You are on page 1of 10

Life cycle assessment of various hydrogen production

methods
E. Cetinkaya, I. Dincer*, G.F. Naterer
Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Ontario Institute of Technology, 2000 Simcoe Street North, Oshawa,
Ontario L1H 7K4, Canada
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 11 May 2011
Received in revised form
8 October 2011
Accepted 12 October 2011
Available online 21 November 2011
Keywords:
Life cycle assessment
Hydrogen production
Global warming potential
Emissions
a b s t r a c t
A comprehensive life cycle assessment (LCA) is reported for ve methods of hydrogen
production, namely steam reforming of natural gas, coal gasication, water electrolysis via
wind and solar electrolysis, and thermochemical water splitting with a CueCl cycle.
Carbon dioxide equivalent emissions and energy equivalents of each method are quanti-
ed and compared. A case study is presented for a hydrogen fueling station in Toronto,
Canada, and nearby hydrogen resources close to the fueling station. In terms of carbon
dioxide equivalent emissions, thermochemical water splitting with the CueCl cycle is
found to be advantageous over the other methods, followed by wind and solar electrolysis.
In terms of hydrogen production capacities, natural gas steam reforming, coal gasication
and thermochemical water splitting with the CueCl cycle methods are found to be
advantageous over the renewable energy methods.
Copyright 2011, Hydrogen Energy Publications, LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights
reserved.
1. Introduction
Energy demand is increasing with a larger world population.
Fossil fuel combustion causes adverse environmental conse-
quences that have motivated research on more environmen-
tally benign alternative fuels. Hydrogen is a promising energy
carrier that can be produced from renewable energy systems.
It can be used for fueling of transportation vehicles and thus
decrease the dependence on petroleum products. According
to Environment Canada, the transportation sector is an
important subsector that accounts for 27% of GHG emissions
in Canada [1]. Nearly half of this is emitted by light-duty
gasoline vehicles. Hydrogen use as a fuel can be an alterna-
tive to signicantly reduce GHG emissions.
Past studies have investigated the LCA of the hydrogen
productionmethods. MomirlanandVeziroglu[2] examinedthe
status of hydrogen energy and various hydrogen production
methods by outlining the economics, environmental impact,
applications, and hydrogen energy status around the world,
as well as hydrogen organizations and associations. Koroneos
et al. [3] performed a LCA to compare the environmental
impact of hydrogen production methods. The results
indicated that wind, hydropower and solar thermal energy led
to less environmental impact, compared to natural gas
reforming.
Holladay et al. [4] reviewed the technologies related to
hydrogen production from both fossil fuel and renewable
biomass resources, including reforming (steam, partial
oxidation, autothermal, plasma, and aqueous phase) and
pyrolysis. The conclusion indicates that over the long term,
countries can produce hydrogen from a variety of local feed-
stock. Ozbilen et al. [5] reported a comparative LCA study of
Abbreviations: AECL, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited; GWP, global warming potential; LCA, life cycle assessment; LNG, liqueed
natural gas; NGSR, natural gas steam reforming; PV, photo voltaic; UOIT, University of Ontario Institute of Technology.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: Eda.Cetinkaya@UOIT.ca (E. Cetinkaya), ibrahim.dincer@uoit.ca (I. Dincer), greg.naterer@uoit.ca (G.F. Naterer).
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
j ournal homepage: www. el sevi er. com/ l ocat e/ he
i nt e r na t i o na l j our na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r g y 3 7 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 2 0 7 1 e2 0 8 0
0360-3199/$ e see front matter Copyright 2011, Hydrogen Energy Publications, LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.10.064
the CueCl water-splitting cycle with various other hydrogen
production methods: the sulfureiodine (SeI) cycle, high-
temperature water electrolysis, conventional steam reform-
ing of natural gas, and hydrogen production from renewable
resources. The results showed that steam reforming of
natural gas has the highest environmental impact, whereas
thermochemical cycles have the lowest. Granovskii et al. [6]
examined various hydrogen production methods and use of
hydrogen in fuel cell vehicles to compare them with a base
case (gasoline use in an internal combustion engine). They
concluded that wind and solar electrolysis are advantageous
by resulting in less air pollution compared to natural gas
reforming method.
