Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Life Cycle Assessment of A Solar Thermal Collector PDF
Life Cycle Assessment of A Solar Thermal Collector PDF
www.elsevier.com/locate/renene
Abstract
The renewable energy sources are often presented as clean sources, not considering the
environmental impacts related to their manufacture. The production of the renewable plants, like
every production process, entails a consumption of energy and raw materials as well as the release of
pollutants. Furthermore, the impacts related to some life cycle phases (as maintenance or
installation) are sometimes neglected or not adequately investigated.
The energy and the environmental performances of one of the most common renewable
technologies have been studied: the solar thermal collector for sanitary warm water demand. A life
cycle assessment (LCA) has been performed following the international standards of series ISO
14040. The aim is to trace the products eco-profile that synthesises the main energy and
environmental impacts related to the whole products life cycle. The following phases have been
investigated: production and deliver of energy and raw materials, production process, installation,
maintenance, disposal and transports occurring during each step. The analysis is carried out on the
basis of data directly collected in an Italian factory.
q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Life cycle assessment (LCA); Renewable energy; Solar thermal collector
1. Introduction
All goods and services have an environmental impact along their life cycle. On this concept
the European countries have focused their attention, considering the improvement of
* Corresponding author. Tel.: C39 91 236 131; fax: C39 91 484 425.
E-mail address: mcellura@dream.unipa.it (M. Cellura).
0960-1481/$ - see front matter q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.renene.2004.09.009
1032 F. Ardente et al. / Renewable Energy 30 (2005) 10311054
The presented results are extracted from the case study CS2 performed within the
works of Task 27Subtask C of IEA (International Energy Agency) about Performance,
durability and sustainability of advanced windows and solar components for buildings.
Data regarding the production, the installation and maintenance phases have been directly
collected; thanks to the collaboration of an Italian firm [22]. The data collection has been
also referred to the Environmental Management System active in the production site. Data
regarding raw materials and energy sources have been referred, when possible, to Italian
mean values. When not available, data of other European databases have been employed.
The first phase of the LCA is the goal and scope definition. It includes an important
step: the clear statement of the functional unit (FU). The FU is defined as the reference
unit expressed as quantified performance of the product system [5]. The FU is important
as basis for data collection and for the comparability of different studies referred to the
same product category. The choice of the FU is not always immediate. In our case study
three different alternatives were checked [3]:
1. FU equal to the entire equipment. The results are presented as global quantities
concerning the whole collector. Probably, this is the most intuitive choice but it could
cause misunderstanding. In fact, there are various typologies of collectors, which can
be roughly divided in two main categories: collectors with forced circulating flow and
collectors with natural circulating flow.1 Performing the LCA related to these two
collectors types, the results could be not comparable.
2. Impacts per unit of collector area. This alternative may be misleading. Enlarging the
collector surface S, the specific environmental impacts (as, for example, the CO2/S)
could decrease. So, two collectors with the same total impacts could have different
specific ones. In fact, the collector with the greater surface would be considered as more
ecological not necessarily being. Furthermore, a greater extension does not imply a
proportional growth of the energy harvest, due to the non-linear relationship between
the collector surface and the collected energy.
3. Impact per unit of energy output. This alternative is generally chosen for energy
systems [23,24], because it refers to the environmental impacts of the energy
performances of the plant. However, it is difficult to apply this FU to the LCA of solar
collectors. The output of this system is an extremely variable data, depending on
1
The first one represents the normal flat collector whose thermal fluid is moved by a pump towards a separate
water tank. The second is a compact collector strictly connected to a smaller water tank, and the fluid is naturally
moved by the difference of density caused by the solar heating.
1034 F. Ardente et al. / Renewable Energy 30 (2005) 10311054
the solar energy input. Confusion could arise referring the impacts to the energy output
because the same collector could have a different eco-profile depending on the location.
Our LCA case study refers to the first FU alternative, and the environmental impacts are
related to the whole collector.
