IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v15y2022i19p7197-d930088.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Novel Methodology to Assess Advanced Biofuel Production at Regional Level: Case Study for Cereal Straw Supply Chains

Author

Listed:
  • Marco Ugolini

    (Ca.Re. For. Engineering, Via Giovanni Boccaccio 71, 50133 Firenze, Italy)

  • Lucia Recchia

    (Ca.Re. For. Engineering, Via Giovanni Boccaccio 71, 50133 Firenze, Italy)

  • Giulio Guandalini

    (Dipartimento di Energia, Politecnico di Milano, via Lambruschini 4, 20156 Milan, Italy)

  • Giampaolo Manzolini

    (Dipartimento di Energia, Politecnico di Milano, via Lambruschini 4, 20156 Milan, Italy)

Abstract

Nowadays, there is an urgent necessity for breakthrough technologies able to reduce process complexity and to lower costs to make the biomass-based biodiesel supply chain competitive. This paper presents an innovative methodology for the identification of secondary biomass potentials for biofuel production. The methodology, divided into four steps, defines the criteria that allow identification of promising scenarios of biomass supply chains for commercial application of innovative technologies. The model set up a scoring procedure based on carbon emission avoidance, efficient resource exploitation and sustainability indexes. Applying the four levels of analysis (biomass availability, suitability analysis, regionalization and multi-criteria analysis), the cereal straw supply chains in four European districts (Scandinavian, Hanseatic, Central European and Mediterranean) have been identified and grouped in 18 biomass supply regional clusters (BSRCs). The clusters represent the most promising hotspots where biomass availability, logistics and feedstock requirements for a novel conversion technology meet. Central European and Mediterranean districts are those with the highest cereal straw bioeconomic potentials which allow mono-feedstock supply chains and relatively high capacity of a conversion technology at 200 MW th and beyond. Central Europe has an overall bioeconomic potential of 16.249 kt (232.359 TJ) distributed over 36 regions and organized in 12 BSRCs. The Mediterranean district has an overall bioeconomic potential of 3541 kt (50.630 TJ) distributed over nine regions and organized in four BSRCs.

Suggested Citation

  • Marco Ugolini & Lucia Recchia & Giulio Guandalini & Giampaolo Manzolini, 2022. "Novel Methodology to Assess Advanced Biofuel Production at Regional Level: Case Study for Cereal Straw Supply Chains," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-21, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:19:p:7197-:d:930088
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/19/7197/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/19/7197/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Avinash Bharti & Kunwar Paritosh & Venkata Ravibabu Mandla & Aakash Chawade & Vivekanand Vivekanand, 2021. "GIS Application for the Estimation of Bioenergy Potential from Agriculture Residues: An Overview," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-15, February.
    2. Xuezhen Guo & Juliën Voogt & Bert Annevelink & Joost Snels & Argyris Kanellopoulos, 2020. "Optimizing Resource Utilization in Biomass Supply Chains by Creating Integrated Biomass Logistics Centers," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-16, November.
    3. Chiaramonti, David & Talluri, Giacomo & Scarlat, Nicolae & Prussi, Matteo, 2021. "The challenge of forecasting the role of biofuel in EU transport decarbonisation at 2050: A meta-analysis review of published scenarios," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    4. Sultana, Arifa & Kumar, Amit, 2012. "Optimal siting and size of bioenergy facilities using geographic information system," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 192-201.
    5. Chiaramonti, David & Maniatis, Kyriakos, 2020. "Security of supply, strategic storage and Covid19: Which lessons learnt for renewable and recycled carbon fuels, and their future role in decarbonizing transport?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 271(C).
    6. Jianliang Wang & Yuru Yang & Yongmei Bentley & Xu Geng & Xiaojie Liu, 2018. "Sustainability Assessment of Bioenergy from a Global Perspective: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-19, August.
    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. Roksana Muzyka & Szymon Sobek & Mariusz Dudziak & Miloud Ouadi & Marcin Sajdak, 2023. "A Comparative Analysis of Waste Biomass Pyrolysis in Py-GC-MS and Fixed-Bed Reactors," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-15, April.

