Reference and functional unit can change bioenergy pathway choices

PurposeThis study aims to compare the life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of two cellulosic bioenergy pathways (i.e., bioethanol and bioelectricity) using different references and functional units. It also aims to address uncertainties associated with a comparative life cycle analysis (LCA) for the two bioenergy pathways.MethodsWe develop a stochastic, comparative life cycle GHG analysis model for a switchgrass-based bioenergy system. Life cycle GHG offsets of the biofuel and bioelectricity pathways for cellulosic bioenergy are compared. The reference system for bioethanol is the equivalent amount of gasoline to provide the same transportation utility (e.g., vehicle driving for certain distance) as bioethanol does. We use multiple reference systems for bioelectricity, including the average US grid, regional grid in the USA according to the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), and average coal-fired power generation, on the basis of providing the same transportation utility. The functional unit is one unit of energy content (MJ). GHG offsets of bioethanol and bioelectricity relative to reference systems are compared in both grams carbon dioxide equivalents per hectare of land per year (g CO2-eq/ha-yr) and grams carbon dioxide equivalents per vehicle kilometer traveled (g CO2-eq/km). For the latter, we include vehicle cycle to make the comparison meaningful. To address uncertainty and variability, we derive life cycle GHG emissions based on probability distributions of individual parameters representing various unit processes in the life cycle of bioenergy pathways.Results and discussionOur results show the choice of reference system and functional unit significantly changes the competition between switchgrass-based bioethanol and bioelectricity. In particular, our results show that the bioethanol pathway produces more life cycle GHG emissions than the bioelectricity pathway on a per unit energy content or a per unit area of crop land basis. However, the bioethanol pathway can offer more GHG offsets than the bioelectricity pathway on a per vehicle kilometer traveled basis when using bioethanol and bioelectricity for vehicle operation. Given the current energy mix of regional grids, bioethanol can potentially offset more GHG emissions than bioelectricity in all grid regions of the USA.ConclusionsThe reference and functional unit can change bioenergy pathway choices. The comparative LCA of bioenergy systems is most useful for decision support only when it is spatially explicit to address regional specifics and differences. The difference of GHG offsets from bioethanol and bioelectricity will change as the grid evolves. When the grids get cleaner over time, the favorability of bioethanol for GHG offsets increases.

[1]  Life-cycle Inventory , 2022 .

[2]  Constantine Samaras,et al.  Incorporating uncertainty analysis into life cycle estimates of greenhouse gas emissions from biomass production , 2011 .

[3]  E. Hertwich,et al.  CO2 emissions from biomass combustion for bioenergy: atmospheric decay and contribution to global warming , 2011 .

[4]  Tianzhu Zhang,et al.  Life cycle assessment of biodiesel production in China. , 2013, Bioresource technology.

[5]  Andrew D. Jones,et al.  Effects of US Maize Ethanol on Global Land Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Estimating Market-Mediated Responses , 2010 .

[6]  Pooya Soltantabar Annual Energy Outlook , 2015 .

[7]  Hao Tan,et al.  Biofuels and indirect land use change effects: the debate continues , 2009 .

[8]  Kimberley A Mullins,et al.  Policy implications of uncertainty in modeled life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions of biofuels. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[9]  Jacinto F. Fabiosa,et al.  Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change , 2008, Science.

[10]  Michael O'Hare,et al.  Greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels' indirect land use change are uncertain but may be much greater than previously estimated. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[11]  Ming-Lung Hung,et al.  Quantifying system uncertainty of life cycle assessment based on Monte Carlo simulation , 2008 .

[12]  Tiffany Amber Groode,et al.  Biomass to ethanol : potential production and environmental impacts , 2008 .

[13]  Sangwon Suh,et al.  Replacing gasoline with corn ethanol results in significant environmental problem-shifting. , 2012, Environmental science & technology.

[14]  J. R. Hess,et al.  Process Design and Economics for Conversion of Lignocellulosic Biomass to Ethanol , 2011 .

[15]  G. Keoleian,et al.  Life cycle assessment of a willow bioenergy cropping system , 2003 .

[16]  Heather L. MacLean,et al.  The contribution of enzymes and process chemicals to the life cycle of ethanol , 2009 .

[17]  Walter Klöpffer,et al.  Life cycle assessment , 1997, Environmental science and pollution research international.

[18]  Shelie A. Miller,et al.  Using DAYCENT to quantify on-farm GHG emissions and N dynamics of land use conversion to N-managed switchgrass in the Southern U.S. , 2011 .

[19]  L. A. Kszos,et al.  Development of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) as a bioenergy feedstock in the United States. , 2005 .