Spath et al. [7e9] presented several LCA studies to deter-
mine the major impact category of the process so that envi-
ronmental impacts can be minimized: a coal to electricity
process, hydrogen production via steam methane reforming,
and wind/electrolysis. Ruether et al. [10] reported the life cycle
emissions of greenhouse gases released during the production
of hydrogen from liqueed natural gas (LNG) and coal.
Yildiz and Kazimi [11] studied hydrogen production from
nuclear energy technologies. The results showed that high-
temperature steam electrolysis coupled to an advanced gas
reactor cooled by supercritical CO
2
(S-CO
2
) has the potential to
provide signicantly higher energy efciency at a lower
temperaturethanother alternatives. Lubis et al. [12] conducted
an LCA study of nuclear-based hydrogen production through
thermochemical water splitting and a thermochemical CueCl
cycle. Their study showed that environmental impacts of
operating the hydrogen plant contribute much less than the
construction of the hydrogen plant and the nuclear plant.
Fig. 1 e Methods and processes in the LCA study.
Fig. 2 e Locations of manufacturers, plants and fueling
station.
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 7 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 2 0 7 1 e2 0 8 0 2072
Geerken et al. [13] performed a review of several LCA
studies and well-to-wheel studies of the production and use of
hydrogen in various stationary and mobile applications. They
concluded that the most important areas of uncertainty for
future LCA studies are the fuel tank, amount of precious
metals in fuel cells, and the lifetime of membranes.
The objectives of this study are to conduct a comprehen-
sive LCA for commercial hydrogen production methods by
including all of the major steps for every method, comparing
the energy consumption, and carbon dioxide equivalent
emissions to examine their environmental impact. Toronto is
chosen as the location of the fueling station for the
case studies. Five different methods are investigated for the
specied location: steam reforming of natural gas, coal
gasication, water electrolysis by wind and solar electricity,
and thermochemical water splitting by the CueCl cycle.
2. Methods of hydrogen production
Five methods of hydrogen production are examined in this
study. The rst is natural gas steam reforming (NGSR),
Table 1 e NGSR plant material requirements.
Material Amount required
[g/kg H
2
]
Concrete 12.612
Steel 4.029
Aluminum 0.033
Iron 0.049
Table 2 e NGSR plant economic inows and air emissions.
Economic inows [g/kg H
2
] Average air emissions [g/kg H
2
]
Construction and decommissioning of the plant Coal (in ground) 6.4 Carbon dioxide 41.85
Iron (Fe, ore) 10.3 Carbon monoxide 0.10
Iron scrap 11.2 Nitrogen oxides 0.20
Limestone (CaCO
3
in ground) 16.0 Nitrous oxide 0.00
Oil (in ground) 4.6 Non-methane hydrocarbons 0.27
Water 718.8 Particulates 1.26
Sulfur oxides 1.20
Natural gas production and transport Coal (in ground) 5.26 Benzene 0.27
Natural gas (in ground) 694.84 Carbon dioxide 299.18
Oil (in ground) 1.81 Carbon monoxide 1.05
Steel e Methane 59.80
Water 257.4 Nitrogen oxides 1.96
Nitrous oxide 0.00
Non-methane hydrocarbons 2.74
Particulates 0.09
Sulfur oxides 1.17
Electricity generation Coal (in ground) 120.81 Carbon dioxide 261.53
Natural gas (in ground) 3.25 Carbon monoxide 0.04
Oil (in ground) 2.33 Nitrogen oxides 1.06
Nitrous oxide 0.02
Non-methane hydrocarbons 2.29
Particulates 0.23
Sulfur oxides 2.21
Operation Natural gas (in ground) 3528.78 Carbon dioxide 8756.1
Water 18,800.0 Carbon monoxide 0.07
Nitrogen oxides 0.82
Particulates 0.02
Total Coal (in ground) 132.49 Benzene 0.27
Iron (Fe, ore) 10.30 Carbon dioxide 9358.66
Iron scrap 11.20 Carbon monoxide 8757.29
Limestone (CaCO
3
in ground) 16.00 Methane 59.80
Natural gas (in ground) 4226.86 Nitrogen oxides 4.04
Oil (in ground) 8.76 Nitrous oxide 0.03
Water 19,776.20 Non-methane hydrocarbons 5.30
Particulates 1.60
Sulfur oxides 4.57
Table 3 e Energy and carbon dioxide equivalents of the
processes for NGSR utility.
