CO2 Footprint and Life‐Cycle Costs of Electrochemical Energy Storage for Stationary Grid Applications

Batteries are considered as one of the key flexibility options for future energy storage systems. However, their production is cost‐ and greenhouse‐gas intensive and efforts are made to decrease their price and carbon footprint. We combine life‐cycle assessment, Monte‐Carlo simulation, and size optimization to determine life‐cycle costs and carbon emissions of different battery technologies in stationary applications, which are then compared by calculating a single score. Cycle life is determined as a key factor for cost and CO2 emissions. This is not only due to the required battery replacements but also due to oversizing needed for battery types with low cycle lives to reduce degradation effects. Most Li‐ion but also the NaNiCl batteries show a good performance in all assessed applications whereas lead‐acid batteries fall behind due to low cycle life and low internal efficiency. For redox‐flow batteries, a high dependence on the desired application field is pointed out. Batteries to store and score: Optimization of the battery under dynamic charge–discharge scenarios helps minimizing carbon footprint and overall costs. Most Li‐ion but also NaNiCl batteries show a good performance in all assessed applications whereas lead‐acid batteries fall behind due to low cycle life and low efficiency. For redox‐flow batteries, a high dependence on the application field is given. Cycle lifetime is another determining factor.