ArticleScientific reports2024
Life cycle environmental impact assessment of natural gas distributed energy system.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Geo-spatial prospective life cycle sustainability of InGaN and InGaP compound semiconductors.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Life cycle inventory dataset for energy production and storage technologies: Standardized metrics for environmental modeling.Data in brief · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Natural gas distributed energy is recognized as a pivotal means to enhance energy efficiency and mitigate carbon dioxide emissions through localized energy cascading. Positioned as a key option for advancing the Sustainable Development Goals, this system optimizes energy utilization near end-users. While maximizing energy efficiency, it is imperative to address potential environmental challenges. A thorough, comprehensive environmental assessment, facilitated by the life cycle assessment method, proves instrumental in meeting this standard. Employing this method enables an intuitive grasp of the environmental strengths and weaknesses inherent in natural gas distributed energy within the power structure. This insight serves as a foundation for informed project decision-making, fostering the growth of the industry. We selected six environmental impact assessment categories based on the CML 2001 method, and conducted the life cycle analysis across four stages. China's inaugural natural gas distributed energy demonstration project was chosen as a model case, and an environmental impact assessment inventory was established, utilizing survey data and literature for comprehensive data collection and analysis. Results from case testing yield environmental impact assessment outcomes, with a specific sensitivity analysis for stages with notable environmental impact factors. The study underscores that the operation phase has the highest environmental impact, comprising 78.37% of the total combined environmental impact, followed by the fuel production phase. Comparative analyses with coal-fired and conventional natural gas power generation, based on dimensionless literature data, reveal that abiotic resources depletion potential is the primary contributor to the environmental impact of 1 kWh of electricity product, constituting 52.76% of the total impact value, followed by global warming potential. Concrete strategies have been outlined for decision-making in both the operational and planning phases of natural gas distributed energy projects. The strengthening of policies is pinpointed towards grid connection and scale expansion.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.