The absorbing collector (including the main framework, the absorbing plate and the
pipes for the thermal fluid flow);
The water tank (including the heat exchanger, the coverage, the electrical resistance
and the inner pipes for the sanitary water flow);
The external support (employed to fasten the system on the houses roof).
The collector belongs to the category of passive solar device. The water tank and the
absorbing surface are strictly connected, constituting a unique unit, and the thermal fluid
circulation occurs with the natural convection. The internal fluid circuit does not need
pumps and it does not cause power energy consumption. This typology of collector is
particularly recommended for small domestic plants with a mediumlow demand of
sanitary warm water.
The water tank and the collector can be directly installed on sloping roofs. The
producing company also furnishes an optional steel support that allows the installation on
flat roofs. This constructive typology being common in Italy, the external support has also
been included into the FU (see Fig. 1).
Impacts related to the three components have been disaggregated to grant the
transparency of the study and to define a dominance analysis referring to the main
components of the plant.
The collector framework is made of painted galvanised steel (0.003 m width). A black-
painted copper plate, welded with pipes for the thermal fluid flow, constitutes the
absorbing surface. An aluminium frame with high-reflectance coefficient to increase the
collectors efficiency protects the plate. The thermal insulation is granted by high-density
polyurethane-PUR foam (0.03 m width).
The collector is covered by high-transparent tempered single glass with low iron-oxides
percentage. The glass (0.004 m width) is shock-proof and it is hermetically fastened to the
framework. To reduce heat losses, vacuum is created inside the collector.
The water tank has 0.16 m3 of capacity and it mainly consists of a galvanised steel
framework. It is protected by the stainless steel coverage, and it is placed on the top of the
collector. The space within the water tank and the external coverage is filled with high-
density PUR foam. There are two circuits for the fluid flows: the heat carrier circuit and the
sanitary water circuit. The thermal fluid is a mixture of water (5080%) and propylene
glycol (2050%) that avoids freezing problems during the cold season. It has been
supposed to use a 50% mixture. The fluid mixture flows along a cylindrical interstice that
works as heat exchanger. The water tank encloses a magnesium anode (to reduce the
corrosion) and an electrical resistance. In the studied FU, this auxiliary resistance is not
computed as a water tanks part but it is considered separately (in the section other
components). So, it is easier to state the incidence of this component on the global eco-
profile.
The section other components also includes the materials for packaging (cardboard
and the low density polyethylene, LDPE) and the external high-density polyethylene
(HDPE) pipes used to connect the collector to the water tank.
Galvanised steel bars, together assembled and fastened to the collector by means of
bolts and screws, constitute the support. Table 1 shows the details of employed materials
and masses.
The following sections describe the studys assumptions and the related energy and
environmental impacts occurring during the collectors life cycle. The following phases
have been investigated: production and delivery of energy and raw materials, production
process, installation, maintenance, disposal and transports occurring during each step.
3.1. Transports
Table 1
Details of employed materials and masses
As it is not possible to determine the exact amount of travels for the production of
the solar collector, the tkm is assumed as functional unit for trucks transport.
It represents the energy and environmental impacts referred to the transport of 1000 kg of
products for 1 km route [25]. The impacts are then calculated by means of the masses and
the distances.
It has been assumed that every transport occurs by means of trucks with 28,000 kg
capacity. A different assumption regards the glass transport, purchased from a foreign
company, that is supposed transported by medium and high-capacity trucks. Having not
further information, it has been supposed an averaged condition of half load transport for
double way. Specific impacts related to trucks have been referred to Italian studies
performed by the Italian Agency for the Environment Protection [25,26].
Regarding all the input materials employed during the life cycle steps and considering
the mean distance values, it has been estimated a global transport load of 154 tkm. Details
of estimated air emissions are shown in Table 2.
Data regarding the collectors production process have been collected; thanks to a field
analysis. The production process concerns mainly in metals transformation and in
assembling them with other externally worked parts (generally, little plastic or metal
auxiliary parts). The three main components (absorbing collector, water tank and support)
are produced in different periods, then packed and stored in warehouses (Fig. 2).
