IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i14p3836-d248212.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Maximizing Environmental Impact Savings Potential through Innovative Biorefinery Alternatives: An Application of the TM-LCA Framework for Regional Scale Impact Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Giovanna Croxatto Vega

    (Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, 2800 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark)

  • Joshua Sohn

    (Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, 2800 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark)

  • Sander Bruun

    (Department of Plant and Environmental Science, University of Copenhagen, 1165 København, Denmark)

  • Stig Irving Olsen

    (Department of Management Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, 2800 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark)

  • Morten Birkved

    (Institute of Chemical Engineering, Biotechnology and Environmental Technology, The University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense, Denmark)

Abstract

In order to compare the maximum potential environmental impact savings that may result from the implementation of innovative biorefinery alternatives at a regional scale, the Territorial Metabolism-Life Cycle Assessment (TM-LCA) framework is implemented. With the goal of examining environmental impacts arising from technology-to-region (territory) compatibility, the framework is applied to two biorefinery alternatives, treating a mixture of cow manure and grape marc. The biorefineries produce either biogas alone or biogas and polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA), a naturally occurring polymer. The production of PHA substitutes either polyethylene terephthalate (PET) or biosourced polylactide (PLA) production. The assessment is performed for two regions, one in Southern France and the other in Oregon, USA. Changing energy systems are taken into account via multiple dynamic energy provision scenarios. Territorial scale impacts are quantified using both LCA midpoint impact categories and single score indicators derived through multi-criteria decision assessment (MCDA). It is determined that in all probable future scenarios, a biorefinery with PHA-biogas co-production is preferable to a biorefinery only producing biogas. The TM-LCA framework facilitates the capture of technology and regionally specific impacts, such as impacts caused by local energy provision and potential impacts due to limitations in the availability of the defined feedstock leading to additional transport.

