Many factors influence the sustainability of a lubricant. These can range from formulation, product manufacturing and packaging, environmental performance, lifespan, product performance, to how the oil is managed at the end of its life.

However, one of the most influential areas resides in its ability to produce a more energy-efficient solution. Increasing the energy efficiency of a lubricant can provide significant energy savings to the machine it’s lubricating, decreasing the organization’s carbon footprint.

Lubricants are used to reduce friction between two surfaces. In essence, a lubricant helps reduce the amount of energy by overcoming frictional forces, which in turn allows work to be done between the two surfaces.

As such, lubricants are known for increasing the energy efficiency of applications by significantly lowering the coefficient of friction. Twenty-five years ago, the lowest coefficient of friction between two sliding surfaces was reported as PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene) at 0.08; however, the lowest values reported today are in the range of 0.0005 which is a significant improvement as per K. Holmberg and A. Erdemir, 2019¹.

Lubricants’ ability to reduce energy consumption and the associated carbon footprint has continued to progress. Advanced mathematical modeling has allowed researchers to better integrate machine design with lubricant properties.

While lubricant technology will continue to advance, contributing to more energy-efficient machines, efforts are also being made in other sciences. Some of these include ultra-low friction coatings, improved sealing materials, and the use of nanoparticles.

Together, these can all contribute to increasing the system’s overall energy efficiency and reducing associated CO2 emissions.

The Impact of the Industrial Sector

The industrial sector is the largest energy consumer, projected to continually increase into the year 2050, per the International Energy Outlook 2019².

In this study, the industrial sector refers to refining, mining, manufacturing, agriculture, and construction, accounting for more than 50% of end-use energy consumption for the projected period (2018 to 2050).

It is also projected that the world industrial sector energy use will increase by more than 30% from 2018 to 2050 and reach approximately 315 quadrillion British thermal units (Btu), as shown in Figure 1 below.

According to a report by ARPA-E in 2017³, over the last decade, annual energy consumption in the U.S. approximated 100 quads (1 quad = 1 x1015 Btu = 1.055 x 1018 J).

Approximately 40% of primary energy is used for actual energy services, while 60% is used to overcome friction and constitutes losses. According to the International Energy Agency 2022⁴, energy accounts for 75% of total GHG emissions globally. Energy efficiency through tribology, therefore, plays a significant role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

As per Woydt et al. in 2022⁵, reductions in friction can save 2.3 – 4.5 gigatons of CO2 per year. Additionally, increased longevity through wear protection and condition monitoring can save between 1.7-6.8 gigatons of CO2 per annum.

This accounts for more emission reduction than all of the coal-fired power plants in the world. Moreover, this is another example where deploying advanced tribology lowers the carbon footprint, can reduce operating costs, and prevent unplanned downtime.

Achieving Energy Efficiency Through Lubrication

Industrial lubricant applications have become more severe over the last several years due to several factors, including:

Increased demand for higher performance: As machines and equipment become more complex and advanced, they require lubricants that can withstand higher temperatures, pressures, and speeds. This demand for higher-performance lubricants has led to developing synthetic and other specialized lubricants that can operate under extreme conditions.

More demanding operating environments: Many industries, such as mining, construction, and manufacturing, operate in harsh environments that are challenging for lubricants. Exposure to extreme temperatures, heavy loads, and contaminants can cause lubricants to break down more quickly and require more frequent replacement.

Increased emphasis on equipment reliability: In recent years, a growing focus has been on maximizing equipment reliability and minimizing downtime. This emphasis has led to the development of lubricants that can extend the life of machinery and reduce the need for repairs or replacement.

Stricter environmental regulations: With increasing concern about the environmental impact of industrial activities, many industries are subject to more stringent regulations on using and disposal of lubricants. This has led to the development of more environmentally friendly lubricants that are biodegradable and less harmful to the environment.

While managing these additional operational stresses, lubricants are also formulated to be more energy efficient with a lower carbon footprint. These factors have contributed to the developing of more advanced base stocks and additive systems.

