Production
Electrode
The Green Hydrogen economy
Direct Component Solution
Produced by Jolt Solutions
Overview
JOLT is dedicated towards accelerating the global transition to green hydrogen to create a more sustainable future. JOLT-Solutions offers innovative solutions that enable the highest efficiency of electrolysers and drive the world towards meeting ambitious sustainability targets. JOLT aims towards becoming a key influencer in the Green Hydrogen economy and generate value for all its stakeholders. The ultimate goal of JOLT is to yearly displace 6 gigatonnes of global emissions decades before the target date of 2050 by assisting customers in reducing their emissions. Jolt’s technology overcomes all the limitations present in other technologies. Our process shares the positive features of the wet chemistry arising from sol-gel and the easiness of a thermal process with the advantage of reducing the energy input (temperatures between 180°C – 250°C).
Executive Summary
Key revelations
The greatest avoided emissions can be attributed to the limited electricity used to manufacture electrodes compared to the conventional practice of thermal decomposition. This step includes both the nickel substrate treatment and manufacturing of the electrode itself. Additionally, the market use of the electrode while producing hydrogen is more efficient than the incumbent technology allowing for avoided CO2 emissions to be claimed. It must be ensured that only one company claims these avoided emissions – either Jolt or Jolt’s costumers. The sourcing of raw materials is the greatest source of emissions for Jolt. This can be explained by the considerable amounts of nickel used to produce an electrode and the high emission factors associated with nickel nitrate and sodium hydroxide.
Insights to Impact Strategy
To maximise avoided emissions Jolt should focus the application of their electrodes on markets with high emission factors for their electricity mix. The reference markets in Spain, Italy, the USA and Denmark show that the electricity mix of a country has a direct effect on the produced emissions over the lifetime of an electrolyzer. To maximise the avoided emissions with the market-use of Jolt’s electrodes, the electrode should be applied in markets with high emission factors. What needs to be considered is that the long-term energy policies of countries will change as countries start to decarbonise their electricity mixes. Finally, opting for more sustainable forms of transport could lower the generated transport emissions.
Offering Projections
The following forecast has been provided by Jolt Solutions and reflects the market outlook of their solution from their own perspective. Production refers to the sourcing of materials and manufacturing processes, while the market activity relates to the consumer use of the electrodes to produce hydrogen. Finally, the end-of-life of the product is categorised under the same name.
Potential Challenges
There is a potential to avoid emissions during the market use of Jolt’s electrodes. However, the long-term energy plans of countries will change as countries start to decarbonize their electricity mixes which could have an effect on the amount of avoided emissions claimable. Therefore, the selection of the target markets should be considered carefully. When selecting markets with high emission factors to their electricity mix then avoided emissions are higher. However, from a system perspective, the additional electricity demand may delay the decarbonization of an electricity mix. On the other hand, selecting low-emission markets will result in less claimable avoided emissions.
Possible Rebounds
The end-of-life process could be the source of additional emissions as the use of electricity and the acidic bath required to remove the catalyst layer could increase the overall generated emissions. Therefore we highly recommend the introduction of more detailed recycling plans and steps to monitor the electrodes’ throughout their lifetime to optimise recycling operations. In turn, this could lead to avoided emissions compared with the incumbent technology.
Climate Value Proposition
This technology’s climate value lies in its potential as a sustainable alternative for conventionally used electrodes to produce hydrogen. The reduction of embodied emissions occurs in Scope 2 Upstream by limiting the electricity used for manufacturing compared with conventional electrodes. Also, the reduction occurs in Scope 3 downstream which is linked to the market use of Jolt’s electrodes for the production of hydrogen. The embodied emissions for this process is lower than that of conventional electrodes.
Annual Emissions
This model represents the year on year emissions of Jolt.
|
Impact Overview
kg CO2eq
|
||||
| Emission | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 |
|
Generated
|
659,027 | 1,980,604 | 11,051,321 | 25,932,156 |
|
Avoided (Scope 4)
|
3,862,790 | 9,693,659 | 58,071,765 | 116,561,873 |
Cumulative Emissions
This represents the aggregated emissions for each respective year.
