IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i18p10371-d637230.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards Comparable Carbon Credits: Harmonization of LCA Models of Cellulosic Biofuels

Author

Listed:
  • Nariê Rinke Dias de Souza

    (Brazilian Center for Research in Energy and Materials (CNPEM), Brazilian Biorenewables National Laboratory (LNBR), Campinas 13083-970, Sao Paulo, Brazil
    Bioenergy Program, School of Food Engineering (FEA), University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas 13083-862, Sao Paulo, Brazil)

  • Bruno Colling Klein

    (Brazilian Center for Research in Energy and Materials (CNPEM), Brazilian Biorenewables National Laboratory (LNBR), Campinas 13083-970, Sao Paulo, Brazil)

  • Mateus Ferreira Chagas

    (Brazilian Center for Research in Energy and Materials (CNPEM), Brazilian Biorenewables National Laboratory (LNBR), Campinas 13083-970, Sao Paulo, Brazil)

  • Otavio Cavalett

    (Bioenergy Program, School of Food Engineering (FEA), University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas 13083-862, Sao Paulo, Brazil
    Industrial Ecology Programme, Department of Energy and Process Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), NO-7034 Trondheim, Norway)

  • Antonio Bonomi

    (Brazilian Center for Research in Energy and Materials (CNPEM), Brazilian Biorenewables National Laboratory (LNBR), Campinas 13083-970, Sao Paulo, Brazil)

Abstract

Decarbonization programs are being proposed worldwide to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from transportation fuels, using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) models or tools. Although such models are broadly accepted, varying results are often observed. This study describes similarities and differences of key decarbonization programs and their GHG calculators and compares established LCA models for assessing 2G ethanol from lignocellulosic feedstock. The selected LCA models were GHGenius, GREET, JRC’s model, and VSB, which originated calculators for British Columbia’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard, California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Renewable Energy Directive, and RenovaBio, respectively. We performed a harmonization of the selected models by inserting data of one model into other ones to illustrate the possibility of obtaining similar results after a few harmonization steps and to determine which parameters have higher contribution to closing the gap between default results. Differences among 2G ethanol from wheat straw were limited to 0.1 gCO 2 eq. MJ −1 , and discrepancies in emissions decreased by 95% and 78% for corn stover and forest residues, respectively. Better understanding of structure, calculation procedures, parameters, and methodological assumptions among the LCA models is a first step towards an improved harmonization that will allow a globally accepted and exchangeable carbon credit system to be created.

