Systematic review of life cycle assessment of thermoelectric materials and devices to identify knowledge gaps and sustainability perspectives

Abstract

This research examines the sustainability of thermoelectric (TE) materials and devices through a systematic review of 15 life cycle assessment (LCA) studies. The review was designed to focus on the significant question, not addressed in the literature, of whether published LCAs of thermoelectric materials and devices collectively enable conclusions to be drawn at the sector scale. The analysis focused on gaps and inconsistencies in the methodologies employed, including a lack of adherence to ISO standards, varying definitions of functional units, and incomplete reporting of environmental impacts. Most studies concentrate on traditional TE materials, such as bismuth telluride, with little emphasis on alternative or emerging materials. The majority of the assessments are based on process-oriented attributional LCAs, while consequential LCAs and cradle-to-cradle approaches are notably underutilized. Key findings suggest that, although TE technologies have the potential to offer environmental advantages—like energy recovery from waste heat and efficient cooling—there are considerable challenges that must be addressed. These include high production costs, dependence on toxic materials, and scalability concerns. The findings of the review illuminate the pathway for future research. It is recommended to focus on the development of sustainable and abundant materials, ensure compliance with standardized LCA methodologies, and incorporate cradle-to-end-of-use assessments to enhance transparency and comparability. There should also be an increased emphasis on case-specific analyses and the use of advanced computational models to better inform decisions regarding environmental sustainability and scalability. While TE technologies are promising, the inconsistencies and gaps in current studies limit a thorough understanding of their environmental impacts and broader acceptance. This review highlights the critical need for consistent methodologies, greater exploration of diverse materials, and geographic inclusivity to build a solid foundation for assessing the sustainability of TE materials and devices.