Cofiring versus biomass-fired power plants: GHG (Greenhouse Gases) emissions savings comparison by means of LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) methodology

Sebastián, Fernando; Royo, Javier; Gómez, Maider

doi:10.1016/j.energy.2010.06.003

Cited by 128 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This allows comparison of the potential benefits/drawbacks of the bioenergy system in question. As such, the results of this LCA are compared to some common fossil fuels including coal and peat, feedstocks with which biomass is commonly co-fired in Ireland (Mann & Spath, 2001;Heller et al, 2004;Styles & Jones, 2008;Sebasti an et al, 2011).…”

Section: Why Life Cycle Assessment?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy requirements and environmental impacts associated with the production of short rotation willow (Salix sp.) chip in Ireland

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Willow Salix sp. is currently cultivated as a short rotation forestry crop in Ireland as a source of biomass to contribute to renewable energy goals. The aim of this study is to evaluate the energy requirements and environmental impacts associated with willow (Salix sp.) cultivation, harvest, and transport using life cycle assessment (LCA). In this study, only emissions from the production of the willow chip are included, end-use emissions from combustion are not considered. In this LCA study, three impact categories are considered; acidification potential, eutrophication potential and global warming potential. In addition, the cumulative energy demand and energy ratio of the system are evaluated. The results identify three key processes in the production chain which contribute most to all impact categories considered; maintenance, harvest and transportation of the crop. Sensitivity analysis on the type of fertilizers used, harvesting technologies and transport distances highlights the effects of these management techniques on overall system performance. Replacement of synthetic fertilizer with biosolids results in a reduction in overall energy demand, but raises acidification potential, eutrophication potential and global warming potential. Rod harvesting compares unfavourably in comparison with direct chip harvesting in each of the impact categories considered due to the additional chipping step required. The results show that dedicated truck transport is preferable to tractor-trailer transport in terms of energy demand and environmental impacts. Finally, willow chip production compares favourably with coal provision in terms of energy ratio and global warming potential, while achieving a higher energy ratio than peat provision but also a higher global warming potential.

show abstract

Section: Why Life Cycle Assessment?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy requirements and environmental impacts associated with the production of short rotation willow (Salix sp.) chip in Ireland

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] evaluated the life cycle environmental impacts of using biomass as a standalone fuel for electricity generation. When performing an LCA, one needs to define the system boundary conditions (which includes details on the activities or processes to be considered in the analysis) and a functional unit of measure (which enables quantification of the net environmental impacts from carrying out an activity or a process as defined within the LCA system boundary conditions).…”

Section: Review Of Biomass-only Lca Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The two distinct advantages of cofiring in existing coal power plants are the achievement of a higher net efficiency of biofuels conversion to electricity (the generally higher efficiency of very large-scale power plants offsets the lower efficiency of the coal boiler) and a significant reduction in the investment costs. However, the option of cofiring requires higher pretreatment consumption to achieve complete biofuel conversion in the coal utility boiler and longer transportation costs of the resources associated with the coal power plants not being placed in potentially important biomass production areas [20]. A more detailed description of the LCA boundary conditions, GHG emissions, and site-specific characteristics associated with each of the aforementioned biomass electricity generation system studies are provided in the sections titled "Review of Biomass-Only LCA Studies" and "Review of Biomass Cofiring with Coal LCA Studies".…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies have analyzed the LCA of biomass-only combustion [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] and biomass cofiring with coal [12,13,20,[22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29]. The two distinct advantages of cofiring in existing coal power plants are the achievement of a higher net efficiency of biofuels conversion to electricity (the generally higher efficiency of very large-scale power plants offsets the lower efficiency of the coal boiler) and a significant reduction in the investment costs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of the Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Different Biomass Feedstock Electricity Generation Systems

