PDF(3018 KB)
International Comparative Study on Dynamic Change of Onshore Wind Power Carbon Footprint
Jingyan Yang, Ziwen Ruan, Xiu Yang, Chaojun Li, Shaoqing Bian, Xi Lu, Kebin He
Strategic Study of CAE ›› 2024, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (4) : 152-163.
PDF(3018 KB)
PDF(3018 KB)
International Comparative Study on Dynamic Change of Onshore Wind Power Carbon Footprint
The global wind energy industry is expected to expand in the context of carbon neutralization. Meanwhile, with the continuous improvement in carbon reduction tools such as carbon market and carbon tariffs, the carbon footprint of renewable energy may impact the cost and development of wind power in the future. Taking China, Europe, and the United States as the research object, this study constructs the lifecycle evaluation process and list of onshore wind power systems, conducts parameter comparison regarding the carbon footprint of onshore wind power in relevant regions, and summarizes the change trends. Moreover, it analyzes the cause of the trend and clarifies the influencing factors. The results indicate that the carbon footprint of onshore wind power shows a downward trend in the aforementioned regions from 2011 to 2022 owing to the large-scale wind turbines, improved generation efficiency, and cleanliness of industrial production. Specifically, the average decrease in China, Europe, and the United States was 49.2%, 46.2%, and 20.8%, respectively, and the decrease was concentrated in the equipment production stage. China has reduced its carbon footprint to a level close to Europe, and its gap with the United States has been reduced to 3.63 g/kW·h. However, China still lags behind Europe and the United States in terms of industrial production cleanliness and fan capacity factor, respectively. In the process of promoting industrial development, China should further promote the power generation efficiency of its wind power system, improve the cleanliness of industrial production, and support the recycling of decommissioned wind power systems, so as to steadily reduce the carbon footprints within the lifecycle of onshore wind power systems.
wind power / lifecycle assessment / carbon footprint / international comparison / large-scale wind turbines / industrial production cleanliness
| [1] |
Global Wind Energy Council. Global wind report 2023 [R]. Brussels: Global Wind Energy Council, 2023.
|
| [2] |
BP p.l.c. Statistical review of world energy 2022 [R]. London: BP p.l.c., 2022
|
| [3] |
中国人民银行广东省分行金融研究处课题组. 发达经济体碳关税政策冲击与中国的应对之策——基于GTAP-E模型的模拟分析 [J]. 南方金融, 2023 (8): 3‒21.
Research Group of the Financial Research Division of PBoC, Guangdong Branch. The impact of carbon tariff policy in developed economies and China's countermeasures: A simulation study based on GTAP-E model [J]. South China Finance, 2023(8): 3‒21.
|
| [4] |
Hertwich E G, Gibon T, Bouman E A, et al. Integrated life-cycle assessment of electricity-supply scenarios confirms global environmental benefit of low-carbon technologies [J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2015, 112(20): 6277‒6282.
|
| [5] |
Crawford R H. Life cycle energy and greenhouse emissions analysis of wind turbines and the effect of size on energy yield [J]. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2009, 13(9): 2653‒2660.
|
| [6] |
马敏杰. 全球风能资源时空分布特征及开发潜力评价 [D]. 成都: 电子科技大学(硕士学位论文), 2018.
Ma M J. Temporal and spatial distribution characteristics and development potential of global wind energy resource [D]. Chengdu: University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (Master's thesis), 2018.
|
| [7] |
Schleisner L. Life cycle assessment of a wind farm and related externalities [J]. Renewable Energy, 2000, 20(3): 279‒288.
|
| [8] |
Vargas A V, Zenón E, Oswald U, et al. Life cycle assessment: A case study of two wind turbines used in Mexico [J]. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2015, 75: 1210‒1216.
|
| [9] |
Chen G Q, Yang Q, Zhao Y H. Renewability of wind power in China: A case study of nonrenewable energy cost and greenhouse gas emission by a plant in Guangxi [J]. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2011, 15(5): 2322‒2329.
|
| [10] |
Yang J, Chen B. Integrated evaluation of embodied energy, greenhouse gas emission and economic performance of a typical wind farm in China [J]. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2013, 27: 559‒568.
|
| [11] |
Liu P T, Liu L Y, Xu X, et al. Carbon footprint and carbon emission intensity of grassland wind farms in Inner Mongolia [J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021, 313: 127878.
|
| [12] |
Raadal H L, Vold B I, Myhr A, et al. GHG emissions and energy performance of offshore wind power [J]. Renewable Energy, 2014, 66: 314‒324.
|
| [13] |
Uddin M S, Kumar S. Energy, emissions and environmental impact analysis of wind turbine using life cycle assessment technique [J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2014, 69: 153‒164.
|
| [14] |
Schreiber A, Marx J, Zapp P. Comparative life cycle assessment of electricity generation by different wind turbine types [J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019, 233: 561‒572.
|
| [15] |
Tremeac B, Meunier F. Life cycle analysis of 4.5 MW and 250 W wind turbines [J]. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2009, 13(8): 2104‒2110.
|
| [16] |
Arvesen A, Hertwich E G. Assessing the life cycle environmental impacts of wind power: A review of present knowledge and research needs [J]. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2012, 16(8): 5994‒6006.
|
| [17] |
向宁, 王礼茂, 屈秋实, 等. 基于生命周期评估的海、陆风电系统排放对比 [J]. 资源科学, 2021, 43(4): 745‒755.