As per ARPA-E in 2017, lubricants need to be stable at higher temperatures, protect against the formation of deposits, inhibit corrosion, have improved water and air separation, and have no tendency to cause foam.

Several industrial applications can appreciate significant energy reductions using more energy-efficient lubricants.

Bearings

Bearings are used in many industrial applications to support rotating machinery. They can experience high loads and speeds, resulting in significant friction and wear.

Engineers can reduce friction and wear using high-quality lubricants, such as synthetic oils or greases, resulting in less energy consumption and longer bearing life. In this application, the focus on dynamic viscosity is an essential factor in designing a more efficient lubricant.

Gears

Gears are used to transmit power between shafts. They can also experience high loads and speeds, resulting in significant friction and wear. This is especially true in worm gearboxes.

By using high-quality gear lubricants, engineers can reduce friction and wear, resulting in less energy consumption and longer gear life. In gear applications, synthetic base stocks have been shown to provide significant energy improvements.

Compressors

Compressors are used to compress gases. They can experience high temperatures and pressures, resulting in significant friction and wear. By using high-quality compressor lubricants, engineers can reduce friction and wear, resulting in less energy consumption and longer compressor life.

Hydraulics

Hydraulic systems are used to transmit power using fluids. They can experience significant friction and wear, resulting in energy losses and reduced efficiency. Many studies have demonstrated the impact of using high-viscosity index hydraulic oils to reduce energy consumption in hydraulic applications.

The Bottom Line

Woydt et al., in 2022, also attempted to calculate the financial savings that can be provided through friction reduction. It is estimated that for 2019, 26.37 BTU quads of energy were used in these industries; Coal, Renewables, Electricity, Petrol, and Natural Gas. This amounted to >500 million MT CO2eq, which translates to a social cost of carbon loss of $28 billion (calculated at an estimated U.S. 2021 value of $51 per MT CO2eq).

The paper further estimates that advanced tribology can provide a 7.5% reduction in friction. This translates to > $2 billion in equivalent savings by reducing carbon footprint. Add energy savings to these and operational improvements in lubricant performance, it is clear that tribology has tremendous potential to improve profitability while reducing carbon emissions simultaneously.

References

1. “The impact of tribology on energy use and CO2 emission globally and in combustion engine and electric cars,” Kenneth Holmberg, Ali Erdemir, 2019, Tribology International, Volume 135, Pages 389-396, ISSN 0301-679X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2019.03.024.
2. “International Energy Outlook 2019 with projections to 2050”. U.S. Energy Information Administration, Office of Energy Analysis, U.S. Department of Energy
3. “Tribology Opportunities for Enhancing America’s Energy Efficiency,” A Report to the Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy at the U.S. Department of Energy, February 14, 2017
4. “Energy and Carbon Tracker, 2022 edition”, International Energy Agency
5. “Climate and Monetary Benefits of Tribology” – Woydt, M., Shah R., Thomas G. (November 2022)

Many companies utilizing rotating equipment have initiated or planned to create decarbonization strategies. The process reduces and compensates for the emissions of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), ultimately down to “Net 0”.

Lubricants are an essential component in rotating equipment, so it makes sense to determine optimum ways of managing these fluids in the most sustainable way possible, which includes enhancing their performance.

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a methodology for assessing environmental impacts associated with all the stages of the life cycle of a product¹ and is the accepted tool to analyze the potential environmental impacts of products.

It is, therefore, the optimum tool for measuring the sustainability of a lubrication program and comparing various products and strategies. Performing an LCA is defined in ISO 14040. It takes a thorough inventory of all the materials and energy required to make a product, calculating a cumulative potential environmental impact.

This calculation assesses midpoint indicators, such as stratospheric ozone depletion, acidification, eutrophication, water scarcity, and toxicity potential. Still, this article will focus on Global Warming Potential measured in CO2e.