Process Energy
equivalent
[kJ/kg H
2
]
CO
2
equivalent
emissions
[g CO
2
-e/kg H
2
]
Construction and decommissioning
of the plant
159,600 2972.00
Natural gas production
and transport
4150 52.84
Electricity generation
(steam export excluded)
1910 273.42
Operation 8595.02
Total 165,660 11,893.28
i nt e r na t i o na l j our na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r g y 3 7 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 2 0 7 1 e2 0 8 0 2073
including raw material extraction, production and distribu-
tion of electricity and natural gas, construction of the equip-
ment and the power plant, landlling and recycling processes.
The second method is coal gasication, including mining,
mine development, transportation, construction of the power
plant, operation and electricity production. Electricity
production results in supplying electricity to the grid, which is
taken into account. Thirdly, wind electrolysis includes
manufacturing and operation of the turbines, electrolysis,
hydrogen production and compression steps. During opera-
tion, there is no emission output. On the other hand,
production of wind turbines leads to manufacturing emis-
sions. Fourthly, for PV (photo voltaic) electrolysis, there are
manufacturing, transportation, decommissioning and
disposal of PV modules, inverters, wiring, installation, oper-
ation and maintenance steps. In the operation step, as with
wind turbines, there are no emissions, but operation and
maintenance causes energy consumption and emissions.
Lastly, thermochemical water splitting is considered with
a nuclear CueCl cycle. This includes mining, milling,
conversion, enrichment, fuel fabrication, construction, oper-
ation and decommissioning of the nuclear plant, construc-
tion, operation and decommissioning of the hydrogen plant.
The methods compared in this paper are shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 2 shows the distances between assumed locations of the
transportation processes. The system boundaries for the
hydrogen production LCA study covers the following major
processes:
Infrastructure for fuel production;
Feedstock production and transport, fuel production and
distribution;
Vehicle body and fuel cell production;
Vehicle use;
Vehicle disposal and recycling.
For this study, the boundary is limited to the infrastructure
for fuel production with feedstock production and transport,
fuel production and distribution. All data related to the
systems will be given under subsections followed by
a comparison given in the results section.
3. Life cycle assessment
3.1. Hydrogen production by steam reforming of natural
gas
Consider a natural gas steam reforming hydrogen plant with
a capacity of 1.5 million Nm
3
/day and operating with a 90%
capacity factor [14]. For full operation capacity, the electricity
requirement is 153.311 MJ/day. The estimated lifetime of the
Fig. 3 e (a) Energy equivalent and (b) Carbon dioxide equivalent percentages for NGSR.
Table 4 e Coal gasication plant air emissions.
Process CO
2
equivalent
emission [g CO
2
-e/kg H
2
]
Surface mining 101.64
Mine development 60.50
Transport of coal 162.34
Manufacture/construction
of the plant
48.40
Coal consumption 11374.00
Electric power production 447.70
Total 11299.18
Fig. 4 e Carbon dioxide equivalent emission percentages
for gasication utility.
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 7 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 2 0 7 1 e2 0 8 0 2074
plant is 20 years with 2 years of construction. The purity of
produced hydrogenis industrial grade, whichis at least 99.95%
hydrogen by mol. Natural gas consumption is about
392 tonnes/day feed and 43 tonnes/day fuel. The steam
requirement for 100% operating capacity is 1293 tonnes/day at
2.6 MPa pressure; the steam production is 1858 tonnes/day at
4.8 MPa [14]. The excess steamgenerated by the power plant is
assumedtobe usedby another source; this amount is excluded
in the calculations, since it is considered as an energy output.
For transport of natural gas from the source to the
hydrogen plant, the main pipelines, which consist of 80% of
the total pipeline length, are assumed to have a diameter of
61 cm and made of steel. The local pipeline diameter is taken
as 15 cm. Natural gas sources are taken from the area north of
Lake Erie, Ontario. Natural gas is transported to a Nanticoke
power plant. The produced hydrogen is transported to Tor-
onto, where the fueling stations are located. The
manufacturing material needed for the NGSR plant is given in
Table 1, which is followed by economic inows and average
air emissions of the same method in Table 2. The data were
adapted from Ref. [8]. The overall energy equivalents and
carbon dioxide emissions of the processes for the NGSR utility
are given for the four main processes in Table 3. The trans-
portation data were calculated for the chosen locations and
calculated values are given in Table 3.
