Sustainability assessment of wood-based bioenergy A methodological framework and a case-study

The sustainability of the utilization of wood biomass for energy and other purposes has been widely assessed in different studies. Especially discrete methods from the family of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), such as Outranking methods, Multi-Attribute Utility Theory, and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) are often applied. AHP is considered one of the most promising options to be used in sustainability assessments, because it is comprehensible to apply and it incorporates the preferences of decision-makers in an advanced manner. In this study, we present a theoretical multi-dimensional framework based on a modified version of AHP for assessing sustainability and apply it in a case of wood-based bioenergy production in eastern Finland. The framework includes four dimensions of sustainability and life cycle phases from the acquisition of raw material to manufacturing the final product. The production systems used in the empirical sustainability assessments are a local heat production plant, a combined heat and power production plant, and a wood pellet processing plant. Local sustainability experts identified indicators relevant at the regional scale. The impact assessment data were obtained from literature, by interviewing the managers of the bioenergy plants, and from a postal survey administered to local people. The local heat provider received the highest sustainability index; however, there were no considerable differences between the sustainability indexes. None of the bioenergy production systems can be considered the most sustainable regardless of the assumptions employed in the framework. The framework provided the basis for a quantitative, interdisciplinary approach to assess sustainability.

[1]  Guillermo A. Mendoza,et al.  Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: A critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms , 2006 .

[2]  Harald Vacik,et al.  Developing criteria and indicators for evaluating sustainable forest management: A case study in Kyrgyzstan , 2012 .

[3]  A. Faaij,et al.  The impact of sustainability criteria on the costs and potentials of bioenergy production : applied for case studies in Brazil and Ukraine , 2010 .

[4]  Nuray Misir,et al.  Developing a multi-objective forest planning process with goal programming: a case study. , 2007, Pakistan journal of biological sciences : PJBS.

[5]  T. Buchholz,et al.  Sustainability criteria for bioenergy systems: results from an expert survey , 2009 .

[6]  E. Neumayer Weak Versus Strong Sustainability: Exploring The Limits Of Two Opposing Paradigms , 2010 .

[7]  Marta Herva,et al.  Review of combined approaches and multi-criteria analysis for corporate environmental evaluation , 2013 .

[8]  Adisa Azapagic,et al.  Sustainable development in practice : case studies for engineers and scientists , 2005 .

[9]  Anders Hammer Strømman,et al.  Life cycle assessment of bioenergy systems: state of the art and future challenges. , 2011, Bioresource technology.

[10]  G. Assefa,et al.  Social sustainability and social acceptance in technology assessment: A case study of energy technologies , 2007 .

[11]  Martin Rogers,et al.  Choosing realistic values of indifference, preference and veto thresholds for use with environmental criteria within ELECTRE , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[12]  A. Holma,et al.  Assessing environmental impacts of biomass production chains - application of life cycle assessment (LCA) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). , 2012 .

[13]  Edgar G. Hertwich,et al.  Effects of boreal forest management practices on the climate impact of CO2 emissions from bioenergy , 2011 .

[14]  Roland Clift,et al.  The Role of the Professional Engineer and Scientist in Sustainable Development , 2005 .

[15]  L. Fahrig Effects of Habitat Fragmentation on Biodiversity , 2003 .

[16]  T. Palosuo,et al.  ToSIA—A tool for sustainability impact assessment of forest-wood-chains , 2010 .

[17]  Diana Gallego Carrera,et al.  Sustainability assessment of energy technologies via social indicators: Results of a survey among European energy experts , 2010 .

[18]  Jiangjiang Wang,et al.  Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making , 2009 .

[19]  V. Martinet A characterization of sustainability with indicators , 2011 .

[20]  David J. Blackwood,et al.  Participatory selection of sustainability criteria and indicators for bioenergy developments , 2013 .

[21]  T. Mrosek,et al.  Field testing of a criteria and indicators system for sustainable forest management at the local level. Case study results concerning the sustainability of the private forest Haliburton Forest and Wild Life Reserve in Ontario, Canada , 2006 .

[22]  M. Lane,et al.  Converging global indicators for sustainable forest management , 2004 .

[23]  T. L. Saaty A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structures , 1977 .

[24]  Annika Kangas,et al.  Outranking methods as tools in strategic natural resources planning , 2001 .

[25]  Berit Hasler,et al.  Limits and targets for a regional sustainability assessment: an interdisciplinary exploration of the threshold concept , 2008 .

[26]  Igor Linkov,et al.  Multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: ten years of applications and trends. , 2011, The Science of the total environment.

[27]  Yin-Feng Xu,et al.  A comparative study of the numerical scales and the prioritization methods in AHP , 2008, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[28]  Jean Pierre Brans,et al.  HOW TO SELECT AND HOW TO RANK PROJECTS: THE PROMETHEE METHOD , 1986 .

[29]  Martin Junginger,et al.  Overview of recent developments in sustainable biomass certification , 2007 .

[30]  V. Katinas,et al.  Trends and sustainability criteria of the production and use of liquid biofuels , 2010 .

[31]  M. Pérez-Soba,et al.  Sustainability Impact Assessment of land use policies , 2008 .

[32]  H. Raiffa,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives , 1993 .