Energy and carbon audit of a rooftop wind turbine

First Published November 1, 2006 Research Article

Authors

1
 
School of Engineering and Electronics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
by this author
, 1
 
School of Engineering and Electronics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
by this author
, 1
 
School of Engineering and Electronics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
by this author
First Published Online: October 14, 2006

Abstract

Microgeneration is being promoted as a means of lowering carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by replacing electricity from the grid with production from small domestic generators. One concern over this drive is that the use of smaller plant could lead to the loss of economies of scale. Partly, this relates to cost but also in terms of energy consumed and CO2 emitted over the life cycle of the microgenerator.

Here, an analysis is presented of a life-cycle audit of the energy use and CO2 emissions for the ‘SWIFT’, a 1.5 kW rooftop-mounted, grid-connected wind turbine. The analysis shows that per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated by the turbine, the energy intensity and CO2 emissions are comparable with larger wind turbines and significantly lower than fossil-fuelled generation. With energy and carbon intensities sensitive to assumed levels of production, assessments were carried out for an annual production range of 1000–4000 kWh, representing capacity factors of 8–31 per cent. For the manufacturer's estimated production of 2000 to 3000 kWh and, giving credit for component recycling, the energy payback period was found to be between 17 and 25 months, whereas the CO2 payback was between 13 and 20 months. Across the full production range, the energy and carbon payback periods were 13–50 months and 10–39 months, respectively.

A key outcome of the study is to inform the manufacturer of the opportunities for improving the energy and carbon intensities of the turbine. A simple example is presented showing the impact of replacing one of the larger aluminium components with alternative materials.

