Life Cycle Assessment of Renewable Energy Production from Biomass

Lijó, Lucía; González‐García, Sara; Lovarelli, Daniela; Moreira, María Teresa; Bacenetti, Jacopo

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-93740-3_6

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…"Sustainable consumption and production patterns" BE could contribute to sustainable consumption and production, but the practical reality of this is an open-ended question [20].…”

Section: Un 2030 Agenda For Sustainable Development Aspects Of Bioenergy Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Positioning Bio-Based Energy Systems in a Hypercomplex Decision Space—A Case Study

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The optimization of the energy portfolio for a small, open, landlocked economy with rather limited fossil resources is a complex task because it must find a long-range, sustainable balance between the various goals of society under the constant pressure of different interest groups. The opinions of independent, informed experts could be an essential input in the decision-making process. The goal of this research was to determine the relative importance of the values and goals potentially accompanying projects, based on the utilization of bioenergy. The current research is based on a wide-ranging survey of 65 non-partisan experts, applying the Pareto analytic hierarchy process to ensure the unbiased prioritization of project segments. The results of the survey put a spotlight on the importance of the economic role of bioenergy projects. Contrary to previous expectations and considerations, the social functions of these projects have hitherto been given relatively little importance. The results highlight the importance of bioenergy in increasing the income-generating capacity of agricultural producers by optimal utilization of natural resources for agricultural production. This can be achieved without considerable deterioration of the natural environment. Modern agricultural production is characterized by high levels of mechanization and automatization. Under these conditions, the social role of bioenergy projects (job creation) is rather limited.

show abstract

“…"Sustainable consumption and production patterns" BE could contribute to sustainable consumption and production, but the practical reality of this is an open-ended question [20].…”

Section: Un 2030 Agenda For Sustainable Development Aspects Of Bioenergy Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Positioning Bio-Based Energy Systems in a Hypercomplex Decision Space—A Case Study

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The main issues relate to the absence of standard controls and the emission of harmful pollutants into the air, land and water, which in turn cause human health and environmental issues [7]. There are many recently published reports around the world discussing the results of life-cycle assessments of air pollution control, energy recovery in waste incineration and approaches to reduce their environmental impact [8][9][10][11][12][13]. It mostly acknowledges that the incineration of the unrecyclable part of MSW is the preferred management option when compared with landfilling even when waste incinerator systems produce toxic ash and other residues that need to be managed.…”

Section: Issues Related To Waste-to-energy Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transforming Municipal Solid Waste into Construction Materials

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapid urbanisation and the associated infrastructure development are creating a deficit of conventional construction materials and straining the natural resources. On the other hand, municipal solid waste (MSW) disposal poses a serious environmental problem. Landfilling of MSW is both costly and polluting. Incineration of MSW to generate energy is a commonly adopted approach. However, there are concerns associated with micro pollutants emitted from the combustion process. The carbon footprint of the process and the environmental cost–benefit balancing are disputable. There is clearly a need to adopt cost-effective alternatives to treat MSW. This paper proposes the potential application of “treated” MSW as an ingredient for construction materials. The treatment process involves placing MSW in an autoclave at 150 °C with 5 bars (0.5 MPa), followed by the separation of metals, plastics and glass for recycling purposes. The end-product, which is a semi-organic mixture (referred to as ‘biomass’), is passed through a vortex-oscillation system, which makes it more uniform as a material. Compressive testing of Portland cement-based pastes containing 10% and 15% biomass shows consistency in the results, demonstrating the potential use of biomass in construction materials.

show abstract

“…The life cycle analysis provides very important information about the environmental impact of such an action. There are numerous life cycle analysis (LCA) articles on renewable energies, such as [30][31][32], but when talking about geothermal energy, this field of research is greatly reduced [13,[33][34][35][36] and is even more so when focusing on the field of energy production for the air conditioning of single-family housing [37,38]. The latter studies are also relatively recent, such as that presented by Todoran, T. P. and Balan, M. C. in 2016 [39], about the experiments conducted on a geothermal heat pump to heat a single-family home.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Impact Comparison of Geothermal Alternatives for Conventional Boiler Replacement

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the transition towards a sustainable world with a “green horizon” (something that is also of great importance to the policy of energy self-sufficiency in housing and self-consumption), geothermal energy is seen as quite a feasible alternative for single-family homes. This article focuses on a comparison between the environmental impact and life cycle analysis of three alternatives and provides a base case for the replacement of a conventional type of boiler with a geothermal one for a typical house located in a Mediterranean climate. The first alternative (A) consists of a horizontal catchment system through a field of geothermal probes. The second alternative (B) is a shallow water catchment system, open type, with the return of water to a nearby river. The third option studied (C) is also a shallow water catchment system but with the water, return injected into a well downstream to the underground water flow. The study shows that alternatives A and B have the least environmental impact in most of the categories studied. The total amortization periods for the three alternatives and the base case differ by almost two years, with alternative A taking 6.99 years and alternative C costing 8.82 years.

show abstract

Life Cycle Assessment of Renewable Energy Production from Biomass

Cited by 10 publications

References 46 publications

Positioning Bio-Based Energy Systems in a Hypercomplex Decision Space—A Case Study

Positioning Bio-Based Energy Systems in a Hypercomplex Decision Space—A Case Study

Transforming Municipal Solid Waste into Construction Materials

Environmental Impact Comparison of Geothermal Alternatives for Conventional Boiler Replacement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About