IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v17y2024i11p2771-d1409303.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life Cycle Assessment of Electricity Production from Different Biomass Sources in Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Amalia Zucaro

    (ENEA, Department for Sustainability, Division Resource Efficiency, 00196 Rome, Italy
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Giuliana Ansanelli

    (ENEA, Department for Sustainability, Division Resource Efficiency, 00196 Rome, Italy
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Antonietta Cerbone

    (ENEA, Department for Sustainability, Division Resource Efficiency, 00196 Rome, Italy)

  • Antonio Picarelli

    (ENEA, Department of Energy Technologies and Renewable Sources, Division Smart Sector Integration and Distributed RES Generation, 00196 Rome, Italy)

  • Caterina Rinaldi

    (ENEA, Department for Sustainability, Division Resource Efficiency, 00196 Rome, Italy)

  • Tiziana Beltrani

    (ENEA, Department for Sustainability, Division Resource Efficiency, 00196 Rome, Italy)

  • Silvia Sbaffoni

    (ENEA, Department for Sustainability, Division Resource Efficiency, 00196 Rome, Italy)

  • Gabriella Fiorentino

    (ENEA, Department for Sustainability, Division Resource Efficiency, 00196 Rome, Italy)

Abstract

The European Union is targeting climate neutrality by 2050, with a focus on enhancing energy efficiency, expanding renewable energy sources, and reducing emissions. Within Italy’s electricity mix, bioenergy sources, namely biogas, solid biomass, and bioliquids, play a crucial territorial role. A comparative analysis was conducted through Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), utilizing national data from the ARCADIA project, to assess the environmental sustainability of the investigated bioenergy chains and identify the most convenient ones. The study revealed that, among the bioenergy sources, solid biomass emerges as the most environmentally friendly option since it does not rely on dedicated crops. Conversely, biogas shows the highest environmental impact, demonstrating less favorable performance across nine out of the sixteen evaluated impact categories. The LCA underscores that the cultivation of dedicated energy crops significantly contributes to environmental burdens associated with electricity generation, affecting both biogas and bioliquids performance. The cultivation process needs water and chemical fertilizers, leading to adverse environmental effects. These findings highlight the importance of prioritizing residual biomass for energy generation over dedicated crops. Utilizing forestry and agro-industrial residues, municipal solid waste, and used cooking oils presents numerous advantages, including environmental preservation, resource conservation and recovery, as well as waste reduction.