LCA is a helpful tool for a variety of purposes. For example, how do you know if an electric vehicle will lower emissions more than an internal combustion vehicle? What if the electric vehicle gets its power from a coal-burning power plant?

Doesn’t mining lithium and manufacturing batteries produce a lot of emissions? This question has many complexities, and the answer would only be possible by performing a cradle-to-grave LCA. (Incidentally, there are many studies on this, and electric vehicles significantly reduce emissions over the vehicle’s life².)

Cradle-to-Gate vs Cradle-to-Grave

When performing an LCA on a lubricant, one can look at various product life stages. Cradle-to-Gate represents the carbon impact of a product from its inception to the moment it is ready for sale. This is the most common LCA done on lubricants, as manufacturers do not have control over the use of the product once it is sold.

Cradle-to-Grave also covers the product’s use and how it is treated at the End of Life. Fig. 1 illustrates these stages and identifies the difference between “cradle-to-gate” and “cradle-to-grave.”

The CO2e contribution of extracting, refining, and blending the crude oil (cradle-to-gate) makes up a smaller value of greenhouse gases compared to its End of Life (cradle-to-grave)³.

Although antioxidants have approximately twice the carbon footprint of mineral oil, they contribute a relatively small amount to the overall total since they are used at a small percentage in the formulation⁴.

Depending on what part of the world the used oil is generated, the contribution of CO2e at the End of Life is defined by what percentage is incinerated or re-refined. Different base oils may also contribute more CO2e to the overall product.

For example, Polyalphaolefins (PAOs) have about twice the cradle-to-gate CO2e footprint as mineral oils. However, the End-of-Life of both products is the same representing a more significant percentage.

The overall CO2e contribution of a mineral turbine oil versus a PAO turbine oil is illustrated in Figure 2. Therefore, an effort to extend the life of in-service oil will significantly impact lowering the total carbon footprint of a lubricant.

It is also interesting to note that transportation plays a minor role in the overall carbon footprint. This is the case as long as lubricants are not being flown around the world.

Comparing Lubricant Sustainability

Many factors go into measuring the sustainability of a lubricant. Figure 3 illustrates these various factors and pathways to make the lubricant more sustainable.

Using a comparison like this, it is possible to compare the sustainability of various lubricants and lubrication practices. Remember that each category can be converted to kg CO2e, except for environmental performance, which is its own category.

Biodegradability performance, bioaccumulation results, and the oil’s toxicity rating are essential aspects of the sustainability of the oil. Still, those qualities must be directly compared since they are on different scales.

Based on this spectrum, the ultimate sustainable lubricant would be plant-based (oleo sourced) and made from renewable energy; one which is readily biodegradable, non-toxic, and doesn’t have bioaccumulation; one which provides a long service life and improves the energy efficiency of the system it is lubricating; and finally at the end of this ideal fluid’s life, it is re-refined or re-used in another application.

Also, for a sustainable lubricant to be practical, it needs to be fully compatible with the application, including materials of construction and contamination ingression. For example, an oleo-based ester may tick all the boxes but may shrink system seals and hydrolyze due to high water contamination, making it unsuitable for a specific application.

Lubricant Sustainability Case Studies

Following are three examples of comparing the sustainability of different lubricants by using LCA. The examples illustrate that the product with the highest cradle-to-gate carbon footprint is not necessarily the one with the lowest carbon footprint once a cradle-to-grave analysis is completed.

Example 1: Group II Engine Oil versus Longer-life PAO Engine Oil

Producing PAO-based engine oil is approximately 40% more carbon-intensive than Group II-based engine oil.

For this example, we’ll assume a typical engine oil formulation with the following ingredients⁵:

• 80% Base Oil
• 2% Detergents
• 6% Dispersants
• 9% Viscosity Modifiers
• 1% Antioxidants
• 2% Antiwear

The difference in these comparative formulations is using a PAO synthetic oil instead of mineral oil (80% of the formulation). Let’s assume both formulations produce the same mileage; the only difference is that synthetic oil will last twice as long. The LCA calculations are below in Figure 4.

