Energy- and greenhouse gas-based LCA of biofuel and bioenergy systems: Key issues, ranges and recommendations

Cherubini, Francesco; Bird, Neil; Cowie, Annette; Jungmeier, Gerfried; Schlamadinger, Bernhard; Woess-Gallasch, Susanne

doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.03.013

Cited by 817 publications

(517 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

498

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on IOA, emission factors were estimated on the order of 30-40 kg CO 2 -eq/MWh [47], thus providing higher values than similar studies using PCA. Emission factors reported in previous review studies were in the range of 5-35 kg CO 2 -eq/MWh [3,4,8,15,[44][45][46]53,[58][59][60]68]. Most LCA studies provided emission factors for NO x and SO 2 , ranging from 0.02-0.06 kg NO x /MWh and 0.02-0.04 kg SO 2 /MWh with emissions mainly depending on the electricity mix used for 13 manufacturing.…”

Section: Windmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: Overview, comparability and limitations

Turconi

Boldrin

Astrup

2013

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

615

300

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electricity generation is a key contributor to global emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), NO x and SO 2 and their related environmental impact. A critical review of 167 case studies involving the life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation based on hard coal, lignite, natural gas, oil, nuclear, biomass, hydroelectric, solar photovoltaic (PV) and wind was carried out to identify ranges of emission data for GHG, NO x and SO 2 related to individual technologies. It was shown that GHG emissions could not be used as a single indicator to represent the environmental performance of a system or technology. Emission data were evaluated with respect to three life cycle phases (fuel provision, plant operation, and infrastructure). Direct emissions from plant operation represented the majority of the life cycle emissions for fossil fuel technologies, whereas fuel provision represented the largest contribution for biomass technologies (71% for GHG, 54% for NO x and 61% for SO 2 ) and nuclear power (60% for GHG, 82% for NO x and 92% for SO 2 ); infrastructures provided the highest impact for renewables. These data indicated that all three phases should be included for completeness and to avoid problem shifting. The most critical methodological aspects in relation to LCA studies were identified as follows: definition of the functional unit, the LCA method employed (e.g., IOA, PCA and hybrid), the emission allocation principle and/or system boundary expansion. The most important technological aspects were identified as follows: the energy recovery efficiency and the flue gas cleaning system for fossil fuel technologies; the electricity mix used during both the manufacturing and the construction phases for nuclear and renewable technologies; and the type, quality and origin of feedstock, as well as the amount and type of co-products, for biomass-based systems. This review demonstrates that the variability of existing LCA results for electricity generation can give rise to conflicting decisions regarding the environmental consequences of implementing new technologies.

show abstract

Section: Windmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: Overview, comparability and limitations

Turconi

Boldrin

Astrup

2013

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

615

300

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…16 Estas limitações são esperadas serem parcialmente superadas pelo desenvolvimento dos chamados biocombustíveis de segunda geração. 17 …”

Section: Combustíveis De Primeira Geraçãounclassified

Do engenho à biorrefinaria: a usina de açúcar como empreendimento industrial para a geração de produtos bioquímicos e biocombustíveis

