Comparative Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Mono- vs. Bivalent Operation of a Crucible Melting Furnace

Abstract

The benefits of energy flexibility measures have not yet been conclusively assessed from an ecological, economic, and social perspective. Until now, analysis has focused on the influence of changes in the energy system and the ecological and economic benefits of these. Therefore, the objective of this study was to perform a life cycle sustainability assessment of energy flexibility measures on the use case of a bivalent crucible melting furnace in comparison with a monovalent one for aluminum light metal die casting. The system boundary was based on a cradle-to-gate approach in Germany and includes the production of the necessary process technologies and energy infrastructure and the utilization phase of the crucible melting furnaces in non-ferrous metallurgy. The LCSA is performed for different economic and environmental scenarios over a 25-year lifetime to account for potential adjustments in the energy system and volatile energy prices. In summary, it can be said that over the entire service life, no complete ecological, economic, and social advantage of energy flexibility measures through a bivalent system can be demonstrated. Only a temporarily better life cycle sustainability performance of the bivalent furnace can be shown. All results must be considered with the caveat that the bivalent crucible melting furnace has not yet been investigated in actual operation and the calculations of the utilization phase are based on the monovalent crucible melting furnace. To further sharpen the results, more research is needed and the use of actual data for bivalent operation.

Principles of Management Systems for Positive Impact Factories

“…In addition, developing an MS for positive impact factories also requires the establishment of a methodological basis. For this purpose, a comprehensive analysis of suitable methods from different fields in the literature, such as Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment [21], Lean Management [22], or decision-making, was also conducted. The method selection was based on two selection criteria.…”