AbstractThe carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technologies have shown promise for directly reducing the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere from significant point sources. This study aims to evaluate an integrated CCUS system in South Korea using three technologies: microalgae photocultivation, CO2 membrane separation, and carbon mineralization. LCAs showed the total GHG emissions, excluding carbon offset effects, were 358 kg CO2 eq/ton, with 95.8% from CO2 membrane separation. Microalgae and mineralization emitted 14.6 kg CO2 eq/ton (4.1%) and 0.371 kg CO2 eq/ton (0.1%), respectively. Including carbon offsets from CaCO3 production and CO2 utilization, the system’s net emissions were −745 kg CO2 eq/ton. Further economic studies are needed, but the study confirmed the system’s high GHG reduction efficiency through LCA, enhancing the potential use of CCUS technologies in urban CHP plants.
Graphical Abstract![]() 1. IntroductionThe use of fossil fuels is known to be the primary source of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, accounting for more than half of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions into the atmosphere [1]. Global carbon emissions from fossil fuels have been growing rapidly since 1900 [2]. Despite the introduction of clean energy technologies that have helped to reduce some of the potential GHG emissions, global energy-related carbon emissions have shown little sign of remission, reaching a new high in 2022 of more than 36.8 Gt [3]. Meanwhile, unfortunately, present efforts to optimize fossil fuels combustion and replace fossil fuel with renewable energy sources are unlikely to be sufficient for counteracting this continued growth in carbon emissions in the near future [4].
In this context, carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technologies have shown promise for directly reducing the amount of CO2 released to the atmosphere from significant point sources. In addition to decarbonizing power generation, CCUS is considered a cost-effective solution to mitigate the CO2 released as a by-product of manufacturing processes from iron, steel, cement, and chemical industries [5]. As of July 31, 2023, the number of commercial CCS facilities in development, construction, or operation is reported to be 392 worldwide (among which 41 are operational) with a total carbon capture capacity of 361 Mtpa, reflecting a 50% increase from 2022 [6].
As mentioned above, the CO2 feedstock for CCUS technology comes from point sources where the technology is deployed, such as power generation plants or industrial facilities. Usually, these facilities are located away from residential areas or outside dense urban spaces where land is scarce. As such, relatively less research exists on the feasibility and GHG reduction efficiency of CCUS deployment in point sources located within urban areas, despite that an estimated 75% of CO2 emissions from global final energy use arise from these densely populated spaces [7]. One of the significant point sources of CO2 emissions located within cities is combined heating and power (CHP) plants, which are known to have higher fuel efficiency and lower environmental impact than other combustion-based power generation methods, as they simultaneously produce heat and power in an integrated process using a common energy source [8]. As such, more cities worldwide have been installing CHP plants for their heating and power needs. Since 2010, the total capacity of CHP plants and installations worldwide has risen by more than 25% in terms of their combined heat output [9].
In the case of South Korea, as of 2021, 99 natural gas-fired power units produce 41.3 GW of power, among which 28 are combined heating and power plants accounting for 7.4 GW of electricity production with further plans for expansion according to the government’s future energy plans [10]. To address the need for a CCUS system that could help reduce the GHG emissions from CHP plants, this study presents an analysis of the GHG emissions reduction efficiency of an integrated CCUS system that can be installed within the CHP plant site performing through a life cycle assessment (LCA). The integrated CCUS system was developed in South Korea as a government-funded project and is currently in construction for full-scale operation after being tested on a pilot scale for three years from 2018 to 2021. This system integrates three different CCUS technologies-microalgae photocultivation, CO2 membrane separation, and carbon mineralization–to capture and utilize CO2 in the flue gas from the CHP plants fueled by liquefied natural gas (LNG). Using the pilot stage data, this study aims to perform and quantify the GHG emissions and global warming potentials of the individual processes by LCA. The system’s GHG emissions reduction performance in the entire life cycle system is compared to other existing CCUS technologies.
