European renewable energy directive: Critical analysis of important default values and methods for calculating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of palm oil biodiesel

PurposeThe aim of this paper is to evaluate assumptions and data used in calculations  related to palm oil produced for biodiesel production relative to the European Renewable Energy Directive (EU-RED). The intent of this paper is not to review all assumptions and data, but rather to evaluate whether the methodology is applied in a consistent way and whether current default values address relevant management practices of palm oil production systems.MethodsThe GHG calculation method provided in Annex V of the EU-RED was used to calculate the GHG-emissions from palm oil production systems. Moreover, the internal nitrogen recycling on the plantation was calculated based on monitoring data in North Sumatra.Results and discussionA calculation methodology is detailed in Annex V of the EU-RED. Some important aspects necessary to calculate the GHG emission savings correctly are insufficiently considered, e.g.:• “Nitrogen recycling” within the plantation due to fronds remaining on the plantation is ignored. The associated organic N-input to the plantation and the resulting nitrous oxide emissions is not considered within the calculations, despite crop residues being taken into account for annual crops in the BIOGRACE tool.• The calculation of GHG-emissions from residue and waste water treatment is inappropriately implemented despite being a hot-spot for GHG emissions within the life cycle of palm oil and palm oil biodiesel. Additionally, no distinction is made between palm oil and palm kernel oil even though palm kernel oil is rarely used for biodiesel production.• The allocation procedure does not address the most relevant oil mill management practices. Palm oil mills produce crude palm oil (CPO) in addition either nuts or palm kernels and nut shells. In the first case, the nuts would be treated as co-products and upstream emissions would be allocated based on the energy content; in the second case the kernels would be treated as co-products while the shelöls are considered as waste without upstream emissions. This has a significant impact on the resulst or GHG savings, respectively.• It is not specified whether indirect GHG emissions from nitrogen oxide emission from the heat and power unit of palm oil mills should be taken into account.Conclusions and recommendationsIn conclusion, the existing calculation methodology described in Annex V of the EU-RED and default values are insufficient for calculating the real GHG emission savings from palm oil and palm oil biodiesel. The current default values do not reflect relevant management practices. Additionally, they protect poor management practices, such as the disposal of empty fruit bunches (EFB), and lead to an overestimation of GHG savings from palm oil biodiesel. A default value for EFB disposal must be introduced because resulting GHG emissions are substantial. Organic nitrogen from fronds must be taken into account when calculating real GHG savings from palm oil biodiesel. Further, more conservative data for FFB yield and fugitive emissions from wastewater treatment should be introduced in order to foster environmental friendly management options. Moreover, credits for bioenergy production from crop residues should be allowed in order to foster the mobilization of currently unused biomass.

[1]  Hernán Mauricio Romero,et al.  The growth of the oil palm industry in Colombia. , 2011 .

[2]  C. Carter,et al.  Palm oil markets and future supply , 2007 .

[3]  Matt J. Aitkenhead,et al.  Agricultural census data and land use modelling , 2006, Comput. Environ. Urban Syst..

[4]  Man Kee Lam,et al.  Life cycle assessment for the production of biodiesel: A case study in Malaysia for palm oil versus jatropha oil , 2009 .

[5]  Mithilesh Kumar Jha,et al.  Bio-diesel: Initiatives, potential and prospects in Thailand: A review , 2009 .

[6]  Chris Cocklin,et al.  Methodological Problems in Evaluating Sustainability , 1989, Environmental Conservation.

[7]  Alawi Sulaiman,et al.  Improved economic viability of integrated biogas energy and compost production for sustainable palm oil mill management. , 2013 .

[8]  Ken E. Giller,et al.  Resource use efficiency and environmental performance of nine major biofuel crops, processed by first-generation conversion techniques , 2010 .

[9]  Charongpun Musikavong,et al.  Alternative technologies for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from palm oil mills in Thailand. , 2013, Environmental science & technology.