    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. Katarzyna Czech & Michał Wielechowski, 2021. "Is the Alternative Energy Sector COVID-19 Resistant? Comparison with the Conventional Energy Sector: Markov-Switching Model Analysis of Stock Market Indices of Energy Companies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Yin Hui Lai & Irene Mei Leng Chew, 2022. "Wastewater System Integration: A Biogenic Waste Biorefinery Eco-Industrial Park," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Mohsen Jamali & Esmaeil Bakhshandeh & Mohammad Yaghoubi Khanghahi & Carmine Crecchio, 2021. "Metadata Analysis to Evaluate Environmental Impacts of Wheat Residues Burning on Soil Quality in Developing and Developed Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-13, June.
    4. Gheorghe Cristian Popescu & Monica Popescu, 2022. "COVID-19 pandemic and agriculture in Romania: effects on agricultural systems, compliance with restrictions and relations with authorities," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 14(2), pages 557-567, April.
    5. Basile, Flavia & Pilotti, Lorenzo & Ugolini, Marco & Lozza, Giovanni & Manzolini, Giampaolo, 2022. "Supply chain optimization and GHG emissions in biofuel production from forestry residues in Sweden," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 405-421.
    6. Paul, Ananna & Shukla, Nagesh & Trianni, Andrea, 2023. "Modelling supply chain sustainability challenges in the food processing sector amid the COVID-19 outbreak," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PA).
    7. Johannes Full & Mathias Trauner & Robert Miehe & Alexander Sauer, 2021. "Carbon-Negative Hydrogen Production (HyBECCS) from Organic Waste Materials in Germany: How to Estimate Bioenergy and Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Potential," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-22, November.
    8. Höhn, J. & Lehtonen, E. & Rasi, S. & Rintala, J., 2014. "A Geographical Information System (GIS) based methodology for determination of potential biomasses and sites for biogas plants in southern Finland," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-10.
    9. Culot, Giovanna & Battistella, Cinzia, 2024. "Future ecosystem business model tool: Design science and field test in the efuel ecosystem towards the sustainability transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    10. Indupurnahayu & Edhie Budi Setiawan & Lira Agusinta & Ryan Firdiansyah Suryawan & Prasadja Ricardianto & Mustika Sari & Sri Mulyono & Reza Fauzi Jaya Sakti, 2021. "Changes in Demand and Supply of the Crude Oil Market During the COVID-19 Pandemic and its Effects on the Natural Gas Market," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 11(3), pages 1-6.
    11. Maung, Thein A. & Gustafson, Cole R. & Saxowsky, David M. & Nowatzki, John & Miljkovic, Tatjana & Ripplinger, David, 2013. "The logistics of supplying single vs. multi-crop cellulosic feedstocks to a biorefinery in southeast North Dakota," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 229-238.
    12. Devlin, Ger & Talbot, Bruce, 2014. "Deriving cooperative biomass resource transport supply strategies in meeting co-firing energy regulations: A case for peat and wood fibre in Ireland," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1700-1709.
    13. Cosette Khawaja & Rainer Janssen & Rita Mergner & Dominik Rutz & Marco Colangeli & Lorenzo Traverso & Maria Michela Morese & Manuela Hirschmugl & Carina Sobe & Alfonso Calera & David Cifuentes & Stefa, 2021. "Viability and Sustainability Assessment of Bioenergy Value Chains on Underutilised Lands in the EU and Ukraine," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-21, March.
    14. Costa, Fabrício Rodrigues & Ribeiro, Carlos Antonio Alvares Soares & Marcatti, Gustavo Eduardo & Lorenzon, Alexandre Simões & Teixeira, Thaisa Ribeiro & Domingues, Getulio Fonseca & Castro, Nero Lemos, 2020. "GIS applied to location of bioenergy plants in tropical agricultural areas," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 911-918.
    15. Reni Pantcheva, 2024. "Economic and Social Drivers of Renewable Energy Consumption in the European Union: An Econometric Analysis," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 7, pages 62-84.
    16. Renata Marks-Bielska & Stanisław Bielski & Anastasija Novikova & Kęstutis Romaneckas, 2019. "Straw Stocks as a Source of Renewable Energy. A Case Study of a District in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-18, August.
    17. Zhang, Jun & Osmani, Atif & Awudu, Iddrisu & Gonela, Vinay, 2013. "An integrated optimization model for switchgrass-based bioethanol supply chain," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 1205-1217.
    18. Alberto Bezama & Carlo Ingrao & Sinéad O’Keeffe & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Resources, Collaborators, and Neighbors: The Three-Pronged Challenge in the Implementation of Bioeconomy Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-18, December.
    19. Mikkel Bojesen & Luc Boerboom & Hans Skov-Petersen, 2014. "Towards a sustainable capacity expansion of the Danish biogas sector," IFRO Working Paper 2014/03, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    20. Sultana, Arifa & Kumar, Amit, 2014. "Development of tortuosity factor for assessment of lignocellulosic biomass delivery cost to a biorefinery," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 288-295.

    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:15:y:2022:i:19:p:7197-:d:930088. 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.