Successively, external companies sell the collectors, attending to transport and install
them to final users.
F. Ardente et al. / Renewable Energy 30 (2005) 10311054 1037
Table 2
Estimated transports air emissions
side: this flange works as support for the electrical resistance, the magnesium anode and
the coil copper pipe. Successively, another cylindrical steel sheet is externally welded to
the water tank. The thermal fluid flows inside this interstice and exchanges heat with water
tank.
The external covering is separately produced and painted. Finally, the water tank parts
are assembled together and PUR is injected into empty spaces.
Fig. 5 shows the production process flow-sheet with the details of masses and sub-
processes.
Power energy being the only energy source directly employed during the production
process, there are not direct emissions from fossil fuels combustion. The production
(mainly concerning with cutting and drilling processes) causes the production of scraps
and metallic dusts. However, it has not been possible to state the exact quantities of
released dusts. On the basis of data coming from the Environmental Management System,
dusts have been indirectly estimated as percentage (about 1.5%) of the process scraps
mass. Particular emissions are produced during the plasma cutting, the coating and
Table 3
Main air-emissions due to welding
the welding. These processes are described in the following paragraphs. No water
emissions have been detected.
Table 4
Composition emission in plasma cutting [18]
Table 5
Plasma cuttingglobal air emissions
a content of about 7 g of volatile organic compounds per kilogram. Emissions from surface
coating for an uncontrolled facility could be estimated by assuming that all the VOC are
emitted [29]. The coating air emissions are summarised in Table 6.
3.4. Installation
Transport of the FU from the factory to storehouses for the sale by retail;
Transport from storehouse to the user place;
Installation of FUs parts.
Transports from factory to storehouses employ various trucks. Also the destinations are
variable (depending on the selling companies places). For these reasons, the following
average conditions have been assumed:
The FU is transported from storehouse to the user place by van of 3500 kg capacity.
Generally, the company makes one travel for each collector. The average covered distance
(double way) is 30 km. The installation consists of:
Table 7
Installation transports air emissions
3.5. Maintenance
As suggested by the selling company we have supposed that the FU would have an
average useful life of 15 years. In absence of rare external damages (as the glass break), the
FU does not necessitate frequent maintenance. The ordinary cycles consist of one
operation every 45 years (in all 23 operations during the FUs useful life). Regarding the
maintenance phase, main assumptions are:
3.6. Disposal
The FUs manufacture causes the production of scraps and wastes (the amount is
4.4 kg, excluding the packagings that wrap raw materials). The company periodically
deliver the wastes to a company that takes care about disposal.
F. Ardente et al. / Renewable Energy 30 (2005) 10311054 1043
Table 8
Maintenance phases transports air emissions
Regarding the FUs disposal, no data are available. In fact, the company started the
production of solar collectors few years ago and, consequently, the sold collectors have not
yet reached their end-life. Furthermore the producing company have not started any
project regarding the collectors recycling (for example, the users could return the
collectors to the factory and the collectors could be successively disassembled in their
components). In particular the metallic components (representing more than 80% of the
total mass) could be potentially recycled.
Having no further information, the recycling of materials has been neglected. It is only
supposed that solar collectors would be collected and disposed to the nearest landfill by
truck (50 km double way). Suppose the transports occur by 28,000 kg truck, the release of
1.4 kgCO2 and few quantities of other pollutants has been estimated. Impacts related to the
landifill management have not been considered.
4. Energy analysis
The energy analysis concerns with the energy flows occurring during the life cycle of
the product. The energy consumption could be split into direct energy and embodied
energy. Direct is the energy directly used during a life cycle step (for example, it
includes the electricity or heat energy employed during the production, the fuel for
transports, etc.). Embodied is the energy consumed by all the processes associated with
the production of the materials employed as FUs inputs.