[10]  L. Kurkalova,et al.  Land use change in a biofuels hotspot: The case of Iowa, USA , 2011 .

[11]  A. Faaij,et al.  Different palm oil production systems for energy purposes and their greenhouse gas implications , 2008 .

[12]  R. Clift,et al.  Soil Organic Carbon Changes in the Cultivation of Energy Crops: Implications for GHG Balances and Soil Quality for Use in LCA , 2011 .

[13]  Bertrand Tailliez,et al.  Unexpected N and K nutrition diagnosis in oil palm smallholdings using references of high-yielding industrial plantations , 2010, Agronomy for Sustainable Development.

[14]  R. H. V. Corley,et al.  Productivity of the Oil Palm (Elaeis guineensis Jacq.) in Malaysia , 1971, Experimental Agriculture.

[15]  Anthony Halog,et al.  A meta‐analytic review of life cycle assessment and flow analyses studies of palm oil biodiesel , 2013, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[16]  H. Stichnothe,et al.  Life cycle assessment of two palm oil production systems. , 2011 .

[17]  A. Mol,et al.  OPTIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY OF THE CRUDE PALM OIL INDUSTRY IN THAILAND THROUGH ENHANCEMENT OF INDUSTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS , 2006 .

[18]  Owuraku Sakyi-Dawson,et al.  Exploring Opportunities for Enhancing Innovation in Agriculture: The Case of Oil Palm Production in Ghana , 2012 .

[19]  J. Murphy,et al.  How much of the target for biofuels can be met by biodiesel generated from residues in Ireland , 2010 .

[20]  Pascal Lesage,et al.  Biogenic Carbon and Temporary Storage Addressed with Dynamic Life Cycle Assessment , 2013 .

[21]  Mark A. Delucchi,et al.  Comment on “Indirect land use change for biofuels: Testing predictions and improving analytical methodologies” by Kim and Dale: statistical reliability and the definition of the indirect land use change (iLUC) issue , 2011 .

[22]  Keat Teong Lee,et al.  Life cycle assessment of palm biodiesel: Revealing facts and benefits for sustainability , 2009 .

[23]  Kah Joo Goh,et al.  Carbon Flow and Budget in a Young Mature Oil Palm Agroecosystem on Deep Tropical Peat , 2008 .

[24]  Pomthong Malakul,et al.  Life cycle energy efficiency and potentials of biodiesel production from palm oil in Thailand , 2010 .

[25]  Lulie Melling,et al.  Carbon Flow and Budget in a Young Mature Oil Palm Agroecosystem on Deep Dropical Deat , 2008 .

[26]  F. N. Teixeira,et al.  Cogeneration potential in the Columbian palm oil industry: Three case studies , 2007 .

[27]  Charongpun Musikavong,et al.  Greenhouse gas emissions of palm oil mills in Thailand , 2012 .

[28]  A. M. Tarmizi,et al.  NUTRIENT DEMANDS OF Tenera OIL PALM PLANTED ON INLAND SOILS OF MALAYSIA , 2006 .

[29]  Stefan Bringezu,et al.  Beyond biofuels: assessing global land use for domestic consumption of biomass: a conceptual and empirical contribution to sustainable management of global resources. , 2012 .

[30]  Naohiro Goto,et al.  Improvement potential for net energy balance of biodiesel derived from palm oil: A case study from Indonesian practice , 2010 .

[31]  Vincent Mahieu,et al.  Well-to-wheels analysis of future automotive fuels and powertrains in the european context , 2004 .

[32]  Nik Meriam Nik Sulaiman,et al.  Environmental performance of the milling process of Malaysian palm oil using the life cycle assessment approach. , 2008 .

[33]  Devon E. Worth,et al.  Fugitive methane emissions from an agricultural biodigester , 2011 .

[34]  Karin Ericsson,et al.  The dilemma of indirect land-use changes in EU biofuel policy – An empirical study of policy-making in the context of scientific uncertainty , 2012 .