Rodrigues¹

2011

Quím. Nova

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recebido em 1/11/10; aceito em 16/2/11; publicado na web em 5/5/11 FROM THE MILL TO A BIOREFINERY. THE SUGAR FACTORY AS AN INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISE FOR THE GENERATION OF BIOCHEMICALS AND BIOFUELS. A sugar cane mill is at the present moment a modest biorefinery producing few products such as sugar, ethanol and polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB). In the near future, this mill can expand its production using several renewable feedstock's to produce biofuels and high value biobased chemicals. However, the choice of appropriate products for addition to the portfolio is challenged by a lack of broad-based conversion technology coupled with a plethora of potential targets. The intent of this revision was to catalyze research efforts to expand the list of products and to present an updated evaluation of potential target structures for chemical production.Keywords: biorefinery; biotechonology; sustainable chemistry. INTRODUÇÃONo início o engenho brasileiro produzia apenas açúcar mascavo, tendo como subproduto a cachaça. Nestes cinco séculos, este pequeno empreendimento rural evoluiu para usinas de açúcar e álcool produzindo diversas nomenclaturas de açúcar, demerara, cristal, refinado e "orgânico", além do polímero PHB (poli-hidroxibutirato) e de energia elétrica. O engenho ainda continua operando, agora gerando a cachaça artesanal, sendo que os maiores fazem a água ardente, a terceira bebida destilada mais consumida no planeta. Nesta resenha, avalia-se qual será a evolução que pode ser esperada para a usina de açúcar e álcool como um empreendimento industrial para geração de produtos químicos.Desde a época do descobrimento, o açúcar tem sido fundamental para a economia do Brasil, naquela época o produto mundial manufaturado mais valioso. 1 O PIB do setor sucroenergético foi de US$ 28.2 bilhões, equivalente a quase 2% do PIB brasileiro (taxa de câmbio de R$ 1,84 por dólar, a média de 2008). 2 Os principais produtos do setor no mercado interno e externo foram: etanol hidratado, etanol anidro, etanol não-combustível, açúcar, bioeletricidade, levedura e crédito de carbono. A safra 2008/09 de cana-de-açúcar, de 568,9 milhões de toneladas foi cultivada em área plantada de 8,5 milhões de hectares. Nos melhores cultivos da região Centro-Sul brasileira, a produtividade foi da ordem de 85 toneladas de cana por hectare. 3 A matriz energética brasileira, que se destaca pela grande incidência de fontes renováveis, passou por transformações que a colocaram entre as mais limpas do mundo. Nesta década, caracterizada pela introdução dos carros flexíveis, a participação do petróleo e derivados na matriz diminuiu cerca de 8 pontos percentuais: passou de 45,5% em 2000 para 37,9% em 2009. Ao fim desse período, cerca de 18% da energia consumida no país já provinha de derivados da cana-deaçúcar, ultrapassando a energia hidráulica em importância na matriz e assumindo o segundo lugar. 4 A cadeia sucroenergética vem mostrando seu potencial de suprir produtos de maneira sustentável, o que contribui para que o Brasil tenha uma excelente imagem de produtor de ...

show abstract

“…LCA is the methodology usually applied to perform the carbon and GHG budgets; a specific approach applied as testing procedures on biofuels and bioenergy carriers was developed (Cherubini et al, 2009;Cherubini, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cereal straw management: a trade-off between energy and agronomic fate

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change mitigation is the most important driving force for bioenergy development. Consequently, the environmental design of bioenergy value chains should address the actual savings of both primary energy demand and greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions. According to the EU Renewable Energy Directive (2009/28/EC), no direct impacts and no GHG emissions should be attributed to crop residues (like cereal straws) when they are removed from agricultural land for the purpose of bioenergy utilisation. The carbon neutral assumption applied to crop residues is, however, a rough simplification. Crop residues, indeed, should not be viewed simply as a waste to be disposed, because they play a critical role in sustaining soil organic matter and therefore have an inherent C-capturing value. Moreover, considering straws as an energy feedstock, its status of co-product is clearly recognised and its availability could be obtained according to different cropping systems, corresponding to different primary energy costs and GHG emissions. This paper highlights some hidden features in the assessment of agricultural energy and carbon balance, still very difficult to be detected and accounted for. Although they are frequently disregarded, these features (such as long term dynamic trend of soil organic carbon and annual nitrous oxide emissions from the soil) should be carefully considered in assembling the energy and emission balance. By using a crop simulation model, the long-term soil organic matter and annual N2O soil emissions were estimated. Consequently, a comprehensive energy and GHG balance was determined in accordance with the life cycle assessment methodology. Contrasting methods of straw management and wheat cultivation were compared: straw retention vs removal from the soil; conventional vs conservation tillage; wheat cropping system as a single-crop or in rotation. The resulting carbon footprint of straws has different magnitudes with respect to the several experimental conditions. By selecting the best agricultural practices, energy from straw can be optimally coupled with grain productions, without detrimental effects on soil fertility. An improved and specifically tailored cropping system is designed to obtain an optimal trade-off.

show abstract

Energy- and greenhouse gas-based LCA of biofuel and bioenergy systems: Key issues, ranges and recommendations

Cited by 817 publications

References 48 publications

Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: Overview, comparability and limitations

Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: Overview, comparability and limitations

Do engenho à biorrefinaria: a usina de açúcar como empreendimento industrial para a geração de produtos bioquímicos e biocombustíveis

Cereal straw management: a trade-off between energy and agronomic fate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About