IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v12y2019i4p718-d208160.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Life Cycle Assessment of Biomethane Production from Waste Feedstock Through Different Upgrading Technologies

Author

Listed:
  • Ciro Florio

    (Department of Science and Technology (DiST), University of Naples “Parthenope”, Centro Direzionale, ISOLA C4 80143 Naples, Italy)

  • Gabriella Fiorentino

    (Department of Science and Technology (DiST), University of Naples “Parthenope”, Centro Direzionale, ISOLA C4 80143 Naples, Italy)

  • Fabiana Corcelli

    (Department of Science and Technology (DiST), University of Naples “Parthenope”, Centro Direzionale, ISOLA C4 80143 Naples, Italy)

  • Sergio Ulgiati

    (Department of Science and Technology (DiST), University of Naples “Parthenope”, Centro Direzionale, ISOLA C4 80143 Naples, Italy
    School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, 19 Xinjiekouwai St., Haidian District, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Stefano Dumontet

    (Department of Science and Technology (DiST), University of Naples “Parthenope”, Centro Direzionale, ISOLA C4 80143 Naples, Italy)

  • Joshua Güsewell

    (Institute of Energy Economics and Rational Use of Energy (IER), University of Stuttgart, Heßbrühlstrasse 49a, 70565 Stuttgart, Germany)

  • Ludger Eltrop

    (Institute of Energy Economics and Rational Use of Energy (IER), University of Stuttgart, Heßbrühlstrasse 49a, 70565 Stuttgart, Germany)