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper evaluates life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the use of different biomass feedstock categories (agriculture residues, dedicated energy crops, forestry, industry, parks and gardens, wastes) independently on biomass-only (biomass as a standalone fuel) and cofiring (biomass used in combination with coal) electricity generation systems. The statistical evaluation of the life cycle GHG emissions (expressed in grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per kilowatt hour, gCO 2 e/kWh) for biomass electricity generation systems was based on the review of 19 life cycle assessment studies (representing 66 biomass cases). The mean life cycle GHG emissions resulting from the use of agriculture residues (N = 4), dedicated energy crops (N = 19), forestry (N = 6), industry (N = 4), and wastes (N = 2) in biomass-only electricity generation systems are 291.25 gCO 2 e/kWh, 208.41 gCO 2 e/kWh, 43 gCO 2 e/kWh, 45.93 gCO 2 e/kWh, and 1731.36 gCO 2 e/kWh, respectively. The mean life cycle GHG emissions for cofiring electricity generation systems using agriculture residues (N = 10), dedicated energy crops (N = 9), forestry (N = 9), industry (N = 2), and parks and gardens (N = 1) are 1039.92 gCO 2 e/kWh, 1001.38 gCO 2 e/kWh, 961.45 gCO 2 e/kWh, 926.1 gCO 2 e/kWh, and 1065.92 gCO 2 e/kWh, respectively. Forestry and industry (avoiding the impacts of biomass production and emissions from waste management) contribute the least amount of GHGs, irrespective of the biomass electricity generation system.

show abstract

“…LCA has been reported to be a suitable methodology to evaluate environmental performance of energy systems [13][14][15][16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybridizing concentrated solar power (CSP) with biogas and biomethane as an alternative to natural gas: Analysis of environmental performance using LCA

Miguel

Corona

2014

Renewable Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) plants typically incorporate one or various auxiliary boilers operating in parallel to the solar field to facilitate start up operations, provide system stability, avoid freezing of heat transfer fluid (HTF) and increase generation capacity. The environmental performance of these plants is highly influenced by the energy input and the type of auxiliary fuel, which in most cases is natural gas (NG). Replacing the NG with biogas or biomethane (BM) in commercial CSP installations is being considered as a means to produce electricity that is fully renewable and free from fossil inputs. Despite their renewable nature, the use of these biofuels also generates environmental impacts that need to be adequately identified and quantified. This paper investigates the environmental performance of a commercial wet-cooled parabolic trough 50 MWe CSP plant in Spain operating according to two strategies: solar-only, with minimum technically viable energy non-solar contribution; and hybrid operation, where 12 % of the electricity derives from auxiliary fuels (as permitted by Spanish legislation). The analysis was based on standard Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology (ISO 14040-14040). The technical viability and the environmental profile of operating the CSP plant with different auxiliary fuels was evaluated, including: NG; biogas from an adjacent plant; and BM withdrawn from the gas network. The effect of using different substrates (biowaste, sewage sludge, grass and a mix of biowaste with animal manure) for the production of the biofuels was also investigated. The results showed that NG is responsible for most of the environmental damage associated with the operation of the plant in hybrid mode. Replacing NG with biogas resulted in a significant improvement of the environmental performance of the installation, primarily due to reduced impact in the following categories: natural land transformation, depletion of fossil resources, and climate change. However, despite the renewable nature of the biofuels, other environmental categories like human toxicity, eutrophication, acidification and marine ecotoxicity scored higher when using biogas and BM.

show abstract

Cofiring versus biomass-fired power plants: GHG (Greenhouse Gases) emissions savings comparison by means of LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) methodology

Cited by 128 publications

References 25 publications

Energy requirements and environmental impacts associated with the production of short rotation willow (Salix sp.) chip in Ireland

Energy requirements and environmental impacts associated with the production of short rotation willow (Salix sp.) chip in Ireland

Evaluation of the Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Different Biomass Feedstock Electricity Generation Systems

Hybridizing concentrated solar power (CSP) with biogas and biomethane as an alternative to natural gas: Analysis of environmental performance using LCA

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About