Reaching the ‘ClimatePoint’
When the orange generated emissions line is below the green avoided emissions line it can be said that the technology has reached ‘ClimatePoint’. With the current emission profile complemented by the company’s projected growth, the ‘ClimatePoint’ is expected to be reached by immediately. However, the ClimatePoint is only reached due to large avoided emissions during manufacturing. The single-unit installed scenario shows that over time the avoided emissions from manufacturing and lower electricity demand compared to the incumbent technology are outweighed by the emissions from operating the electrode. To ensure continued stay above the ClimatePoint the electrode should be produced and operated with 100% renewable electricity.
Analysis Parameters
Meeting international standards
These analysis parameters are grounded in Lifecycle Assessment methods used in academic research and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14040. They ensure a defined and structured approach to the analysis and outline the potential for comparability between two different solutions along with transparency for the reader. The functional unit is a quantification of the product or service that is being analyzed. It forms the center piece of the analysis, and it is used to analyze the proposed climate solution along with the comparative elements of the incumbent technology. The system boundary specifies what is included and what is omitted in the analysis. The product lifetime is essential to estimate potential use-phase as well as end-of-life emissions.
Functional Unit
Unit of electrode
The functional unit is one electrode with a diameter of 1.5 meters and a surface area of 1.75 m2.
System Boundary
The system boundary encompasses the product from cradle to grave, including all the activities from manufacturing the JOLT electrodes to the end-of-life recycling. The analysis considers Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions of JOLT solutions electrodes for green hydrogen production.
Lifetime
The electrode has a lifetime of 10 years. This means it lasts 2x longer than the incumbent technology, who has an expected lifetime of 5 years. At the end-of-life there is a potential to recycle the electrode. This is, however, not considered quantiatively in this analysis, as no concrete plans for recycling have been implemented by Jolt yet.
Process Overview
Understanding your emission profile
This process summary depicts an overview of the most significant emission factors that take place throughout your lifecycle activity. By viewing these intensities alongside each other, you can gauge their relative importance with respect to positive and negative extremes. Each process item listed on the horizontal access will be described further in the Scope Allocation Analysis where readers can dive into the details behind each of the data points. While this model represents the complete overview, we make sure that each factor is supported by a sound methodology.
Building your impact foundation
Some process items may remain blank because the ClimatePoint team has considered them to be out of project scope, insignificant, or without enough information to analyse. These gaps should eventually be completed as you aim for your emission profile to approach higher levels of accuracy. Because of this presentation, you can understand which additional data is necessary to complete your entire impact profile and accommodate the dynamic growth and scalability of your company. ClimatePoint is here to help you navigate this pathway and optimize your impact strategy.
Climate change – total, fossil, biogenic and land use
|
Impact Overview (kg CO2-eq per unit Electrode)
|
||
| Emission | One-off | Recurring |
|
Generated
|
57.67
|
29.14
|
|
Avoided (Scope 4)
|
338.01
|
3.18
|
Water use
|
Impact Overview (m3 world eq. deprived per unit Electrode)
|
||
| Emission | One-off | Recurring |
|
Generated
|
0.12
|
0
|
|
Avoided (Scope 4)
|
0.1
|
0
|
Scope Allocation Analysis
Connecting academia with business
The scope allocation analysis is our strategy to bridge the LCA emission assessment to the world of corporate GHG reporting. When our team approaches a new technology, we start with the most significant aspects that outline both your generated emissions and your avoided emission impact. The following process items represent these key factors backed by a defined methodology approach. This format permits the technology to be strategically aligned with our global climate targets, challenged for verification, and refined with evolution and growth. As the climate solution matures, we can easily update or add process items making this a truly dynamic report. This ClimatePoint approach integrates impact foundations outlined by the international community.
Your most significant climate impact
To help you interpret the key climate aspects of your technology, we assign each process item two labels to serve as high level indicators. A ‘Score’ that is ‘Aligned’ indicates that there is a quantifiable reduction in emissions relative to the incumbent process. If a process is assigned ‘Potential,’ there is an opportunity for additional alignment, but more verification is required to prove this benefit. ‘Negative’ means that the process results in additional emissions over the equivalent process while a ‘Rebound’ identifies additional emissions that would not have otherwise been generated by the incumbent technology. The ‘Priority’ label rates these with relative significance to qualitatively distinguish importance.