Abstract

Upgrading consists of a range of purification processes aimed at increasing the methane content of biogas to reach specifications similar to natural gas. In this perspective, an environmental assessment, based on the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method, of different upgrading technologies is helpful to identify the environmental characteristics of biomethane and the critical steps for improvement. The aim of this work is to conduct an LCA of biomethane production from waste feedstock, using the SimaPro software. The study focuses on the comparison of several upgrading technologies (namely, membrane separation, cryogenic separation, pressure swing adsorption, chemical scrubbing, high pressure water scrubbing) and the on-site cogeneration of electricity and heat, including the environmental benefits deriving from the substitution of fossil-based products. The results show a better environmental performance of the cogeneration option in most of the impact categories. The Fossil resource scarcity is the impact category which is mainly benefited by the avoided production of natural gas, with savings of about 0.5 kg oil eq/m 3 of biogas for all the investigated technologies, with an average improvement of about 76% compared to conventional cogeneration. The results show that the membrane upgrading technology is slightly more environmentally convenient than the other upgrading technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Ciro Florio & Gabriella Fiorentino & Fabiana Corcelli & Sergio Ulgiati & Stefano Dumontet & Joshua Güsewell & Ludger Eltrop, 2019. "A Life Cycle Assessment of Biomethane Production from Waste Feedstock Through Different Upgrading Technologies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-12, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:12:y:2019:i:4:p:718-:d:208160
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/4/718/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/4/718/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hijazi, O. & Munro, S. & Zerhusen, B. & Effenberger, M., 2016. "Review of life cycle assessment for biogas production in Europe," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1291-1300.
    2. Cellura, Maurizio & Longo, Sonia & Mistretta, Marina, 2011. "Sensitivity analysis to quantify uncertainty in Life Cycle Assessment: The case study of an Italian tile," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4697-4705.
    3. Lin, Long & Xu, Fuqing & Ge, Xumeng & Li, Yebo, 2018. "Improving the sustainability of organic waste management practices in the food-energy-water nexus: A comparative review of anaerobic digestion and composting," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 151-167.
    4. Collet, Pierre & Flottes, Eglantine & Favre, Alain & Raynal, Ludovic & Pierre, Hélène & Capela, Sandra & Peregrina, Carlos, 2017. "Techno-economic and Life Cycle Assessment of methane production via biogas upgrading and power to gas technology," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 282-295.
    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. Apoorva Upadhyay & Andrey A. Kovalev & Elena A. Zhuravleva & Dmitriy A. Kovalev & Yuriy V. Litti & Shyam Kumar Masakapalli & Nidhi Pareek & Vivekanand Vivekanand, 2022. "Recent Development in Physical, Chemical, Biological and Hybrid Biogas Upgradation Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-30, December.
    2. Elena Tamburini & Mattias Gaglio & Giuseppe Castaldelli & Elisa Anna Fano, 2020. "Biogas from Agri-Food and Agricultural Waste Can Appreciate Agro-Ecosystem Services: The Case Study of Emilia Romagna Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-15, October.
    3. Achinas, Spyridon & Willem Euverink, Gerrit Jan, 2020. "Rambling facets of manure-based biogas production in Europe: A briefing," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    4. Hidalgo, D. & Sanz-Bedate, S. & Martín-Marroquín, J.M. & Castro, J. & Antolín, G., 2020. "Selective separation of CH4 and CO2 using membrane contactors," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 935-942.
    5. Svetlana Zueva & Andrey A. Kovalev & Yury V. Litti & Nicolò M. Ippolito & Valentina Innocenzi & Ida De Michelis, 2021. "Environmental and Economic Aspects of Biomethane Production from Organic Waste in Russia," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-8, August.
    6. Khoshnevisan, Benyamin & Tabatabaei, Meisam & Tsapekos, Panagiotis & Rafiee, Shahin & Aghbashlo, Mortaza & Lindeneg, Susanne & Angelidaki, Irini, 2020. "Environmental life cycle assessment of different biorefinery platforms valorizing municipal solid waste to bioenergy, microbial protein, lactic and succinic acid," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    7. Egidijus Buivydas & Kęstutis Navickas & Kęstutis Venslauskas, 2024. "A Life Cycle Assessment of Methane Slip in Biogas Upgrading Based on Permeable Membrane Technology with Variable Methane Concentration in Raw Biogas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-18, April.
    8. Lombardi, Lidia & Francini, Giovanni, 2020. "Techno-economic and environmental assessment of the main biogas upgrading technologies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 440-458.
    9. Naquash, Ahmad & Qyyum, Muhammad Abdul & Haider, Junaid & Bokhari, Awais & Lim, Hankwon & Lee, Moonyong, 2022. "State-of-the-art assessment of cryogenic technologies for biogas upgrading: Energy, economic, and environmental perspectives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    10. Sylwia Myszograj, 2019. "Biogas and Methane Potential of Pre-Thermally Disintegrated Bio-Waste," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-12, October.
    11. Robert Czubaszek & Agnieszka Wysocka-Czubaszek & Piotr Banaszuk, 2020. "GHG Emissions and Efficiency of Energy Generation through Anaerobic Fermentation of Wetland Biomass," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-25, December.
    12. Eric Santos-Clotas & Alba Cabrera-Codony & Alba Castillo & Maria J. Martín & Manel Poch & Hèctor Monclús, 2019. "Environmental Decision Support System for Biogas Upgrading to Feasible Fuel," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-14, April.
    13. Khan, Muhammad Usman & Lee, Jonathan Tian En & Bashir, Muhammad Aamir & Dissanayake, Pavani Dulanja & Ok, Yong Sik & Tong, Yen Wah & Shariati, Mohammad Ali & Wu, Sarah & Ahring, Birgitte Kiaer, 2021. "Current status of biogas upgrading for direct biomethane use: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    14. Bidart, Christian & Wichert, Martin & Kolb, Gunther & Held, Michael, 2022. "Biogas catalytic methanation for biomethane production as fuel in freight transport - A carbon footprint assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    15. Rasheed, Rizwan & Tahir, Fizza & Yasar, Abdullah & Sharif, Faiza & Tabinda, Amtul Bari & Ahmad, Sajid Rashid & Wang, Yubo & Su, Yuehong, 2022. "Environmental life cycle analysis of a modern commercial-scale fibreglass composite-based biogas scrubbing system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 1261-1271.
    16. Matteo Galloni & Gioele Di Marcoberardino, 2024. "Biogas Upgrading Technology: Conventional Processes and Emerging Solutions Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-29, June.
    17. Izabela Samson-Bręk & Marlena Owczuk & Anna Matuszewska & Krzysztof Biernat, 2022. "Environmental Assessment of the Life Cycle of Electricity Generation from Biogas in Polish Conditions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-22, August.
    18. Robert Bedoić & Goran Smoljanić & Tomislav Pukšec & Lidija Čuček & Davor Ljubas & Neven Duić, 2021. "Geospatial Analysis and Environmental Impact Assessment of a Holistic and Interdisciplinary Approach to the Biogas Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-20, August.
    19. Elena Tamburini & Mattias Gaglio & Giuseppe Castaldelli & Elisa Anna Fano, 2020. "Is Bioenergy Truly Sustainable When Land-Use-Change (LUC) Emissions Are Accounted for? The Case-Study of Biogas from Agricultural Biomass in Emilia-Romagna Region, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-20, April.
    20. Rufis Fregue Tiegam Tagne & Xiaobin Dong & Solomon G. Anagho & Serena Kaiser & Sergio Ulgiati, 2021. "Technologies, challenges and perspectives of biogas production within an agricultural context. The case of China and Africa," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(10), pages 14799-14826, October.
    21. Gabriella Fiorentino & Amalia Zucaro & Antonietta Cerbone & Alessandro Giocoli & Vincenzo Motola & Caterina Rinaldi & Simona Scalbi & Giuliana Ansanelli, 2024. "The Contribution of Biogas to the Electricity Supply Chain: An Italian Life Cycle Assessment Database," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-24, July.

