Can distributed generation offer substantial benefits in a Northeastern American context? A case study of small-scale renewable technologies using a life cycle methodology Mourad Ben Amor a, *, Pascal Lesage a,b , Pierre-Olivier Pineau c , Re ´ jean Samson a a CIRAIG, Department of Chemical Engineering, P.O. Box 6079, E ´ cole Polytechnique de Montreal (Qc), Canada H3C 3A7 b Sylvatica, 7379 St-Hubert, Montreal (Qc), Canada H2R 2N4 c HEC Montreal, 3000 Chemin de la Co ˆte-Sainte-Catherine, Montreal (Qc), Canada H3T 2A7 Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 2886 2. Small-scale renewable technology configurations and energy analysis ..................................................... 2886 3. Life cycle performance methodology and results ....................................................................... 2887 3.1. Life cycle assessment ....................................................................................... 2887 3.2. Cumulative energy demand and life cycle costing ................................................................ 2887 3.3. Life cycle performance ...................................................................................... 2889 Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 14 (2010) 2885–2895 ARTICLE INFO Article history: Received 19 April 2010 Accepted 28 July 2010 Keywords: Distributed generation Grid-connected Wind energy Photovoltaic systems Life cycle Decision support ABSTRACT Renewable distributed electricity generation can play a significant role in meeting today’s energy policy goals, such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions, improving energy security, while adding supply to meet increasing energy demand. However, the exact potential benefits are still a matter of debate. The objective of this study is to evaluate the life cycle implications (environmental, economic and energy) of distributed generation (DG) technologies. A complementary objective is to compare the life cycle implications of DG technologies with the centralized electricity production representing the Northeastern American context. Environmental and energy implications are modeled according to the recommendations in the ISO 14040 standard and this, using different indicators: Human Health; Ecosystem Quality; Climate Change; Resources and Non-Renewable Energy Payback Ratio. Distinctly, economic implications are modeled using conventional life cycle costing. DG technologies include two types of grid-connected photovoltaic panels (3 kWp mono-crystalline and poly-crystalline) and three types of micro-wind turbines (1, 10 and 30 kW) modeled for average, below average and above average climatic conditions in the province of Quebec (Canada). A sensitivity analysis was also performed using different scenarios of centralized energy systems based on average and marginal (short- and long-term) technology approaches. Results show the following. First, climatic conditions (i.e., geographic location) have a significant effect on the results for the environmental, economic and energy indicators. More specifically, it was shown that the 30 kW micro-wind turbine is the best technology for above average conditions, while 3 kWp poly-crystalline photovoltaic panels are preferable for below average conditions. Second, the assessed DG technologies do not show benefits in comparison to the centralized Quebec grid mix (average technology approach). On the other hand, the 30 kW micro-wind turbine shows a potential benefit as long as the Northeastern American electricity market is considered (i.e., oil and coal centralized technologies are affected for the short- and long-term marginal scenarios, respectively). Photovoltaic panels could also become more competitive if the acquisition cost decreased. In conclusion, DG utilization will represent an improvement over centralized electricity production in a Northeastern American context, with respect to the environmental, energy and economic indicators assessed, and under the appropriate conditions discussed (i.e., geographical locations and affected centralized electricity production scenarios). ß 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. * Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 514 340 4711x4122; fax: +1 514 340 5913. E-mail addresses: ben.amor@b2b2c.ca, ben.amor@hotmail.ca (M.B. Amor). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser 1364-0321/$ – see front matter ß 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2010.08.001