2. Literature Review on Existing LCA studies on CCUS TechnologiesLCA is a technique outlined by the ISO 14044: 2006 and ISO 14040: 2006 standards for quantifying inputs and emissions throughout the entire life cycle of a product or process to evaluate the overall environmental impact. A typical LCA is carried out in four stages: defining the goal and scope, analyzing the life cycle inventory (LCI), assessing the environmental impact throughout the lifecycle, and interpreting the results of the LCA. LCA is widely applied in various areas and contexts, especially for systematically comparing the environmental impact of different options, such as other waste management strategies and systems [11–18].
LCA is also being increasingly applied as an analytical method to understand the environmental benefits of CCUS technologies, especially since 2007, in line with rising concerns about the need to mitigate global climate change and the quantification of GHGs released into the global atmosphere [19]. LCA studies have been conducted on individual technologies, such as direct air carbon capture and storage [20–21] and membrane-based carbon capture [22], as well as systems integrating anthropogenic CO2 sources and CCUS technologies, including CO2-enhanced oil recovery [23], combustion-based electricity generation systems integrated with CCS [24], and many more.
In a recent review of LCA studies on CCUS technologies, Chelvam and Hanafiah [25] point out that carbon capture technologies can indeed reduce GHG emissions to a significant degree. However, they also have the potential to increase other environmental burdens (e.g., acidification, eutrophication, and ecotoxicity) depending on their method, energy penalty, and the rate of nitrogen oxides (NOx) emitted from the CCUS facility. According to the LCA case studies by Edge Environment for a report undertaken by Parsons Brinckerhoff and the Global CCS Institute (SI Table 1 in Supporting information), the ton-CO2 eq Emitted/Reusing Act of 1 ton-CO2 computed for different CCU technologies were as follows, in the order of highest to lowest value: Polymers (5.52), formic acid production (3.96), urea yield boosting (2.27), CO2 concrete curing (2.2), renewable methanol (1.71), enhanced geothermal systems (0.58), Bauxite residue carbonation (0.53), enhanced oil recovery (0.51), enhanced coal bed methane (0.44), algae cultivation (0.42), and carbonate mineralization (0.32) [26]. When the value of ton-CO2 eq Emitted/Reusing Act of 1 ton-CO2 is one or above, it means that the process emits more than 1 ton of CO2 to remove 1 ton of CO2, while when the value is less than 1, the technology is capable of removing more CO2 than it emits in the process. Among the case studies evaluated in this report, algae cultivation and carbon mineralization exhibited the lowest values, indicating their efficiency in reducing carbon emissions. Thus, the integrated CCUS system incorporating these two technologies will show a positive GHG emissions reduction effect.
3. Description of Integrated CCUS System
Fig. 1 presents the schematic of the integrated CCUS system examined in this study. The system is installed within the site of the CHP plant and has a compact size.
The flue gas from the CHP plant is sent to the integrated CCUS system via a set of infrastructure: a fixture at the side of the stack (chimney) that extracts the flue gas before it is emitted to the atmosphere, pipelines connecting the stack and the CCUS system, a powerful blower that pushes the flue gas through those pipes, and a separate branch for testing the system. The top of the stack is 100 meters high, from which the flue gas is extracted and sent to ground level. A high-pressure ring blower is coupled with a device for maintaining a constant pressure resistance to ensure a continuous flow rate, and the flue gas supply is measured by comparing the flow meter mounted on the ring blower and the flow meter mounted on the integrated CCUS system.