Table 5 e Wind power plant economic inows and air emissions.
Source inows [g/kg H
2
] Average air emissions [g/kg H
2
]
Manufacturing the turbines and operation Coal (in ground) 145.4 Carbon dioxide 741.95
Iron (Fe, ore) 136.0 Carbon monoxide 0.72
Iron scrap 91.8 Methane 0.28
Limestone (CaCO
3
in ground) 353.4 Nitrogen oxides 2.16
Natural gas (in ground) 11.7 Nitrous oxide 0.03
Oil (in ground) 36.8 Non-methane hydrocarbons 2.75
Water 10,146.0 Particulates 27.04
Sulfur oxides 3.77
Electrolysis Coal (in ground) 12.0 Carbon dioxide 41.80
Iron (Fe, ore) 12.5 Carbon monoxide 0.03
Iron scrap 13.4 Methane 0.01
Limestone (CaCO
3
in ground) 1.1 Nitrogen oxides 2.21
Natural gas (in ground) 2.5 Nitrous oxide 0.0
Oil (in ground) 6.3 Non-methane hydrocarbons 0.32
Water 12,015.0 Particulates 0.20
Sulfur oxides 1.59
Storage Coal (in ground) 57.3 Carbon dioxide 166.25
Iron (Fe, ore) 63.7 Carbon monoxide 0.15
Iron scrap 69.0 Methane 0.01
Limestone (CaCO
3
in ground) 12.1 Nitrogen oxides 0.33
Natural gas (in ground) 2.0 Nitrous oxide 0.01
Oil (in ground) 5.2 Non-methane hydrocarbons 1.32
Water 4539.0 Particulates 1.44
Sulfur oxides 0.74
Total Coal (in ground) 214.7 Carbon dioxide 950.0
Iron (Fe, ore) 212.2 Carbon monoxide 0.90
Iron scrap 174.2 Methane 0.30
Limestone (CaCO
3
in ground) 366.6 Nitrogen oxides 4.70
Natural gas (in ground) 16.2 Nitrous oxide 0.05
Oil (in ground) 48.3 Non-methane hydrocarbons 4.40
Water 26,700.0 Particulates 28.67
Sulfur oxides 6.10
Table 6 e Wind power plant energy equivalents and
carbon dioxide equivalent emissions.
Processes Energy
equivalent
[kJ/kg H
2
]
CO
2
equivalent
emissions
[g CO
2
-e/kg H
2
]
Manufacturing and operation
of turbines
6606.60 757.00
Electrolysis 436.80 43.00
Hydrogen compression and
storage
2875.60 170.00
Total 9919.00 970.00
Table 7 e Wind power plant solid wastes.
Solid wastes [g/kg hydrogen production]
By process Manufacturing of wind turbines 164.36
Manufacturing of the grid 59.44
Total 223.80
By source
consumption
Concrete total 105.19
Manufacturing of the grid 44.18
Limestone production 31.56
Steel total 49.24
Manufacturing of the grid 15.26
Conversion of iron ore to steel 30.03
i nt e r na t i o na l j our na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r g y 3 7 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 2 0 7 1 e2 0 8 0 2075
The predicted energy equivalent and carbon dioxide
equivalent emission percentages are given in Fig. 3. The gure
shows 96% of the energy requirement is due to the power
plant construction and decommissioning. However, the main
source of carbon dioxide emissions is caused by the plant
operation, as expected.
3.2. Hydrogen production by coal gasication
According to the Coal Association in Canada [15], the closest
major Canadian coal mine to Toronto is in Stellarton, Nova
Scotia, about 1875kmfromtheNanticokecoal-redpower plant
(see Fig. 2). Thus, the transportation distance is assumed to be
2000 km, including the distance from Nanticoke to Toronto.
The coal gasication plant characteristics are reported for
no CO
2
capture as follows [10]:
284 tonnes/day hydrogen production;
2268 tonnes/day coal feed;
38 MW net power output;
All of the coal consumption is provided by a surface mine.
