IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v12y2019i13p2535-d244797.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Global Warming Potential of Biomass-to-Ethanol: Review and Sensitivity Analysis through a Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Rui Pacheco

    (Instituto de Bioengenharia e Biociências, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Avenida Rovisco Pais 1, 1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal)

  • Carla Silva

    (Instituto Dom Luiz, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, Campo Grande, 1749-016 Lisboa, Portugal)

Abstract

In Europe, ethanol is blended with gasoline fuel in 5 or 10% volume (E5 or E10). In USA the blend is 15% in volume (E15) and there are also pumps that provide E85. In Brazil, the conventional gasoline is E27 and there are pumps that offer E100, due to the growing market of flex fuel vehicles. Bioethanol production is usually by means of biological conversion of several biomass feedstocks (first generation sugar cane in Brazil, corn in the USA, sugar beet in Europe, or second-generation bagasse of sugarcane or lignocellulosic materials from crop wastes). The environmental sustainability of the bioethanol is usually measured by the global warming potential metric (GWP in CO 2 eq), 100 years time horizon. Reviewed values could range from 0.31 to 5.55 gCO 2 eq/L ETOH . A biomass-to-ethanol industrial scenario was used to evaluate the impact of methodological choices on CO 2 eq: conventional versus dynamic Life Cycle Assessment; different impact assessment methods (TRACI, IPCC, ILCD, IMPACT, EDIP, and CML); electricity mix of the geographical region/country for different factory locations; differences in CO 2 eq factor for CH 4 and N 2 O due to updates in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports (5 reports so far), different factory operational lifetimes and future improved productivities. Results showed that the electricity mix (factory location) and land use are the factors that have the greatest effect (up to 800% deviation). The use of the CO 2 equivalency factors stated in different IPCC reports has the least influence (less than 3%). The consideration of the biogenic emissions (uptake at agricultural stage and release at the fermentation stage) and different allocation methods is also influential, and each can make values vary by 250%.

