LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT
To evaluate the environmental effects of products in a life cycle point of view
ON-GOING WORKS
LCA and TEA OF HYDROGEN PRODUCed From waste resources
Life cycle assessment and techno-economic analysis of hydrogen produced from waste resources.
Funded by Korea Energy Agency, 2022.
Gyuna(규나) and Yehyeong(예형) are working on this project.
LCA OF HYDROGEN and ammonia imported From Abroad
Life cycle assessment and techno-economic analysis of liquefied hydrogen and ammonia imported from abroad.
Funded by Korea Gas Corporation, 2023.
Gyuna(규나) and Yujin(유진) are working on this project.
LIFE CYCLE Assessment OF STEEL PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES
Life cycle assessment of various steel production technologies.
Comparing the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of conventional blast furnacing, electric arc furnacing, natural gas direct reduction, and hydrogen direct reduction.
Funded by 국토교통부, 2023-2026.
Juha(주하) is working on this project.
LIFE CYCLE Assessment OF E-FUEL PATHWAYS
Life cycle assessment of E-fuel pathways.
Comparing the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of conventional fuels and e-fuels.
Funded by 국토교통부, 2023-2026.
Yujin(유진) is working on this project.
Battery degration considered WELL-TO-WHEEL analysis OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES
Exploring how the time-related parameters affect the well-to-wheel greenhouse gas emissions of electric vehicles.
Degradation, temperature, charging speeds, and charging times affect the well-to-wheel greenhouse gas emissions of electric vehicles.
Funded by 국토교통부, 2023-2026.
Juha(주하) and 인영(Inyoung) are working on this work.
LIFE CYCLE Assessment OF Materials and components of vehicles
Life cycle assessment of materials and components of vehicle.
Funded by 국토교통부, 2023-2026.
재연(Jaeyeon) and 인영(Inyoung) are working on this work.
PREVIOUS WORKS
Wonjae Choi and Sanggyu Kang
Journal of Environmental Management, 2023. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117569
Four methods using green hydrogen in steel mills were analysed and compared.
Both GHG reduction and economic cost of four methods were evaluated.
Hydrogen steelmaking has both the largest GHG reductions and economic cost.
Making methanol is better than making methane in both GHG and cost points of view.
Four methods were evaluated not only for the present but also for the future (2040).
Wonjae Choi, Eunji Yoo, Eunsu Seol, Myoungsoo Kim, and Han Ho Song
Applied Energy, 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114754
Well-to-wheel (WTW) analyses were conducted for present and future vehicle pathways.
Six future scenarios were made to show each case that each energy policy is in act.
Gaps between the WTW GHG emissions of various vehicle types reduce in the future.
The impacts of policies regarding electricity and hydrogen production were analysed.
A framework to assess a policy of electricity and hydrogen production was proposed.
Wonjae Choi and Han Ho Song
Applied Energy, 2018. DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.08.092
A case of countries dependent on fuel imports via maritime transportation is studied.
5 power generation fuels, 10 generation methods, and 2 electric grids are analysed.
Importing raises the GHG emissions of power generation fuels, especially natural gas.
WTW GHG emissions of BEVs with each generation fuel and method are calculated.
The average WTW GHG emissions of BEVs are lower than those of ICEVs and HEVs.
Wonjae Choi and Han Ho Song
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2014. DOI: 10.1007/s11367-014-0704-7
The environmental impact associated with the use of natural gas in Korea was analysed.
The well-to-wheel analysis on natural gas in Korea is far different from that of the U.S, because ~99 % of natural gas used in Korea is imported from the oversea countries in the form of liquefied natural gas (LNG).
The well-to-pump GHG emissions of city gas and compressed natural gas are calculated as 25,717–30,178 and 28,903–33,422 g CO2 eq./GJ_Final_fuel, respectively.
The WTW GHG emission of compressed-natural-gas-fueled city bus is calculated as 1,348–1,417 g CO2 eq./km.
These values are relatively larger than those of the U.S., because most of the natural gas used in the U.S. is transported by pipeline in a gaseous state as compared to the import of LNG in Korea.