Besides, it is necessary to state how much of the energy consumption is related to the
feedstock rate. This is defined as heat of combustion of raw material inputs, which are
not used as an energy source, to a product system [6]. The feedstock quantifies the
potential of materials (as wood or plastics) to deliver energy when they are burned with
heat recovery after their useful life. The overall energy consumption can be obtained
1044 F. Ardente et al. / Renewable Energy 30 (2005) 10311054
Table 9
Direct energy consumption
multiplying the used energy quantities by the calorific value. Following the suggestions of
the Italian Environment Protection Agency (ANPA), all the energy calculations refer to
the gross calorific value for fuels [30]. The following paragraphs show in detail the energy
consumption during all the life cycle phases.
The FUs LCA has involved two direct energy consumptions: the electricity used for
the production (medium voltage) and installation (low voltage) and the diesel oil used for
transports (during every life cycle phase).
However, the energy quantities described in the previous paragraphs are end-energy
quantities, meaning the energy quantities consumed by final users. All these quantities
have to be valued as primary, defined as the energy embodied in natural resources (e.g.
coal, crude oil, sunlight, uranium) that has not undergone any anthropogenic conversion or
transformation [31]. The secondary sources can be transformed into primary quantities by
means of specific conversion factors. They represent the effective MJs of energy that are
necessary to deliver one MJ of energy to users, including all the energy losses occurring
during the energy source life cycle.2 Table 9 summarises direct energy consumption in
terms of end-energy and primary-energy.
2
The production of electricity refers to the Italian energy mix during the period 19901994 [26]. Data include
all the energy losses occurring in the following phases: extraction, treatment and transport of fuels, production and
distribution of electricity, construction and disposal of structures. It has been assumed the following conversion
factors: low voltage electricity (3.21 MJPrim/MJEnd) and medium voltage electricity (2.87 MJPrim/MJEnd).
Regarding diesel oil for transport, it has been assumed a conversion factor of 1.16 MJPrim/MJEnd. It includes all
the energy losses occurring for extraction, refining and transport of diesel up to the filling station [32].
F. Ardente et al. / Renewable Energy 30 (2005) 10311054 1045
Table 10
Embodied energy consumption
Analogous to the direct energy consumptions, also the embodied energy consumptions
have to be computed as primary. Table 10 summarises the primary energy demand for all
the employed raw materials. Data regarding the embodied energy of materials refers to
the Italian official environmental database [26]. Missing data are taken from other sources
[32,33]. General assumptions are:
Missing information about Italian stainless steel, it has been referred to average steel
data;
The producing company employs glass with low iron oxides. Missing information
about this glass, it has been referred to common float glass for windows;
The company uses epoxy powders as coating. Missing information about these
powders, data have been referred to epoxy resin. However, epoxy powders are about
0.6% of the overall empty mass and they could be neglected, following 1% cut-off
criteria [5].
No information is available about the eco-profile of welding rods. However, the rod
mass is very low (less than 0.2% of the overall mass) and it has been neglected in the
calculations.
The global energy consumption is 11.5 GJPrim. The direct energy consumption is only
11%, while the indirect is 89%.
The energy consumption for the production (542.6 MJPrim of electricity) is less than 5%
of the global consumption. This value shows the low incidence of the factory process on
the global energy balance.
1046 F. Ardente et al. / Renewable Energy 30 (2005) 10311054
The energy consumption (direct and indirect) related to the water tank manufacture is
about 4.4 GJPrim (38.6% of the global). The production of the collector has a similar
energy demand (3.7 GJPrim and 32% of the global) while the support involves a lower
consumption (about 1.1 GJprim).
Installation and disposal have a low incidence. The computed impacts are mainly
related to transports. About the installation, it is possible to observe that the support is
used for flat-roof installation (and it is the most common case in our region). If the
support is considered as belonging to the installation, its contribution will be about
11.5% of the global consumption.
Table 11
Main energy and resource consumption
The inclusion of other parts (copper resistance and HDPE-pipes) needs of a further
0.2 GJPrim (0.9% of the global). The packaging has, instead, a greater influence
(0.6 GJPrim and 2.5% of global).