#
Emission impact factor
Scope
Score
Priority
Sourcing of raw materials
Score: Potential
This process has been designated as having «Potential», because it represents the highest emission contributions to Jolt’s emission profile. By reducing emissions from this process, considerable emission reductions in the overall emission profile can be achieved.
Prioryti: Medium
This process has been designated as having «Medium» priority because of its potential to avoid carbon emissions during the raw material sourcing step.
Qualitative Overview
Company Claim
Our electrode is a nickel substrate coated with a solution that becomes a catalyst layer after a final curing process. […] it gives us a mass around 2.5 Kg. i.a. Kg/u Nickel 2.50 Nickel nitrate 0.05 Iron sulphate 0.02 Citric acid 0.03 Sodium hydroxide (50%) 1.18 Sulphuric acid 1.18 Water 15.00 […] (Quantities assuming a waste of 50% of solution when you coat the substrate)
Benchmarks (Directly induced (DI))
The benchmark consists of the incumbent electrode. It consists of a 2.5 kg nickel mesh and a coating with nickel, cobalt and iridium. The coating is applied by thermal decomposition. Two incumbent technology electrodes are needed to replace one Jolt electrode, because the Jolt electrode lasts twice as long. The information on the incumbent technology was provided by Jolt.
Recommendation
Replacing virgin nickel with recyclced nickel could greatly reduce the emission profile of raw material sourcing. This highlights the potential benefits for Jolt of introducing a recycling program. To further benchmark Jolt’s electrode against conventional electrodes and uncover potential avoided emissions that Jolt can claim, a bill of materials of the incumbent technology is needed.
Methodology
In order to quantify the emissions associated with the sourcing the quantities of raw materials for manufacturing an electrode of Ø 1.5 m, area 1.75 m2 are considered. Currently it is claimed that to manufacture these electrodes Nickel 2.50kg, Nickel nitrate 0.05kg, Iron sulphate 0.02kg, Citric acid 0.03kg, Sodium hydroxide (50%) 1.18kg, Sulphuric acid 1.18kg, Water 15.00kg are required per unit of electrode. Therefore, the emissions are calculated with respect to sourcing of each of these raw materials. All materials were assumed to be virgin materials, so not recycled.
Quantitative Overview
Quantification Analysis
Overall raw material sourcing emissions sum up to about 48 kg of CO2 eq. per electrode. These emissions are mainly driven by the nickel sourcing, which accounts for 46.75 kg CO2 eq. In comparison, the incumbent electrode emits about 52 kg CO2 eq. per unit. Thus, Jolt can avoid emissions of up to 3.8 kg CO2 eq.from raw material sourcing compared to the incumbent technology.
Additional Insights
Not only is the material demand for nickel the highest, but also the emission factor for nickel provision is the largest out of the sourced raw materials. Thus, reducing nickel consumption and switching to recycled nickel could have a two-fold reducing effect on Jolt’s emission profile: 1) the required amount reduces and 2) by using recycled nickel the emission factor reduces. The emissions of the incumbent electrode are also driven by the nickel demand. However, the Iridium demand, despite its low requirement of only 0.0015 kg per electrode, is the second highest contributor. The high emission factor of Iridium is due to its extreme rarity. Thus, if Jolt can continue to avoid Iridium in its electrode this holds great avoided emissions potential.
|
Amounts
|
|||||
| Type | Name | Amount | Activity | Details | Source |
|
Process
|
Sourcing of raw materials | 1 unit | Transformation | The information of sourced raw materials was provided by Jolt. | |
|
Benchmark
|
Incumbent electrode (thermal decomposition method) | 2 unit | Transformation | The information on the incumbent technology was provided by Jolt. The amount is two because Jolt’s electrodes last twice as long as the incumbent electrode. Thus, two incumbent electrodes are needed to cover the same timeframe as covered with one Jolt electrode. | |
Quantified sub-process
Subprocesses were taken from Jolt.
