Comparison of four different end-of-life modelling approaches for an environmental life cycle assessment of agrivoltaic systems in Austria

Abstract Purpose Agrivoltaics (APV), i.e., simultaneous use of agricultural land for food and photovoltaic-electricity production, is a topic of growing interest as it offers a potential solution to increasing competition for land between agriculture and renewable electricity production. However, sustainability assessments using LCA are still scarce, particularly regarding the end-of-life (EoL) phase. Methods This study extends the previous cradle-to-gate LCA of two APV systems, stilted (S-) and vertical bifacial (VB-APV), by assessing the whole life cycle, focusing on EoL. It compares both APV systems, and assesses the influence of selected EoL approaches: cut-off with allocation by classification (CO), avoided burden (AB), open-loop with closed-loop recycling procedure with expanded system boundaries, and the circular footprint formula. Impact categories assessed are climate change, human toxicity, freshwater eutrophication and terrestrial acidification with the functional unit of 1 kWh el and a basket of agricultural goods. Results Results indicate that the choice of EoL approach significantly affects the environmental performance of APV. CO approach generally shows highest impacts across all assessed categories, with AB approach showing the lowest since all materials are sent to recycling at EoL and receiving credits. Comparing S- with VB-APV, S-APV shows higher environmental impacts due to higher material demand, particularly for the mounting structure. However, S-APV produces more electricity than VB-APV, potentially offsetting some impacts. Conclusions The EoL phase plays a crucial role in the environmental assessment of APV and the choice of EoL approach can significantly influence results. Findings underscore the importance of considering different EoL approaches for more accurate and robust results.