In Table 4, the electric power production value is negative,
since it indicates electricity supply to the grid. Carbon dioxide
equivalent emission percentages for gasication are given in
Fig. 4. The transportationdistance is longer thanassumeddata
in other studies, but it does not have a signicant effect within
the total emission values. Coal consumption is much larger
than the other processes. The mine is selected as a surface
mine; therefore it is the cause of only 1% of total emissions.
3.3. Hydrogen production by wind electrolysis
The values given in Table 5 are calculated based on the
following assumptions: 3 50 kW wind turbine and electro-
lyzer with 30 Nm
3
/h data taken from the manufacturers. The
electrolyzer size is 75% of the maximum wind speed. The
electrolyzer can convert 85% of the electricity into hydrogen,
Fig. 5 e (a) Energy equivalent and (b) Carbon dioxide equivalent percentages for wind electrolysis.
Table 8 e Solar power plant energy equivalents and
carbon dioxide equivalent emissions.
Processes Energy
equivalent
[kJ/kg H
2
]
CO
2
equivalent
emissions
[g CO
2
-e/kg H
2
]
Materials and manufacturing
of PV modules
25,550.48 1519.53
Transportation 602.53 461.36
Inverters 830.91 110.93
Wiring 602.41 60.24
Installation 2679.68 37.18
Operation and maintenance 2285.00 161.20
Decommissioning and disposal 893.23 61.70
Total 33,444.24 2412.13
Fig. 6 e (a) Energy equivalent and (b) Carbon dioxide equivalent percentages for solar PV electrolysis.
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 7 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 2 0 7 1 e2 0 8 0 2076
which is later compressed to a pressure of 20 MPa, stored, and
dispensed at the fueling station. Transmission losses (7.03%)
and electricity consumption for pumping the deionized water
and compression of the produced hydrogen were subtracted
from the gross amount of electricity produced by the wind
turbines [9].
Hydrogen is assumed to be produced at the fueling station,
so there is no transportation loss for moving hydrogen. The
electricity produced via wind energy is transferred to the grid
and the same amount of electricity (excluding transmission
losses) is takenas aninput of the hydrolysis process. Excluding
water, 37.4% of the total resource consumption by weight is
iron, which is used in the manufacturing of the wind turbines,
as well as hydrogen storage vessels. The second resource
consumption is limestone with 35.5%, which is consumed to
build concrete foundations. Coal accounts for 20.8% of the
Table 9 e Economic inows of the nuclear thermochemical water-splitting plant.
Economic inows
Mining Electricity [kJ/kg H
2
] 274.069
Equipment fuel [kJ/kg H
2
] 63.660
Water [g/kg H
2
] 82,352.600
Milling Electricity [kJ/kg H
2
] 152.646
Water [g/kg H
2
] 7,937,600.000
Uranium ore [g/kg H
2
] 33.561
Conversion Electricity [kJ/kg H
2
] 26.154
Coal [kJ/kg H
2
] 9480.769
Natural gas [kJ/kg H
2
] 136.923
Water [g/kg H
2
] 2,840,000.000
U
3
O
8
[g/kg H
2
] 3.721
Enrichment Electricity [kJ/kg H
2
] 0.000055
Coal [kJ/kg H
2
] 78.269
Gasoline [kJ/kg H
2
] 1.387
Water [g/kg H
2
] 1600.000
UF
6
[g/kg H
2
] 0.825
Construction and decommissioning
of nuclear plant
Aluminum ingots [g/kg H
2
] 0.021
Concrete [g/kg H
2
] 38.250
Copper [g/kg H
2
] 0.030
Lead [g/kg H
2
] 0.048
Polyvinylchloride (PVC) [g/kg H
2
] 0.165
Spruce [g/kg H
2
] 3.627
Steel [g/kg H
2
] 9.717
Titanium [g/kg H
2
] 0.014
Operation of nuclear plant Aluminum ingots [g/kg H
2
] 0.006
Copper [g/kg H
2
] 0.051
Lead [g/kg H
2
] 0.014
Polyvinylchloride (PVC) [g/kg H
2
] 0.005
Steel [g/kg H
2
] 0.189
Titanium [g/kg H
2
] 0.000413
Construction of hydrogen plant Aluminum ingots [g/kg H
2
] 0.016
Concrete [g/kg H
2
] 29.308
Copper [g/kg H
2
] 0.228
Lead [g/kg H
2
] 0.037
Polyvinylchloride (PVC) [g/kg H
