Summary of IEAGHG/CSLF Workshop on LCA in CCUS London 12-13 November 2015

Publication Overview

A workshop on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in Carbon Capture Utilization and Storage (CCUS) was held in London, UK, 12^th and 13^th November 2015, hosted by IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme (IEAGHG) and the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum (CSLF). The workshop built on the IEAGHG report 2010/TR2 and review work by the CSLF. The workshop looked at the state-of-the art of LCA for CCUS in terms of goals and scope definition, inventory analysis, impact assessment and interpretation as well as social LCA and Life Cycle Costing (LCC).

Publication Summary

The workshop concluded on the following general topics:

• There is a need to communicate how and why differences in LCA come about
• Key principles
  • Transparency is essential and must be improved (but be aware that transparency does not equal quality)
  • The questions to be answered must be decided before the LCA work starts. It is also important to know who asks the questions.
  • Be aware why an LCA is performed – it is not for the sake of LCA itself
  • Clearly distinguish an LCA from carbon/GHG accounting and foot-printing
  • Generic LCAs are only useful for indicative comparisons
  • Preference for mid-point indicators
• Harmonization
• No clear answer from the group due to different views
• Can be a good tool to provide insights and deeper understanding but should be used with great care
• Weighting
• May be done if assumptions and intentions are clear but caution is needed in use and interpretation
• No weighting means to assign equal weights
• CCUS specific issues
  • Generalisations not possible due to a multitude of different CCUS technologies and their locations
  • Overall energy system related issues will apply
• Bio-CCUS
  • More LCA work is necessary here, as the biomass component brings along a set of new issues and increases complexity (e.g. land use change, food-water-energy-climate nexus)
• Social LCA
  • Is an emerging area but less mature and quantifiable than environmental LCA for the time being, so should be a parallel rather than an integrated exercise
• Guidelines
• Definition of guideline varied between participants
• No formal guideline prescribing a specific framework, methodology or tool is needed
• A check list on how to document scope, functional units, data inventories, allocations, weighing (if used), uncertainties and how to communicate results would be useful
• Guidance on how to read and interpret LCA studies for non-experts and end users, such as policy/decisions makers would also be helpful