The LCA values for the Cradle-to-Gate4 and Gate-to-Grave⁶ are used from published LCA source material. The PAO-based engine oil is approximately 63% more carbon-intensive to produce than the Group II engine oil.

However, if one assumes that the PAO product will last twice as long, its total carbon footprint is 42% lower than the Group II formulation. This is a good example showing the importance of performing a cradle-to-grave LCA to differentiate between the sustainability of different products.

Example 2: Re-refined Hydraulic Oil Versus an Energy Efficient Hydraulic Oil

There have been a lot of studies on the use of energy-efficient hydraulic oils and their impact on power consumption⁷,⁸. For this example, we’ll compare a conventional hydraulic oil using a re-refined base stock to an energy-efficient formulation. The estimated cradle-to-gate carbon footprint for these two products is below:

• Re-refined hydraulic oil: 0.63 kg CO2e/kg⁹
• Group II, High VI, Energy Efficient hydraulic oil: 1.06 kg CO2e/kg5 (Assumes 8% viscosity index improver in addition to antioxidant and antiwear additives.)

At first glance, the energy-efficient hydraulic oil requires approximately 68% more carbon to produce. However, by using LCA, we can better evaluate the performance of the two products throughout their life cycle to provide a fairer comparison.

For this example, a Milicron^® plastic injection molding machine (3,000 US tons; 230000; Performance Model) was used, containing 590 gals of hydraulic oil. To compare the energy efficiency of the two products, Mobil^®‘s Industrial Hydraulic Oil Productivity Calculator was used.

View an example of this calculator in the State of Pennsylvania Energy Efficiency Technical Reference Manual, under the chapter “Energy Efficient Industrial Lubricants: Reducing Energy Consumption with Industrial Lubricants”¹⁰.

Assuming the Energy Efficient Hydraulic Oil decreases power consumption by 3%, below is an example of Mobil’s calculator determining power usage.

The model calculates that an energy-efficient hydraulic oil formulation with a 3% efficiency improvement will reduce energy consumption by 29,125 kW-hr a year. We can then convert the kW to CO2e using EPA’s online calculator¹¹.

Another benefit of upgrading to an energy-efficient formulation in this application is a minimum service life extension factor of 3X. These calculations can now be put into an LCA comparison, as seen in Figure 6.

This calculation determined that the energy-efficient formulation reduced the overall carbon footprint by 4%. Although this doesn’t seem significant, this equates to almost 12,000 kgs per year of avoided CO2e emissions in one machine.

When one considers the thousands of plastic injection molding machines in use, the carbon footprint impact of using an energy-efficient hydraulic oil is significant.

This is a good example to illustrate that the performance improvements offered by new lubrication technologies may far outweigh their extra cradle-to-gate carbon footprint.

As can also be seen from the Mobil calculator, even though energy-efficient formulations are more expensive to purchase, they also provide a significant return on investment. LCA can be considered the sustainability version of Total Cost of Ownership.

Example 3: Avoiding a “Varnish Flush” in a 5,000 Gallon Gas Turbine

Maintaining a turbine oil with low varnish potential has many financial benefits for a power plant. In addition to increased availability and reliability, one may avoid doing a “varnish flush” between oil changes. Flushes are energy- and volume-intensive, accumulating a sizeable carbon footprint.

Fluitec invented a solubility-enhancing technology called DECON, which decontaminates lube oil systems between oil changes. Among other benefits, the technology allows rotating equipment users to avoid having to do a varnish flush between oil changes.

The following case examines the sustainability impact of adding 3% DECON to an in-service turbine oil to avoid having to perform an oil flush. In this example, we use a gas turbine oil with a 5,000-gallon reservoir and an eight-year life span.

The Fluitec Value Impact Calculator adds the cost and carbon footprint of adding DECON to the fluid and measures the value of not having to perform a flush during the following oil change. Review the results in Figure 7.