[35]  I. Henson,et al.  Oil Palm — Achievements and Potential , 2005 .

[36]  Cinzia Buratti,et al.  Life cycle assessment of biomass production: Development of a methodology to improve the environmental indicators and testing with fiber sorghum energy crop , 2010 .

[37]  Ruedi Müller-Wenk,et al.  Climatic impact of land use in LCA—carbon transfers between vegetation/soil and air , 2010 .

[38]  Heinz Stichnothe,et al.  Comparison of different treatment options for palm oil production waste on a life cycle basis , 2010 .

[39]  E. Gawel,et al.  The iLUC dilemma: How to deal with indirect land use changes when governing energy crops? , 2011 .

[40]  Assaad Zoughaib,et al.  Origins of the debate on the life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption of first-generation biofuels – A sensitivity analysis approach , 2012 .

[41]  Vijaya Subramaniam,et al.  Determination of GHG contributions by subsystems in the oil palm supply chain using the LCA approach , 2011 .

[42]  Shabbir H. Gheewala,et al.  Environmental evaluation of biodiesel production from palm oil in a life cycle perspective , 2004 .

[43]  Sampo Soimakallio,et al.  Attributing land-use change carbon emissions to exported biomass , 2012 .

[44]  S. B. Chiu,et al.  Fertilizer recommendation systems for oil palm: estimating the fertilizer rates. , 2005 .

[45]  J. Murphy,et al.  Can Rape Seed Biodiesel Meet the European Union Sustainability Criteria for Biofuels , 2010 .

[46]  E. C. Leonard,et al.  Proceedings of the World Conference on Palm and Coconut Oils for the 21st Century: sources, processing, applications, and competition, Bali, Indonesia, February 1998. , 1999 .

[47]  P. E. Poh,et al.  Development of anaerobic digestion methods for palm oil mill effluent (POME) treatment. , 2009, Bioresource technology.

[48]  F. Sulaiman,et al.  An outlook of Malaysian energy, oil palm industry and its utilization of wastes as useful resources , 2011 .

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

[50]  O. Chavalparit,et al.  Industrial ecosystems in the crude palm oil industry in Thailand , 2003 .

[51]  André Faaij,et al.  A greenhouse gas balance of electricity production from co-firing palm oil products from Malaysia , 2007 .

[52]  S. S. Chen,et al.  The LCA Approach to Illustrate Palm Oil's Sustainability Advantage , 2008 .

[53]  Kah Joo Goh,et al.  Global warming potential from soils in tropical peatland of Sarawak, Malaysia , 2005 .

[54]  Shabbir H. Gheewala,et al.  Full chain energy analysis of biodiesel production from palm oil in Thailand , 2009 .

[55]  D. Agyei-Dwarko,et al.  Selection of new standard crosses for the oil palm (Elaeis guineensis J.) third cycle of selection , 2010 .

[56]  Lulie Joshua Melling Greenhouse gas fluxes from tropical peatland of Sarawak, Malaysia , 2005 .

[57]  J. Schmidt,et al.  The importance of systems boundaries for LCA on large material flows of vegetable oils , 2004 .

[58]  J. Anderson,et al.  Decomposition processes and nutrient release patterns of oil palm residues. , 2000 .

[59]  A. Tabeau,et al.  Impact of EU biofuel policies on world agricultural production and land use , 2011 .

[60]  Jerry D. Murphy,et al.  Is it better to import palm oil from Thailand to produce biodiesel in Ireland than to produce biodiesel from indigenous Irish rape seed , 2009 .

[61]  Seungdo Kim,et al.  Indirect land use change for biofuels: Testing predictions and improving analytical methodologies , 2011 .

[62]  I. E. Henson Comparative ecophysiology of oil palm and tropical rainforest , 2009 .

[63]  Wouter Achten,et al.  Life cycle assessment of a palm oil system with simultaneous production of biodiesel and cooking oil in Cameroon. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.