PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 21, 2026ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering3 citations

Life Cycle Sustainability and Techno-Economic Trade-offs of Hydrogen from PEM Electrolysis: A Comparative Study of Power Sources

View Full Paper
YLYunyun LiuRCRui CaoHZHeng Zhang

Key Points

  • The aim is to systematically evaluate hydrogen production via PEM electrolysis across different power sources, revealing trade-offs.
  • Developed a life cycle assessment and techno-economic analysis framework
  • Evaluated hydrogen production powered by coal, photovoltaic, and wind energy
  • Analyzed global warming potential, acidification potential, and economic costs
  • Coal-based hydrogen has the highest global warming potential and acidification potential compared to renewables.
  • Renewable sources like PV and wind significantly reduce global warming potential but increase abiotic depletion potential.
  • Coal-based hydrogen presents the lowest levelized cost, indicating a trade-off between cost and environmental impact.

Abstract

Hydrogen energy is vital for future clean energy systems, and its production methods critically influence environmental sustainability and economic viability. Unlike previous studies that focus on either environmental or economic aspects, this study develops an integrated life cycle assessment (LCA) and techno-economic analysis (TEA) framework under a unified functional unit to systematically evaluate PEM electrolytic hydrogen production powered by coal, photovoltaic (PV), and wind power. The results indicated that coal-based hydrogen had significantly higher global warming potential (GWP: 22.03 kg CO2-eq/kg H2) and acidification potential (AP: 0.25 kg SO2-eq/kg H2) than renewable options. PV and wind pathways greatly reduced GWP (2.98 and 1.80 kg CO2-eq/kg H2, respectively) but shift the environmental burden toward abiotic depletion potential due to electrolyzer manufacturing (ADP: 1.64 × 10–4 and 6.27 × 10–5 kg Sb-eq/kg H2, respectively). A key finding is that the dominant contributors to environmental impacts differ fundamentally across power sources: electricity generation governs impacts in coal-based systems, whereas electrolyzer manufacturing becomes the primary hotspot in renewable-powered systems. TEA revealed that coal-based hydrogen had the lowest levelized cost (¥10.57/kg H2), highlighting a trade-off between economic feasibility and environmental performance. By jointly considering environmental impacts, economic costs, and resource depletion, this study provides new insights into the complementary roles of PV and wind power and highlights the importance of balancing sustainability and system stability in advancing green hydrogen pathways.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Liu et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69994c6f873532290d020d83https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.5c12463
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Life-cycle analysis of hydrogen production from water electrolyzers2024 · 74 citations
  2. 2Levelized costs and potential production of green hydrogen with wind and solar power in different provinces of mainland China2024 · 35 citations
  3. 3Ionomer-free electrodes in PEM water electrolyzers: a critical review2025 · 4 citations
  4. 4Harmonized life cycle sustainability assessment of advanced hydrogen production technologies for decarbonization2025 · 10 citations
  5. 5Green hydrogen production by PEM water electrolysis up to the year 2050: Prospective life cycle assessment using learning curves2024 · 45 citations