Maintenance involves a significant energy consumption (about 11.5% of the global). This
is caused by the use of spare parts (and, in particular, by the substitution of thermal fluid).
The propyleneglycol is an oil-derived fluid and it involves a primary consumption of
77.4 MJprim/kg. Furthermore, this fluid is largely employed in the collector (about 19 kg
all over the life cycle). Consequently, the global use of this fluid has a great incidence
on the results (about 13% of the global consumption).
Transports cause the consumption of about 700 MJprim (6.1% of the global).
Feedstock consumption is about 13% of the global (and about 15% of the indirect
contribution). This energy could be theoretically recovered when materials are burnt
(with heat recovery) after their end-life. Actually, about 60% of feedstock is related to
the use of propyleneglycol; this fluid is mixed to water in the thermal fluid and,
generally, it is wasted without any treatment.
5. Environmental impacts
Resources consumption;
Air emissions;
Water emissions;
Wastes and solid pollutants.
Environmental impacts have been divided into direct and indirect. Direct impacts are
those directly related to the production process and to transports. Indirect are the impacts
related to the production of process inputs (as raw materials and energy sources). The FUs
manufacture caused the direct emission of some air pollutants and the production of
1048 F. Ardente et al. / Renewable Energy 30 (2005) 10311054
Table 12
Resource consumption
a small quantity of wastes. Emissions related to the production of diesel fuel have been
neglected: these emissions are very low with respect to those related to the fuel
combustion [26].
The life cycle analysis has shown an overall consumption of about 415 kg of resources.
The employed materials are summarised in Table 12. It is possible to observe that they are
mainly constituted by ferrous minerals: it reflects the FUs composition mainly made by
steel parts.
Table 13 shows the direct and indirect air emissions. In detail, we could observe that
Water emissions are only indirect (in fact, neither the production process nor the
transports have water contact). Table 14 shows the main pollutants. Organic releases
amount to 18 kg of chemical oxygen demand (COD); other emission are mainly little
quantities of metallic ions.
F. Ardente et al. / Renewable Energy 30 (2005) 10311054 1049
Table 13
Direct and indirect air emissions
5.4. Wastes
Wastes directly produced by company are about 4.4 kg. The overall produced wastes
are summarised in Table 15.
Table 14
Water emissions
Water pollutants
COD (kg) 18.1
Fe (g) 49.8
Mg (g) 16.4
K (g) 7.8
NH3 (g) 4.8
Phosphorus (g) 1.4
Cr (g) 1.1
Pb (g) 0.5
Na (g) 0.4
Ni (g) 0.4
Mn (g) 0.3
Cd (mg) 5.4
Hg (mg) 4.0
1050 F. Ardente et al. / Renewable Energy 30 (2005) 10311054
Table 15
Wastes production
Wastes production
Normal wastes (kg) 59.5
Special wastes (kg) 5.2
Ashes (kg) 6.8
The eco-profile of the collectors can be summarised employing the following potential
environmental indexes:
These indexes have been calculated employing the characterisation factors regarding
the compilation of the Italian Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) [30]. Results are
summarised in Table 16.
The energy payback-time (EPT) can be defined as the time necessary for a solar equipment
to collect the energy (valued as primary) equivalent to that used to produce it [34]
LCAenergy
EPT Z (1)
Euseful K EUse
where
LCAenergy primary energy consumed during all the life cycle phases (GJ);
Euseful yearly useful saved energy (GJ per year);
Euse energy employed during the use of the renewable system (GJ per year).
Table 16
Potential environmental impacts
In passive collector systems the water circulation occurs naturally and, consequently, the
Euse is null. The energy saving referred to the use of solar collector has been calculated
considering the average temperatures and solar inputs of the city of Palermo (Italy, 388
latitude) [3,9]. The useful primary energy saving Euseful is estimated 6.6 GJ per year [34].
The payback-time related to the studied equipment results lower than 2 years. This value
shows the great energy convenience of such technology.
