IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i21p11351-d667286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability Assessment of Combined Animal Fodder and Fuel Production from Microalgal Biomass

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin W. Portner

    (Bauhaus Luftfahrt e.V., Willy-Messerschmitt-Str. 1, 82024 Taufkirchen, Germany)

  • Antonio Valente

    (Department of Chemistry and Applied Biosciences, Institute for Chemical and Bioengineering, ETH Zurich, 8093 Zurich, Switzerland)

  • Sandy Guenther

    (Bauhaus Luftfahrt e.V., Willy-Messerschmitt-Str. 1, 82024 Taufkirchen, Germany)

Abstract

We present a comparative environmental and social life cycle assessment (ELCA and SLCA) of algal fuel and fodder co-production (AF + fodder) versus algal fuel and energy co-production (AF + energy). Our ELCA results indicate that fodder co-production offers an advantage in the following categories: climate change (biogenic, land use and land use change, total), ecotoxicity, marine eutrophication, ionizing radiation, photochemical ozone creation, and land use. By contrast, the AF + energy system yields lower impacts in the other 11 out of 19 Environmental Footprint impact categories. Only AF + fodder offers greenhouse gas reduction compared to petroleum diesel (−25%). Our SLCA results indicate that AF + fodder yields lower impacts in the following categories: fair salaries, forced labor, gender wage gap, health expenditure, unemployment, and violation of employment laws and regulations. AF + energy performs favorably in the other three out of nine social indicators. We conclude that the choice of co-products has a strong influence on the sustainability of algal fuel production. Despite this, none of the compared systems are found to yield a consistent advantage in the environmental or social dimension. It is, therefore, not possible to recommend a co-production strategy without weighing environmental and social issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin W. Portner & Antonio Valente & Sandy Guenther, 2021. "Sustainability Assessment of Combined Animal Fodder and Fuel Production from Microalgal Biomass," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-18, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:21:p:11351-:d:667286
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11351/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11351/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. García Prieto, Carla V. & Ramos, Fernando D. & Estrada, Vanina & Villar, Marcelo A. & Diaz, M. Soledad, 2017. "Optimization of an integrated algae-based biorefinery for the production of biodiesel, astaxanthin and PHB," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1159-1172.
    2. Cruce, Jesse R. & Quinn, Jason C., 2019. "Economic viability of multiple algal biorefining pathways and the impact of public policies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 233, pages 735-746.
    3. Gnansounou, Edgard & Kenthorai Raman, Jegannathan, 2016. "Life cycle assessment of algae biodiesel and its co-products," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 300-308.
    4. Collet, Pierre & Lardon, Laurent & Hélias, Arnaud & Bricout, Stéphanie & Lombaert-Valot, Isabelle & Perrier, Béatrice & Lépine, Olivier & Steyer, Jean-Philippe & Bernard, Olivier, 2014. "Biodiesel from microalgae – Life cycle assessment and recommendations for potential improvements," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 525-533.
    5. Subhadra, Bobban G. & Edwards, Mark, 2011. "Coproduct market analysis and water footprint of simulated commercial algal biorefineries," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(10), pages 3515-3523.
    6. Alizadeh, Reza & Lund, Peter D. & Soltanisehat, Leili, 2020. "Outlook on biofuels in future studies: A systematic literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    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. Rebolledo-Leiva, Ricardo & Moreira, María Teresa & González-García, Sara, 2023. "Progress of social assessment in the framework of bioeconomy under a life cycle perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).