When the flue gas arrives at the integrated CCUS system, a part of the gas is bypassed for utilization as feedstock for growing microalgae to convert CO2 into biomass. Microalgae grow quickly in light and convert CO2 into organic carbon in their growth process, fixing carbon 10–50 times more efficiently than terrestrial plants [27]. Due to this ability of microalgae, microalgae-based processes have emerged as one of the most promising long-term platforms for biological CCU [27]. The set-up for microalgae photocultivation using LNG flue gas and natural light consisted of photobioreactors equipped with TAP-C culture medium. The total capacity of the photobioreactors was 5 tons. In 2,000 hours, this set-up can produce 20 kg of biomass from growing Chlorella sorokiniana based on repeated batch cultivation using a one-stage continuous culture strategy, which adds up to 87.6 kg/year of biomass. After sufficient microalgae growth, 95% is harvested using centrifugation, and the remaining 5% of biomass and the culture medium are reused. More than 90% of the medium solution is reused to minimize water use and maximize water reuse.
The remaining elements of the flue gas after the microalgae photocultivation process are sent back into the main flue gas pipeline, where it joins the rest of the flue gas (i.e., three fourth of total incoming flue gas) to reach the CO2 separation and capture process using membrane technology. Many existing CCS facilities utilize absorbent agents to capture CO2, which requires considerable land for installation and are usually developed for processing flue gas from coal-fired plants. Moreover, significant amounts of chemicals and energy use are necessary for regenerating the absorbents, making it less than ideal for further industrial installation [28]. CO2 membrane separation technology, on the other hand, has been emerging as a promising technology due to its high energy efficiency and minor physical and chemical footprint, as well as its being absorbent-free [28]. This particular process is comprised of a multi-stage membrane system that is continuously operated at an operating pressure ranging from 2 to 5 bar at an operating temperature ranging from room temperature to 50°C.
The concentrated CO2 is then sent to the carbon mineralization process for conversion into calcium carbonate (CaCO3) through spontaneous reactions between CO2 and divalent cations (e.g., Ca2+, Mg2+, or Fe2+) [29]. In recent years, active research has been done on utilizing industrial residue materials and byproducts (e.g., fly and bottom ash from furnace operations, cement kiln dust, and waste concrete, mining waste, etc.) as a source of Ca and Mg cations for carbon mineralization due to their ready availability, low cost, and proximity to significant CO2 emission sources [30]. The carbon mineralization process of the integrated CCUS system also utilizes an alkaline aqueous solution recovered from industrial waste consisting of abundant (about 30%) CaO and MgO to source the divalent cations for direct carbon mineralization in a slurry, which eliminates the need for absorption agents.
In this study, the flow of the integrated CCUS system takes the order of ‘microalgae photocultivation – CO2 membrane separation – carbon mineralization,’ however, it is also possible to place the microalgae photocultivation process at the very end, that is, in the order of ‘CO2 membrane separation – carbon mineralization–microalgae photocultivation.’ In this case, rather than bypassing a part of the flue gas to the microalgae photocultivation process at the beginning, the microalgae photocultivation process becomes responsible for reducing the CO2 in the flue gas that was insufficiently sequestered by the other two processes.
4. Input and Output Analysis for LCAThe goal and scope of this study are clearly defined, which is to verify the GHG emissions reduction effect of the integrated CCUS system from CO2 source to the final form as a helpful product or service. The life cycle inventories (LCIs) for all three processes of the integrated CCUS system were put together in terms of their inputs (such as the usage of fuel and chemicals, the amount and composition of flue gas processed, electricity and water use, etc.) and outputs (including gas and water emissions and resource recovery, etc.). The data for the following components were obtained from the LCIs in the national LCI database provided by the South Korean government: truck transportation, energy production, chemicals, water supply, calcium carbonate, and wastewater treatment. The inputs and outputs of each process and that of the flue gas supply infrastructure were analyzed and computed regarding CO2 emissions utilization, and the detailed tables are provided in Table 1 and Supplementary Materials. Table 1 shows the flue gas supply device with 125,000 m3/hr input flow gas and 400 Nm3/hr output flue gas sent to the integrated CCUS system.