Knowing the yearly Euseful, we have also calculated the yearly emission saving (EMSi).
It represents the emissions that the auxiliary system would produce to deliver as much
energy as that saved by means of the solar collector. The EMS depends on the typology of
the employed auxiliary heater. The global impacts during the life cycle and the emission
saving are summarised by the emission payback-time (EMPT). It is defined as the
time during which the avoided emissions due to the employment of the solar plant are equal
to those released during the production and use of the renewable plant itself. It is possible to
calculate the EMPT relatively to the pollutant i as [34]
EMi
EMPTKi Z (2)
EMSKi K EMUSEKi
The EMuse could be caused by the use of the conventional energy that the plant needs to
work (mainly the electricity used by pumps). In passive collectors the EMuse term is null.
The global warming potential (GWP) related to the collector life cycle is 721 kgeq.CO2
(see Table 16). Considering a domestic gas boiler as auxiliary system, it is assumed a
specific global warming factor of 65.7!10K3 kgeq.CO2 per MJ of useful heat [26]. The
yearly CO2-eq. emission saving is estimated to be 407 kgeq.CO2 [34]. Similarly to the energy
payback-time, even the CO2 payback-time resulted lower than 2 years.
The positive judgements revealed by the low values of energy and CO2 payback times
substantially agree with the results of different studies [14,1719].
7. Conclusions
The present report shows the results of an LCA performed upon a solar thermal collector.
Production process, installation, maintenance, transports and disposal are checked.
The collected information could become an important starting point to improve the
ecological performances of the product. It is important to carry out a database of FUs
environmental performances as a powerful tool for the eco-oriented design. On the other
hand, we would like to point out that the life cycle thinking is basic in the design for
environment but the final decision regarding the product cannot be just environmental
oriented. Other aspects like cost, physical lifetime, and energy performances are important
1052 F. Ardente et al. / Renewable Energy 30 (2005) 10311054
References
[1] Commission of the European Communities. Sixth environment action programme of the European
community. Environment 2010: our future, our choice. Communication from the Commission to the Council,
COM 2001, 31 Final.
[2] Commission of the European Communities. Green paper on integrated product policy, COM 2001, 68 Final.
[3] Ardente F, Beccali G, Cellura M, Lo Brano V. The environmental product declaration EPD with a particular
application to a solar thermal collector. Proceedings of conference ECOSUD 2003, Siena; 46, 2003.
F. Ardente et al. / Renewable Energy 30 (2005) 10311054 1053
[4] Commission of the European Communities. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the
European ParliamentIntegrated product policy building on environmental life-cycle thinking, COM 2003,
302 Final.
[5] ISO14040. Environmental managementLife cycle assessmentPrinciples and framework; 1998.
[6] ISO14041. Environmental managementLife cycle assessmentGoal and scope definition and inventory
analysis; 1999.
[7] ISO 14042. Environmental managementLife cycle assessmentLife cycle impact assessment; 2000.
[8] Goralczyk M. Life cycle assessment in the renewable energy sector. Appl Energy 2003;75:20511.
[9] Duffie JA, Beckman WA. Lenergia solare nelle applicazioni termiche (Italian language), Liguori ed.; 1978.
[10] Diakoulaki D, Zervos A, Sarafidis J, Mirasgedis S. Cost benefit analysis for solar water heating systems.
Energy Convers Manage 2001;42:172739.
[11] Souliotis M, Tripanagnostopoulos Y. Experimental study of CPC type ICS solar systems. Solar Energy 2004;
76:389408.
[12] Tripanagnostopoulos YGT, Souliotis MK, Battisti R, Corrado A. Application aspects of hybrid PV/T solar
systems. ISES solar world congress 2003, Goteborg, Sweden; June 1419, 2003.
[13] Kalogirou SA. Solar thermal collector and applications. Progr Energy Combust Sci 2004;30:23195.
