IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v11y2022i2p7-d727386.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon Footprint and Feedstock Quality of a Real Biomass Power Plant Fed with Forestry and Agricultural Residues

Author

Listed:
  • Alessio Ilari

    (Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche 10, 60131 Ancona, Italy)

  • Daniele Duca

    (Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche 10, 60131 Ancona, Italy)

  • Kofi Armah Boakye-Yiadom

    (Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche 10, 60131 Ancona, Italy)

  • Thomas Gasperini

    (Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche 10, 60131 Ancona, Italy)

  • Giuseppe Toscano

    (Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche 10, 60131 Ancona, Italy)

Abstract

Phasing out fossil fuels to renewables is currently a global priority due to the climate change threat. Advocacy for biomass use as an energy source requires assessing the quality biomass and ecological impacts of bioenergy supply chains. This study evaluated the quality of biomass residues from orchards and silviculture transported from different Northern and Central Italy locations and the carbon footprint of a biomass power plant. The total greenhouse emissions were calculated based on primary data for 2017 according to the ISO/TS 14067. All the residue samples showed their suitability for biofuel use. Ash content was relatively low on average (3–5% d.m.), except for grapevine residues (18% d.m.). The lower heating value was within the expected range of 15–21 MJ kg −1 for plant species. The average GHG emission from the power plant was 17.4 g CO 2 eq./MJ of electrical energy, with the energy conversion (38%) and transportation of biomass (34%) phases being the main impact contributors. For this study, impacts of residual agricultural residue were about half that of residues from forest management, mainly due to chipping and greater transport distance. Results show that sourcing residual biomass materials for electricity generation close to power plants significantly reduce GHG emissions compared to conventional fossil fuels.