Quantified Results (per unit, one-off)
The emissions from sourcing different raw materials for the manufacturing of one electrode is calculated by adding the respective individual emissions from the quantity of raw material used.
| Average emissions generated: | 48.38 kg CO2-eq | 0.05 ton CO2-eq |
| Avoided emissions: | ||
| Incumbent electrode (thermal decomposition method) (mean): | 55.97 kg CO2-eq | 0.06 ton CO2-eq |
Electricity for manufacturing electrodes
Score: Potential
This process has been designated as having «Potential», to highlight 1) the reduced electricity demand of Jolt’s manufacturing technology and 2) the importance of using electricity from renewable sources, as this can provide considerable emission savings during the manufacturing process.
Prioryti: Medium
This process has been designated as having «High» priority because of its large potential to avoid carbon emissions during the manufacturing step by expanding the use of renewable electricity.
Qualitative Overview
Company Claim
The power required in our pilot plant (according to our engineering project) is around 250 kW, due to the thermal treatment of the electrode after coating (other sources of CO2 inherit the process are considered negligible). Energy Consumption = 250 kW x 60 s / 3600 s = 4.16 kWh. We could consider the standard mixing rate in the Spanish market [but] We can expect 25-50% of electricity coming from PV panels.
Benchmarks (Directly induced (DI))
Electricity requirements from the thermal decomposition method. Amounts have been multiplied by 2 due to the longer lifetime of Jolt’s electrode.
Recommendation
For the electricity used during the manufacturing to be quantified, the electricity source and the quantity used need to be shared so that these can be compared to conventional practices in the industry.
Methodology
This step includes the nickel substrate treatment and manufacturing of the electrode itself. The nickel substrate treatment requires 350 000kWh/year / 11 428 electrodes/year = 30.625 kWh/electrode. The manufacturing electricity demand of one electrode = 250 kW x 60 s / 3600 s = 4.16 kWh. The electricity mix at the factory is assumed to be 37.5% electricity from PV + 62.5% from Spanish electricity mix.
Quantitative Overview
Quantification Analysis
Jolt’s manufacturing technology uses about 100 times less electricity per electrode. This results in considerably lower emissions. For one electrode Jolt only emits 7.9 kg CO2 eq. The incumbent technology, therman decomposition, emits up to 144 kg CO2 eq. This results in avoided emissions of about 136 kg CO2 eq. per electrode.
Additional Insights
The large difference in electricity demand is in part due to the lower heat and curing time needed by Jolt. Thus, less electricity is needed. Moreover, Jolt only needs to apply one catalyst layer to its electrode. In thermal decomposition, however, at least 3 catalyst layers need to be applied. This multiplies the already higher manufacturing emissions by 3, resulting in this considerable difference in emissions.
Quantified sub-process
The Spanish electricity mix emits around 0.2 kg CO2 eq. per kWh. In comparison, PV electricity emits around 0.02 kg CO2 eq. per kWh, thus about 10 times less. Increasing the share of PV electricity used by Jolt could further reduce their emission profile.
Quantified Results (per unit, one-off)
The emissions from electricity consumption for the manufacturing of electrodes is calculated, with expected 37.5% of the electricity coming from solar PV.
| Average emissions generated: | 7.98 kg CO2-eq | 0.01 ton CO2-eq |
| Avoided emissions: | ||
| Electricity for thermal decomposition method (mean): | 280.77 kg CO2-eq | 0.28 ton CO2-eq |
Operational electricity electrode (Germany)
Score: Potential
This process has been designated as being «Aligned», because electrolyzers with Jolt electrodes are more efficient than the incumbent technology and thus produce less emissions.
Prioryti: Medium
This process has been designated as having «Medium» priority, because it is important to maintain this efficiency advantage over the incumbent technology to claim avoided emissions in the future.
Qualitative Overview
Company Claim
The simplicity of the process and the consequent reduction on energy consumption is the most significant point of impact. […] Energy consumption [Jolt]: 63.0 kWh/kg H2. Energy consumption [incumbent]: 56.8 kWh/kg H2. […] The saving on energy consumption is around 10%. […] Most probably destination countries: USA, Germany, Denmark, Italy and Spain.