[14] Wagner HJ. Ermittlung des primaerenergieaufwanfes und Abschaetzung der emissionen zur Herstellung und
zum Betrieb von ausgewaehlten absorberanlangen zur Schimmbadwasserwaermung und von Solarkollector-
anlangen zur Brauchwassererwaermung (German language),VDI Berichte, Reihe 6, no. 325; 1995.
[15] Veenstra A, Oversloot HP, Spoorenberg HHR. The environmental performance of solar energy systems and
related energy saving installations. Dissemination workshop of the International Energy Agency (IEA)Task
27Performance of Solar Facade, Copenhagen; April 2002.
[16] Andresen I, Thyholt M, Geissler S, Rappl B. Sustainable use of aluminium in buildings. Report no. 1:
overview of research studies. SINTEF civil and environmental engineering architecture and building
technology, Norway. Report no. STF22 A01525. p. 2548.
[17] Tsilingiridis G, Martinopoulos G, Kyriakis N. Life cycle environmental impact of a thermosyphonic domestic
solar hot water system in comparison with electrical and gas water heating. Renewable Energy 2004;29:
127788.
[18] Mirasgedis S, Diakoulaki D, Assimacopoulos D. Solar energy and the abatement of atmospheric emissions.
Renewable Energy 1996;7(4):32938.
[19] Crawford RH, Treloar GJ. Net energy analysis of solar and conventional domestic hot water systems in
Melbourne, Australia. Solar Energy 2004;76:15963.
[20] Ardente F, Beccali G, Cellura M. Eco-sustainable energy and environmental strategies in design for recycling:
the software ENDLESS. Ecolog Modell 2003;163:10118.
[21] Ardente F, Beccali M, Cellura M. FALCADE: a fuzzy software for the energy and environmental balances of
products. Ecolog Modell 2003;176(34):35979.
[22] Ardente F, Beccali G, Cellura M, Lo Brano V. Life cycle analysis of solar thermal collector (first part: life
cycle inventory). First report of the International Energy Agency (IEA)Task 27Performance of solar
facade, Subtask CProject C1 environmental performance; March 2003.
[23] The Swedish Environmental Management Council. Product-specific requirements (PSR)Electricity and
district heating generation; 2001.
[24] The Swedish Environmental Management Council. Product-specific requirements (PSR)Electrical
manipulating industrial robot; 2002.
[25] ANPAItalian National Agency for Environment Protection. Banca dati italiana a supporto della valutazione
del ciclo di vitaManuale settore trasporti (Italian language); 2000.
[26] ANPAItalian National Agency for Environment Protection. Banca dati italiana a supporto della valutazione
del ciclo di vita. Italian environmental database version 2.0; 2000.
[27] US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Compilation of air pollutant emission factors, 5th ed., vol. I:
stationary point and area sources. Chapter 12: Metallurgical industry; section 12.19: electric arc welding;
January 1995.
[28] von Bromsen B, Lilieberg L, Frojd N. Emission of fume, nitrogen oxides and noise in plasma cutting of
stainless and mild steel, the Swedish Institute of Production Engineering Research, doc IE-174-93 edition;
March 1994.
1054 F. Ardente et al. / Renewable Energy 30 (2005) 10311054
[29] US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Compilation of air pollutant emission factors, 5th ed., vol. I:
stationary point and area sources. Chapter 4: Evaporation loss sources; section 4.2.2.1: general industrial
surface coating; January 1995.
[30] ANPAItalian National Agency for Environment Protection. Regole per la redazione della Dichiarazione
Ambientale di Prodotto (Italian language); July 2001.
[31] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Third assessment reportAnnex BGlossary of terms;
2000.
[32] O ko-Institut (Institut fur angewandte O
kologie). Global emission model for integrated systems (GEMIS),
German environmental database.
[33] Boustead Ltd. Boustead Model, environmental database; 2001.
[34] Ardente F, Beccali G, Cellura M, Lo Brano V. Life cycle assessment of a solar thermal collector: sensitivity
analysis, energy and environmental balances. Renewable Energy 2005;30:10930.