Suggested Citation

  • Alessio Ilari & Daniele Duca & Kofi Armah Boakye-Yiadom & Thomas Gasperini & Giuseppe Toscano, 2022. "Carbon Footprint and Feedstock Quality of a Real Biomass Power Plant Fed with Forestry and Agricultural Residues," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-20, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:11:y:2022:i:2:p:7-:d:727386
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/11/2/7/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/11/2/7/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saidur, R. & Abdelaziz, E.A. & Demirbas, A. & Hossain, M.S. & Mekhilef, S., 2011. "A review on biomass as a fuel for boilers," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 2262-2289, June.
    2. Muench, Stefan & Guenther, Edeltraud, 2013. "A systematic review of bioenergy life cycle assessments," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 257-273.
    3. Deboni, Tamires Liza & Simioni, Flávio José & Brand, Martha Andreia & Lopes, Gisele Paim, 2019. "Evolution of the quality of forest biomass for energy generation in a cogeneration plant," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 1291-1302.
    4. Beagle, E. & Belmont, E., 2019. "Comparative life cycle assessment of biomass utilization for electricity generation in the European Union and the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 267-275.
    5. Ganesh, Anuradda & Banerjee, Rangan, 2001. "Biomass pyrolysis for power generation — a potential technology," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 9-14.
    6. Loução, Pedro O. & Ribau, João P. & Ferreira, Ana F., 2019. "Life cycle and decision analysis of electricity production from biomass – Portugal case study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 452-480.
    7. Buonocore, Elvira & Vanoli, Laura & Carotenuto, Alberto & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2015. "Integrating life cycle assessment and emergy synthesis for the evaluation of a dry steam geothermal power plant in Italy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 476-487.
    8. Frick, Stephanie & Kaltschmitt, Martin & Schröder, Gerd, 2010. "Life cycle assessment of geothermal binary power plants using enhanced low-temperature reservoirs," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2281-2294.
    9. Zang, Guiyan & Zhang, Jianan & Jia, Junxi & Lora, Electo Silva & Ratner, Albert, 2020. "Life cycle assessment of power-generation systems based on biomass integrated gasification combined cycles," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 336-346.
    10. Asif Saeed & Umara Noreen & Akbar Azam & Muhammad Sohail Tahir, 2021. "Does CSR Governance Improve Social Sustainability and Reduce the Carbon Footprint: International Evidence from the Energy Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-16, March.
    11. Fournel, S. & Palacios, J.H. & Morissette, R. & Villeneuve, J. & Godbout, S. & Heitz, M. & Savoie, P., 2015. "Influence of biomass properties on technical and environmental performance of a multi-fuel boiler during on-farm combustion of energy crops," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 247-259.
    12. Evans, Annette & Strezov, Vladimir & Evans, Tim J., 2010. "Sustainability considerations for electricity generation from biomass," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 1419-1427, June.
    13. Agnieszka Janik & Adam Ryszko & Marek Szafraniec, 2020. "Greenhouse Gases and Circular Economy Issues in Sustainability Reports from the Energy Sector in the European Union," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-36, November.
    14. Uusitalo, V. & Havukainen, J. & Manninen, K. & Höhn, J. & Lehtonen, E. & Rasi, S. & Soukka, R. & Horttanainen, M., 2014. "Carbon footprint of selected biomass to biogas production chains and GHG reduction potential in transportation use," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 90-98.
    15. Kucukvar, Murat & Tatari, Omer, 2011. "A comprehensive life cycle analysis of cofiring algae in a coal power plant as a solution for achieving sustainable energy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 6352-6357.
    16. Rizal Taufiq Fauzi & Patrick Lavoie & Luca Sorelli & Mohammad Davoud Heidari & Ben Amor, 2019. "Exploring the Current Challenges and Opportunities of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, January.
    17. Maria Pergola & Angelo Rita & Alfonso Tortora & Maria Castellaneta & Marco Borghetti & Antonio Sergio De Franchi & Antonio Lapolla & Nicola Moretti & Giovanni Pecora & Domenico Pierangeli & Luigi Toda, 2020. "Identification of Suitable Areas for Biomass Power Plant Construction through Environmental Impact Assessment of Forest Harvesting Residues Transportation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-16, May.
    18. Nian, Victor, 2016. "The carbon neutrality of electricity generation from woody biomass and coal, a critical comparative evaluation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1069-1080.
    19. Anukam, Anthony & Mamphweli, Sampson & Reddy, Prashant & Meyer, Edson & Okoh, Omobola, 2016. "Pre-processing of sugarcane bagasse for gasification in a downdraft biomass gasifier system: A comprehensive review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 775-801.
    20. Lam, Hon Loong & Varbanov, Petar & Klemeš, Jiří, 2010. "Minimising carbon footprint of regional biomass supply chains," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 54(5), pages 303-309.
    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. Raja Chowdhury & Nidia Caetano & Matthew J. Franchetti & Kotnoor Hariprasad, 2023. "Life Cycle Based GHG Emissions from Algae Based Bioenergy with a Special Emphasis on Climate Change Indicators and Their Uses in Dynamic LCA: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-19, January.
    2. Aleksandr Ketov & Natalia Sliusar & Anna Tsybina & Iurii Ketov & Sergei Chudinov & Marina Krasnovskikh & Vladimir Bosnic, 2022. "Plant Biomass Conversion to Vehicle Liquid Fuel as a Path to Sustainability," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-11, August.
    3. Chen, Xinke & Yan, Hongchi & Ma, Lun & Fang, Qingyan & Deng, Shuanghui & Wang, Xuebin & Yin, Chungen, 2023. "Moisture content effects on self-heating in stored biomass: An experimental study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).
    4. Daniele Duca & Giuseppe Toscano, 2022. "Biomass Energy Resources: Feedstock Quality and Bioenergy Sustainability," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-6, June.