Benchmarks (Enabled (E))
Emissions from electricity use of the Jolt electrode vs. the incumbent electrode. For visualization, other markets for the Jolt electrode and their respective emissions per kg hydrogen have been added as well. This value has not been multiplied by two as the efficiency advantage is not affected by the electrode’s lifetime.
Recommendation
It is crucial that Jolt maintains the efficiency advantage over the incumbent technology, as this is a recurring process. As a result, lower electricity demand over time will compound, resulting in considerably lower emissions over the lifetime of a Jolt electrode versus an incumbent technology electrode.
Methodology
The emissions are quantified by calculating the amount of electricity required by JOLT electrodes to produce 1kg of hydrogen against the benchmarked incumbent electrolysing electrodes. The electricity consumption of the electrode by Jolt and the incumbent technology were taken from data from Jolt. Emissions were calculated assuming the German electricity mix for both Jolt’s electrode and the incumbent technology electrode. Germany is a good location as it is a target market and transport emissions to Germany have also been analyzed.
Quantitative Overview
Quantification Analysis
1kg of hydrogen produced with the help of the Jolt electrode emits the equivalent of 29 kg CO2. The incumbent electrode using the German electricity mix emits about 32 kg Co2 eq. Therefore, Jolt’s technology avoids around 3 kg of CO2-eq. To maximize the avoided emissions Jolt should focus the application of their electrodes on markets with high emission factors for their electricity mix.
Additional Insights
The reference markets in Spain, Italy, the USA and Denmark show that the electricity mix of a country has a direct effect on the produced emissions over the lifetime of an electrolyzer. To maximize the avoided emissions with the Jolt electrodes downstream of their supplychain, the electrode should be applied in markets with high emission factors. As the electrode has a 10+ lifetime long-term energy policies of countries should be taken into account as countries start to decarbonize their electricity mixes.
Quantified Results (per unit, recurring)
The generated emissions are calculated for the Germsn electricity mix.
| Average emissions generated: | 29.14 kg CO2-eq | 0.03 ton CO2-eq |
| Avoided emissions: | ||
| 1 kg hydrogen with incumbent electrode in Germany (mean): | 3.18 kg CO2-eq | 0 ton CO2-eq |
Transportation of raw materials
Score: Potential
This process has been designated as having «Rebound» as carbon emission savings in the transport process might lead to higher emissions in other processes.
Prioryti: Medium
This process has been designated as having «Low» priority because of its very small contribution to the overall CO2 emissions of the electrode production process.
Qualitative Overview
Company Claim
Nickel substrate is purchased from European suppliers. The rest of raw materials come from Spanish suppliers.[the transport distance is] Maximum 2,000 Km, considering nickel mesh suppliers in Germany. [Spanish suppliers are located] Around Barcelona, maximum 50 Km. [The transportation processes is arranged by a] Third party [and conducted as] Road transport.
Benchmarks (Directly induced (DI))
This offerings tries to approximate the transporatation of the raw materials of the incumbent electrode that Jolt is expecting to replace on the market. Material need data has been provided by Jolt. Travel data has been assumed: Nickel from Germany by truck, Cobalt and Iridium from Russia by ship. Amounts have been multiplied by 2 due to the longer lifetime of Jolt’s electrode.
Recommendation
Transport emissions contribute little to Jolt’s overall emissions In the transportation emissions breakdown it becomes clear that importing copper from Germany is the main emission driver in raw material transport. The reference process shows that importing nickel import from Germany by train could result in emission savings and should thus be considered.
Methodology
The Material transported (tonnes) is multiplied by the distance covered in order to obtain the mton*km value. This value is then multiplied with the relevant emission factor for the specific transport used. This is the mix of the different materials transported for one of Jolt’s electrodes: Nickel mesh (Nickel + nickel nitrate): 0.00255 tonnes, 2 000 km Iron sulphate: 0.00002 tonnes, 50 km Citric acid: 0.00003 tonnes, 50 km Sodium hydroxide (50%): 0.00118 tonnes, 50 km Sulphuric acid: 0.00118 tonnes, 50 km.
