Life-cycle greenhouse gas analysis of LNG as a heavy vehicle fuel in Europe

Arteconi, Alessia; Brandoni, Caterina; Evangelista, Dario; Polonara, Fabio

doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.11.012

Cited by 148 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The comparison of the LCA GHG emission results of different studies focused on NGVs in China and other countries is shown in Table 9. For the LNG HDT application type, the value of the net GHG reduction rate (NGRR) in this study is 8%, a positive result similar to that obtained in other studies on China and other countries (Arteconi et al 2010;Tu et al 2013b). For the LNG bus application type, the result in this study is 7%, a more pessimistic result than that of other studies specific to China but similar to the findings of studies from other countries (Beer et al 2002;Ercan and Tatari 2015;Lin et al 2015).…”

Section: Comparison Of the Results With Those Of Other Studiescontrasting

confidence: 40%

Petroleum substitution, greenhouse gas emissions reduction and environmental benefits from the development of natural gas vehicles in China

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study develops a bottom-up model to quantitatively assess the comprehensive effects of replacing traditional petroleum-powered vehicles with natural gas vehicles (NGVs) in China based on an investigation of the direct energy consumption and critical air pollutant (CAP) emission intensity, life-cycle energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission intensity of NGV fleets. The results indicate that, on average, there are no net energy savings from replacing a traditional fuel vehicle with an NGV. Interestingly, an NGV results in significant reductions in direct CAP and life-cycle GHG emissions compared to those of a traditional fuel vehicle, ranging from 61% to 76% and 12% to 29%, respectively. Due to the increasing use of natural gas as a vehicle fuel in China (i.e. approximately 28.2 billion cubic metres of natural gas in 2015), the total petroleum substituted with natural gas was approximately 23.8 million tonnes (Mt), which generated a GHG emission reduction of 16.9 Mt of CO 2 equivalent and a CAP emission reduction of 1.8 Mt in 2015. Given the significant contribution of NGVs, growing the NGV population in 2020 will further increase the petroleum substitution benefits and CAP and GHG emission reduction benefits by approximately 42.5 Mt of petroleum-based fuel, 3.1 Mt of CAPs and 28.0 Mt of GHGs. By 2030, these benefits will reach 81.5 Mt of traditional petroleum fuel, 5.6 Mt of CAPs and 50.5 Mt of GHGs, respectively.

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of the Results With Those Of Other Studiescontrasting

confidence: 40%

Petroleum substitution, greenhouse gas emissions reduction and environmental benefits from the development of natural gas vehicles in China

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Referring to the EU condition, Lopez et al (López et al 2009) reported on the greenhouse gas emissions of two different engines using three different fuels, including also compressed natural gas from LNG in Spain. In opposition to what was found for the USA, Arteconi et al (Arteconi et al 2010) concluded for the EU that the upstream emissions for diesel and LNG for use in heavy-duty vehicles were almost identical. The source and transportation distance are key factor for the total environmental burden of the LNG supply chain: some authors (Edwards et al 2006;Kavalov et al 2010) analysed the upstream (emissions before the gas use) LNG emissions for different sending and receiving ports and showed that the transportation distance can double the GHG emissions.…”

Section: Environmental Impacts Of Using Lngmentioning

confidence: 57%

“…3. As far as possible, data for the GWP on the LNG upstream production have been collected according to four categoriesextraction and drying, liquefaction, transport and evaporation--from literature (Tamura et al 2001;Edwards et al 2006;Okamura et al 2007;López et al 2009;Kavalov et al 2010;Arteconi et al 2010;Venkatesh et al 2011;NETL 2012;Safaei et al 2015). The results reported in Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A number of scientific studies have analysed the carbon footprint of LNG production and use in specific geographical contexts and against alternative energy supplies, including for example coal (Jaramillo et al 2007), compressed natural gas (López et al 2009) or also heavy fuel (Arteconi et al 2010) and shale gas (Stamford and Azapagic 2014).…”

Section: Environmental Impacts Of Using Lngmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Liquefied natural gas for the UK: a life cycle assessment