As shown in Table S2, the first stage of the integrated CCUS system is the microalgae photocultivation process, which receives 50 Nm3/hr of flue gas, wherein CO2 takes up 2.1 Nm3/hr (4.2%). The significant inputs are electricity, chemicals, and water, while the outputs include discharged wastewater and excess flue gas after use in algae cultivation. The photobioreactors consume a considerable amount of electricity (406 kWh/year), and a variety of chemicals are used for the culture medium, among which NH4Cl, sodium bicarbonate, K2HPO4, and KH2PO4 make up the most significant ratios. The water used in this process is 0.13 kg per 1 ton of CO2 emissions utilized. However, 80% of the water is recycled, reducing the wastewater discharge to 0.03 kg per 1 ton of CO2 emissions used. Automized monitoring of long-term operations has shown a 39.6–80.05% CO2 reduction effect, and the amount of CO2 emissions utilized in this stage was calculated based on a 39.6% reduction efficiency.
Table S3 in SI shows the inputs and outputs of the CO2 membrane separation process. The CO2 membrane separation was set up to process 24,500 Nm3/hr of flue gas at total capacity; however, in the pilot stage, the actual amount of flue gas processed in this process was 1,200 Nm3/hr, of which CO2 accounted for 4.5% (840 tons/year). The membrane-based CO2 separation process selectively concentrates the CO2 in the incoming flue gas, reducing the total volume of gas passing through to 57 Nm3/hr, about 80% of which is CO2. The only input required for this process is electricity, consuming 692.6 kWh per 1 ton of CO2 emissions utilized when operated at total capacity. As such, there are no air or water emissions. The CO2-enriched flue gas can also be produced as liquid carbon dioxide if linked to a liquefaction process, which is not applied in this integrated CCUS system.
The amount of CO2-enriched mixed gas from the CO2 membrane separation process that reaches the carbon mineralization process is 884 tons/year, which is composed of 20% nitrogen and 80% carbon dioxide (pure CO2 input: 707 tons/year). The CO2 enters and becomes processed at a pace of 57 Nm3/hr, and 99% (700 tons/year) is mineralized, in other words, fixed as calcium carbonate (CaCO3). This process utilizes recycled industrial waste materials as the alkaline residues for mineralizing CO2, and 4.3 kg 1 ton of CO2 emissions utilized (3,009.6 tons/year) of aqueous solution recovered from industrial waste materials (25% CaO concentration) is used. The electricity used to run the process is 25.7 kWh per 1 ton of CO2 emissions utilized. The amount of CaCO3 produced annually is 1,454.8 tons/year, which is equivalent to 2,078 kg per 1 ton of CO2 emissions used. Transportation of the mineralized carbon (CaCO3) by truck was also included in the inputs, assuming a distance of 10 km (20 km round trip) between the testing facility and the product destination. The final mixed gas emitted into the atmosphere after this process comprised 6 other substances (SOx, NOx, dioxin, CO, HCI, and dust) in addition to CO2, which take up the bulk of the mixed gas (see Table S4).
5. Results and DiscussionThe LCA characterized the global warming potential of the integrated CCUS system using methods outlined by IPCC (1996) [1]. The detailed results of the LCA and the GHG emissions reduction effect of each stage are described below, followed by an evaluation of the whole system. Accordingly, the functional unit used in the LCA performed in this study was 1 kg CO2 eq/ton [1] The carbon offsetting effect was evaluated by adding up the amount of CO2 emissions utilized through conversion into calcium carbonate (CaCO3), which is the product outcome of the CCUS system. The flue gas supply device was excluded from the scope of the LCA since this stage does not involve any CO2 removal. The software used for the LCA is TOTAL 5.0, which was developed and distributed by the South Korean Ministry of Environment [31].
