A systematic review of bioenergy life cycle assessments

被引:155
|
作者
Muench, Stefan [1 ,2 ]
Guenther, Edeltraud [1 ]
机构
[1] Tech Univ Dresden, Chair Environm Management & Accounting, D-01062 Dresden, Germany
[2] Tech Univ Dresden, Boysen TUD Grad Kolleg, D-01062 Dresden, Germany
关键词
Biomass; Electricity; Heat; LCA; Sustainability; FIRED POWER-PLANTS; CARBON-DIOXIDE EMISSIONS; GREENHOUSE-GAS; ELECTRICITY-GENERATION; COMBINED HEAT; ASSESSMENT LCA; CO2; EMISSIONS; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; BIOMASS RESOURCES; NATURAL-GAS;
D O I
10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.06.001
中图分类号
TE [石油、天然气工业]; TK [能源与动力工程];
学科分类号
0807 ; 0820 ;
摘要
On a global scale, bioenergy is highly relevant to renewable energy options. Unlike fossil fuels, bioenergy can be carbon neutral and plays an important role in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Biomass electricity and heat contribute 90% of total final biomass energy consumption, and many reviews of biofuel Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs) have been published. However, only a small number of these reviews are concerned with electricity and heat generation from biomass, and these reviews focus on only a few impact categories. No review of biomass electricity and heat LCAs included a detailed quantitative assessment. The failure to consider heat generation, the insufficient consideration of impact categories, and the missing quantitative overview in bioenergy LCA reviews constitute research gaps. The primary goal of the present review was to give an overview of the environmental impact of biomass electricity and heat. A systematic review was chosen as the research method to achieve a comprehensive and minimally biased overview of biomass electricity and heat LCAs. We conducted a quantitative analysis of the environmental impact of biomass electricity and heat. There is a significant variability in results of biomass electricity and heat LCAs. Assumptions regarding the bioenergy system and methodological choices are likely reasons for extreme values. The secondary goal of this review is to discuss influencing methodological choices. No general consensus has been reached regarding the optimal functional unit, the ideal allocation of environmental impact between co-products, the definition of the system boundary, or how to model the carbon cycle of biomass. We concluded that a higher level of transparency and a harmonisation of the preparation of biomass electricity and heat LCAs are needed to improve the comparability of such evaluations. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:257 / 273
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Life cycle assessment of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage systems: Critical review of life cycle inventories
    Duval-Dachary, S.
    Beauchet, S.
    Lorne, D.
    Salou, T.
    Helias, A.
    Pastor, A.
    RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2023, 183
  • [22] The hotspots of life cycle assessment for bioenergy: A review by social network analysis
    Li, Jiao
    Wang, Yuan
    Yan, Beibei
    SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2018, 625 : 1301 - 1308
  • [23] Wastewater recovery for sustainable agricultural systems in the circular economy - A systematic literature review of Life Cycle Assessments
    Crovella, Tiziana
    Paiano, Annarita
    Falciglia, Pietro Paolo
    Lagioia, Giovanni
    Ingrao, Carlo
    SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2024, 912
  • [24] Life cycle-based sustainability indicators for electricity generation: A systematic review and a proposal for assessments in Brazil
    Lassio, Joao Gabriel
    Magrini, Alessandra
    Branco, David Castelo
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2021, 311
  • [25] A systematic literature review of Life Cycle Assessments on primary pig production: Impacts, comparisons, and mitigation areas
    Gislason, Styrmir
    Birkved, Morten
    Maresca, Alberto
    SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION, 2023, 42 : 44 - 62
  • [26] Use of life cycle assessments in the construction sector: critical review
    Dossche, Charlotte
    Boel, Veerle
    De Corte, Wouter
    3RD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SUSTAINABLE CIVIL ENGINEERING STRUCTURES AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS - SUSTAINABLE STRUCTURES FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS, 2017, 171 : 302 - 311
  • [27] Review: life cycle assessments in Nigeria, Ghana, and Ivory Coast
    Mpho Maepa
    Michael Oluwatosin Bodunrin
    Nicholas W. Burman
    Joel Croft
    Shaun Engelbrecht
    A. O. Ladenika
    O. S. MacGregor
    Kevin G. Harding
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2017, 22 : 1159 - 1164
  • [28] Review: life cycle assessments in Nigeria, Ghana, and Ivory Coast
    Maepa, Mpho
    Bodunrin, Michael Oluwatosin
    Burman, Nicholas W.
    Croft, Joel
    Engelbrecht, Shaun
    Ladenika, A. O.
    MacGregor, O. S.
    Harding, Kevin G.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2017, 22 (07): : 1159 - 1164
  • [29] A human-centered review of life cycle assessments of bioplastics
    Monica I. Rodriguez Morris
    Andrea L. Hicks
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2022, 27 : 157 - 172
  • [30] Tackling uncertainty in life cycle assessments for the built environment: A review
    Marsh, Ellen
    Allen, Stephen
    Hattam, Laura
    BUILDING AND ENVIRONMENT, 2023, 231