    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. Eksi, Guner & Karaosmanoglu, Filiz, 2017. "Combined bioheat and biopower: A technology review and an assessment for Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1313-1332.
    2. Xuejun Qian & Jingwen Xue & Yulai Yang & Seong W. Lee, 2021. "Thermal Properties and Combustion-Related Problems Prediction of Agricultural Crop Residues," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-18, July.
    3. 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.
    4. Zailan, Roziah & Lim, Jeng Shiun & Manan, Zainuddin Abdul & Alwi, Sharifah Rafidah Wan & Mohammadi-ivatloo, Behnam & Jamaluddin, Khairulnadzmi, 2021. "Malaysia scenario of biomass supply chain-cogeneration system and optimization modeling development: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    5. Luiz Moreira Coelho Junior & Edvaldo Pereira Santos Júnior, 2022. "Space-Time Conglomerates Analysis of the Forest-Based Power Plants in Brazil (2000–2019)," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-12, June.
    6. Maria Pergola & Angelo Rita & Alfonso Tortora & Maria Castellaneta & Marco Borghetti & Antonio Sergio De Franchi & Antonio Lapolla & Nicola Moretti & Giovanni Pecora & Domenico Pierangeli & Luigi Toda, 2020. "Identification of Suitable Areas for Biomass Power Plant Construction through Environmental Impact Assessment of Forest Harvesting Residues Transportation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-16, May.
    7. Michela Zanetti & Corrado Costa & Rosa Greco & Stefano Grigolato & Giovanna Ottaviani Aalmo & Raffaele Cavalli, 2017. "How Wood Fuels’ Quality Relates to the Standards: A Class-Modelling Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-14, September.
    8. Maria Milousi & Athanasios Pappas & Andreas P. Vouros & Giouli Mihalakakou & Manolis Souliotis & Spiros Papaefthimiou, 2022. "Evaluating the Technical and Environmental Capabilities of Geothermal Systems through Life Cycle Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-30, August.
    9. Deboni, Tamires Liza & Simioni, Flávio José & Brand, Martha Andreia & Lopes, Gisele Paim, 2019. "Evolution of the quality of forest biomass for energy generation in a cogeneration plant," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 1291-1302.
    10. Fan, Yee Van & Romanenko, Sergey & Gai, Limei & Kupressova, Ekaterina & Varbanov, Petar Sabev & Klemeš, Jiří Jaromír, 2021. "Biomass integration for energy recovery and efficient use of resources: Tomsk Region," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    11. Gkousis, Spiros & Welkenhuysen, Kris & Compernolle, Tine, 2022. "Deep geothermal energy extraction, a review on environmental hotspots with focus on geo-technical site conditions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    12. Andrzej Kuranc & Monika Stoma & Leszek Rydzak & Monika Pilipiuk, 2020. "Durability Assessment of Wooden Pellets in Relation with Vibrations Occurring in a Logistic Process of the Final Product," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-15, November.
    13. KS Rajmohan & C Ramya & Sunita Varjani, 2021. "Trends and advances in bioenergy production and sustainable solid waste management," Energy & Environment, , vol. 32(6), pages 1059-1085, September.
    14. Wang, Yabo & Liu, Shengchun & Nian, Victor & Li, Xueqiang & Yuan, Jun, 2019. "Life cycle cost-benefit analysis of refrigerant replacement based on experience from a supermarket project," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    15. Selim Karkour & Yuki Ichisugi & Amila Abeynayaka & Norihiro Itsubo, 2020. "External-Cost Estimation of Electricity Generation in G20 Countries: Case Study Using a Global Life-Cycle Impact-Assessment Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-35, March.
    16. Mahmoud G. Hemeida & Ashraf M. Hemeida & Tomonobu Senjyu & Dina Osheba, 2022. "Renewable Energy Resources Technologies and Life Cycle Assessment: Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-36, December.
    17. Hanbury, O. & Vasquez, V.R., 2018. "Life cycle analysis of geothermal energy for power and transportation: A stochastic approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 371-381.
    18. Yu, Xin & Yu, Dunxi & Liu, Fangqi & Han, Jingkun & Wu, Jianqun & Xu, Minghou, 2022. "Synergistic effects, gas evolution and ash interaction during isothermal steam co-gasification of biomass with high-sulfur petroleum coke," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    19. Nunes, L.J.R. & Matias, J.C.O. & Catalão, J.P.S., 2014. "A review on torrefied biomass pellets as a sustainable alternative to coal in power generation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 153-160.
    20. Menberg, Kathrin & Heberle, Florian & Bott, Christoph & Brüggemann, Dieter & Bayer, Peter, 2021. "Environmental performance of a geothermal power plant using a hydrothermal resource in the Southern German Molasse Basin," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 20-31.

    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:jresou:v:11:y:2022:i:2:p:7-:d:727386. 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.