5.1. Microalgae PhotocultivationThe LCA revealed that the microalgae photocultivation process emitted 0.371 kg CO2 eq/ton of GHGs to utilize 1 ton of CO2 emissions, as shown in Table 2. The largest emission factor was the use of electricity, which accounted for 80.1% of the total emissions of this process (0.297 kg CO2 eq/ton). GHG emissions from chemicals (e.g., NH4Cl) used to create the TAP-C medium was 0.0426 kg CO2 eq/ton, accounting for 11.5% of total emissions, and the emission from wastewater treatment was 0.0313 kg CO2 eq/ton. Since 80% of the water input is reused, water use resulted in a low environmental burden. The amount of CO2 emissions utilized by cultivating 87.6 kg/year of microalgae was estimated to be 164.9 kg CO2 eq/year using the formula, CO2 fixation rate (g day-1) = 1.882* (biomass) g day-1, based on the method used in existing studies [32–35]. If this process is operated in full capacity within the integrated CCUS system, the total CO2 emissions it utilizes is equivalent to 700.165 tons/year. Accordingly, in this LCA, this amount (700 tons/year) was used as the baseline for converting the data into the functional unit (kg CO2 eq/ton).
The cultivated microalgae could be further utilized, such as for producing omega-3, which can also be considered a carbon offset. However, due to the lack of data and information on microalgae-based products necessary to compile an LCI, we could not include them in the present LCA. If an LCI of microalgae-based products becomes available, it may be positively reflected as a carbon offsetting effect of microalgae photocultivation.
5.2. CO2 Separation via Membrane TechnologyAs explained above, the CO2 membrane separation process uses only electricity without requiring any chemicals or water. 484,849 kWh/year of electricity was used to concentrate the CO2 in the incoming flue gas from 4.5% to 80% before it is sent to the downstream process, equivalent to 692.6 kWh for every ton of CO2 emissions utilized. Consequently, the total GHG emissions during this process was computed to be 343 kg CO2 eq/ton. The detailed LCA of this process is presented in Table 3.
5.3. Carbon MineralizationAs shown in Table 4, the LCA result revealed that the carbon mineralization process emitted 14.6 kg CO2 eq/ton of GHG emissions to utilize 1 ton of CO2 in the flue gas. The most significant contributing factor to GHG emissions in this process was electricity (12.7 kg CO2 eq/ton), followed by wastewater treatment (1.89 kg CO2 eq/ton) based on a water reuse of 57.9%. The transportation of the CaCO3 product using 24-ton capacity trucks was estimated to contribute 0.0004 kg CO2 eq/ton.
The production of CaCO3 had a carbon offsetting effect of −99.9 kg CO2 eq/ton, significantly reducing the total GHG emissions of this process to −88.8 kg CO2 eq/ton. Although the LCA lacked the LCI of the aqueous solution recovered from industrial waste materials (25% CaO concentration), its reflection in the LCA is expected to further reduce the total GHG emissions of this process.
5.4. LCA of the Integrated CCUS System and DiscussionThe integrated CCUS system’s GHG emissions reduction performance was calculated by finding the sum of total GHG emissions of each process–microalgae cultivation process (0.371 kg CO2 eq/ton), CO2 membrane separation process (343 kg CO2 eq/ton), and carbon mineralization process (−88.8 kg CO2 eq/ton) – then subtracting the amount of CO2 emissions utilized by the entire system (−1000 kg CO2 eq/ton), as shown in Table 5). Overall, the integrated CCUS system demonstrated a net GHG reduction effect of −745 kg CO2 eq/ton (255 kg CO2 eq/ton when not accounting for the CO2 emissions utilized). Compared to the LCA case studies by Edge Environment, which found that carbonate mineralization technology emitted 320 kg CO2 eq/ton of GHGs per 1 ton of CO2 emissions utilized, and the algae cultivation technology emitted 420 kg CO2 eq/ton per 1 ton of CO2 emissions utilized [36], the integrated CCUS system incorporating both technologies thus had a superior GHG reduction effect (255 kg CO2 eq/ton per 1 ton of CO2 emissions utilized). The GHG reduction effect of the integrated CCUS system is expected to be greater if the aqueous solution recovered from industrial waste materials (25% CaO concentration) and the production of microalgae derivative products, such as omega-3, are also considered in the LCA.
