Addressing Environmental Criteria and Energy Footprint in the Selection of Feedstocks for Bioenergy Production

作者: Iana Salim , Lucía Lijó , Maria Teresa Moreira , Gumersindo Feijoo

DOI: 10.1007/978-981-13-2457-4_1

关键词:

摘要: The search for alternatives to fossil fuel resources relies on the use of renewable bioenergy. objective this research is define most relevant sustainability criteria in exploitation feedstocks bioenergy production from a life cycle perspective. Three types biofuels were evaluated: biogas, bioethanol and biodiesel. In addition, conventional innovative biomass sources will be analysed compared. A comprehensive literature review was conducted identify suitable each type biofuel terms environmental impacts energy-related indicators. Many studies have identified inconsistent results (from very positive negative consequences), leading great uncertainty issue. Cereal crops (wheat, maize triticale) animal waste are examples biogas production. Sugarcane, sugar beet their by-products (molasses bagasse) recognised as technologically validated As biodiesel, oilseeds (soybean, palm, sunflower, etc.) cooking oil residues possible feedstocks. number related emerging feedstocks, such algae jatropha biodiesel; poplar, beech, black locust macroalgae steadily increasing. Therefore, processes involved feedstock should properly calculated an accurate assessment, they play important role substitution fuels. outputs assessment (LCA) methodology help support decision-making analysis avoid misleading conclusions. Energy Return Investment (EROI) found comparing vary considerably one another, due differences geographical distribution, agricultural practices energy efficiency index. many cases, it that (e.g. stover bioethanol) or (pig slurry biogas) source could better EROI values than first-generation allocation burdens.

参考文章(122)
Claudius Da Costa Gomez, Biogas as an energy option: an overview The Biogas Handbook. pp. 1- 16 ,(2013) , 10.1533/9780857097415.1
Sybille Büsser Knöpfel, Thomas Lützkendorf, Maria Balouktsi, Rolf Frischknecht, Franziska Wyss, Cumulative energy demand in LCA: the energy harvested approach International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. ,vol. 20, pp. 957- 969 ,(2015) , 10.1007/S11367-015-0897-4
Roeland Bosch, Mattheüs van de Pol, Jim Philp, Policy: Define biomass sustainability Nature. ,vol. 523, pp. 526- 527 ,(2015) , 10.1038/523526A
Govinda R. Timilsina, Ashish Shrestha, Biofuels : markets, targets and impacts Social Science Research Network. pp. 1- 49 ,(2010) , 10.1596/1813-9450-5364
Keith Knoll, Brian West, Shean Huff, John Thomas, John Orban, Cynthia Cooper, Effects of Mid-Level Ethanol Blends on Conventional Vehicle Emissions SAE 2009 Powertrains Fuels and Lubricants Meeting. ,vol. 1, ,(2009) , 10.4271/2009-01-2723
Debora Cynamon Kligerman, Edward J. Bouwer, Prospects for biodiesel production from algae-based wastewater treatment in Brazil: A review Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews. ,vol. 52, pp. 1834- 1846 ,(2015) , 10.1016/J.RSER.2015.08.030
Valentina Fantin, Antonio Giuliano, Michele Manfredi, Giuseppe Ottaviano, Milena Stefanova, Paolo Masoni, Environmental assessment of electricity generation from an Italian anaerobic digestion plant Biomass & Bioenergy. ,vol. 83, pp. 422- 435 ,(2015) , 10.1016/J.BIOMBIOE.2015.10.015
Zaman Sajid, Faisal Khan, Yan Zhang, Process simulation and life cycle analysis of biodiesel production Renewable Energy. ,vol. 85, pp. 945- 952 ,(2016) , 10.1016/J.RENENE.2015.07.046
Edgard Gnansounou, Jegannathan Kenthorai Raman, Life cycle assessment of algae biodiesel and its co-products Applied Energy. ,vol. 161, pp. 300- 308 ,(2016) , 10.1016/J.APENERGY.2015.10.043
Yu Bai, Lin Luo, Ester van der Voet, Life cycle assessment of switchgrass-derived ethanol as transport fuel International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. ,vol. 15, pp. 468- 477 ,(2010) , 10.1007/S11367-010-0177-2