By using DECON and avoiding having to perform a lube oil system flush, this turbine can avoid generating 18 metric tons of CO2e per year. A calculation like this would be challenging without performing a cradle-to-grave LCA.

Other Strategies to Manage Oils in a More Sustainable Way

Multiple other lubricant management strategies can lower the carbon footprint of your lubricant program, including:

• Selecting the best-performing oil for your application resulting in longer drain intervals and lower maintenance costs.
• Implementing an oil analysis program to optimize the drain intervals of your oils. Keep in mind that not acting when oil analysis warrants it increases maintenance costs and dramatically increases your carbon footprint.
• Avoiding Varnish. In addition to failed components, deposits can create an insulating layer on bearing surfaces, resulting in higher temperatures and lowering the system’s energy efficiency.
• Extending lubricant life by additive replenishment. When done responsibly, this practice can double the life of your in-service oil, significantly lowering your carbon footprint.
• Re-refining an oil at the end of its life. Creating a circular economy with your lubricant at the end of its life by re-refining instead of incinerating will reduce the carbon footprint of your lubricant program.
• Minimizing contamination ingression. Studies have shown that contamination is responsible for as much as 70% of premature machinery failures. Deploying a solid contamination control program saves significant operational costs and reduces the associated carbon footprint.

As the saying goes, “If it doesn’t get measured, it doesn’t get managed.” In the case of achieving sustainable lubrication, using cradle-to-grave LCA principles allows you to measure and improve the sustainability of your lubricant program.

This article illustrates how to perform these calculations, and as the case studies showed, the initial carbon footprint of the lubricant does not necessarily mean decreased sustainability.

Conducting these LCA studies allows users to identify areas for improvement quickly and can quantify the benefits. These calculations can also shed some light on the practices which should be negated to assist in the decarbonization efforts, such as lube oil flushing, as illustrated in Case Study 3.

The carbon footprint of lubricants may seem small, especially if one does not consider “product use” in LCA equations. However, tribology, in general, can tremendously impact lowering society’s carbon footprint. A report to ARPA-E in 2017 calculated that 24% of energy could be saved annually through tribology efforts¹². Measuring these efforts start with cradle-to-grave Life Cycle Assessments.

References:

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life-cycle_assessment

[2] “A Global Comparison of the Life-Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Combustion Engie and Electric Passenger Cars” Bieker, G., ICCT, https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/Global-LCA-passenger-cars-jul2021_0.pdf

[3] Cradle-to-grave LCA performed by Fluitec

[4] “LCA of petroleum-based lubricants: state of art and inclusion of additives,” A. Raimondi et al. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 17, 8, 987-996, 2012, DOI: 10.1007/s11367-012-0437-4

[5] “LCA of petroleum-based lubricants: state of art and inclusion of additives,” A. Raimondi et al. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 17, 8, 987-996, 2012, DOI: 10.1007/s11367-012-0437-4

[6] Wernet, G., Bauer, C., Steubing, B., Reinhard, J., Moreno-Ruiz, E., and Weidema, B., 2016. The ecoinvent database version 3 (part I): overview and methodology. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, [online] 21(9), pp.1218–1230.

[7] Taylor, R.I. et al., “Lubricants & Energy Efficiency: Life Cycle Analysis.” Life Cycle Tribology, 2005.

[8] European Patent. International Application Number: PCT/EP2015/068272

[9] Fehrenbach, H. (2005), “Ecological and energetic assessment of re-refining used oils to base oils: Substitution of primarily produced base oils including semi-synthetic and synthetic compounds,” Institut für Energieund Umweltforschung GmbH (IFEU), a study commissioned by GEIR-Groupement Européen de l’Industrie de la Régénération.