The integrated CCUS system’s energy consumption performance was also compared to other CCUS technologies using chemical absorbents. Existing CO2 capture technologies use chemical absorbents (wet and dry), and the regeneration of these absorbents after absorption takes up the highest portion of electricity consumption in their processes. As shown in Table 6, the regeneration of wet (liquid) absorbents alone requires 2.95 GJ/ton-CO2 of energy, and the regeneration of dry (powder) absorbents consumes more than 4.2 GJ/ton-CO2 of energy. Furthermore, as seen from Table 7, if CCS technology is applied to a coal-fired power plant, the energy consumed to remove 1 ton of CO2 in the flue gas is 5.81 GJ/ton-CO2.
The integrated CCUS system, which uses the flue gas from an LNG CHP plant as feedstock, captures and removes CO2 of a lower concentration and converts it into a resource using only 2.59 GJ/ton-CO2 of energy, which is significantly less than existing post-combustion capture technology. Table 7 also presents the estimations of GHG emissions based on energy consumption, which shows that existing post-combustion capture technologies emit 798 kg CO2 eq/ton of GHGs to utilize 1 ton of CO2 emissions. The integrated CCUS system’s GHG emissions are only 44% (356 kg CO2 eq/ton) compared to existing technology.
Source: The previous study used for comparison here is Table 7 in [37], which provides the projection of characterized CO2 capture performance for post-combustion CCS technologies utilized from 1995 to 2009, including information on their energy (power) consumption. The data on energy consumption was converted to the applicable unit, and the GHG emissions were estimated through an LCA using the national LCI database.
6. ConclusionsThis study presented an integrated CCUS system currently being tested in South Korea that incorporates three different CCUS technologies: microalgae photocultivation, CO2 membrane separation, and carbon mineralization. LCAs were performed to understand the global warming potential of the individual processes and the whole system. The total GHG emissions of the integrated CCUS system, excluding the carbon offsetting effect, were assessed to be 358 kg CO2 eq/ton, 95.8% (343 kg CO2 eq/ton) of which was emitted during the CO2 membrane separation process. The GHG emissions of the microalgae photocultivation and carbon mineralization processes were 14.6 kg CO2 eq/ton (4.1%) and 0.371 (0.1%), respectively. When the carbon offsetting effect of CaCO3 production (−103 kg CO2 eq/ton) and the CO2 emissions utilized during the entire process (−1000 kg CO2 eq/ton) were accounted for, the total GHG emissions of the integrated CCUS system came out to be −745kg CO2 eq/ton.
Although further studies on the economic feasibility are necessary to determine the path to commercialization for this system, this study objectively verified the integrated CCUS system’s high GHG emissions reduction efficiency through an LCA using global warming characterization factors, thereby widening the applicability of CCUS technologies for CHP plants in urban spaces.
AcknowledgementsThis paper is based on the findings of the major methodologies of the research works “Evaluation of the Eco-Efficiency of Waste Treatment Methods (RE2018-14)” funded by the Korea Environment Institute (KEI) and of the foundational data of the project “Development of a Hybrid Process for Carbon Dioxide Capture and Carbon Resource Utilization” funded by Korea District Heating Corporation.
NotesReferences1. Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga Y, Sokona E, Farahani Kadner K, Seyboth A, et al. IPCC: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press; 2014. p. 6–7.
