Advancing the Circular Economy Through Organic by-Product Valorisation: A Multi-criteria Assessment of a Wheat-Based Biorefinery

Hagman, Linda; Feiz, Roozbeh

doi:10.1007/s12649-021-01440-y

Cited by 14 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The framework presented in this research can also be used by academia and practitioners in specific cases. When more information is available, the qualitative scale could rely on quantitative thresholds for poor, moderate, and good performance and even add some scales in between if it is necessary to differentiate the alternatives even more (e.g., Hagman and Feiz, 2021). Information regarding locations and yields could provide additional insights on the transportation required to reach sites for CO₂ utilization outside the facility boundaries.…”

Section: For Decision Supportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utilizing CO2 from biomethane production : Sustainability and climate performance

Cordova

2023

Linköping Studies in Science and Technology. Licentiate Thesis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cover design: Stephanie S. Cordova i biomethane plants. The identified alternatives with a high readiness level are additional methane through methanation, horticulture, mineral carbonates, fuels, pH control, bulk chemicals, and liquefied CO₂ for direct use. The results provide information to decision-makers in relation to considerations to take before implementation, like energy requirements, the existence of regulations and standards, and uncertainty. In terms of the climate performance of biomethane with the inclusion of CCU alternatives, the results show a possible reduction of CO₂ emissions that depends on the possibility of substituting fossil-based products. The investigated alternatives all result in lower emissions, but concrete curing and methanation using renewable hydrogen produce the best results.To conclude, the potential future increase of green CO₂ from biomethane in Sweden creates opportunities to substitute fossil carbon in current applications and mature conversion pathways. Moreover, the inclusion of CCU in biomethane production contributes to reducing biomethane system emissions and diversifying its products. Possible alternatives of CCU that can be integrated into biomethane production systems in the short term include methanation and concrete curing. Other alternatives could be possible but present lower performance and higher uncertainties at the moment.

show abstract

Section: For Decision Supportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utilizing CO2 from biomethane production : Sustainability and climate performance

Cordova

2023

Linköping Studies in Science and Technology. Licentiate Thesis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Metodiken för denna baserades på artiklar av Lindfors m.fl. [40] samt Hagman och Feiz [41] och bestod av fem steg:…”

Section: Multikriterieanalysunclassified

Värdeskapande av koldioxid från biogasproduktion

Gustafsson,

Cordova

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

arbon dioxide (CO₂) has a negative impact on the climate, but it also has several practical areas of use. Many industrial processes emit CO₂ in high concentrations, which could be captured to mitigate emissions while also creating valuable products. One example of such a process is biogas upgrading – a process separating renewable gases, where methane is taken care of for use as vehicle fuel or industrial energy carrier, while CO₂ is released into the atmosphere. The aim of this project has been to chart alternatives and technologies for taking care of green CO₂ from biogas upgrading, so-called carbon capture and utilization (CCU), and to investigate the conditions for applying these in a Swedish context. The work has been guided by the following research questions: * How large is the current and future potential for CCU from biogas production? * What are the possible areas of use for CO₂ from biogas production? * What factors influence the choice of areas of use for CO₂ from biogas production? * How large is the environmental benefit of CCU from biogas production? To answer these questions, calculations of potentials, a multi-criteria assessment and a life cycle assessment were carried out, based on the Swedish biogas production. A reference group comprising representatives for large Swedish companies within biogas production and biogas upgrading technology was used to enable coproduction and networking between the research group and the business sector. The production of CO₂ from biogas was estimated to 160,000 ton/year in 2020, with potential to increase to 540,000 – 840,000 ton/year in a few years and 790,000 – 1,230,000 ton/year in a longer perspective, as a consequence of an expected increase in the Swedish biogas production. A large share of the CO₂ is however produced at relatively small upgrading facilities, which could limit the feasibility for CCU due to high costs for investment and operation. Adding hydrogen to transform all the CO₂ into methane could potentially increase the methane production from biogas from 2 to 3 TWh/year in a short-term perspective and from 11 to 17 TWh/year in a long-term perspective, given sufficient access to hydrogen. Other ways of utilizing CO₂ from biogas include production of biomass or chemicals, concrete curing, pH control of process water and use as a refrigerant. The choice of CCU options can be influenced by environmental, technical, economic and policy-related aspects. From the biogas producers’ perspective, methanation is the option that is the most compatible with the existing production system and business model, while other solutions usually involve another actor taking care of the CO₂. Hydrogen is required for methanation as well as for production of chemicals. Another limiting factor are the high purity requirements on all CO₂ that is distributed and sold on the market. The geographical distribution of the production plants can also be a challenge. Several CCU options can improve the environmental performance of biogas by replacing fossil-based products. The potential climate impact is the lowest if the CO₂ is methanized with renewable hydrogen or mineralized in concrete, but other forms of environmental impact can also be reduced by applying these or other CCU options. For comparison, permanent storage of CO₂ in geological formations (carbon capture and storage, CCS) only reduces the climate impact, while it increases other forms of environmental impact. Furthermore, permanently storing biogenic CO₂ can make it difficult to reduce the use of fossil CO₂ and transition to a more sustainable society. The need for carbon in many essential processes and products suggests that biogenic CO₂ should be utilized and not stored.

show abstract

“…The geographical proximity of biogas production with other industrial actors can have several mutual benefits such as facilitating the development of industrial symbiosis (Lindfors et al, 2020;Martin and Eklund, 2011), increasing local waste management capacity of a large food processing industry (Feiz et al, 2021), and enhancing byproduct management of a biorefinery (Hagman and Feiz, 2021). Interviewees also pointed out that cooperating with near-by waste treatment facilities (sewage treatment, waste separation & recycling, composting, landfill, etc.)…”

Section: Existing Industriesmentioning

confidence: 99%