% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Schreiber:863775,
      author       = {Schreiber, Andrea and Marx, Josefine and Zapp, Petra},
      title        = {{C}omparative life cycle assessment of electricity
                      generation by different wind turbine types},
      journal      = {Journal of cleaner production},
      volume       = {233},
      issn         = {0959-6526},
      address      = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
      publisher    = {Elsevier Science},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2019-03771},
      pages        = {561 - 572},
      year         = {2019},
      abstract     = {Wind turbines produce electricity with hardly any emissions
                      during operation. Most environmental impacts are associated
                      with their manufacture. This work performs a comparative
                      life cycle assessment (LCA) to evaluate the environmental
                      impacts of different 3 MW power class wind turbines at a
                      fictive onshore site in Germany. The three most frequently
                      installed onshore turbine types are considered: geared
                      converter with doubly-fed induction generator (DFIG), direct
                      driven synchronous generator (DDSG) electrically excited and
                      direct drive permanent magnet synchronous generator
                      (DDPMSG). LCA reveals that environmental impacts are
                      concentrated during manufacturing of fundament, tower and
                      nacelle, which account for up to $19\%,$ $30\%$ and $99\%$
                      of single impacts, respectively. Main drivers are the use of
                      copper, steel and in case of DDPMSG also the rare earth
                      permanent magnets. The DDSG shows higher impacts than the
                      other wind turbines in 14 out of all 15 categories, due to
                      the higher weight of its nacelle. Impacts due to operation
                      add up to $3\%.Four$ sensitivity analyses are conducted to
                      estimate the effects of component replacement, recycling,
                      origin of rare earths for permanent magnet production for
                      DDPMSG and electricity yield. Possible recycling options
                      show the highest improvement potential and even change
                      turbine types ranking.},
      cin          = {IEK-STE},
      ddc          = {330},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-STE-20101013},
      pnm          = {153 - Assessment of Energy Systems – Addressing Issues of
                      Energy Efficiency and Energy Security (POF3-153)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-153},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:000479025500045},
      doi          = {10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.058},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/863775},
}