2. Boden T, Marland G, Andres R. Global, Regional, and National Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory U.S. Department of Energy; Oak Ridge, Tenn., USA: 2017.
https://doi.org/10.3334/CDIAC/00001_V2017
3. CO2 Emissions in 2022. IEA; Paris: [cited 11 March 2024] Available from: https://www.iea.org/reports/co2-emissions-in-2022
4. Dziejarski B, Krzy¿yñska R, Andersson K. Current status of carbon capture, utilization, and storage technologies in the global economy: A survey of technical assessment. Fuel. 2023;342:127776.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2023.127776
![]() 5. Zero Emissions Platform. CCS in a biodiversity and land use perspective. [cited 20 May 2024]. Available from: https://zeroemissionsplatform.eu/wp-content/uploads/Report-CCS-ina-BLU-perspective.pdf
6. The Global Status of CCS Report 2023. Global CCS Institute. Australia. [cited 4 June 2024]. Available from: https://status23.globalccsinstitute.com/
8. Thorin E, Sandberg J, Yan J. Combined heat and power. Clean Energy Conversion Technologies Cogeneration and Polygeneration. Eng EnvironSci. 2015;
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118991978.hces021
![]() 9. Global Cogeneration Market Overview. 2nd EdCOGEN World Coalition. December 2003. Available from: https://www.cogenworld.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/CWC_2nd_Global_Market_Overview_Dec-2023.pdf
10. Solutions For Our Our Climate. Bridge to Death: Air Quality and Health Impacts of Fossil Gas Power. [cited 11 November 2023]. Available from: https://energyandcleanair.org/wp/wpcontent/uploads/2021/12/SFOC-Air-Quality_Health-Impacts_Gas-Power_.pdf
11. Cherubini F, Bargigli S, Ulgiati S. Life cycle assessment (LCA) of waste management strategies: Landfilling, sorting plant and incineration. Energy. 2009;34(12)2116–2123.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2008.08.023
![]() 12. Yadav P, Samadder S. Life cycle assessment of solid waste management options: A Review. Recent Res. Sci. Technol. 2014;6(1)113–116.
13. Chen S, Lian Z, Li S, et al. The Environmental Burdens of Lead-Acid Batteries in China: Insights from an Integrated Material Flow Analysis and Life Cycle Assessment of Lead. Energies. 2017;10(12)1969.
https://doi.org/10.3390/en10121969
![]() 14. Brancoli P, Bolton K. Life cycle assessment of waste management systems Sustainable resource recovery and zero waste approaches. Elsevier; 2019. p. 23–33. ISBN 9780444642004,
15. Park Y, Putra A, Park H, Kim J. Characterization of the Life Cycle Carbon Footprint of the Automobile Industry in the Republic of Korea by Environmentally Extended Input-Output Model. Environ. Eng. Res. 2024;29(5)230583.
https://doi.org/10.4491/eer.2023.583
![]() 16. Kim J. Heavy Metals in Air Emission and Assessment of Human Toxicity Footprint. J. Korean Soc. Environ. Eng. 2021;43(9)614–622.
https://doi.org/10.4491/KSEE.2021.43.9.614
![]() 17. Badawy W, Sarhan Y, Octavian G, Kim J, Yushin N, Samman HA, et al. Monitoring of air pollutants using plants and co\_located soil—Egypt: characteristics, pollution, and toxicity impact. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022;29:21049–21066.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17218-7
![]() ![]() 18. Shin K, Kim J, Hwang Y, Kim B, Kim D. LCA-based environmental benefit allocation between steel and cement industries in steel byproduct recycling. Environ. Eng. Res. 2025;30(1)240032.
https://doi.org/10.4491/eer.2024.032
![]() 19. Cruz T, Balestieri J, Toledo J, Vilanova M, Oliveira O, Ávila I. Life cycle assessment of carbon capture and storage/utilization: From current state to future research directions and opportunities. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control. 2021;108:103309.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2021.103309
![]() 20. Terlouw T, Treyer K, Bauer C, Mazzotti M. Life cycle assessment of direct air carbon capture and storage with low-carbon energy sources. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2021;55(16)11397–11411.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c03263
![]() ![]() 21. Casaban D, Tsalaporta E. Life cycle assessment of a direct air capture and storage plant in Ireland. Sci. Report. 2023;13(1)18309.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-44709-z
![]() ![]() ![]() 22. Nilkar A, Orme C, Klaehn J, Zhao H, Adhikari B. Life Cycle Assessment of Innovative Carbon Dioxide Selective Membranes from Low Carbon Emission Sources: A Comparative Study. Membranes. 2023;13(4)410.
