IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v39y2011i10p5726-5736.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methods of dealing with co-products of biofuels in life-cycle analysis and consequent results within the U.S. context

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Michael
  • Huo, Hong
  • Arora, Salil

Abstract

Products other than biofuels are produced in biofuel plants. For example, corn ethanol plants produce distillers' grains and solubles. Soybean crushing plants produce soy meal and soy oil, which is used for biodiesel production. Electricity is generated in sugarcane ethanol plants both for internal consumption and export to the electric grid. Future cellulosic ethanol plants could be designed to co-produce electricity with ethanol. It is important to take co-products into account in the life-cycle analysis of biofuels and several methods are available to do so. Although the International Standard Organization's ISO 14040 advocates the system boundary expansion method (also known as the "displacement method" or the "substitution method") for life-cycle analyses, application of the method has been limited because of the difficulty in identifying and quantifying potential products to be displaced by biofuel co-products. As a result, some LCA studies and policy-making processes have considered alternative methods. In this paper, we examine the available methods to deal with biofuel co-products, explore the strengths and weaknesses of each method, and present biofuel LCA results with different co-product methods within the U.S. context.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Michael & Huo, Hong & Arora, Salil, 2011. "Methods of dealing with co-products of biofuels in life-cycle analysis and consequent results within the U.S. context," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 5726-5736, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:10:p:5726-5736
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421510002156
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Delucchi, Mark, 2003. "A Lifecycle Emissions Model (LEM): Lifecycle Emissions from Transportation Fuels, Motor Vehicles, Transportation Modes, Electricity Use, Heating and Cooking Fuels, and Materials," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt9vr8s1bb, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    2. Wang, Michael Q., 2008. "Well-to-Wheels Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emission Results and Issues of Fuel Ethanol," Lifecycle Carbon Footprint of Biofuels Workshop, January 29, 2008, Miami Beach, Florida 49098, Farm Foundation.
    3. Searchinger, Timothy & Heimlich, Ralph & Houghton, R. A. & Dong, Fengxia & Elobeid, Amani & Fabiosa, Jacinto F. & Tokgoz, Simla & Hayes, Dermot J. & Yu, Hun-Hsiang, 2008. "Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12881, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. מחקר - ביטוח לאומי, 2007. "ינואר 2007," Working Papers 212, National Insurance Institute of Israel.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Cherubini, Francesco & Bird, Neil D. & Cowie, Annette & Jungmeier, Gerfried & Schlamadinger, Bernhard & Woess-Gallasch, Susanne, 2009. "Energy- and greenhouse gas-based LCA of biofuel and bioenergy systems: Key issues, ranges and recommendations," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 53(8), pages 434-447.
    2. McCollum, David & Yang, Christopher, 2009. "Achieving deep reductions in US transport greenhouse gas emissions: Scenario analysis and policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5580-5596, December.
    3. Cherubini, Francesco, 2010. "GHG balances of bioenergy systems – Overview of key steps in the production chain and methodological concerns," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 1565-1573.
    4. 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).
    5. Baka, Jennifer & Roland-Holst, David, 2009. "Food or fuel? What European farmers can contribute to Europe's transport energy requirements and the Doha Round," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2505-2513, July.
    6. Nguyen, Thu Lan T. & Hermansen, John E. & Mogensen, Lisbeth, 2010. "Fossil energy and GHG saving potentials of pig farming in the EU," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2561-2571, May.
    7. Sarah Jansen & William Foster & Gustavo Anríquez & Jorge Ortega, 2021. "Understanding Farm-Level Incentives within the Bioeconomy Framework: Prices, Product Quality, Losses, and Bio-Based Alternatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-21, January.
    8. Argueyrolles, Robin & Delzeit, Ruth, 2022. "The interconnections between Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reforms and biofuels," Conference papers 333492, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    9. Aruga, Kentaka, 2011. "非遺伝子組換え大豆とエネルギーの価格関係について [Relationships among the Non-Genetically Modified Soybean and Energy Prices]," MPRA Paper 38186, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 20 Aug 2011.
    10. Ribeiro, Lauro André & Silva, Patrícia Pereira da, 2013. "Surveying techno-economic indicators of microalgae biofuel technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 89-96.
    11. Gal Hochman & Chrysostomos Tabakis, 2020. "Biofuels and Their Potential in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-17, September.
    12. Mohlin, Kristina & Camuzeaux, Jonathan R. & Muller, Adrian & Schneider, Marius & Wagner, Gernot, 2018. "Factoring in the forgotten role of renewables in CO2 emission trends using decomposition analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 290-296.
    13. Khoo, Hsien H., 2015. "Review of bio-conversion pathways of lignocellulose-to-ethanol: Sustainability assessment based on land footprint projections," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 100-119.
    14. Shirizadeh, Behrang & Quirion, Philippe, 2022. "The importance of renewable gas in achieving carbon-neutrality: Insights from an energy system optimization model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    15. Fung, Timothy K.F. & Choi, Doo Hun & Scheufele, Dietram A. & Shaw, Bret R., 2014. "Public opinion about biofuels: The interplay between party identification and risk/benefit perception," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 344-355.
    16. Stefan Mann, 2016. "Governing complementary responsibility goods through hybrid systems in a globalizing world," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 9(1), pages 14-21.
    17. Winden, Matthew & Cruze, Nathan & Haab, Tim & Bakshi, Bhavik, 2015. "Monetized value of the environmental, health and resource externalities of soy biodiesel," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 18-24.
    18. Stephen P. Holland & Jonathan E. Hughes & Christopher R. Knittel & Nathan C. Parker, 2013. "Unintended Consequences of Transportation Carbon Policies: Land-Use, Emissions, and Innovation," NBER Working Papers 19636, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Reijnders, L., 2009. "Are forestation, bio-char and landfilled biomass adequate offsets for the climate effects of burning fossil fuels?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 2839-2841, August.
    20. Yuqing An & Jin Yeu Tsou & Kapo Wong & Yuanzhi Zhang & Dawei Liu & Yu Li, 2018. "Detecting Land Use Changes in a Rapidly Developing City during 1990–2017 Using Satellite Imagery: A Case Study in Hangzhou Urban Area, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-14, September.

    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:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:10:p:5726-5736. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.