The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Life-cycle assessment of carbon dioxide capture and utilization: avoiding the pitfalls
Abstract
Carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and utilization (CCU) aims at reducing both greenhouse-gas emissions and fossil-resource depletion. Assessment of these aims requires quantitative environmental evaluation. So far, evaluation of CCU is based on ad hoc criteria such as the amount of CO2 utilized, simplified CO2 balances or CO2 storage duration. Albeit these criteria may be useful for very early stages of potential research pathways, we show that they are insufficient as basis for decisions on implementations and that they may lead to even qualitatively wrong environmental evaluation of CCU. Therefore, a holistic evaluation using life-cycle assessment (LCA) is mandatory. However, the application of LCA to CCU is subject to methodological pitfalls: (i) utilized CO2 might intuitively be considered as negative GHG emissions; (ii) since CCU usually generates products both in the capture and in the utilization process, choices exist how to allocate emissions to the individual products and (iii) CO2 storage duration is not reflected in traditional LCA. To avoid the existing pitfalls, we provide a systematic framework for LCA of CCU in which (i) the utilized CO2 is correctly considered as regular feedstock with its own production emissions; (ii) recommendations for obtaining product-specific LCA results for CCU processes are given and (iii) the CO2 storage duration is incorporated into a time-resolved global warming metric. The developed framework is illustrated by simplified LCA of CO2 capture from the atmosphere and from coal power plants, and of CO2 utilization for methanol and polymer production. Overall, the presented framework allows for the sound environmental evaluation of CCU.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Recent advances in catalytic hydrogenation of carbon dioxide
Wang, W., Wang, S., Ma, X., & Gong, J. (2011) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/c1cs15008a · Cited by 3,316
An overview of CO2 capture technologies
MacDowell, N., Florin, N., Buchard, A., Hallett, J., Galindo, A., Jackson, G., Adjiman, C. S., Williams, C. K., Shah, N., & Fennell, P. (2010) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c004106h · Cited by 1,636
Considering Time in LCA: Dynamic LCA and Its Application to Global Warming Impact Assessments
Levasseur, A., Lesage, P., Margni, M., Deschênes, L., & Samson, R. (2010) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es9030003 · Cited by 731
Air as the renewable carbon source of the future: an overview of CO2 capture from the atmosphere
Goeppert, A., Czaun, M., Surya Prakash, G. K., & Olah, G. A. (2012) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c2ee21586a · Cited by 724
CHERUBINI, F., PETERS, G. P., BERNTSEN, T., STRØMMAN, A. H., & HERTWICH, E. (2011) · GCB Bioenergy · doi:10.1111/j.1757-1707.2011.01102.x · Cited by 645
Life cycle assessment of hydrogen fuel production processes
KORONEOS, C. (2004) · International Journal of Hydrogen Energy · doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2004.01.016 · Cited by 437
Brandão, M., Levasseur, A., Kirschbaum, M. U. F., Weidema, B. P., Cowie, A. L., Jørgensen, S. V., Hauschild, M. Z., Pennington, D. W., & Chomkhamsri, K. (2013) · The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1007/s11367-012-0451-6 · Cited by 371
Life Cycle Inventory of CO2 in an Enhanced Oil Recovery System
Jaramillo, P., Griffin, W. M., & McCoy, S. T. (2009) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es902006h · Cited by 159
Cited by
The ecoinvent database version 3 (part I): overview and methodology
Wernet, G., Bauer, C., Steubing, B., Reinhard, J., Moreno-Ruiz, E., & Weidema, B. (2016) · The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1007/s11367-016-1087-8 · Cited by 5,564
Carbon capture and storage (CCS): the way forward
Bui, M., Adjiman, C. S., Bardow, A., Anthony, E. J., Boston, A., Brown, S., Fennell, P. S., Fuss, S., Galindo, A., Hackett, L. A., et al. (2018) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c7ee02342a · Cited by 4,374
Self-citationCuéllar-Franca, R. M., & Azapagic, A. (2015) · Journal of CO2 Utilization · doi:10.1016/j.jcou.2014.12.001 · Cited by 1,571
Negative emissions—Part 2: Costs, potentials and side effects
Fuss, S., Lamb, W. F., Callaghan, M. W., Hilaire, J., Creutzig, F., Amann, T., Beringer, T., de Oliveira Garcia, W., Hartmann, J., Khanna, T., et al. (2018) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/aabf9f · Cited by 1,525
Potential and risks of hydrogen-based e-fuels in climate change mitigation
Ueckerdt, F., Bauer, C., Dirnaichner, A., Everall, J., Sacchi, R., & Luderer, G. (2021) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/s41558-021-01032-7 · Cited by 709
Metadata
- Authors
- von der Assen, N., Jung, J., & Bardow, A.
- Venue
- Energy & Environmental Science
- Publisher
- Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
- Published
- 2013
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 2721
- ISSN
- 1754-5692 (ISSN-L)
- 1754-5706
- OpenAlex
- W1968635164
- Cited by
- 447
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 17.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Life-cycle assessment of carbon dioxide capture and utilization: avoiding the pitfalls. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1039/c3ee41151f
- The paper
- von der Assen, N., Jung, J., & Bardow, A. (2013). Life-cycle assessment of carbon dioxide capture and utilization: avoiding the pitfalls. Energy & Environmental Science. https://doi.org/10.1039/c3ee41151f
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
