Life cycle environmental performance of miscanthus gasification versus other technologies for electricity production

Abstract In this paper, the life cycle environmental performance of miscanthus gasification for electricity production in Denmark is evaluated and compared with that of direct combustion and anaerobic digestion. Furthermore, the results obtained are compared to those of natural gas to assess the potential of miscanthus as an energy source. Our results indicate that production of 1 kWh electricity from miscanthus via gasification leads to a global warming potential (100-year GWP) of 26 g and 296 g CO 2 e, without and with consideration of CO 2 emissions from indirect land use change respectively. For other impact categories, the production results in non-renewable energy use of 0.6 MJ primary, acidification of 1.6 g SO 2 e, eutrophication of 7.8 g NO 3 e and respiratory inorganics of 0.1 g PM2.5e. Of the three alternatives, gasification is found to have the best performance in all impact categories considered, with the exception of non-renewable energy use where anaerobic digestion performs best. Our results also show that replacing natural gas with miscanthus reduces global warming and non-renewable energy use. The results of the study are region-specific, i.e., valid for Denmark, but we believe that the general conclusions are applicable to those regions/areas with similar conditions.

[1]  A. Baky,et al.  Best available technologies for pig manure biogas plants in the Baltic Sea region , 2011 .

[2]  Willy Verstraete,et al.  Thermal wet oxidation improves anaerobic biodegradability of raw and digested biowaste. , 2004, Environmental science & technology.

[3]  Peter Weiland,et al.  Production and energetic use of biogas from energy crops and wastes in Germany , 2003, Applied biochemistry and biotechnology.

[4]  Irini Angelidaki,et al.  Manure and energy crops for biogas production : Status and barriers , 2008 .

[5]  Jannick H. Schmidt.  System delimitation in agricultural consequential LCA , 2008 .

[6]  S. O. Petersen,et al.  Algorithms for calculating methane and nitrous oxide emissions from manure management , 2004, Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems.

[7]  Kristian Kristensen,et al.  Carbon sequestration in soil beneath long-term Miscanthus plantations as determined by 13C abundance , 2004 .

[8]  Iris Lewandowski,et al.  Delayed harvest of miscanthus—influences on biomass quantity and quality and environmental impacts of energy production , 2003 .

[9]  Pete Smith,et al.  Estimating the pre-harvest greenhouse gas costs of energy crop production , 2008 .

[10]  M. Borzęcka-Walker,et al.  Evaluation of carbon sequestration in energetic crops (Miscanthus and coppice willow) , 2008 .

[11]  A. Faaij,et al.  The economical and environmental performance of miscanthus and switchgrass production and supply chains in a European setting , 2009 .

[12]  Jo Smith,et al.  Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture , 2008, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[13]  Henrik Wenzel,et al.  Life Cycle Assessment of Slurry Management Technologies , 2009 .

[14]  John E. Hermansen,et al.  Environmental assessment of gasification technology for biomass conversion to energy in comparison with other alternatives: the case of wheat straw , 2013 .

[15]  H. Uellendahl,et al.  Energy balance and cost-benefit analysis of biogas production from perennial energy crops pretreated by wet oxidation. , 2008, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[16]  I. Lewandowski,et al.  CO2-balance for the cultivation and combustion of Miscanthus , 1995 .

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

[18]  A. Lehtomäki.  Biogas production from energy crops and crop residues , 2006 .

[19]  J. Clifton-Brown,et al.  Miscanthus biomass production for energy in Europe and its potential contribution to decreasing fossil fuel carbon emissions , 2004 .

[20]  E. Brizio,et al.  LCA of bioenergy chains in Piedmont (Italy): a case study to support public decision makers towards sustainability. , 2011 .

[21]  Gerald Rebitzer,et al.  IMPACT 2002+: A new life cycle impact assessment methodology , 2003 .

[22]  Davide Tonini,et al.  LCA of biomass-based energy systems: A case study for Denmark , 2012 .

[23]  Jakob Magid,et al.  Application of processed organic municipal solid waste on agricultural land – a scenario analysis , 2006 .

[24]  S. Carpenter,et al.  Global Consequences of Land Use , 2005, Science.

[25]  A. Monti,et al.  Life cycle assessment of different bioenergy production systems including perennial and annual crops , 2011 .

[26]  P. Kaparaju,et al.  Effects of temperature on post‐methanation of digested dairy cow manure in a farm‐scale biogas production system , 2003, Environmental technology.

[27]  D. Dowling,et al.  Microbes and sustainable production of biofuel crops: a nitrogen perspective , 2010 .

[28]  Uffe Jørgensen,et al.  Benefits versus risks of growing biofuel crops: the case of Miscanthus , 2011 .

[29]  Christoph Emmerling,et al.  Decomposition and mineralization of energy crop residues governed by earthworms , 2009 .

[30]  J. Porter,et al.  A model for fossil energy use in Danish agriculture used to compare organic and conventional farming , 2001 .

[31]  N. Hutchings,et al.  Emissions of gaseous nitrogen species from manure management: a new approach. , 2008, Environmental pollution.

[32]  John Clifton-Brown,et al.  Carbon mitigation by the energy crop, Miscanthus , 2007 .

[33]  Stefan Bringezu,et al.  Environmental Implications and Costs of Municipal Solid Waste‐Derived Ethylene , 2013 .

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