2
] 0.126
Spruce [g/kg H
2
] 2.781
Steel [g/kg H
2
] 0.745
Titanium [g/kg H
2
] 0.011
Fuel fabrication Electricity [kJ/kg H
2
] 31.346
Coal [kJ/kg H
2
] 89.038
Natural gas [kJ/kg H
2
] 23.846
Water [g/kg H
2
] 101.538
Operation of hydrogen plant Copper chloride-raw [g/kg H
2
] 0.377
Hydrogen chloride-raw [g/kg H
2
] 0.139
Water-raw [g/kg H
2
] 320.577
Aluminum ingots [g/kg H
2
] 0.000025
Copper [g/kg H
2
] 0.204
Lead [g/kg H
2
] 0.000055
Polyvinylchloride (PVC) [g/kg H
2
] 0.000191
Steel [g/kg H
2
] 0.001
Titanium [g/kg H
2
] 0.000003
Fabrication uranium [g/kg H
2
] 0.825
Electricity for heavy water production [g/kg H
2
] 207.692
Heavy water [g/kg H
2
] 31,346.154
i nt e r na t i o na l j our na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r g y 3 7 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 2 0 7 1 e2 0 8 0 2077
remaining resources, which is consumed primarily to produce
steel, iron, and concrete. Coal consumption is followed by oil
and natural gas, with shares of 4.7% and 1.6%, respectively [9].
The Ontario governments Green Energy and Green
Economy Act of 2009 has enabled a 20 MW Lakewind project
that will generate enough clean electricity to power 13,000
homes annually [16]. The project will be located in the village
of Bervie, just East of Kincardine (Fig. 2). Based on this energy
course, the predicted wind power plant economic inows and
air emissions are given in Table 5 in g/kg H
2
unit. Average air
emissions are given as different gaseous components and
particulates, which later are converted to carbon dioxide
equivalent emissions in Table 6 with the energy equivalents
related to that process. Table 7 shows the wind power plant
solid wastes caused by manufacturing of the wind turbines
and the grid, with respect to source consumptions. Energy and
carbon dioxide equivalent percentages for wind electrolysis
are shown in Fig. 5.
3.4. Hydrogen production by integrated PV power
system
Consider a 160 m
2
building integrated PV system with
a capacity of 8 kW for a lifetime of 30 years. PV panels are
assumed to be located 32 km from Toronto city center. The
total transportation distance is taken as 600 km from the
manufacturer to Sarnia and then back to Toronto city center
(Fig. 2) [17]. In Table 8, the solar power plant energy equiva-
lents and carbon dioxide equivalent emissions are given for
each of the steps. The Sarnia Solar Project, 80 MW, represents
enough electricity each year to power more than 12,000
homes e or about 40% of homes in Sarnia, Ontario.
Construction of the project created about 800 jobs [18].
Energy and carbon dioxide equivalent percentages for solar
PV electrolysis are shown in Fig. 6. It can be seen that the GWP
caused by manufacturing of PV modules are considerably
higher. About 81% of the material production emissions are
due to encapsulation [6]. Transportation consumes more
energy per unit of hydrogen production, whereas the GWP of
transportation takes about 2%.
3.5. Hydrogen production by thermochemical water
splitting with nuclear CueCl cycle
Canada produced about 10,617 tonnes of U
3
O
8
in 2008, and in
2009 production was 11997 tonnes U
3
O
8
, which contributes
20% of world total [19]. Most of this comes from its third
generation mines, which started operation in 1999 at McClean
Lake and McArthur River in northern Saskatchewan (Rabbit
Lake mine) [19]. The shortest distance to the nuclear plant
facility is foundto be the northerncost of McCleanLake (Fig. 2).
A consortium led by the University of Ontario Institute of
Technology (UOIT) and Atomic Energy of Canada Limited
(AECL) has developed the unit operations of a copperechlorine
Table 10 e Carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of the
nuclear thermochemical water-splitting plant.
