Consequential life cycle assessment of biogas, biofuel and biomass energy options within an arable crop rotation

被引:72
|
作者
Styles, David [1 ]
Gibbons, James [1 ]
Williams, Arwel P. [1 ]
Dauber, Jens [2 ]
Stichnothe, Heinz [3 ]
Urban, Barbara [3 ]
Chadwick, David R. [1 ]
Jones, Davey L. [1 ]
机构
[1] Bangor Univ, Sch Environm Nat Resources & Geog, Bangor LL57 2UW, Gwynedd, Wales
[2] Thunen Inst Biodivers, D-38116 Braunschweig, Germany
[3] Thunen Inst Agr Technol, D-38116 Braunschweig, Germany
来源
GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY BIOENERGY | 2015年 / 7卷 / 06期
关键词
anaerobic digestion; biofuels; ecosystem services; GHG mitigation; land use change; LCA; Miscanthus; renewable energy; GREENHOUSE-GAS EMISSIONS; LAND-USE CHANGE; ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES; ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; LCA; BIOENERGY; MANURE; AGRICULTURE; PERFORMANCE; SUPPORT;
D O I
10.1111/gcbb.12246
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
Feed in tariffs (FiTs) and renewable heat incentives (RHIs) are driving a rapid expansion in anaerobic digestion (AD) coupled with combined heat and power (CHP) plants in the UK. Farm models were combined with consequential life cycle assessment (CLCA) to assess the net environmental balance of representative biogas, biofuel and biomass scenarios on a large arable farm, capturing crop rotation and digestate nutrient cycling effects. All bioenergy options led to avoided fossil resource depletion. Global warming potential (GWP) balances ranged from -1732kgCO(2)eMg(-1) dry matter (DM) for pig slurry AD feedstock after accounting for avoided slurry storage to +2251kgCO(2)eMg(-1) DM for oilseed rape biodiesel feedstock after attributing indirect land use change (iLUC) to displaced food production. Maize monoculture for AD led to net GWP increases via iLUC, but optimized integration of maize into an arable rotation resulted in negligible food crop displacement and iLUC. However, even under best-case assumptions such as full use of heat output from AD-CHP, crop-biogas achieved low GWP reductions per hectare compared with Miscanthus heating pellets under default estimates of iLUC. Ecosystem services (ES) assessment highlighted soil and water quality risks for maize cultivation. All bioenergy crop options led to net increases in eutrophication after displaced food production was accounted for. The environmental balance of AD is sensitive to design and management factors such as digestate storage and application techniques, which are not well regulated in the UK. Currently, FiT payments are not dependent on compliance with sustainability criteria. We conclude that CLCA and ES effects should be integrated into sustainability criteria for FiTs and RHIs, to direct public money towards resource-efficient renewable energy options that achieve genuine climate protection without degrading soil, air or water quality.
引用
收藏
页码:1305 / 1320
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Modelling approaches for consequential life-cycle assessment (C-LCA) of bioenergy: Critical review and proposed framework for biogas production
    Marvuglia, Antonino
    Benetto, Enrico
    Rege, Sameer
    Jury, Colin
    [J]. RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2013, 25 : 768 - 781
  • [42] Assessment of energy recovery potential and analysis of environmental impacts of waste to energy options using life cycle assessment
    Kumar, Atul
    Samadder, Sukha Ranjan
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2022, 365
  • [43] Life Cycle Assessment of Willow Produced in Short Rotation Coppices for Energy Purposes
    Krzyzaniak, Michal
    Stolarski, Mariusz
    Szczukowski, Stefan
    Tworkowski, Jozef
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BIOBASED MATERIALS AND BIOENERGY, 2013, 7 (05) : 566 - 578
  • [44] Life cycle assessment of forest biomass energy feedstock in the Northeast United States
    Quinn, Ryan J.
    Ha, HakSoo
    Volk, Timothy A.
    Brown, Tristan R.
    Bick, Steven
    Malmsheimer, Robert W.
    Fortier, Marie-Odile P.
    [J]. GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY BIOENERGY, 2020, 12 (09): : 728 - 741
  • [45] Best Practices of Biomass Energy Life Cycle Assessment and Possible Applications in Serbia
    Peric, Milica
    Komatina, Mirko
    Bugarski, Branko
    Antonijevic, Dragi
    [J]. CROATIAN JOURNAL OF FOREST ENGINEERING, 2016, 37 (02) : 375 - 390
  • [46] Lessons from the use of a long-term energy model for consequential life cycle assessment: The BTL case
    Menten, Fabio
    Tchung-Ming, Stephane
    Lorne, Daphne
    Bouvart, Frederique
    [J]. RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2015, 43 : 942 - 960
  • [47] Life Cycle Assessment of biogas production by monofermentation of energy crops and injection into the natural gas grid
    Jury, Colin
    Benetto, Enrico
    Koster, Daniel
    Schmitt, Bianca
    Welfring, Joelle
    [J]. BIOMASS & BIOENERGY, 2010, 34 (01): : 54 - 66
  • [48] Sustainable utilization of crop residues for energy generation: A life cycle assessment (LCA) perspective
    Prasad, Shiv
    Singh, Anoop
    Korres, Nicholas E.
    Rathore, Dheeraj
    Sevda, Surajbhan
    Pant, Deepak
    [J]. BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY, 2020, 303
  • [49] Life Cycle Energy Assessment of biohydrogen production via biogas steam reforming: Case study of biogas plant on a farm in Serbia
    Cvetkovic, Slobodan M.
    Radoicic, Tatjana Kaluderovic
    Kijevcanin, Mirjana
    Novakovic, Jasmina Grbovic
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2021, 46 (27) : 14130 - 14137
  • [50] Energy intensity, life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions, and economic assessment of liquid biofuel pipelines
    Strogen, Bret
    Horvath, Arpad
    Zilberman, David
    [J]. BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY, 2013, 150 : 476 - 485