[10] Young, J., Eriksen, E., Pennsylvania Statewide Technical Reference Manual – Work Paper: Energy Efficient Industrial Lubricants: Reducing Energy Consumption with Industrial Lubricants, https://www.puc.pa.gov/pcdocs/1687236.pdf

[11] https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator#results

[12] “Tribology Opportunities for Enhancing America’s Energy Efficiency,” A Report to the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy at the US Department of Energy, February 14, 2017

In December 2015, the Paris Agreement came to life at the Paris Climate Conference (COP21). This agreement is the first-ever universal, legally binding global climate change agreement and was adopted by consensus by all members of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The Paris agreement outlines the global framework to limit global warming well below 2°C.

Currently, 197 countries have agreed to work towards reaching net carbon neutrality by 2050. Ideally, this should keep the temperatures below 1.5°C by 2100. However, as per the Global Climate Action Tracker released in May 2021, the current policies estimate that the levels can increase to a maximum of 3.9°C with a minimum of 2.1°C. With the pledges and targets, it is hoped to achieve an average of 2.4°C, as seen in Figure 1 below.

What can the difference of 1°C indicate?

As per Vitra Global, the last time the global average temperature was 2°C warmer, the average sea level was over 6 meters higher than today. Thus, with a 3°C rise, cities such as Miami, Shanghai, Osaka, or Rio do Janeiro could sink underwater. This can potentially force 275 million people worldwide to relocate to escape flooding. Figure 2 shows the impact of the Paris Agreement on the estimated global temperatures from the Global Climate Tracker.

What is the role of the Industrial sector in Decarbonization?

Decarbonization is the process of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The most critical gases which contribute to the GHG effect are Carbon Dioxide (CO₂), Methane (CH₄), Nitrous Oxide (N₂O), and fluorinated gases. In the United States, CO₂ emissions represent over 80% of U.S. manufacturing energy-related GHG emissions, as per the United States Department of Energy.

In September 2022, the United States Department of Energy released its Industrial Decarbonization Roadmap (DOE/EE-2635). It details Decarbonization pathways to Net-Zero Emissions by 2050 for Five Energy Intensive Industrial Subsectors: Chemicals, Refining, Iron & Steel, Food & Beverage, and Cement & Lime. Figure 3 shows a breakdown of the percentage of Industrial MMT (Million Metric Tons) CO₂ per sector.

Overall, industry represents 30% of U.S. energy-related CO2 emissions, which translates to 1360 Million Metric tons of CO₂ (based on stats from 2020). The five highest sectors in which decarbonization can have the most significant impact account for 51% of energy-related CO₂ emissions in the U.S. industrial sector. This also represents 15% of the U.S. economy-wide total CO₂ emissions.

Four key technological pillars can significantly reduce emissions for the five subsectors identified above. These crosscutting decarbonization pillars are; Energy efficiency, Industrial Electrification, Low-Carbon Fuels, Feedstocks and Energy Sources (LCFFES), and Carbon Capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS), as shown in figure 4 below.

How can sustainable lubrication help?

Based on the information seen thus far, it can be concluded that the industrial sector accounts for a fair amount of GHG emissions. In most of these industries, lubricants are used in small and large quantities. Lubrication can significantly impact the overall efficiency of a machine if the proper lubricant is being used while performing its function of reducing the coefficient of friction. The lubricant can also affect the energy efficiency of the equipment. In most cases, particular types of lubricants have shown considerably reduced power consumption. As shown in figure 5, Industrial Energy consumption contributes to 33% according to the U.S. DOE’s R&D Roadmap.

Significant efforts are being made to increase the use of energy-efficient lubricants. Two roadblocks to widespread adoption include cost and the challenge of quantifying measurable improvements. Energy-efficient lubricants typically cost more because they are made of tailored synthesized chemicals rather than straight hydrocarbon base oils. Generally, users are reluctant to purchase more expensive products unless there is demonstrable value.

One example is the use of multigrade hydraulic oils in industrial applications. Shear-stable polyalkylmethacrylate polymers are excellent viscosity index improvers, and multiple studies have demonstrated energy efficiency gains of 5-15% compared to monograde hydraulic oils. However, in most hydraulic applications, measuring these improvements is challenging without sophisticated equipment.