Processes CO
2
equivalent
emissions
[g CO
2
-e/kg H
2
]
Mining 540.66
Milling 1757.14
Conversion 1892.31
Enrichment 2703.30
Construction and decommissioning
of nuclear plant
540.66
Operation of nuclear plant 2027.47
Construction of hydrogen plant 675.82
Fuel fabrication N/A
Operation of hydrogen plant 2162.64
Total 12,300.00
Fig. 7 e Carbon dioxide equivalent emission percentages of
the nuclear hydrogen plant.
Table 11 e Summary of daily hydrogen production
capacity and GWP values for various methods.
Hydrogen
production
method
Hydrogen
production
capacity [kg/day]
GWP
[g/kg H
2
]
Steam reforming of natural gas 111,200 11,893
Coal gasication 284,000 11,299
Water electrolysis via wind energy 14 970
Water electrolysis via solar energy 160 2412
Thermochemical water splitting
via CueCl cycle
124,800 12,300
Fig. 8 e Total hydrogen production capacities of various
methods.
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 7 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 2 0 7 1 e2 0 8 0 2078
cycle, for future production of hydrogen from nuclear energy
[20]. Table 9 shows the economic inows of a nuclear thermo-
chemical water-splitting plant, based on the CueCl cycle.
Carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of the nuclear water-
splitting plant are given in Table 10. From Fig. 7, it can
be observed that about 55% of the total carbon dioxide equiv-
alent emissions are caused by uranium processing. The
remaining 45% is due to plant manufacturing, operation, and
decommissioning.
4. Results and discussion
Table 11 shows a summary of daily hydrogen production
capacity and carbon dioxide equivalent values for the various
methods. Fig. 8 illustrates the total hydrogen production
capacities of the methods analyzed. The chosen capacities of
wind turbines and PVs are relatively lower, because the
hydrogen plant is located in the city center of Toronto and
cannot utilize a large area. Between fossil fuel (NGSR and coal
gasication) based methods, the latter is more advantageous
by having a higher capacity with lower carbon dioxide emis-
sions. Total carbon dioxide equivalent values of the hydrogen
production methods are plotted in Fig. 9, which indicates that
the most environmentally benign method is thermochemical
water splitting by the nuclear CueCl cycle for the chosen
locations, with respect to air emissions and total carbon
dioxide emissions. Since the operation step is the highest
carbon dioxide source, unlike fossil fuel based methods,
a nuclear power plant does not emit carbon dioxide during the
operation step, which results in lower carbon dioxide emis-
sions in total. It is followed by wind and solar PV power, which
are both renewable energy sources. These methods can be
operated independently of the fossil fuel source locations, as
the turbines and PVs are locally available.
When evaluating the total production capacities, fossil fuel
consuming methods and nuclear power provide a more
consistent and large-scale output, in order to provide
hydrogen continuously in large amounts at potentially much
lower cost. However, the total air emissions caused by fossil
fuel systems are much higher than the CueCl cycle, wind, and
solar PV production. One kg of hydrogen production via these
methods creates almost the same GWP as 6 kg of hydrogen
production via renewable energy sources.
5. Conclusions
Life cycle assessments are reported for hydrogen production
from steam reforming of natural gas, coal gasication, water
electrolysis via wind and solar electrolysis, and thermo-
chemical water splitting by the CueCl cycle. Global warming
potentials (GWP) of each method are quantied. The hydrogen
production capacities of wind turbines and PVs are less than
the other methods. For example, the coal gasication capacity
is 20,000 times the wind power production in this study. In
terms of total carbon dioxide equivalent emissions, the most
environmentally benign method is found to be wind elec-
trolysis, followed by solar PV power. Both of these renewable
energy methods can be used in appropriate locations with low
capacities, which do not depend on the fossil fuel availability
in the region, where local supply is available. The highest
population density of Canada is in the Greater Toronto Area
(GTA), which is distant from the fossil fuel resources needed
for hydrogen production. Although all the resources for
hydrogen production are assumed to be extracted within the
borders of Canada, there are still relatively large trans-
portation distances. There are also different parameters
affecting the LCA study of hydrogen production, such as
safety issues of natural gas and uranium production and
transportation, as well as nuclear waste disposal.
r e f e r e n c e s
[1] Matin A, Blain D, Neitzert F, Smith D, Smyth S. National
inventory report: 1990e2008, greenhouse gas sources and
sinks in Canada; 2010. Ch. 2: 51. Gatineau, Canada.
