Concerns about potential climate change stemming from refrigerated systems have increased because of the environmental burden of nonrenewable energy use and refrigerants' high global warming impacts. Currently, cold storage systems based on phase-change material (PCM) technology have emerged as an alternative solution to the commonly used vapor-compression refrigeration system (VCRS). This study compares the carbon footprint of a conventional VCRS with an alternative PCM-based cold storage system (PCCSS). As such, we first develop a comprehensive life cycle assessment approach, focused on climate change, to examine the carbon footprint of the two refrigeration systems. To validate this model, we conducted the comparison by addressing key factors—such as various ambient temperatures, refrigeration temperatures, national energy mix and different refrigerants—that influence the two systems' potential climate change impacts. Upon analysis of the key parameters, the results revealed that the PCSSS has a smaller carbon footprint. The PCCSS showed a reduction ranging from 22% to 56% when compared with the conventional VCRS. Our results show that the use-stage is the carbon footprint hot spot in both investigated cases, accounting for 84%–91% of the VCRS's total carbon footprint and around 68% for the PCCSS's. The PCCSS's potential carbon footprint reduction mainly depends on electric grids, which could achieve up to 56% reduction with a lower emission factor than the VCRS, which uses fossil fuels. Moreover, compared to the VCRS, the PCCSS presented a greater potential to reduce the carbon footprint in warmer climates. Additionally, reducing refrigerated temperatures from 0 °C to −18 °C increases the life-cycle carbon footprint of the VCRS by an average of 47% and that of the PCCSS by an average of 58%. Compared with R404A, the carbon footprint for the VCRS was reduced by 1.5–1.8% when using refrigerant R410A (over a 10-year lifespan), while the use of R744 in the same time frame, resulted in a reduction of 3.2%–3.9%. It can be concluded that the PCCSS has an advantage in reducing its carbon footprint during the use stage, but its carbon footprint increases with higher resource input for the production and recycling stage than conventional VCRS. In the future, engine efficiency, clean electricity grids, and refrigerants' global warming potential must be further prioritized for low-carbon refrigeration systems.

由于不可再生能源使用的环境负担和制冷剂对全球变暖的严重影响，人们对制冷系统引起的潜在气候变化的担忧有所增加。目前，基于相变材料（PCM）技术的冷藏系统已成为常用的蒸汽压缩制冷系统（VCRS）的替代解决方案。本研究比较了传统 VCRS 与替代 PCM 冷藏系统 (PCCSS) 的碳足迹。因此，我们首先开发了一种以气候变化为重点的综合生命周期评估方法，以检查两种制冷系统的碳足迹。为了验证这个模型，我们通过解决关键因素进行了比较，例如各种环境温度、制冷温度、国家能源结构和不同的制冷剂——这会影响这两个系统对气候变化的潜在影响。通过对关键参数的分析，结果表明 PCSSS 的碳足迹较小。与传统的 VCRS 相比，PCCSS 减少了 22% 到 56%。我们的结果表明，在两个调查案例中，使用阶段都是碳足迹热点，占 VCRS 总碳足迹的 84%–91%，PCCSS 约占 68%。PCCSS 潜在的碳足迹减少主要依赖于电网，与使用化石燃料的 VCRS 相比，电网可以减少高达 56% 的排放因子。此外，与 VCRS 相比，PCCSS 在温暖气候下减少碳足迹的潜力更大。此外，将冷藏温度从 0°C 降低到 -18°C 可使 VCRS 的生命周期碳足迹平均增加 47%，PCCSS 的生命周期碳足迹平均增加 58%。与 R404A 相比，使用制冷剂 R410A（超过 10 年的使用寿命）时，VCRS 的碳足迹减少了 1.5-1.8%，而在同一时间范围内使用 R744，减少了 3.2%-3.9 %。可以得出结论，PCCSS 在减少使用阶段的碳足迹方面具有优势，但与传统 VCRS 相比，其碳足迹随着生产和回收阶段的资源投入增加而增加。未来，低碳制冷系统必须进一步优先考虑发动机效率、清洁电网和制冷剂的全球变暖潜力。