Suggested Citation

  • Amalia Zucaro & Giuliana Ansanelli & Antonietta Cerbone & Antonio Picarelli & Caterina Rinaldi & Tiziana Beltrani & Silvia Sbaffoni & Gabriella Fiorentino, 2024. "Life Cycle Assessment of Electricity Production from Different Biomass Sources in Italy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-20, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:11:p:2771-:d:1409303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/11/2771/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/11/2771/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saharudin, Djasmine Mastisya & Jeswani, Harish Kumar & Azapagic, Adisa, 2023. "Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECSS): Life cycle environmental and economic assessment of electricity generated from palm oil wastes," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 349(C).
    2. Garcia, Rita & Marques, Pedro & Freire, Fausto, 2014. "Life-cycle assessment of electricity in Portugal," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 563-572.
    3. Messagie, Maarten & Mertens, Jan & Oliveira, Luis & Rangaraju, Surendraprabu & Sanfelix, Javier & Coosemans, Thierry & Van Mierlo, Joeri & Macharis, Cathy, 2014. "The hourly life cycle carbon footprint of electricity generation in Belgium, bringing a temporal resolution in life cycle assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 469-476.
    4. Evans, Annette & Strezov, Vladimir & Evans, Tim J., 2009. "Assessment of sustainability indicators for renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 1082-1088, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Akber, Muhammad Zeshan & Thaheem, Muhammad Jamaluddin & Arshad, Husnain, 2017. "Life cycle sustainability assessment of electricity generation in Pakistan: Policy regime for a sustainable energy mix," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 111-126.
    2. Busola D. Akintayo & Oluwafemi E. Ige & Olubayo M. Babatunde & Oludolapo A. Olanrewaju, 2023. "Evaluation and Prioritization of Power-Generating Systems Using a Life Cycle Assessment and a Multicriteria Decision-Making Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-18, September.
    3. Ingrid Munné-Collado & Fabio Maria Aprà & Pol Olivella-Rosell & Roberto Villafáfila-Robles, 2019. "The Potential Role of Flexibility During Peak Hours on Greenhouse Gas Emissions: A Life Cycle Assessment of Five Targeted National Electricity Grid Mixes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-22, November.
    4. Ramirez, A.D. & Boero, A. & Rivela, B. & Melendres, A.M. & Espinoza, S. & Salas, D.A., 2020. "Life cycle methods to analyze the environmental sustainability of electricity generation in Ecuador: Is decarbonization the right path?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    5. Ramirez, Angel D. & Rivela, Beatriz & Boero, Andrea & Melendres, Ana M., 2019. "Lights and shadows of the environmental impacts of fossil-based electricity generation technologies: A contribution based on the Ecuadorian experience," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 467-477.
    6. Zerrin Günkaya & Alp Özdemir & Aysun Özkan & Müfide Banar, 2016. "Environmental Performance of Electricity Generation Based on Resources: A Life Cycle Assessment Case Study in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-14, October.
    7. Kabayo, Jeremiah & Marques, Pedro & Garcia, Rita & Freire, Fausto, 2019. "Life-cycle sustainability assessment of key electricity generation systems in Portugal," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 131-142.
    8. L. Hay & A. H. B. Duffy & R. I. Whitfield, 2017. "The S‐Cycle Performance Matrix: Supporting Comprehensive Sustainability Performance Evaluation of Technical Systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 45-70, January.
    9. Emblemsvåg, Jan, 2022. "Wind energy is not sustainable when balanced by fossil energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    10. Gottschamer, L. & Zhang, Q., 2016. "Interactions of factors impacting implementation and sustainability of renewable energy sourced electricity," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 164-174.
    11. Mostafa Shaaban & Jürgen Scheffran & Jürgen Böhner & Mohamed S. Elsobki, 2018. "Sustainability Assessment of Electricity Generation Technologies in Egypt Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-25, May.
    12. Aleksandra Matuszewska-Janica & Dorota Żebrowska-Suchodolska & Urszula Ala-Karvia & Marta Hozer-Koćmiel, 2021. "Changes in Electricity Production from Renewable Energy Sources in the European Union Countries in 2005–2019," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-27, October.
    13. Toledo, Olga Moraes & Oliveira Filho, Delly & Diniz, Antônia Sônia Alves Cardoso, 2010. "Distributed photovoltaic generation and energy storage systems: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 506-511, January.
    14. Hong, Sanghyun & Bradshaw, Corey J.A. & Brook, Barry W., 2014. "Nuclear power can reduce emissions and maintain a strong economy: Rating Australia’s optimal future electricity-generation mix by technologies and policies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 712-725.
    15. Maiti, Moinak, 2022. "Does development in venture capital investments influence green growth?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    16. Zhang, Xiaoyue & Huang, Guohe & Liu, Lirong & Li, Kailong, 2022. "Development of a stochastic multistage lifecycle programming model for electric power system planning – A case study for the Province of Saskatchewan, Canada," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    17. 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.
    18. Suopajärvi, Hannu & Pongrácz, Eva & Fabritius, Timo, 2013. "The potential of using biomass-based reducing agents in the blast furnace: A review of thermochemical conversion technologies and assessments related to sustainability," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 511-528.
    19. Bonou, Alexandra & Laurent, Alexis & Olsen, Stig I., 2016. "Life cycle assessment of onshore and offshore wind energy-from theory to application," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 327-337.
    20. Berjawi, A.E.H. & Walker, S.L. & Patsios, C. & Hosseini, S.H.R., 2021. "An evaluation framework for future integrated energy systems: A whole energy systems approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).

    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:17:y:2024:i:11:p:2771-:d:1409303. 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.