Suggested Citation

  • Nariê Rinke Dias de Souza & Bruno Colling Klein & Mateus Ferreira Chagas & Otavio Cavalett & Antonio Bonomi, 2021. "Towards Comparable Carbon Credits: Harmonization of LCA Models of Cellulosic Biofuels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-17, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:18:p:10371-:d:637230
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/18/10371/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/18/10371/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Obnamia, Jon Albert & Dias, Goretty M. & MacLean, Heather L. & Saville, Bradley A., 2019. "Comparison of U.S. Midwest corn stover ethanol greenhouse gas emissions from GREET and GHGenius," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C), pages 591-601.
    2. Raphael Slade & Ausilio Bauen & Robert Gross, 2014. "Global bioenergy resources," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(2), pages 99-105, February.
    3. Hoefnagels, Ric & Smeets, Edward & Faaij, André, 2010. "Greenhouse gas footprints of different biofuel production systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(7), pages 1661-1694, September.
    4. Deepak Jaiswal & Amanda P. De Souza & Søren Larsen & David S. LeBauer & Fernando E. Miguez & Gerd Sparovek & Germán Bollero & Marcos S. Buckeridge & Stephen P. Long, 2017. "Brazilian sugarcane ethanol as an expandable green alternative to crude oil use," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 7(11), pages 788-792, November.
    5. Manochio, C. & Andrade, B.R. & Rodriguez, R.P. & Moraes, B.S., 2017. "Ethanol from biomass: A comparative overview," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 743-755.
    6. Zabed, H. & Sahu, J.N. & Suely, A. & Boyce, A.N. & Faruq, G., 2017. "Bioethanol production from renewable sources: Current perspectives and technological progress," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 475-501.
    7. Pereira, L.G. & Cavalett, O. & Bonomi, A. & Zhang, Y. & Warner, E. & Chum, H.L., 2019. "Comparison of biofuel life-cycle GHG emissions assessment tools: The case studies of ethanol produced from sugarcane, corn, and wheat," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 1-12.
    8. Cherubini, Francesco & Strømman, Anders Hammer & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2011. "Influence of allocation methods on the environmental performance of biorefinery products—A case study," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(11), pages 1070-1077.
    9. Cherubini, Francesco & Fuglestvedt, Jan & Gasser, Thomas & Reisinger, Andy & Cavalett, Otávio & Huijbregts, Mark A.J. & Johansson, Daniel J.A. & Jørgensen, Susanne V. & Raugei, Marco & Schivley, Greg , 2016. "Bridging the gap between impact assessment methods and climate science," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 129-140.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Comineti, Camila da Silva Serra & Pretel, Ariel Fernandes & Schlindwein, Madalena Maria, 2023. "The type of development promoted by Brazilian National Biofuels Policy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    2. Vinícius P. Shibukawa & Lucas Ramos & Mónica M. Cruz-Santos & Carina A. Prado & Fanny M. Jofre & Gabriel L. de Arruda & Silvio S. da Silva & Solange I. Mussatto & Júlio C. dos Santos, 2023. "Impact of Product Diversification on the Economic Sustainability of Second-Generation Ethanol Biorefineries: A Critical Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-30, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Danilo Arcentales-Bastidas & Carla Silva & Angel D. Ramirez, 2022. "The Environmental Profile of Ethanol Derived from Sugarcane in Ecuador: A Life Cycle Assessment Including the Effect of Cogeneration of Electricity in a Sugar Industrial Complex," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-24, July.
    2. Rita H. R. Branco & Mariana S. T. Amândio & Luísa S. Serafim & Ana M. R. B. Xavier, 2020. "Ethanol Production from Hydrolyzed Kraft Pulp by Mono- and Co-Cultures of Yeasts: The Challenge of C6 and C5 Sugars Consumption," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-15, February.
    3. Umanath Malaiarasan & R. Paramasivam & K. Thomas Felix & S. J. Balaji, 2020. "Simultaneous equation model for Indian sugar sector," Journal of Social and Economic Development, Springer;Institute for Social and Economic Change, vol. 22(1), pages 113-141, June.
    4. Maja Perčić & Nikola Vladimir & Marija Koričan, 2021. "Electrification of Inland Waterway Ships Considering Power System Lifetime Emissions and Costs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-25, October.
    5. Wu, Horng-Wen & Lin, Ke-Wei, 2019. "Hydrogen-rich syngas production by reforming of ethanol blended with aqueous urea using a thermodynamic analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 541-551.
    6. Carvalho, João Luís Nunes & Oliveira, Bruna Gonçalves & Cantarella, Heitor & Chagas, Matheus Ferreira & Gonzaga, Leandro Carolino & Lourenço, Késia Silva & Bordonal, Ricardo Oliveira & Bonomi, Antonio, 2021. "Implications of regional N2O–N emission factors on sugarcane ethanol emissions and granted decarbonization certificates," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    7. Canabarro, N.I. & Silva-Ortiz, P. & Nogueira, L.A.H. & Cantarella, H. & Maciel-Filho, R. & Souza, G.M., 2023. "Sustainability assessment of ethanol and biodiesel production in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Guatemala," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    8. Baudry, Gino & Delrue, Florian & Legrand, Jack & Pruvost, Jérémy & Vallée, Thomas, 2017. "The challenge of measuring biofuel sustainability: A stakeholder-driven approach applied to the French case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 933-947.
    9. Bergthorson, Jeffrey M. & Thomson, Murray J., 2015. "A review of the combustion and emissions properties of advanced transportation biofuels and their impact on existing and future engines," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1393-1417.
    10. Batidzirai, B. & Smeets, E.M.W. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2012. "Harmonising bioenergy resource potentials—Methodological lessons from review of state of the art bioenergy potential assessments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(9), pages 6598-6630.
    11. Suopajärvi, Hannu & Pongrácz, Eva & Fabritius, Timo, 2013. "The potential of using biomass-based reducing agents in the blast furnace: A review of thermochemical conversion technologies and assessments related to sustainability," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 511-528.
    12. van der Hilst, F. & Lesschen, J.P. & van Dam, J.M.C. & Riksen, M. & Verweij, P.A. & Sanders, J.P.M. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2012. "Spatial variation of environmental impacts of regional biomass chains," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 2053-2069.
    13. Sahu, Omprakash, 2021. "Appropriateness of rose (Rosa hybrida) for bioethanol conversion with enzymatic hydrolysis: Sustainable development on green fuel production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 232(C).
    14. Huang, Jiangfeng & Khan, Muhammad Tahir & Perecin, Danilo & Coelho, Suani T. & Zhang, Muqing, 2020. "Sugarcane for bioethanol production: Potential of bagasse in Chinese perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    15. Lin, Boqiang & Xu, Bin, 2018. "How to promote the growth of new energy industry at different stages?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 390-403.
    16. Bechara, Rami & Gomez, Adrien & Saint-Antonin, Valérie & Schweitzer, Jean-Marc & Maréchal, François & Ensinas, Adriano, 2018. "Review of design works for the conversion of sugarcane to first and second-generation ethanol and electricity," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 152-164.
    17. Somorin, Tosin Onabanjo & Di Lorenzo, Giuseppina & Kolios, Athanasios J., 2017. "Life-cycle assessment of self-generated electricity in Nigeria and Jatropha biodiesel as an alternative power fuel," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 966-979.
    18. Ghadge, Abhijeet & van der Werf, Sjoerd & Er Kara, Merve & Goswami, Mohit & Kumar, Pankaj & Bourlakis, Michael, 2020. "Modelling the impact of climate change risk on bioethanol supply chains," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    19. Yang, Q. & Chen, G.Q., 2013. "Greenhouse gas emissions of corn–ethanol production in China," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 252(C), pages 176-184.
    20. Jonker, J.G.G. & Junginger, H.M. & Verstegen, J.A. & Lin, T. & Rodríguez, L.F. & Ting, K.C. & Faaij, A.P.C. & van der Hilst, F., 2016. "Supply chain optimization of sugarcane first generation and eucalyptus second generation ethanol production in Brazil," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 494-510.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:18:p:10371-:d:637230. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.