[2] MomirlanM, VezirogluTN. Current status of hydrogenenergy.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2002;6:141e79.
[3] Koroneos C, Dompros Roumbas AG, Moussiopoulos N. Life
cycle assessment of hydrogen fuel production processes.
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2004;29:1443e50.
[4] Holladay JD, Hu J, King DL, Wang Y. An overview of hydrogen
production technologies. Catalysis Today 2009;139:244e60.
[5] Ozbilen A, Dincer I, Rosen MA. A comparative life cycle
analysis of hydrogen production via thermochemical water
splitting using a CueCl cycle. International Journal of
Hydrogen Energy 2011;36:11321e7.
[6] Granovskii M, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Environmental and
economic aspects of hydrogen production and utilization in
fuel cell vehicles. Journal of Power Sources 2006;157:411e21.
[7] Spath PL, Mann MK, Kerr DR. Life cycle assessment of coal-
red power production. U.S. National Renewable Energy
Laboratory; 1999. Tech. Rep. NREL/TP-570e25119. Golden,
U.S.A.
[8] Spath PL, Mann MK. Life cycle assessment of hydrogen
production via natural gas steam reforming. U.S. National
Renewable Energy Laboratory; 2001. Tech. Rep. NREL/TP-
570e27637. Golden, U.S.A.
[9] Spath PL, Mann MK. Life cycle assessment of renewable
hydrogen production via wind/electrolysis. U.S. National
Renewable Energy Laboratory; 2004. Tech. Rep. NREL/MP-
560e35404. Golden, U.S.A.
Fig. 9 e Total CO
2
equivalent values of the hydrogen
production methods.
i nt e r na t i o na l j our na l o f hy d r og e n e ne r g y 3 7 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 2 0 7 1 e2 0 8 0 2079
[10] Ruether J, Ramezan M, Grol E. Life-cycle analysis of
greenhouse gas emissions for hydrogen fuel production in
the United States from LNG and coal. Tech. Rep. DOE/NETL-
2006/1227. Pittsburgh, U.S.A: U.S. Department of Energy/
NETL; 2005.
[11] Yildiz B, Kazimi MS. Efciency of hydrogen production
systems using alternative nuclear energy technologies.
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2006;31:77e92.
[12] Lubis LL, Dincer I, Rosen MA. Life cycle assessment of
hydrogen production using nuclear energy: an application
based on thermochemical water splitting. Journal of Energy
Resources Technology 2010;132:210041e6.
[13] Geerken T, Timmermans V, Lassaux S. Hydrogen and its
applications: review of life cycle assessment studies and well-
to-wheel studies; 2005. 10th European Roundtable on
Sustainable Consumption and Production. Antwerp, Belgium.
[14] Ontario Energy Board. Coal statistics [Online], Available:
http://www.oeb.gov.on.ca/documents/map_gas_pipelines.
pdf; 2011, May 1.
[15] Coal Association in Canada. Coal statistics [Online],
Available: http://coal.ca; 2011, May 1.
[16] WindShare wind power co-operative. The lakewind project
[Online], Available: http://www.windshare.ca/lakewind/;
2011, May 1.
[17] Meier PJ. Life cycle assessment of electricity generation
systems and applications for climate change policy analysis.
Fusion Technology Institute University of Wisconsin, Ph.D.
thesis; 2002.
[18] The Government of Ontario. Ontario welcomes the worlds
largest solar PV farm [Online], Available: http://news.ontario.
ca/mei/en/2010/10/ontario-welcomes-the-worlds-largest-
solar-pv-farm.html; 2011, May 1.
[19] World Nuclear Association. Uranium in Canada [Online],
Available: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf49.html;
2011, May 1.
[20] University of Ontario Institute of Technology. Research at
UOIT [Online], Available: http://research.uoit.ca/EN/main/
about_research/238287/Greg_Naterer.html; 2011, May 1.
i nt e r na t i ona l j o ur na l o f hy d r o g e n e ne r g y 3 7 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 2 0 7 1 e2 0 8 0 2080

You might also like