Ammonia on-farm : Life cycle assessment of different ammonia uses on a farm
Energy Efficiency(Transport)
Renewable Energy Sources(Bio-Energy, Production of transport biofuels (incl. Production from wastes))
Renewable Energy Sources(Bio-Energy, Production of other biomass-derived fuels (incl. Production from wastes))
BIOLOGICAL AND AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES (Agriculture, Veterinary and Food Science)
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES (Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences)
Sociological economical and environmental impact of energy (Environmental dimensions)
Ricardo AEA Limited
Executive summary
Using life cycle assessment, this study compared three uses of ammonia produced via a Haber-Bosch facility on a remote farm in Scotland. The three ammonia uses compared in this study are:
- Aqueous ammonia fertiliser
- Ammonia vehicle fuel
- Ammonia CHP
These uses were compared with traditional alternatives:
- Urea fertiliser
- Diesel tractor
- Natural gas CHP
Findings
The study found that aqueous ammonia fertiliser provided the largest environmental benefit out of the three ammonia uses. While ammonia vehicle fuel and ammonia CHP were found to provide environmental benefits across most indicators, in some areas the traditional alternative was preferred. This was not the case for ammonia fertiliser.
Normalising the systems impacts in terms of European People Equivalents (EPE), suggests that marine ecotoxicity is the key indicator, since impacts on this indicator amounted to many more EPEs than the other indicators.
Sensitivity analysis into soil type and alternative fertilisers served to reinforce aqueous ammonias environmental credentials.
The studys farm was found to have production capacity that exceeded its fertiliser need. An assessment examining whether to export excess aqueous ammonia or use ammonia for CHP and vehicle fuel revealed that both systems delivered a net environmental benefit across all indicators.
However, it is this studys conclusion that the export scenario is preferred since it delivers a marine ecotoxicity benefit equivalent to -1,000EPEs compared to -438EPEs in the no export scenario. A transport burden greater than the length of Scotland is required for the no export scenario to deliver a larger marine ecotoxicity benefit.
No related datasets
No related projects
