Recent Advances in Life Cycle Assessment of Methane Pyrolysis for Sustainable Hydrogen Production
Résumé fourni par la source
Methane pyrolysis has emerged as a promising pathway for sustainable hydrogen production, with the potential to yield valuable solid carbon byproducts. This review critically examines recent advances in the life cycle assessment (LCA) of methane pyrolysis technologies, focusing on methodological frameworks, sensitivity drivers, and modeling infrastructure. Despite increasing interest, current LCA studies are hindered by inconsistencies in system boundary definitions, functional unit selection, coproduct allocation strategies, and life cycle impact assessment methods. These variations undermine cross‐study comparability and limit the reliability of environmental evaluations. This review analyzes recent studies to evaluate how different LCA approaches, spanning data collection, software platforms, and impact methods, shape reported greenhouse gas emissions and broader environmental outcomes. Key findings highlight the need for harmonized LCA protocols, transparent reporting practices, and standardized impact indicators to support robust environmental benchmarking. Special emphasis should be placed on the treatment of solid carbon coproducts, whose valuation and handling can significantly alter emissions and economic feasibility. The review concludes by recommending methodological standardization and integration of regional policy factors to improve the reliability of LCA studies and guide the development and deployment of methane pyrolysis as a scalable low‐carbon hydrogen technology.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Recent Advances in Life Cycle Assessment of Methane Pyrolysis for Sustainable Hydrogen Production
- Date Crossref
- 01/05/2026
- Éditeur
- Wiley
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.