2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2015.10.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An approach to unify the appraisal framework for biomass conversion systems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Only a few recent studies have proposed assessment approaches for biomass conversion systems considering multiple attributes. Suwelack and Wüst (2015) developed a unified appraisal framework for biomass conversion systems that includes a MCA approach based on standardized data and impact levels. The approach was tested on random data for three biomass conversion systems considering seven criteria on social, environmental and economic issues.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Only a few recent studies have proposed assessment approaches for biomass conversion systems considering multiple attributes. Suwelack and Wüst (2015) developed a unified appraisal framework for biomass conversion systems that includes a MCA approach based on standardized data and impact levels. The approach was tested on random data for three biomass conversion systems considering seven criteria on social, environmental and economic issues.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Without a clear definition and calculation procedures for the indicators, it is difficult or even impossible to apply the framework to specific cases with the available information on the method; (3) case studies-many frameworks do not exemplify their application to a case study [7][8][9][10][11][12]; therefore, they still lack validation on their applicability to specific contexts, or different types and scales of systems; (4) assessment approach-there are three main types of frameworks: those relying on heavy computation, optimization and modeling of system characteristics, and mostly directed to sector-wide analysis [7][8][9]; those intended for the continuous improvement of a system, which require a measured baseline of the selected indicators and monitoring over time [9,[12][13][14], and those intended only to compare two or more systems. The latter mostly rely on Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) [15][16][17], which requires definition of objectives and preferences of stakeholders to generate the required criteria and/or indicators. Both approaches require a comparison to make a value judgment on the sustainability of the system, whether against the same system in a previous time state, or against another system or scenario.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the benefits that WTE technologies can offer both in terms of power production and emissions reduction, the application of bioenergy systems encounters many barriers due to the amount and complexity of information relating to the development of such systems [15]. At the level of technology design assessment, the access to information about bioenergy systems and best practices for biomass production, harvesting and conversion appears to be complex as well as the manipulation of the data and specifications of different systems for the decision on the best technology for local biomass exploitation [16].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%