[20]  Michael Wang,et al.  Well-to-Wheels Analysis of Advanced Fuel/Vehicle Systems — A North American Study of Energy Use, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Criteria Pollutant Emissions , 2005 .

[21]  Gail Taylor,et al.  Counting the cost of carbon in bioenergy systems: sources of variation and hidden pitfalls when comparing life cycle assessments , 2011 .

[22]  H. Wenzel,et al.  Bioenergy production from perennial energy crops: a consequential LCA of 12 bioenergy scenarios including land use changes. , 2012, Environmental science & technology.

[23]  Andrew D. Jones,et al.  Supporting Online Material for: Ethanol Can Contribute To Energy and Environmental Goals , 2006 .

[24]  John M. E. Storey,et al.  Fuel Economy and Emissions of the Ethanol-Optimized Saab 9-5 Biopower , 2007 .

[25]  David Pearce,et al.  The Policy Implications , 1997 .

[26]  Oar,et al.  Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID) , 2015 .

[27]  L. Schebek,et al.  Environmental impacts of a lignocellulose feedstock biorefinery system: An assessment , 2009 .

[28]  B. Mary,et al.  Biofuels, greenhouse gases and climate change. A review , 2011, Agronomy for Sustainable Development.

[29]  Russell W Stratton,et al.  Quantifying variability in life cycle greenhouse gas inventories of alternative middle distillate transportation fuels. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[30]  R. Perlack,et al.  Exploring Potential U.S. Switchgrass Production for Lignocellulosic Ethanol , 2008 .

[31]  Tetsuo Fuchino,et al.  Thermo-economic analysis for the optimal conceptual design of biomass gasification energy conversion systems , 2009 .

[32]  Jürgen Reinhard,et al.  Consequential life cycle assessment of the environmental impacts of an increased rapemethylester (RME) production in Switzerland , 2011 .

[33]  P. L. Spath,et al.  Life cycle assessment of a biomass gasification combined-cycle power system , 1997 .

[34]  Troy R. Hawkins,et al.  Comparative Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Conventional and Electric Vehicles , 2013 .

[35]  M. O'hare,et al.  Accounting for indirect land-use change in the life cycle assessment of biofuel supply chains , 2012, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.

[36]  Henrik Wenzel,et al.  Life cycle inventory modelling of land use induced by crop consumption , 2007 .

[37]  Tianzhu Zhang,et al.  Unintended consequences of bioethanol feedstock choice in China. , 2012, Bioresource technology.

[38]  Heather L MacLean,et al.  Ethanol or bioelectricity? Life cycle assessment of lignocellulosic bioenergy use in light-duty vehicles. , 2013, Environmental science & technology.

[39]  S. Polasky,et al.  Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[40]  Chris Somerville,et al.  Cellulosic biofuels. , 2009, Annual review of plant biology.

[41]  Deepak Kumar,et al.  Life cycle assessment of energy and GHG emissions during ethanol production from grass straws using various pretreatment processes , 2012, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[42]  J. M. Earles,et al.  Consequential life cycle assessment: a review , 2011 .

[43]  Cécile Bessou,et al.  Biofuels, Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change , 2011 .

[44]  D. Peterson,et al.  Market Assessment of Biomass Gasification and Combustion Technology for Small- and Medium-Scale Applications , 2009 .

[45]  Albert W. Chan,et al.  Life Cycle assessment of bio-ethanol derived from cellulose , 2003 .

[46]  Emily Kunen,et al.  Biofuels and Indirect Land Use Change , 2011 .

[47]  Alain Haurie,et al.  Application of three independent consequential LCA approaches to the agricultural sector in Luxembourg , 2013, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[48]  Ester van der Voet,et al.  Life cycle assessment of switchgrass-derived ethanol as transport fuel , 2010 .

[49]  C. Field,et al.  Greater Transportation Energy and GHG Offsets from Bioelectricity Than Ethanol , 2009, Science.

[50]  Shahab Sokhansanj,et al.  Switchgrass (Panicum vigratum, L.) delivery to a biorefinery using integrated biomass supply analysis and logistics (IBSAL) model. , 2007, Bioresource technology.

[51]  A. Horvath,et al.  Grand challenges for life-cycle assessment of biofuels. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[52]  Gail Taylor,et al.  Sources of variability in greenhouse gas and energy balances for biofuel production: a systematic review , 2010 .

[53]  Consequential and Attributional Approaches to LCA : a Guide to Policy Makers with Specific Reference to Greenhouse Gas LCA of Biofuels April 2008 , 2009 .