Quantitative Overview
Quantification Analysis
The average emissions generated by road transport are 0.67kg CO2-eq. The main driver of emissions is the truck delivery of nickel from Germany (0.65 kg Co2 eq.). This is 1) because it is the most material mass that is transported and 2) it is transported over the longest distance. To reduce this emission driver there are three options: 1) reduce the amount of mass that is transported, 2) reduce the distance it is transported or 3) change the mode of transport, for example from truck to train. Compared to the benchmark of the incumbent electrode’s raw materials Jolt’s transport emissions are 0.015 kg CO2 eq. higher.
Additional Insights
Transportation emissions are highly variable depending on the distance covered and the mode of transport used. Potential emission savings of about 0.4 kg CO2 eq. per electrode could be realized when importing nickel from Germany by train rather than by truck. The incumbent electrode has slightly lower transport emissions, because of the bulk efficiency of ship transport. If Jolt can ship nickel from Germany by train then Jolt could potentially claim more avoided emissions over the incumbent technology.
Quantified sub-process
Sub-processes were taken from communications with Jolt.
Quantified Results (per unit, one-off)
The emissions represent the distance and the mass of material transported to manufacture the electrodes.
| Average emissions generated: | 0.67 kg CO2-eq | 0 ton CO2-eq |
| Avoided emissions: | ||
| Transport incumbent electrode raw materials (mean): | 0.64 kg CO2-eq | 0 ton CO2-eq |
Transport of electrodes to customers
Score: Potential
This process has been designated as having «Potential» as emission saving potential has been identified when replacing road transport with transport by train.
Prioryti: Medium
This process has been designated as having «Low» priority because of its very small contribution to the overall CO2 emissions of the electrode production process. Moreover, the shipping is conducted by a third party and thus less controllable for Jolt.
Qualitative Overview
Company Claim
Most probably destination countries: USA, Germany, Denmark, Italy and Spain. [The transportation processes is arranged by a] Third party [and conducted as] Maritime and/or road transport.
Benchmarks (Enabled (E))
For transportation to costumers the incumbent electrode is assumed to weigh the same and be produced in the same place as Jolt’s electrode. Amounts have been multiplied by 2 due to the longer lifetime of Jolt’s electrode.
Recommendation
When comparing road transport destinations, the closer the destination the lower are the emissions. However, shipping an electrode to the USA with a freight ship results in lower emissions per electrode than when shipping an electrode to Denmark by truck due to the larger advantage of bulk shipping. To minimize the downstream emission profile of Jolt, local markets or shipping by freight ship should be considered. Moreover, replacing shipping by truck with shipping by train where possible can reduce emissions further.
Methodology
The weight of the electrode transported (tonnes) is multiplied by the distance covered in order to obtain the mton*km value. This value is then multiplied with the relevant emission factor for the specific transport used. For distances between countries the distance the distance from Google Maps was used for land transport and from shore to shore for sea transport. For sea transport additional transportation by truck should be expected but is not accounted for here. The main process to consider for Jolt’s emission profile was an electrode transported to Germany by truck, because this was between Denmark and Italy.
Quantitative Overview
Quantification Analysis
The average emissions generated by transporting the electrodes through road transport are on average 0.64 kg CO2-eq. This amount is more or less the same as for the raw material transport. Transporting the raw materials by train would lead to a reduction of transport emissions of by 0.4kg CO2-eq. The incumbent technology was assumed to weigh the same and be produced in the same location as Jolt’s. Thus, there are no avoided emissions during this process.
Additional Insights
Transportation emissions are highly variable depending on the distance covered and the mode of transport used. The exception is shipping by freight ship, where the bulk transportation advantage brings about lower emissions.