    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. Hijazi, O. & Abdelsalam, E. & Samer, M. & Attia, Y.A. & Amer, B.M.A. & Amer, M.A. & Badr, M. & Bernhardt, H., 2020. "Life cycle assessment of the use of nanomaterials in biogas production from anaerobic digestion of manure," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 417-424.
    2. Abdelsalam, E. & Hijazi, O. & Samer, M. & Yacoub, I.H. & Ali, A.S. & Ahmed, R.H. & Bernhardt, H., 2019. "Life cycle assessment of the use of laser radiation in biogas production from anaerobic digestion of manure," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 130-136.
    3. M. Samer & O. Hijazi & E. M. Abdelsalam & A. El-Hussein & Y. A. Attia & I. H. Yacoub & H. Bernhardt, 2021. "Life cycle assessment of using laser treatment and nanomaterials to produce biogas through anaerobic digestion of slurry," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(10), pages 14683-14696, October.
    4. Muhamed Rasit Atelge & Halil Senol & Mohammed Djaafri & Tulin Avci Hansu & David Krisa & Abdulaziz Atabani & Cigdem Eskicioglu & Hamdi Muratçobanoğlu & Sebahattin Unalan & Slimane Kalloum & Nuri Azbar, 2021. "A Critical Overview of the State-of-the-Art Methods for Biogas Purification and Utilization Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-39, October.
    5. Qi, Chuanren & Cao, Dingge & Gao, Xingzu & Jia, Sumeng & Yin, Rongrong & Nghiem, Long D. & Li, Guoxue & Luo, Wenhai, 2023. "Optimising organic composition of feedstock to improve microbial dynamics and symbiosis to advance solid-state anaerobic co-digestion of sewage sludge and organic waste," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 351(C).
    6. Henrik B. Møller & Peter Sørensen & Jørgen E. Olesen & Søren O. Petersen & Tavs Nyord & Sven G. Sommer, 2022. "Agricultural Biogas Production—Climate and Environmental Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-24, February.
    7. Yue Jiang & Yue Zhang & Hong Li, 2023. "Research Progress and Analysis on Comprehensive Utilization of Livestock and Poultry Biogas Slurry as Agricultural Resources," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-17, November.
    8. Victor Hugo Souza de Abreu & Victória Gonçalves Ferreira Pereira & Laís Ferreira Crispino Proença & Fabio Souza Toniolo & Andrea Souza Santos, 2023. "A Systematic Study on Techno-Economic Evaluation of Hydrogen Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-23, September.
    9. Sofia Dahlgren & Jonas Ammenberg, 2021. "Sustainability Assessment of Public Transport, Part II—Applying a Multi-Criteria Assessment Method to Compare Different Bus Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-30, January.
    10. Awasthi, Mukesh Kumar & Sarsaiya, Surendra & Wainaina, Steven & Rajendran, Karthik & Kumar, Sumit & Quan, Wang & Duan, Yumin & Awasthi, Sanjeev Kumar & Chen, Hongyu & Pandey, Ashok & Zhang, Zengqiang , 2019. "A critical review of organic manure biorefinery models toward sustainable circular bioeconomy: Technological challenges, advancements, innovations, and future perspectives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 115-131.
    11. Elena Helerea & Marius D. Calin & Cristian Musuroi, 2023. "Water Energy Nexus and Energy Transition—A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-31, February.
    12. Elena Tamburini & Mattias Gaglio & Giuseppe Castaldelli & Elisa Anna Fano, 2020. "Is Bioenergy Truly Sustainable When Land-Use-Change (LUC) Emissions Are Accounted for? The Case-Study of Biogas from Agricultural Biomass in Emilia-Romagna Region, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-20, April.
    13. Wang, Bing & Ke, Ruo-Yu & Yuan, Xiao-Chen & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2014. "China׳s regional assessment of renewable energy vulnerability to climate change," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 185-195.
    14. Singlitico, Alessandro & Goggins, Jamie & Monaghan, Rory F.D., 2019. "The role of life cycle assessment in the sustainable transition to a decarbonised gas network through green gas production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 16-28.
    15. Bacenetti, Jacopo & Sala, Cesare & Fusi, Alessandra & Fiala, Marco, 2016. "Agricultural anaerobic digestion plants: What LCA studies pointed out and what can be done to make them more environmentally sustainable," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 669-686.
    16. Jacopo Bacenetti, 2020. "Economic and Environmental Impact Assessment of Renewable Energy from Biomass," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-5, July.
    17. Jun Hou & Weifeng Zhang & Pei Wang & Zhengxia Dou & Liwei Gao & David Styles, 2017. "Greenhouse Gas Mitigation of Rural Household Biogas Systems in China: A Life Cycle Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-14, February.
    18. Kapoor, Rimika & Subbarao, P.M.V. & Vijay, Virendra Kumar & Shah, Goldy & Sahota, Shivali & Singh, Dhruv & Verma, Mahesh, 2017. "Factors affecting methane loss from a water scrubbing based biogas upgrading system," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 1379-1388.
    19. Robert Czubaszek & Agnieszka Wysocka-Czubaszek & Piotr Banaszuk, 2020. "GHG Emissions and Efficiency of Energy Generation through Anaerobic Fermentation of Wetland Biomass," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-25, December.
    20. Märker, Carolin & Venghaus, Sandra & Hake, Jürgen-Friedrich, 2018. "Integrated governance for the food–energy–water nexus – The scope of action for institutional change," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 290-300.

    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:4:p:718-:d:208160. 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.