Xiang N, Wang L M, Qu Q S, et al. Comparison of emissions from offshore and onshore wind power systems based on life cycle assessment [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(4): 745‒755.
|
| [18] |
杨东, 刘晶茹, 杨建新, 等.基于生命周期评价的风力发电机碳足迹分析 [J]. 环境科学学报, 2015, 35(3): 927‒934.
Yang D, Liu J R, Yang J X, et al. Carbon footprint of wind turbine by life cycle assessment [J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 2015, 35(3): 927‒934.
|
| [19] |
Razdan P, Garrett P. Life cycle assessment of electricity production from an onshore V117-4.2 MW wind plant [R]. Aarhus: Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 2019.
|
| [20] |
Razdan P, Garrett P. Life cycle assessment of electricity production from an onshore V100-2.0 MW wind plant [R]. Aarhus: Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 2015.
|
| [21] |
Razdan P, Garrett P. Life cycle assessment of electricity production from an onshore V90-3.0 MW wind plant [R]. Aarhus: Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 2013.
|
| [22] |
Razdan P, Garrett P. Life cycle assessment of electricity production from an onshore V150-6.0 MW wind plant [R]. Aarhus: Vestas Wind Systems A/S, 2023.
|
| [23] |
Gomaa M R, Rezk H, Mustafa R J, et al. Evaluating the environmental impacts and energy performance of a wind farm system utilizing the life-cycle assessment method: A practical case study [J]. Energies, 2019, 12(17): 3263.
|
| [24] |
Li J Y, Li S S, Wu F. Research on carbon emission reduction benefit of wind power project based on life cycle assessment theory [J]. Renewable Energy, 2020, 155: 456‒468.
|
| [25] |
Mendecka B, Lombardi L. Life cycle environmental impacts of wind energy technologies: A review of simplified models and harmonization of the results [J]. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2019, 111: 462‒480.
|
| [26] |
Land-based wind market report: 2023 edition [EB/OL]. (2023-08-15)[2024-04-15]. https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2023-08/land-based-wind-market-report-2023-edition.pdf.
|
| [27] |
Wind Europe Intelligence Platform. Wind energy in Europe: Statistics [R]. Belgium: Wind Europe Intelligence Platform, 2023.
|
| [28] |
International Renewable Energy Agency. Renewable generation power costs in 2021 [EB/OL]. [2024-04-15]. https://www.irena.org/publications/2022/Jul/Renewable-Power-Generation-Costs-in-2021.
|
| [29] |
International Energy Agency. IEA CO2 emissions from fuel combustion statistics: Greenhouse gas emissions from energy [EB/OL]. [2024-04-15]. https://doi.org/10.1787/df8c491e-en.
|
| [30] |
European Environment Agency. Greenhouse gas emission intensity of electricity generation [EB/OL]. (2023-10-25)[2024-04-15]. https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/co2-emission-intensity-14#tab-chart_7.
|
| [31] |
United States Environmental Protection Agency. GHG emission factors hub [EB/OL]. [2024-04-15]. https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/ghg-emission-factors-hub.
|
| [32] |
Eurostat Statistics Explained. Energy statistics-an overview [EB/OL]. (2023-05-15)[2024-04-15]. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Energy_statistics_-_an_overview#Primary_energy_production.
|
| [33] |
U.S. Energy Information Administration. Total energy: Annual energy review [EB/OL]. [2024-04-15]. https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/index.php.
|
| [34] |
Guezuraga B, Zauner R, Pölz W. Life cycle assessment of two different 2 MW class wind turbines [J]. Renewable Energy, 2012, 37(1): 37‒44.
|
| [35] |
Demir N, Taşkın A. Life cycle assessment of wind turbines in Pınarbaşı‒Kayseri [J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2013, 54: 253‒263.
|
| [36] |
Zhao X L, Liu S W, Yan F G, et al. Energy conservation, environmental and economic value of the wind power priority dispatch in China [J]. Renewable Energy, 2017, 111: 666‒675.
|
| [37] |
Siddiqui O, Dincer I. Comparative assessment of the environmental impacts of nuclear, wind and hydro-electric power plants in Ontario: A life cycle assessment [J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017, 164: 848‒860.
|
| [38] |
Xu L, Pang M Y, Zhang L X, et al. Life cycle assessment of onshore wind power systems in China [J]. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2018, 132: 361‒368.
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
AI Summary