1. Department of Trade and Industry. The renewables obligation order 2002, 2002 (Stationary Office, London).
Google Scholar
2. Bialek, J. W. Attempts to introduce locational marginal loss charging in the UK. 6th International Conference Advances in Power System Control, Operation and Management, vol. 1, Hong Kong, 11–14 November 2003, pp. 108116.
Google Scholar
3. Jamasb, T., Nuehoff, K., Newberry, D., Pollitt, M. Long-term framework for electricity distribution access charges, March 2005 (Office of Gas and Electricity Markets, London).
Google Scholar
4. International Federation of Institutes for Advanced Studies. Workshop report energy analysis and economics. Res. Energy, 1978, 1, 151204.
Google Scholar | Crossref
5. McCulloch, M., Raynolds, M., Laurie, M. Life cycle value assessment of a wind turbine, 2000 (Pembina Institute for Appropriable Development, Alberta, Canada), available from www.pembina.org/pdf/publications/windlcva.pdf
Google Scholar
6. Schleisner, L. Life cycle assessment of a wind farm and related externalities. Renew. Energy, 2000, 20, 279288.
Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI
7. Elsam Engineering A/S. Life cycle assessment of offshore and onshore sited wind power plants based on Vestas V80-2.0MW turbines, 2004 (Vestas Wind Power Systems A/S, Randers, Denmark), available from www.vestas.com
Google Scholar
8. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. A conceptual framework for life-cycle impact assessment, 1992, Workshop report, Sandestin, Florida, USA (Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Florida).
Google Scholar
9. Hunkler, D., Rebitzer, G. The future of life cycle assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Anal., 2005, 10 (5), 305308.
Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI
10. Ciambrone, D. F. Environmental life cycle analysis, 1997 (CRC Press, New York).
Google Scholar
11. Renewable Devices Ltd. SWIFT rooftop wind energy system product data sheet, 2006 (Renewable Devices, Edinburgh), available from www.renewabledevices.com/swift
Google Scholar
12. Department of Trade and Industry. UK energy in brief, 2005 (DTI, London).
Google Scholar
13. Dutton, A. G., Halliday, J. A., Blanch, M. J. The feasibility of building-mounted/integrated wind turbines (BUWTs): Achieving their potential for carbon emission reductions. Final Report, 4 May 2005, p. 109.
Google Scholar
14. Mertens, S. The energy yield of roof mounted wind turbines. Wind Eng., 2003, 27 (6), 507518.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
15. Manwell, J. F., McGowan, J. G., Rogers, A. L. Wind energy explained: theory, design and application, 2002 (J. Wiley & Sons, Chichester).
Google Scholar | Crossref
16. Harrison, G. P., Wallace, A. R. Climate sensitivity of marine energy. Renew. Energy, 2005, 30 (12), 18011817.
Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI
17. Department of Trade and Industry. Fuel mix disclosure data table, current UK fuel mix and emissions, 2005 (DTI, London), available from www.dti.gov.uk/energy/consumers/fuel_mix/index.shtml
Google Scholar
18. International Standards Organisation. ISO 14040: 1997 environmental management, life cycle assessment, principles and framework, 1997 (ISO, Geneva).
Google Scholar
19. International Aluminium Institute. Life cycle inventory of the worldwide aluminium industry with regard to energy consumption and emissions of greenhouse gases, March 2003 (IAI, London), available from www.world-aluminium.org
Google Scholar
20. International Iron and Steel Institute. LCI data for steel products, 2005 (IISI, Brussels), available from www.IISI.org
Google Scholar
21. International Iron and Steel Forum. World steel life cycle inventory methodology report (1999/2000), 2002 (IISF, Brussels), available from www.worldstainless.org
Google Scholar
22. European Copper Institute. Life cycle analysis for copper products, June 2005 (Deutches Kupferinstitut, Dusseldorf, Germany), available from www.kupferinstitut.de/lifecycle/
Google Scholar
23. Association of Plastics Manufacturers in Europe. Eco-profiles of the European plastics industry - liquid epoxy resins, 2005 (PlasticsEurope, Brussels), available from www.plasticseurope.org
Google Scholar
24. Rydh, C. J., Sun, M. Life cycle inventory data for materials grouped according to environmental and material properties. J. Clean. Prod., 2005, 13, 12581268.
Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI
25. European Aluminium Association. Aluminium recycling in LCA, 2005 (EEA, Brussels), available from www.eaa.net
Google Scholar
26. Dahmus, J., Gutowski, G. An environmental analysis of machining. ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and RD&D Expo, IMechE 2004, Anaheim, CA, USA, 13–19 November 2004.
Google Scholar | Crossref
27. Ashby, M. Materials selection in mechanical design, 2nd edition, 1999 (Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK).
Google Scholar
28. Suzuki, T., Takahashi, J. Prediction of energy intensity of carbon fiber reinforced plastics for mass-produced passenger cars. 9th Japan International SAMPE Symposium JISSE-9, Tokyo, Japan, 29 November-2 December, 2005.
Google Scholar
29. Takayoshi, U., Shiino, T., Ouishi, H. Evaluation of electronic components in life cycle assessment. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag., 1999, 1, 2532.
Google Scholar
30. Revenues HM and Customs. Foreign exchange rates: Japan, 2006 (HMRC, London), available from www.hmrc.gov.uk/exrate/japan.htm
Google Scholar
31. Automobile Association. AA 2003 road atlas, 2002 (Automobile Association, London).
Google Scholar
32. DEFRA. Guidelines for companies reporting on greenhouse gas emissions, 2001 (Department for Environment and Rural Affairs, London).
Google Scholar
33. Vehicle Certification Agency. Vehicle data for ford transit, 2005 (VCA, Bristol), available from www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk
Google Scholar
34. Khron, S. The energy balance of modern wind turbines, Wind Power Note, 1997 (Danish Wind Energy Association, Denmark).
Google Scholar
35. Fujii, H., Nagaiwa, T., Kusuno, H., Malm, S. How to quantify the environmental profile of stainless steel. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry North America 26th Annual Meeting, November 2005 (SETAC, Pensacola, Florida, USA).
Google Scholar
36. Lenzen, M., Munksgaard, J. Energy and CO2 life cycle analysis of wind turbines-reviews and applications. Renew. Energy, 2002, 26, 339362.
Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI
37. Voorspools, K. R., Brouwers, E. A., D'haeseleer, W. D. Energy content and indirect greenhouse gas emissions embedded in âemission-freeâ™ power plants: Results for the low countries. Appl. Energy, 2000, 67 (3), 307330.
Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI
38. Meier, P. J., Wilson, P. P. H., Kulcinski, G. L., Denholm, P. L. US electric industry response to carbon constraint: A life-cycle assessment of supply side alternatives. Energy Policy, 2005, 33, 10991108.
Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI
39. Tahara, K., Kojima, T., Inaba, A. Evaluation of CO2 payback time of power plants by LCA. Energy Conserv. Manage., 1997, 38, 615620.
Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI
40. AEA Technology. Environmental product declaration of electricity from torness nuclear power station - summary of results, May 2005 (British Energy, London).
Google Scholar

Access content

To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.
  • Access Options

    My Account

    Welcome
    You do not have access to this content.

    Chinese Institutions / 中国用户

    Click the button below for the full-text content

    请点击以下获取该全文

    Institutional Login

    Purchase Content

    24 hours online access to download content

    Added to Cart

    Cart is full

    There is currently no price available for this item in your region.

    Research off-campus without worrying about access issues. Find out about Lean Library here


Purchase

PIA-article-ppv for GBP32.00
PIA-article-ppv for $41.50
Single Issue 24 hour E-access for GBP789.95
Single Issue 24 hour E-access for $946.50