Material and energy flows in the materials production, assembly, and end-of-life stages of the automotive lithium-ion battery life cycle

This document contains material and energy flows for lithium-ion batteries with an active cathode material of lithium manganese oxide (LiMn{sub 2}O{sub 4}). These data are incorporated into Argonne National Laboratory's Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in Transportation (GREET) model, replacing previous data for lithium-ion batteries that are based on a nickel/cobalt/manganese (Ni/Co/Mn) cathode chemistry. To identify and determine the mass of lithium-ion battery components, we modeled batteries with LiMn{sub 2}O{sub 4} as the cathode material using Argonne's Battery Performance and Cost (BatPaC) model for hybrid electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and electric vehicles. As input for GREET, we developed new or updated data for the cathode material and the following materials that are included in its supply chain: soda ash, lime, petroleum-derived ethanol, lithium brine, and lithium carbonate. Also as input to GREET, we calculated new emission factors for equipment (kilns, dryers, and calciners) that were not previously included in the model and developed new material and energy flows for the battery electrolyte, binder, and binder solvent. Finally, we revised the data included in GREET for graphite (the anode active material), battery electronics, and battery assembly. For the first time, we incorporated energy and material flows for battery recycling into GREET, considering four battery recycling processes: pyrometallurgical, hydrometallurgical, intermediate physical, and direct physical. Opportunities for future research include considering alternative battery chemistries and battery packaging. As battery assembly and recycling technologies develop, staying up to date with them will be critical to understanding the energy, materials, and emissions burdens associated with batteries

Fuel cycle comparison of distributed power generation technologies.

The fuel-cycle energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with the application of fuel cells to distributed power generation were evaluated and compared with the combustion technologies of microturbines and internal combustion engines, as well as the various technologies associated with grid-electricity generation in the United States and California. The results were primarily impacted by the net electrical efficiency of the power generation technologies and the type of employed fuels. The energy use and GHG emissions associated with the electric power generation represented the majority of the total energy use of the fuel cycle and emissions for all generation pathways. Fuel cell technologies exhibited lower GHG emissions than those associated with the U.S. grid electricity and other combustion technologies. The higher-efficiency fuel cells, such as the solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) and molten carbonate fuel cell (MCFC), exhibited lower energy requirements than those for combustion generators. The dependence of all natural-gas-based technologies on petroleum oil was lower than that of internal combustion engines using petroleum fuels. Most fuel cell technologies approaching or exceeding the DOE target efficiency of 40% offered significant reduction in energy use and GHG emissions

Fuel-cycle assessment of selected bioethanol production.

A large amount of corn stover is available in the U.S. corn belt for the potential production of cellulosic bioethanol when the production technology becomes commercially ready. In fact, because corn stover is already available, it could serve as a starting point for producing cellulosic ethanol as a transportation fuel to help reduce the nation's demand for petroleum oil. Using the data available on the collection and transportation of corn stover and on the production of cellulosic ethanol, we have added the corn stover-to-ethanol pathway in the GREET model, a fuel-cycle model developed at Argonne National Laboratory. We then analyzed the life-cycle energy use and emission impacts of corn stover-derived fuel ethanol for use as E85 in flexible fuel vehicles (FFVs). The analysis included fertilizer manufacturing, corn farming, farming machinery manufacturing, stover collection and transportation, ethanol production, ethanol transportation, and ethanol use in light-duty vehicles (LDVs). Energy consumption of petroleum oil and fossil energy, emissions of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide [CO{sub 2}], nitrous oxide [N{sub 2}O], and methane [CH{sub 4}]), and emissions of criteria pollutants (carbon monoxide [CO], volatile organic compounds [VOCs], nitrogen oxide [NO{sub x}], sulfur oxide [SO{sub x}], and particulate matter with diameters smaller than 10 micrometers [PM{sub 10}]) during the fuel cycle were estimated. Scenarios of ethanol from corn grain, corn stover, and other cellulosic feedstocks were then compared with petroleum reformulated gasoline (RFG). Results showed that FFVs fueled with corn stover ethanol blends offer substantial energy savings (94-95%) relative to those fueled with RFG. For each Btu of corn stover ethanol produced and used, 0.09 Btu of fossil fuel is required. The cellulosic ethanol pathway avoids 86-89% of greenhouse gas emissions. Unlike the life cycle of corn grain-based ethanol, in which the ethanol plant consumes most of the fossil fuel, farming consumes most of the fossil fuel in the life cycle of corn stover-based ethanol

Mobility Chains Analysis of Technologies for Passenger Cars and Light Duty Vehicles Fueled With Biofuels : Application of the Greet Model to Project the Role of Biomass in America's Energy Future (RBAEF) Project.

