1 in 2030, and total well-to-city-gate emissions of gas supplies are estimated to grow by~3 times. While securing gas supply is a top priority for the Chinese government, decreasing GHG intensity should be considered in meeting its commitment to emission reductions.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Carbon footprint of global natural gas supplies to China

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This database includes the processes necessary to complete the product system. The gas production process was developed by Littlefield et al (2019) as part of a life cycle analysis of natural gas extraction and power generation. The computer production process was developed as part of the US Environmentally-Extended Input-Output (USEEIO) model (Yang et al 2017).…”

Section: Data Sources and Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life cycle assessment of behind-the-meter Bitcoin mining at US power plant

Roeck

Drennen

2022

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Due to its highly energy-intensive process, Bitcoin has attracted the global attention of climate research and media. At the time of this submission, behind-the-meter Bitcoin mining has gained significant traction; however, not a single environmental impact assessment has been conducted on this type of operation. This study seeks to fill the gap, applying the established Life Cycle Assessment methodology to estimate the environmental footprint of a single case study. Methods A life cycle assessment methodology of a natural gas power plant mining Bitcoin behind-the-meter in the state of New York following the ISO 14040 guidelines was applied. The functional unit (FU) is defined as the attributed generation capacity of 14 MW over the course of a regular full-calendar year in the attributional model. The FU is scaled to 22 MW and 104 MW in the predictive models to represent planned expansion. The TRACI 2.1 method was applied to characterize the environmental impact. The environmental impact categories considered in this study included global warming, acidification, smog formation, and particulate emissions. Results and discussion Located in New York State, Greenidge LLC, a natural gas power plant produces an estimated 88,440 metric tons of CO 2 -eq per year to mine Bitcoin behind-the-meter. Annual emissions would total 656,983 metric tons of CO 2 -eq if the plant devotes 100% of its generation to Bitcoin mining. The primary driver of greenhouse gas emissions is the generation of electricity itself, accounting for ~ 79% of the total emissions. At full capacity, annual emissions are comparable to the annual emissions of 140,000 passenger vehicles or the emissions resulting from the burning of 600 million lb of coal. Further, additional planned cases could produce an estimated 1.9 million tons tCO 2 -eq per annum. Conclusions Behind-the-meter Bitcoin mining makes the power plant a significant contributor to global warming at a time when New York State is attempting to radically reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 85% by 2050 and to have 100% carbon-free electricity by 2040. The environmental impact of this business model is not limited to individual sites but is spread out over upstream impacts as well. In combination, we see that behind-the-meter Bitcoin mining not only goes against local climate initiatives but also poses a significant danger to national initiatives due to feasible scalability, caused by an availability of existing infrastructure and favorable financials. Supplementary information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11367-022-02025-0.

show abstract

“…Figure 2. Basins that Account for Majority of U.S. Natural Gas Production [54] NETL has also published LCA data for the unit process for natural gas combustion [55]. The LCA data is used to generate the LCIA results for each of the TRACI impact categories.…”

Section: Figure 1 Nerc Regions and Balancing Authorities 11mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gas vs Electric: Sustainability Performance of Heating Fuel Options in the NIST NZERTF

Webb¹,

Kneifel²

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This manuscript builds on analysis completed in an article by O'Rear, Webb, Kneifel and O'Fallon (1) that focuses on a case study evaluating the sustainability performance of singlefamily homes in Maryland. Since most of the background, literature, methodology, and analysis remain the same, numerous sections are abbreviated versions of sections in the article For additional details on these sections refer to the prior study.

show abstract

Life Cycle Analysis of Natural Gas Extraction and Power Generation

Cited by 15 publications

References 0 publications

Carbon footprint of global natural gas supplies to China

Carbon footprint of global natural gas supplies to China

Life cycle assessment of behind-the-meter Bitcoin mining at US power plant

Gas vs Electric: Sustainability Performance of Heating Fuel Options in the NIST NZERTF

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About