https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes13040410
![]() ![]() ![]() 23. Cooney G, Littlefield J, Marriott J, Skone T. Evaluating the climate benefits of CO2-enhanced oil recovery using life cycle analysis. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015;49(12)7491–7500.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b00700
![]() ![]() 24. Wang Y, Pan Z, Zhang W, Borhani T, Li R, Zhang Z. Life cycle assessment of combustion-based electricity generation technologies integrated with carbon capture and storage: A review. Env. Res. 2022;207:112219.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.112219
![]() ![]() 25. Chelvam K, Hanafiah M. Life cycle assessment of carbon capture, utilisation and storage technologies: An analytical review. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2023;1167(1)012036.
![]() ![]() 26. Brinckerhoff P. Accelerating the uptake of CCS: industrial use of captured carbon dioxide. Global CCS Institute. 2011;260.
27. Severo I, Santos A, Deprá M, Barin J, Jacob-Lopes E. Microalgae photobioreactors integrated into combustion processes: A patent-based analysis to map technological trends. Alg. Res. 2021;60:102529.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.algal.2021.102529
![]() 28. Fong H, Freeman C, Hill B, Xie Z. Current status and advances in membrane technology for carbon capture. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2022;300:121863.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2022.121863
![]() 29. Kim K, Kim D, Na Y, Song Y, Wang J. A review of carbon mineralization mechanism during geological CO2 storage. Heliyon. 2023;9(12)e23135.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e23135
![]() ![]() ![]() 30. Soong R, Carney Y, Rush C, Nielsen G, O’Connor W. Mineralization of carbon dioxide: a literature review. ChemBioEng Rev. 2015;2(4)231–256.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cben.201500002
![]() 31. Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute. Environmental Declaration of Product. [cited 20 November 2023] Available online: http://www.edp.or.kr/edp/edp_intro.asp
32. Chisti Y. Biodiesel from microalgae. Biotech. Adv. 2007;25(3)294–306.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2007.02.001
![]() ![]() 33. Suryata I, Svavarsson H, Einarsson S, Brynjólfsdóttir Á, Maliga G. Geothermal CO2 bio-mitigation techniques by utilizing microalgae at the Blue Lagoon, Iceland. In : Proceedings, 34th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering; 2010; Stanford University; Stanford:
34. Van Den Hende S, Vervaeren H, Boon N. Flue gas compounds and microalgae:(Bio-) chemical interactions leading to biotechnological opportunities. Biotech. Adv. 2012;30(6)1405–1424.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2012.02.015
![]() ![]() 35. Hariz H, Takriff M, Ba-Abbad M, Yasin N, Hakim N. CO2 fixation capability of Chlorella sp. and its use in treating agricultural wastewater. J. Appl. Phycol. 2018;30(6)3017–3027.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10811-018-1488-0
![]() 36. The Development of a Model for Analyzing District Energy Business for CCUS Feasibility Study. Korea District Heating Corporation. 2019;Internal report
37. Min B. Status of CO2 capturing technologies in post combustion. KIC News. 2009;12(1)15–29.
Table 1Inputs and outputs of the flue gas supply device Table 2LCA of the microalgae photocultivation process (Unit: kg CO2 eq/ton) Table 3LCA of the CO2 separation process via membrane technology (Unit: kg CO2 eq/ton) Table 4LCA of the carbon mineralization process (Unit: kg CO2 eq/ton) Table 5LCA of the integrated CCU system (Unit: kg CO2 eq/ton) Table 6Energy consumption of CO2 capture technologies using chemical absorbents Source: KDHC (2019) [36] Table 7Energy consumption and GHG emissions of CCS technologies (Unit: GJ/ton-CO2, kg CO2 eq/ton-CO2) |
|