The Role of Biomass in America's Energy Future (RBAEF) is a multi-institution, multiple-sponsor research project. The primary focus of the project is to analyze and assess the potential of transportation fuels derived from cellulosic biomass in the years 2015 to 2030. For this project, researchers at Dartmouth College and Princeton University designed and simulated an advanced fermentation process to produce fuel ethanol/protein, a thermochemical process to produce Fischer-Tropsch diesel (FTD) and dimethyl ether (DME), and a combined heat and power plant to co-produce steam and electricity using the ASPEN Plus{trademark} model. With support from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) conducted, for the RBAEF project, a mobility chains or well-to-wheels (WTW) analysis using the Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in Transportation (GREET) model developed at ANL. The mobility chains analysis was intended to estimate the energy consumption and emissions associated with the use of different production biofuels in light-duty vehicle technologies

Updated estimation of energy efficiencies of U.S. petroleum refineries.

Evaluation of life-cycle (or well-to-wheels, WTW) energy and emission impacts of vehicle/fuel systems requires energy use (or energy efficiencies) of energy processing or conversion activities. In most such studies, petroleum fuels are included. Thus, determination of energy efficiencies of petroleum refineries becomes a necessary step for life-cycle analyses of vehicle/fuel systems. Petroleum refinery energy efficiencies can then be used to determine the total amount of process energy use for refinery operation. Furthermore, since refineries produce multiple products, allocation of energy use and emissions associated with petroleum refineries to various petroleum products is needed for WTW analysis of individual fuels such as gasoline and diesel. In particular, GREET, the life-cycle model developed at Argonne National Laboratory with DOE sponsorship, compares energy use and emissions of various transportation fuels including gasoline and diesel. Energy use in petroleum refineries is key components of well-to-pump (WTP) energy use and emissions of gasoline and diesel. In GREET, petroleum refinery overall energy efficiencies are used to determine petroleum product specific energy efficiencies. Argonne has developed petroleum refining efficiencies from LP simulations of petroleum refineries and EIA survey data of petroleum refineries up to 2006 (see Wang, 2008). This memo documents Argonne's most recent update of petroleum refining efficiencies

Consumptive water use in the production of ethanonl and petroleum gasoline.

The production of energy feedstocks and fuels requires substantial water input. Not only do biofuel feedstocks like corn, switchgrass, and agricultural residues need water for growth and conversion to ethanol, but petroleum feedstocks like crude oil and oil sands also require large volumes of water for drilling, extraction, and conversion into petroleum products. Moreover, in many cases, crude oil production is increasingly water dependent. Competing uses strain available water resources and raise the specter of resource depletion and environmental degradation. Water management has become a key feature of existing projects and a potential issue in new ones. This report examines the growing issue of water use in energy production by characterizing current consumptive water use in liquid fuel production. As used throughout this report, 'consumptive water use' is the sum total of water input less water output that is recycled and reused for the process. The estimate applies to surface and groundwater sources for irrigation but does not include precipitation. Water requirements are evaluated for five fuel pathways: bioethanol from corn, ethanol from cellulosic feedstocks, gasoline from Canadian oil sands, Saudi Arabian crude, and U.S. conventional crude from onshore wells. Regional variations and historic trends are noted, as are opportunities to reduce water use

Life-Cycle Assessment of Corn-Based Butanol as a Potential Transportation Fuel.

Butanol produced from bio-sources (such as corn) could have attractive properties as a transportation fuel. Production of butanol through a fermentation process called acetone-butanol-ethanol (ABE) has been the focus of increasing research and development efforts. Advances in ABE process development in recent years have led to drastic increases in ABE productivity and yields, making butanol production worthy of evaluation for use in motor vehicles. Consequently, chemical/fuel industries have announced their intention to produce butanol from bio-based materials. The purpose of this study is to estimate the potential life-cycle energy and emission effects associated with using bio-butanol as a transportation fuel. The study employs a well-to-wheels analysis tool--the Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) model developed at Argonne National Laboratory--and the Aspen Plus{reg_sign} model developed by AspenTech. The study describes the butanol production from corn, including grain processing, fermentation, gas stripping, distillation, and adsorption for products separation. The Aspen{reg_sign} results that we obtained for the corn-to-butanol production process provide the basis for GREET modeling to estimate life-cycle energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. The GREET model was expanded to simulate the bio-butanol life cycle, from agricultural chemical production to butanol use in motor vehicles. We then compared the results for bio-butanol with those of conventional gasoline. We also analyzed the bio-acetone that is coproduced with bio-butanol as an alternative to petroleum-based acetone. Our study shows that, while the use of corn-based butanol achieves energy benefits and reduces greenhouse gas emissions, the results are affected by the methods used to treat the acetone that is co-produced in butanol plants