Another example exists in the turbine oil space. Mobil recently introduced a new turbine oil formulation that is 18cSt at 40^oC rather than a standard ISO 32 VG, which is 32cSt at 40^oC. This was designed to meet GE’s new specification, GEK 121603. Mobil developed a mathematical model to measure efficiency improvements and verified the measurements in test rigs and full-scale gas turbines. Compared to a standard ISO 32 VG formulation, the new formulation increases overall turbine efficiency by 0.09% due to reductions in bearing frictional energy loss. This slight improvement in energy efficiency can translate to tens of thousands of dollars of fuel savings and a reduction of over 400 tons of CO2e annually. Measuring these energy efficiency improvements in the field remains challenging, but bearing and lube oil drain temperature reductions at similar load and ambient conditions can confirm these improvements.

The road to lubricant decarbonization does not just lay with energy efficiency improvements. Significant efforts can be made to lower GHG emissions by using more sustainable lubricants and implementing sustainable lubrication practices. This approach often provides cost savings, and the environmental benefit can be quantified. There are three critical activities for more sustainable lubrication include:

1. Extending drain intervals
2. Implementing sustainable lubrication practices
3. Using lubricants formulated from renewable sources

Each of these practices allows accurate measurement of the environmental benefit using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Although LCA is a well-documented practice defined in ISO 14040, there are still areas of interpretation in performing LCAs on lubricants. To provide more clarity on performing LCAs, the American Petroleum Institute (API) is creating a technical report entitled “Lubricants Life Cycle Assessment and Carbon Footprinting – Methodology and Best Practice.” Although this report is still in its draft form, its publication will improve the accuracy and consistency of performing LCAs on lubricants.

Fill4Life™ Lubricants – one pathway toward sustainable lubrication

Over 50 billion liters of lubricants are sold annually. Approximately half of this volume is formulated into engine oils, and the other half is formulated into industrial lubricants. If only 1% of the industrial oils doubled their oil drain interval, this would equate to a reduction of over one million metric tons of CO2e per year.

This is one of the reasons why Fluitec has developed the concept of Fill4Life lubrication. This practice converts lubricants from a consumable into an asset. Like any other asset at an operating plant, the lubricant’s life is optimized rather than treated like a consumable. Actively removing dead oil molecules while replenishing the lubricant with fresh additive components allows the oil’s life to be significantly extended. Fluitec’s Solvancer® family of technologies has been formulated to optimize oil life and performance. For example, DECON AO was developed to replenish the sacrificial antioxidants in turbine and compressor oils. Long-term field studies have demonstrated DECON AO’s ability to more than double the life of in-service lubricants. The range of Solvancer technologies, including the world’s first Fill4Life turbine oil, can be seen in Figure 6.

The oil must be kept clean and free from moisture while maintaining a healthy balance of additives to increase its lifespan. Fluitec’s Electrophysical Separation Process (ESP) VITA units can assist in removing varnish-related deposits from the oil. Furthermore, ESP removes some of the free radicals in the oil, which consume antioxidants and can increase the life of the oil by >50%.

The Solar Impulse Foundation has independently verified these solutions, resulting in the Fill4Life solution being granted the exclusive Efficiency Solution award in 2019. Solar Impulse Foundation created this award for technologies that simultaneously address climate change while enabling economic growth. An independent Life Cycle Assessment demonstrated a reduction of >90% GHGs with Fluitec’s Fill4Life solution. In addition, average cost savings are over 60%. Fill4Life is at the intersection of sustainability and economics and represents a positive movement in the energy industry’s decarbonization efforts.

Overall, the drive toward lubricant decarbonization will only begin when there is a change toward more sustainable practices. This can be initiated by increased awareness of the environmental impacts of the various industries on the planet. The pathway toward keeping the temperatures below 1.5°C by 2100 can only be achieved if we all work together to help reduce our GHG emissions.