Quantified Results (per unit, one-off)
The emissions related to the transportation of the electrodes from the manufacturing location to Germany by truck.
| Average emissions generated: | 0.64 kg CO2-eq | 0 ton CO2-eq |
| Avoided emissions: | ||
| Transport of incumbent electrode (mean): | 0.64 kg CO2-eq | 0 ton CO2-eq |
End-of-life
Score: Potential
This process has been designated as having «Potential» as avoided carbon emissions through recycling of the electrode materials can help reduce emissions considerably.
Prioryti: Medium
This process has been designated as having «High» priority because of its very small contribution to the overall CO2 emissions of the electrode production process.
Qualitative Overview
Company Claim
We are considering the recycling of electrodes at the end of their working life. The electrode has a lifetime of 10 years. Water, sodium hydroxide and sulphuric acid leave the process as waste waters to be treated by an external recycling agent. Our intention in the future is to recycle them internally recovering water to reuse in the process. The rest of raw materials are in the final product. Regarding the electrode manufactured, we could recover the substrate at the end of its life. Using an acidic bath we could easily remove the catalyst layer and recycle the nickel substrate.We can recover the nickel substrate, but it seems difficult to use it directly without a previous mechanical refurbishment. [We] can recover […] more than 90% of the mass of the electrode.
Recommendation
End-of-life recycling is an important process to reduce the amount of virgin raw materials required. It can also further claimable avoided emissions if done by Jolt. Therefore we highly recommend the introduction of recycling plans and steps to monitor the electrodes’ throughout their lifetime to optimize recycling operations. Finally, designing the electrode in ways that make it easily recyclable can further improve the positive effects of recycling operations.
Scope Agregation
Functional unit profile
This graph represents the aggregation of all the aforementioned emission factors with respect to the defined functional unit. By selecting a benchmark, the corresponding avoided emissions will also be displayed on the graph. This enables you to see the difference in the emission profile that this climate solution has to the incumbent technology. There is also an effect filter to identify which impact factors only occur once and which recur multiple times, usually throughout the lifetime use of the product or service. You can click the process labels in the legend to hide and show different elements to reveal further insights.
Climate change – total, fossil, biogenic and land use
|
Scope Overview
kg CO2 per unit
|
||||||
| Emission | Scope 1 up | Scope 1 down | Scope 2 up | Scope 2 down | Scope 3 up | Scope 3 down |
|
Generated
|
0 | 0 | 7.98 | 0 | 49.05 | 29.78 |
|
Avoided (Scope 4)
|
0 | 0 | 280.77 | 0 | 56.61 | 3.82 |
Water use
|
Scope Overview
m3 world eq. deprived per unit
|
||||||
| Emission | Scope 1 up | Scope 1 down | Scope 2 up | Scope 2 down | Scope 3 up | Scope 3 down |
|
Generated
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.06 | 0.06 |
|
Avoided (Scope 4)
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.05 | 0.06 |
Projections
Forecasting your impact
As we seek to mitigate emissions across entire industry sectors, identifying our most strategic opportunities requires an examination of future scenarios and corresponding scalability. This section represents the aggregated impacts applied to the modeled growth forecast. Use the filters to navigate respective scopes and perspectives to visualize the nuances of these aggregations. You can even select different ‘Scenarios’ and ‘Benchmarks’ to understand the implications of different pathways and audience outlooks.
Different lifecycle stages
Some lifecycle activities, such as ‘production,’ reveal all of the embodied emissions that result from bringing the product or service to market. Meanwhile, ‘Market’ represents emission factors that occur after the technology is deployed. Think of this for products and services that continue to have an impact even after they are sold to the end consumer. ‘End-of-life’ activities may also be applicable to modeling if, for example, additional emissions are generated with waste processing. This Life Cycle Analysis represents aggregations of all stages.
Scenario
This scenario is purely theoretical, but it shows the importance of renewable electricity. The scenario uses Jolt’s market expectations as its basis until 2026. From 2026 until 2035 the model then assumes no more production to show what happens with the emissions during the use-phase. It becomes evident that use-phase emissions outweigh the avoided emissions over time if coventional electricity mixes are used, assuming they do not decarbonize. This highlights the need to, in the long-term, power the Jolt electrodes with renewable electricity. The number of units in the market reduces from 2033 on as Jolt assumes a lifetime of about 10 years.