Full Fuel-Cycle Comparison of Forklift Propulsion Systems.A

Hydrogen has received considerable attention as an alternative to fossil fuels. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) investigates the technical and economic feasibility of promising new technologies, such as hydrogen fuel cells. A recent report for DOE identified three near-term markets for fuel cells: (1) Emergency power for state and local emergency response agencies, (2) Forklifts in warehousing and distribution centers, and (3) Airport ground support equipment markets. This report examines forklift propulsion systems and addresses the potential energy and environmental implications of substituting fuel-cell propulsion for existing technologies based on batteries and fossil fuels. Industry data and the Argonne Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) model are used to estimate full fuel-cycle emissions and use of primary energy sources, back to the primary feedstocks for fuel production. Also considered are other environmental concerns at work locations. The benefits derived from using fuel-cell propulsion are determined by the sources of electricity and hydrogen. In particular, fuel-cell forklifts using hydrogen made from the reforming of natural gas had lower impacts than those using hydrogen from electrolysis

Updated greenhouse gas and criteria air pollutant emission factors and their probability distribution functions for electricity generating units

Greenhouse gas (CO{sub 2}, CH{sub 4} and N{sub 2}O, hereinafter GHG) and criteria air pollutant (CO, NO{sub x}, VOC, PM{sub 10}, PM{sub 2.5} and SO{sub x}, hereinafter CAP) emission factors for various types of power plants burning various fuels with different technologies are important upstream parameters for estimating life-cycle emissions associated with alternative vehicle/fuel systems in the transportation sector, especially electric vehicles. The emission factors are typically expressed in grams of GHG or CAP per kWh of electricity generated by a specific power generation technology. This document describes our approach for updating and expanding GHG and CAP emission factors in the GREET (Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation) model developed at Argonne National Laboratory (see Wang 1999 and the GREET website at http://greet.es.anl.gov/main) for various power generation technologies. These GHG and CAP emissions are used to estimate the impact of electricity use by stationary and transportation applications on their fuel-cycle emissions. The electricity generation mixes and the fuel shares attributable to various combustion technologies at the national, regional and state levels are also updated in this document. The energy conversion efficiencies of electric generating units (EGUs) by fuel type and combustion technology are calculated on the basis of the lower heating values of each fuel, to be consistent with the basis used in GREET for transportation fuels. On the basis of the updated GHG and CAP emission factors and energy efficiencies of EGUs, the probability distribution functions (PDFs), which are functions that describe the relative likelihood for the emission factors and energy efficiencies as random variables to take on a given value by the integral of their own probability distributions, are updated using best-fit statistical curves to characterize the uncertainties associated with GHG and CAP emissions in life-cycle modeling with GREET

Life-cycle analysis results for geothermal systems in comparison to other power systems: Part II.

A study has been conducted on the material demand and life-cycle energy and emissions performance of power-generating technologies in addition to those reported in Part I of this series. The additional technologies included concentrated solar power, integrated gasification combined cycle, and a fossil/renewable (termed hybrid) geothermal technology, more specifically, co-produced gas and electric power plants from geo-pressured gas and electric (GPGE) sites. For the latter, two cases were considered: gas and electricity export and electricity-only export. Also modeled were cement, steel and diesel fuel requirements for drilling geothermal wells as a function of well depth. The impact of the construction activities in the building of plants was also estimated. The results of this study are consistent with previously reported trends found in Part I of this series. Among all the technologies considered, fossil combustion-based power plants have the lowest material demand for their construction and composition. On the other hand, conventional fossil-based power technologies have the highest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, followed by the hybrid and then two of the renewable power systems, namely hydrothermal flash power and biomass-based combustion power. GHG emissions from U.S. geothermal flash plants were also discussed, estimates provided, and data needs identified. Of the GPGE scenarios modeled, the all-electric scenario had the highest GHG emissions. Similar trends were found for other combustion emissions