Sonia Longo

Dr. Sonia Longo

Department of Energy, Information Engineering and Mathematical Models; University of Palermo, Viale delle Scienze Ed.9, 90128 - PALERMO, Italy
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

16Years (2011-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
3 January 2020 in Energies
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
VMVincenzo Muteri
Vincenzo Muteri
Maurizio CelluraMaurizio Cellura
Maurizio Cellura
Domenico CurtoDomenico Curto
Domenico Curto
Vincenzo FranzittaVincenzo Franzitta
Vincenzo Franzitta
Sonia LongoSonia Longo
Sonia Longo
Maria Laura ParisiMaria Laura Parisi
Maria Laura Parisi
The photovoltaic (PV) sector has undergone both major expansion and evolution over the last decades, and currently, the technologies already marketed or still in the laboratory/research phase are numerous and very different. Likewise, in order to assess the energy and environmental impacts of these devices, life cycle assessment (LCA) studies related to these systems are always increasing. The objective of this paper is to summarize and update the current literature of LCA applied to different types of grid-connected PV, as well as to critically analyze the results related to energy and environmental impacts generated during the life cycle of PV technologies, from 1st generation (traditional silicon based) up to the third generation (innovative non-silicon based). Most of the results regarded energy indices like energy payback time, cumulative energy demand, and primary energy demand, while environmental indices were variable based on different scopes and impact assessment methods. Moreover, the review work allowed to highlight and compare key parameters (PV type and system, geographical location, efficiency), methodological insights (functional unit, system boundaries, etc.), and energy/environmental hotspots of 39 LCA studies relating to different PV systems, in order to underline the importance of these aspects, and to provide information and a basis of comparison for future analyses.


1 December 2011 in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Maurizio CelluraMaurizio Cellura
Maurizio Cellura
Sonia LongoSonia Longo
Sonia Longo
Marina MistrettaMarina Mistretta
Marina Mistretta

1 June 2012 in Journal of Cleaner Production
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Maurizio CelluraMaurizio Cellura
Maurizio Cellura
Sonia LongoSonia Longo
Sonia Longo
Marina MistrettaMarina Mistretta
Marina Mistretta

1 November 2013 in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Marco BeccaliMarco Beccali
Marco Beccali
Maurizio CelluraMaurizio Cellura
Maurizio Cellura
MFMario Fontana
Mario Fontana
Sonia LongoSonia Longo
Sonia Longo
Marina MistrettaMarina Mistretta
Marina Mistretta

24 May 2024 in Environments
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Manfredi Picciotto ManiscalcoManfredi Picciotto Maniscalco
Manfredi Picciotto Maniscalco
Sonia LongoSonia Longo
Sonia Longo
Maurizio CelluraMaurizio Cellura
Maurizio Cellura
GMGabriele Miccichè
Gabriele Miccichè
Marco FerraroMarco Ferraro
Marco Ferraro
In light of growing concerns regarding greenhouse gas emissions and the increasingly severe impacts of climate change, the global situation demands immediate action to transition towards sustainable energy solutions. In this sense, hydrogen could play a fundamental role in the energy transition, offering a potential clean and versatile energy carrier. This paper reviews the recent results of Life Cycle Assessment studies of different hydrogen production pathways, which are trying to define the routes that can guarantee the least environmental burdens. Steam methane reforming was considered as the benchmark for Global Warming Potential, with an average emission of 11 kgCO2eq/kgH2. Hydrogen produced from water electrolysis powered by renewable energy (green H2) or nuclear energy (pink H2) showed the average lowest impacts, with mean values of 2.02 kgCO2eq/kgH2 and 0.41 kgCO2eq/kgH2, respectively. The use of grid electricity to power the electrolyzer (yellow H2) raised the mean carbon footprint up to 17.2 kgCO2eq/kgH2, with a peak of 41.4 kgCO2eq/kgH2 in the case of countries with low renewable energy production. Waste pyrolysis and/or gasification presented average emissions three times higher than steam methane reforming, while the recourse to residual biomass and biowaste significantly lowered greenhouse gas emissions. The acidification potential presents comparable results for all the technologies studied, except for biomass gasification which showed significantly higher and more scattered values. Regarding the abiotic depletion potential (mineral), the main issue is the lack of an established recycling strategy, especially for electrolysis technologies that hamper the inclusion of the End of Life stage in LCA computation. Whenever data were available, hotspots for each hydrogen production process were identified.