    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. Thomassen, Gwenny & Van Dael, Miet & Lemmens, Bert & Van Passel, Steven, 2017. "A review of the sustainability of algal-based biorefineries: Towards an integrated assessment framework," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 68(P2), pages 876-887.
    2. Arcigni, Francesco & Friso, Riccardo & Collu, Maurizio & Venturini, Mauro, 2019. "Harmonized and systematic assessment of microalgae energy potential for biodiesel production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 614-624.
    3. Jambo, Siti Azmah & Abdulla, Rahmath & Mohd Azhar, Siti Hajar & Marbawi, Hartinie & Gansau, Jualang Azlan & Ravindra, Pogaku, 2016. "A review on third generation bioethanol feedstock," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 756-769.
    4. Chen, Jiaxin & Li, Ji & Dong, Wenyi & Zhang, Xiaolei & Tyagi, Rajeshwar D. & Drogui, Patrick & Surampalli, Rao Y., 2018. "The potential of microalgae in biodiesel production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 336-346.
    5. Baudry, Gino & Macharis, Cathy & Vallée, Thomas, 2018. "Can microalgae biodiesel contribute to achieve the sustainability objectives in the transport sector in France by 2030? A comparison between first, second and third generation biofuels though a range-," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 1032-1046.
    6. Escobar, Neus & Laibach, Natalie, 2021. "Sustainability check for bio-based technologies: A review of process-based and life cycle approaches," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    7. Kang, Seongwhan & Heo, Seongmin & Realff, Matthew J. & Lee, Jay H., 2020. "Three-stage design of high-resolution microalgae-based biofuel supply chain using geographic information system," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    8. Sánchez-Bayo, Alejandra & López-Chicharro, Daniel & Morales, Victoria & Espada, Juan José & Puyol, Daniel & Martínez, Fernando & Astals, Sergi & Vicente, Gemma & Bautista, Luis Fernando & Rodríguez, R, 2020. "Biodiesel and biogas production from Isochrysis galbana using dry and wet lipid extraction: A biorefinery approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 188-195.
    9. Jayne Lois San Juan & Carlo James Caligan & Maria Mikayla Garcia & Jericho Mitra & Andres Philip Mayol & Charlle Sy & Aristotle Ubando & Alvin Culaba, 2020. "Multi-Objective Optimization of an Integrated Algal and Sludge-Based Bioenergy Park and Wastewater Treatment System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-22, September.
    10. 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.
    11. Lim, Juin Yau & Teng, Sin Yong & How, Bing Shen & Nam, KiJeon & Heo, SungKu & Máša, Vítězslav & Stehlík, Petr & Yoo, Chang Kyoo, 2022. "From microalgae to bioenergy: Identifying optimally integrated biorefinery pathways and harvest scheduling under uncertainties in predicted climate," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    12. Nugroho Adi Sasongko & Ryozo Noguchi & Junko Ito & Mikihide Demura & Sosaku Ichikawa & Mitsutoshi Nakajima & Makoto M. Watanabe, 2018. "Engineering Study of a Pilot Scale Process Plant for Microalgae-Oil Production Utilizing Municipal Wastewater and Flue Gases: Fukushima Pilot Plant," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-24, June.
    13. Pranav Nakhate & Yvonne van der Meer, 2021. "A Systematic Review on Seaweed Functionality: A Sustainable Bio-Based Material," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-26, May.
    14. Sun, Chihe & Xia, Ao & Liao, Qiang & Fu, Qian & Huang, Yun & Zhu, Xun, 2019. "Life-cycle assessment of biohythane production via two-stage anaerobic fermentation from microalgae and food waste," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 395-410.
    15. Ali M. H. A. Khajah & Simon P. Philbin, 2022. "Techno-Economic Analysis and Modelling of the Feasibility of Wind Energy in Kuwait," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-21, January.
    16. Jozami, Emiliano & Mele, Fernando D & Piastrellini, Roxana & Civit, Bárbara M & Feldman, Susana R, 2022. "Life cycle assessment of bioenergy from lignocellulosic herbaceous biomass: The case study of Spartina argentinensis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(PA).
    17. Okadera, Tomohiro & Geng, Yong & Fujita, Tsuyoshi & Dong, Huijuan & Liu, Zhu & Yoshida, Noboru & Kanazawa, Takaaki, 2015. "Evaluating the water footprint of the energy supply of Liaoning Province, China: A regional input–output analysis approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 148-157.
    18. Raja Chowdhury & Nidia Caetano & Matthew J. Franchetti & Kotnoor Hariprasad, 2023. "Life Cycle Based GHG Emissions from Algae Based Bioenergy with a Special Emphasis on Climate Change Indicators and Their Uses in Dynamic LCA: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-19, January.
    19. Kleiman, Rachel M. & Characklis, Gregory W. & Kern, Jordan D., 2022. "Managing weather- and market price-related financial risks in algal biofuel production," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 111-124.
    20. Pritpal Singh & Gurdeep Singh & G. P. S. Sodhi, 2022. "Data envelopment analysis based optimization for improving net ecosystem carbon and energy budget in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) cultivation: methods and a case study of north-western India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 2079-2119, February.

    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:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:21:p:11351-:d:667286. 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.