Suggested Citation

  • Giovanna Croxatto Vega & Joshua Sohn & Sander Bruun & Stig Irving Olsen & Morten Birkved, 2019. "Maximizing Environmental Impact Savings Potential through Innovative Biorefinery Alternatives: An Application of the TM-LCA Framework for Regional Scale Impact Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-22, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:14:p:3836-:d:248212
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/14/3836/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/14/3836/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bugge, Jørgen & Kjær, Sven & Blum, Rudolph, 2006. "High-efficiency coal-fired power plants development and perspectives," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(10), pages 1437-1445.
    2. Annie Levasseur & Pascal Lesage & Manuele Margni & Réjean Samson, 2013. "Biogenic Carbon and Temporary Storage Addressed with Dynamic Life Cycle Assessment," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 17(1), pages 117-128, February.
    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. Spyridoula Gerassimidou & Olwenn V. Martin & Gilenny Yamily Feliz Diaz & Chaoying Wan & Dimitrios Komilis & Eleni Iacovidou, 2022. "Systematic Evidence Mapping to Assess the Sustainability of Bioplastics Derived from Food Waste: Do We Know Enough?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-27, December.
    2. Su, Shu & Ju, Jingyi & Guo, Qiyue & Li, Xiaodong & Zhu, Yimin, 2023. "A temporally dynamic model for regional carbon impact assessment based on city information modeling," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    3. Felipe Romero-Perdomo & Miguel Ángel González-Curbelo, 2023. "Integrating Multi-Criteria Techniques in Life-Cycle Tools for the Circular Bioeconomy Transition of Agri-Food Waste Biomass: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-27, March.
    4. Giovanna Croxatto Vega & Juliën Voogt & Joshua Sohn & Morten Birkved & Stig Irving Olsen, 2020. "Assessing New Biotechnologies by Combining TEA and TM-LCA for an Efficient Use of Biomass Resources," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-35, May.
    5. Luciano Vogli & Stefano Macrelli & Diego Marazza & Paola Galletti & Cristian Torri & Chiara Samorì & Serena Righi, 2020. "Life Cycle Assessment and Energy Balance of a Novel Polyhydroxyalkanoates Production Process with Mixed Microbial Cultures Fed on Pyrolytic Products of Wastewater Treatment Sludge," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-27, May.
    6. Vonk, W.J. & Schut, A.G.T. & van Ittersum, M.K. & Grillot, M. & Topp, C.F.E. & Hendriks, R. & Hijbeek, R., 2025. "Environmental effects of improved regional nitrogen cycling in crop-livestock systems – A generic modelling approach," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 224(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. Chihiro Kayo & Ryu Noda, 2018. "Climate Change Mitigation Potential of Wood Use in Civil Engineering in Japan Based on Life-Cycle Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Brizga, Janis & Räty, Tarmo, 2024. "Production, consumption and trade-based forest land and resource footprints in the Nordic and Baltic countries," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    3. Yuanyuan Pu & Derek B. Apel & Alicja Szmigiel & Jie Chen, 2019. "Image Recognition of Coal and Coal Gangue Using a Convolutional Neural Network and Transfer Learning," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-11, May.
    4. Perejón, Antonio & Romeo, Luis M. & Lara, Yolanda & Lisbona, Pilar & Martínez, Ana & Valverde, Jose Manuel, 2016. "The Calcium-Looping technology for CO2 capture: On the important roles of energy integration and sorbent behavior," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 787-807.
    5. Locatelli, Giorgio & Mancini, Mauro & Todeschini, Nicola, 2013. "Generation IV nuclear reactors: Current status and future prospects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1503-1520.
    6. Pettinau, Alberto & Ferrara, Francesca & Tola, Vittorio & Cau, Giorgio, 2017. "Techno-economic comparison between different technologies for CO2-free power generation from coal," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 426-439.
    7. Shu Su & Jingyi Ju & Yujie Ding & Jingfeng Yuan & Peng Cui, 2022. "A Comprehensive Dynamic Life Cycle Assessment Model: Considering Temporally and Spatially Dependent Variations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-18, October.
    8. Chamkalani, A. & Zendehboudi, S. & Rezaei, N. & Hawboldt, K., 2020. "A critical review on life cycle analysis of algae biodiesel: current challenges and future prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    9. Asdrubali, F. & Baggio, P. & Prada, A. & Grazieschi, G. & Guattari, C., 2020. "Dynamic life cycle assessment modelling of a NZEB building," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    10. Wang, Zhu & Liu, Ming & Zhao, Yongliang & Wang, Chaoyang & Chong, Daotong & Yan, Junjie, 2020. "Flexibility and efficiency enhancement for double-reheat coal-fired power plants by control optimization considering boiler heat storage," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    11. Siviter, J. & Montecucco, A. & Knox, A.R., 2015. "Rankine cycle efficiency gain using thermoelectric heat pumps," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 161-170.
    12. Xu, Gang & Xu, Cheng & Yang, Yongping & Fang, Yaxiong & Zhou, Luyao & Zhang, Kai, 2014. "Novel partial-subsidence tower-type boiler design in an ultra-supercritical power plant," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 363-373.
    13. Hinkley, James T. & Hayward, Jennifer A. & Curtin, Bryan & Wonhas, Alex & Boyd, Rod & Grima, Charles & Tadros, Amir & Hall, Ross & Naicker, Kevin, 2013. "An analysis of the costs and opportunities for concentrating solar power in Australia," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 653-661.
    14. Bartela, Łukasz & Skorek-Osikowska, Anna & Kotowicz, Janusz, 2015. "An analysis of the investment risk related to the integration of a supercritical coal-fired combined heat and power plant with an absorption installation for CO2 separation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 423-435.
    15. Yao, Gui-huan & Wang, Fang & Wang, Xiao-bo & Gui, Ke-ting, 2010. "Magnetic field effects on selective catalytic reduction of NO by NH3 over Fe2O3 catalyst in a magnetically fluidized bed," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2295-2300.
    16. Pellegrini, Luiz Felipe & de Oliveira Júnior, Silvio & Burbano, Juan Carlos, 2010. "Supercritical steam cycles and biomass integrated gasification combined cycles for sugarcane mills," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 1172-1180.
    17. Fenner, Andriel Evandro & Kibert, Charles Joseph & Woo, Junghoon & Morque, Shirley & Razkenari, Mohamad & Hakim, Hamed & Lu, Xiaoshu, 2018. "The carbon footprint of buildings: A review of methodologies and applications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1142-1152.
    18. Braud, L. & McDonnell, K. & Murphy, F., 2023. "Environmental life cycle assessment of algae systems: Critical review of modelling approaches," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    19. Gkousis, Spiros & Thomassen, Gwenny & Welkenhuysen, Kris & Compernolle, Tine, 2022. "Dynamic life cycle assessment of geothermal heat production from medium enthalpy hydrothermal resources," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 328(C).
    20. Patzek, Tadeusz W. & Croft, Gregory D., 2010. "A global coal production forecast with multi-Hubbert cycle analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 3109-3122.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:11:y:2019:i:14:p:3836-:d:248212. 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.