Suggested Citation

  • Rui Pacheco & Carla Silva, 2019. "Global Warming Potential of Biomass-to-Ethanol: Review and Sensitivity Analysis through a Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-18, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:12:y:2019:i:13:p:2535-:d:244797
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/13/2535/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/13/2535/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luo, Lin & van der Voet, Ester & Huppes, Gjalt, 2009. "An energy analysis of ethanol from cellulosic feedstock-Corn stover," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(8), pages 2003-2011, October.
    2. Morales, Marjorie & Quintero, Julián & Conejeros, Raúl & Aroca, Germán, 2015. "Life cycle assessment of lignocellulosic bioethanol: Environmental impacts and energy balance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1349-1361.
    3. Quintero, J.A. & Montoya, M.I. & Sánchez, O.J. & Giraldo, O.H. & Cardona, C.A., 2008. "Fuel ethanol production from sugarcane and corn: Comparative analysis for a Colombian case," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 385-399.
    4. Borrion, Aiduan Li & McManus, Marcelle C. & Hammond, Geoffrey P., 2012. "Environmental life cycle assessment of lignocellulosic conversion to ethanol: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(7), pages 4638-4650.
    5. Kosugi, Akihiko & Kondo, Akihiko & Ueda, Mitsuyoshi & Murata, Yoshinori & Vaithanomsat, Pilanee & Thanapase, Warunee & Arai, Takamitsu & Mori, Yutaka, 2009. "Production of ethanol from cassava pulp via fermentation with a surface-engineered yeast strain displaying glucoamylase," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1354-1358.
    6. McMillan, James D., 1997. "Bioethanol production: Status and prospects," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 295-302.
    7. Paixão, Susana M. & Alves, Luís & Pacheco, Rui & Silva, Carla M., 2018. "Evaluation of Jerusalem artichoke as a sustainable energy crop to bioethanol: energy and CO2eq emissions modeling for an industrial scenario," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 468-481.
    8. Gengmao, Zhao & Mehta, S.K. & Zhaopu, Liu, 2010. "Use of saline aquaculture wastewater to irrigate salt-tolerant Jerusalem artichoke and sunflower in semiarid coastal zones of China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(12), pages 1987-1993, November.
    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. 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. Mariana Raposo & Carla Silva, 2022. "City-Level E-Bike Sharing System Impact on Final Energy Consumption and GHG Emissions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-16, September.
    3. Isler-Kaya, Asli & Karaosmanoglu, Filiz, 2022. "Life cycle assessment of safflower and sugar beet molasses-based biofuels," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(P1), pages 1127-1138.
    4. Yee Ho Chai & Suzana Yusup & Wan Nadiah Amalina Kadir & Chung Yiin Wong & Siti Suhailah Rosli & Muhammad Syafiq Hazwan Ruslan & Bridgid Lai Fui Chin & Chung Loong Yiin, 2020. "Valorization of Tropical Biomass Waste by Supercritical Fluid Extraction Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-24, December.
    5. Carla Silva, 2021. "Greenhouse Gas Emission Assessment of Simulated Wastewater Biorefinery," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-14, July.
    6. Remston Martis & Amani Al-Othman & Muhammad Tawalbeh & Malek Alkasrawi, 2020. "Energy and Economic Analysis of Date Palm Biomass Feedstock for Biofuel Production in UAE: Pyrolysis, Gasification and Fermentation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-34, November.
    7. Debora Sotto & Arlindo Philippi & Tan Yigitcanlar & Md Kamruzzaman, 2019. "Aligning Urban Policy with Climate Action in the Global South: Are Brazilian Cities Considering Climate Emergency in Local Planning Practice?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-31, 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. Daylan, B. & Ciliz, N., 2016. "Life cycle assessment and environmental life cycle costing analysis of lignocellulosic bioethanol as an alternative transportation fuel," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 578-587.
    2. Siti Jamilah Hanim Mohd YUSOF & Ahmad Muhaimin Roslan & Khairul Nadiah Ibrahim & Sharifah Soplah Syed ABDULLAH & Mohd Rafein Zakaria & Mohd Ali Hassan & Yoshihito Shirai, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment for Bioethanol Production from Oil Palm Frond Juice in an Oil Palm Based Biorefinery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Parajuli, Ranjan & Dalgaard, Tommy & Jørgensen, Uffe & Adamsen, Anders Peter S. & Knudsen, Marie Trydeman & Birkved, Morten & Gylling, Morten & Schjørring, Jan Kofod, 2015. "Biorefining in the prevailing energy and materials crisis: a review of sustainable pathways for biorefinery value chains and sustainability assessment methodologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 244-263.
    4. 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.
    5. Meng, Fanran & Dornau, Aritha & Mcqueen Mason, Simon J. & Thomas, Gavin H. & Conradie, Alex & McKechnie, Jon, 2021. "Bioethanol from autoclaved municipal solid waste: Assessment of environmental and financial viability under policy contexts," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 298(C).
    6. Fiorentino, Gabriella & Zucaro, Amalia & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2019. "Towards an energy efficient chemistry. Switching from fossil to bio-based products in a life cycle perspective," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 720-729.
    7. Eckert, C.T. & Frigo, E.P. & Albrecht, L.P. & Albrecht, A.J.P. & Christ, D. & Santos, W.G. & Berkembrock, E. & Egewarth, V.A., 2018. "Maize ethanol production in Brazil: Characteristics and perspectives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3907-3912.
    8. 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).
    9. Morales, Marjorie & Quintero, Julián & Conejeros, Raúl & Aroca, Germán, 2015. "Life cycle assessment of lignocellulosic bioethanol: Environmental impacts and energy balance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1349-1361.
    10. Buchspies, Benedikt & Kaltschmitt, Martin, 2018. "A consequential assessment of changes in greenhouse gas emissions due to the introduction of wheat straw ethanol in the context of European legislation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 368-381.
    11. Mariana Abreu & Luís Silva & Belina Ribeiro & Alice Ferreira & Luís Alves & Susana M. Paixão & Luísa Gouveia & Patrícia Moura & Florbela Carvalheiro & Luís C. Duarte & Ana Luisa Fernando & Alberto Rei, 2022. "Low Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC) Energy Crops to Bioenergy and Biofuels—A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-68, June.
    12. Duarte, Alexandra & Uribe, Juan Carlos & Sarache, William & Calderón, Andrés, 2021. "Economic, environmental, and social assessment of bioethanol production using multiple coffee crop residues," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    13. Burnes, Ellen & Wichelns, Dennis & Hagen, John W., 2005. "Economic and policy implications of public support for ethanol production in California's San Joaquin Valley," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1155-1167, June.
    14. 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.
    15. Geraili, A. & Sharma, P. & Romagnoli, J.A., 2014. "Technology analysis of integrated biorefineries through process simulation and hybrid optimization," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 145-159.
    16. Tiziano Gomiero, 2015. "Are Biofuels an Effective and Viable Energy Strategy for Industrialized Societies? A Reasoned Overview of Potentials and Limits," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-31, June.
    17. Wang, Ping & Liu, Chaoqi & Chang, Juan & Yin, Qingqiang & Huang, Weiwei & Liu, Yang & Dang, Xiaowei & Gao, Tianzeng & Lu, Fushan, 2019. "Effect of physicochemical pretreatments plus enzymatic hydrolysis on the composition and morphologic structure of corn straw," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 502-508.
    18. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    19. Passos, Wilson E. & Oliveira, Ivan P. & Michels, Flávio S. & Trindade, Magno A.G. & Falcão, Evaristo A. & Marangoni, Bruno S. & Oliveira, Samuel L. & Caires, Anderson R.L., 2021. "Quantification of water in bioethanol using rhodamine B as an efficient molecular optical probe," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 165(P2), pages 42-51.
    20. 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.

    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:jeners:v:12:y:2019:i:13:p:2535-:d:244797. 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.