Tagliaferri

Clift

Lettieri

et al. 2017

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Liquefied natural gas (LNG) is expected to become an important component of the UK's energy supply because the national hydrocarbon reserves on the continental shelf have started diminishing. However, use of any carbon-based fuel runs counter to mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). Hence, a broad environmental assessment to analyse the import of LNG to the UK is required. Methods A cradle to gate life cycle assessment has been carried out of a specific but representative case: LNG imported to the UK from Qatar. The analysis covers the supply chain, from gas extraction through to distribution to the end-user, assuming state-of-the-art facilities and ships. A sensitivity analysis was also conducted on key parameters including the energy requirements of the liquefaction and vaporisation processes, fuel for propulsion, shipping distance, tanker volume and composition of raw gas. Results and discussion All environmental indicators of the CML methodology were analysed. The processes of liquefaction, LNG transport and evaporation determine more than 50% of the cradle to gate global warming potential (GWP). When 1% of the total gas delivered is vented as methane emissions leakage throughout the supply chain, the GWP increases by 15% compared to the GWP of the base scenario. The variation of the GWP increases to 78% compared to the base scenario when 5% of the delivered gas is considered to be lost as vented emissions. For all the scenarios analysed, more than 75% of the total acidification potential (AP) is due to the sweetening of the natural gas before liquefaction. Direct emissions from transport always determine between 25 and 49% of the total eutrophication potential (EP) whereas the operation and maintenance of the sending ports strongly influences the fresh water aquatic ecotoxicity potential (FAETP). Conclusions The study highlights long-distance transport of LNG and natural gas processing, including sweetening, liquefaction and vaporisation, as the key operations that strongly affect the life cycle impacts. Those cannot be considered negligible when the environmental burdens of the LNG supply chain are considered. Furthermore, the effect of possible fugitive methane emissions along the supply chain are critical for the impact of operations such as extraction, liquefaction, storage before transport, transport itself and evaporation.

show abstract

“…Arteconi et al [32] found the LNG purchased directly from the regasification terminal enables a 10% reduction in GHG emissions in comparison with diesel, while the emissions produced locally (at the service station) with small-scale plants are comparable with those of diesel in Europe. On the other hand, in the 2008 CARB study [33] referred in [32], it is stated that there was no advantage for the use of LNG in terms of GHG emissions in comparison with diesel: GHG emissions of LNG fuelled heavy-duty vehicles were 6.4% higher than diesel emissions in the USA.…”

Section: Lifecycle Ghg Analysis: Hot Issue For Transportation Fuels Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life Cycle GHG of NG-Based Fuel and Electric Vehicle in China

Zhang

et al. 2013

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper compares the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of natural gas (NG)-based fuels to the GHG emissions of electric vehicles (EVs) powered with NG-to-electricity in China. A life-cycle model is used to account for full fuel cycle and use-phase emissions, as well as vehicle cycle and battery manufacturing. The reduction of life-cycle GHG emissions of EVs charged by electricity generated from NG, without utilizing carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) technology can be 36%-47% when compared to gasoline vehicles. The large range change in emissions reduction potential is driven by the different generation technologies that could in the future be used to generate electricity in China. When CCS is employed in power plants, the GHG emission reductions increase to about 71%-73% compared to gasoline vehicles. It is found that compressed NG (CNG) and liquefied NG (LNG) fuels can save about 10% of carbon as compared to gasoline vehicles. However, gas-to-liquid (GTL) fuel made through the Fischer-Tropsch method will likely lead to a life-cycle GHG emissions increase, potentially 3%-15% higher than gasoline, but roughly equal to petroleum-based diesel. When CCS is utilized, the GTL fueled vehicles emit roughly equal GHG emissions to petroleum-based diesel fuel high-efficient hybrid electric vehicle from the life-cycle perspective.

show abstract

Life-cycle greenhouse gas analysis of LNG as a heavy vehicle fuel in Europe

Cited by 148 publications

References 17 publications

Petroleum substitution, greenhouse gas emissions reduction and environmental benefits from the development of natural gas vehicles in China

Petroleum substitution, greenhouse gas emissions reduction and environmental benefits from the development of natural gas vehicles in China

Liquefied natural gas for the UK: a life cycle assessment

Life Cycle GHG of NG-Based Fuel and Electric Vehicle in China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About