Use of a participatory approach to develop a regional assessment tool for bioenergy production

Recent years have witnessed an upsurge in certification schemes and sustainability assessment tools for bioenergy, however these mechanisms are often too generic, numerous and too broad for regional or local level implementation. Furthermore, these assessments are often weighted toward economic and environmental sustainability with less focus on social, cultural and institutional factors. This study was intended to overcome these limitations. We developed a community-driven regional assessment tool for forest-based bioenergy production in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan (USA). Stakeholders representing local landowners, farmers, township supervisors, timberland management companies, venture capitalists, government organizations and local interest groups generated a preliminary list of criteria and indicators (C&I) in a series of focus groups and interviews, and narrowed the list using multiple criteria analysis (MCA) in a workshop. Participants ranked environmental protection as the most important and relevant sustainability criteria, although policy and governance, and institutional capacity were also weighted highly. The final set of C&I consisted of 17 criteria and 31 indicators (in parentheses): Economic (6), Environmental (7), Social (8), Policy and regulations (4) and Institutional capacity (6). This set reflected the general balance across sustainability principles valued by the stakeholders. While expert-developed sustainability assessments are routinely biased toward easily quantifiable indicators, the indicators that were considered important and relevant by our participants included both quantitative as well as qualitative indicators, in almost equal proportions. This participatory MCA method identified criteria and indicators that reflect the regional context and the concerns of local stakeholders, and data for many of these indicators are readily available.     

Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle cost (LCC) analysis model for a stand-alone hybrid renewable energy system

Nowadays the biggest challenge for most organizations is a real and substantial application of sustainability through the measurement and comparability of results in order to satisfy the principles of sustainability of all the stakeholders. Definitively, it is necessary to pursue sustainability through the measurements of specific indicators and control the variables that influence the state of the economic, social and environmental issues. The aim of this paper is to contribute to the development of a comprehensive, yet practical and reliable tool for a systematic sustainability assessment, based on the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to support decision makers in complex decision problems in the field of environmental sustainability. The results are applied to a novel compressed air energy storage system proposed as a suitable technology for the energy storage in a small scale stand-alone renewable energy power plant (photovoltaic power plant) that is designed to satisfy the energy demand of a radio base station for mobile telecommunications. The outcome is a dynamic analysis and iterative integrated sustainability assessment of corporate performance.     

Issues to consider, existing tools and constraints in biofuels sustainability assessments

Biofuels world production has increased sharply in recent years. Oil reserves depletion, the oil high price and the confidence in biofuels “carbon neutrality” are the main causes of this phenomenon. However, claims related to the negative consequences of biofuel programs are frequent; mainly those related to the biofuels/food competition and sustainability. This paper aims to contribute for the development of a framework for sustainability indicators as a tool for performance assessment. The most used indicators to measure the biofuels sustainability are: Life Cycle Energy Balance (LCEB), quantity of fossil energy substituted per hectare, co-product energy allocation, life cycle carbon balance and changes in soil utilization. On the other hand, existing assessment tools, such as Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Integrated Environmental Assessment (IEA), are compared emphasizing their advantages and disadvantages. Main constraints related to the studied frontiers, as well as the lack of reliable data and their effects are also discussed. Discussions are held on the basis of real life cycle studies carried out by the authors about palm oil biodiesel and different alternatives for the stillage treatment and disposal. Finally, suggestions and recommendations are made to improve existing methodologies for biofuels sustainability evaluation, all this from a south perspective.     

Multi Criteria Analysis for bioenergy systems assessments

Sustainable bioenergy systems are, by definition, embedded in social, economic, and environmental contexts and depend on support of many stakeholders with different perspectives. The resulting complexity constitutes a major barrier to the implementation of bioenergy projects. The goal of this paper is to evaluate the potential of Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA) to facilitate the design and implementation of sustainable bioenergy projects. Four MCA tools (Super Decisions, DecideIT, Decision Lab, NAIADE) are reviewed for their suitability to assess sustainability of bioenergy systems with a special focus on multi-stakeholder inclusion. The MCA tools are applied using data from a multi-stakeholder bioenergy case study in Uganda. Although contributing to only a part of a comprehensive decision process, MCA can assist in overcoming implementation barriers by (i) structuring the problem, (ii) assisting in the identification of the least robust and/or most uncertain components in bioenergy systems and (iii) integrating stakeholders into the decision process. Applying the four MCA tools to a Ugandan case study resulted in a large variability in outcomes. However, social criteria were consistently identified by all tools as being decisive in making a bioelectricity project viable.     

The changing nature of life cycle assessment

LCA has evolved from its origins in energy analysis in the 1960s and 70s into a wide ranging tool used to determine impacts of products or systems over several environmental and resource issues. The approach has become more prevalent in research, industry and policy. Its use continues to expand as it seeks to encompass impacts as diverse as resource accounting and social well being. Carbon policy for bioenergy has driven many of these changes.Enabling assessment of complex issues over a life cycle basis is beneficial, but the process is sometimes difficult. LCA's use in framing is increasingly complex and more uncertain, and in some cases, irreconcilable. The charged environment surrounding biofuels and bioenergy exacerbates all of these. Reaching its full potential to help guide difficult policy discussions and emerging research involves successfully managing LCA's transition from attributional to consequential and from retrospective to prospective.This paper examines LCA's on-going evolution and its use within bioenergy deployment. The management of methodological growth in the context of the unique challenges associated with bioenergy and biofuels is explored. Changes seen in bioenergy LCA will bleed into other LCA arenas, especially where it is important that a sustainable solution is chosen.     

Is life cycle assessment (LCA) a suitable method for quantitative CO2 saving estimations? the impact of field input on the LCA results for a pure vegetable oil chain

The environmental and social sustainability of biofuel production and use is today the most critical issue for the development of support policies in this sector.The Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodology is commonly agreed as the main tool for the estimation of the impact of biofuel chains, even in quantitative terms. This is also reflected in the recently issued EU Directive (Renewable Energy Directive, RED) on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources. However, the results of Life Cycle Assessment works largely depend on the quality of the information given as input to the study, as also very recent research works started to investigate: in addition, the comparison of a large number of very different (technically, geographically, agronomically) biofuel chains, as some Life Cycle Assessments and reviews tried to do, is a very difficult task due to the extremely large number of variable conditions and parameters. This paper, by considering a very specific biofuel chain (production and use of Pure/Straight Sunflower Oil in North-Central Italy), discuss some limits and constraints of the application of the LCA method. The work investigated within which boundaries Life Cycle Assessment could be implemented to perform quantitative assessments, as requested by the current supporting policies in the biofuel area. Results showed very large variations in the calculation of the CO₂ equivalent emissions, thus illustrating how achievable results depends on the local agricultural practices and performances, even for such a small and well defined biofuel chain. The adoption of the present standardized Life Cycle Assessment approach for generalized evaluations in the bioenergy sector and, in particular, for quantitative assessments should therefore be reconsidered. Concluding, LCA studies, even while addressing very specific and well defined chains, should always provide the bias of the calculations, as this range of variation of Life Cycle Assessment results could be significantly greater than the initially set quantitative targets and therefore the whole investigation would be at risks of inconsistency. Proposals are finally given for small scale projects, with the aim of developing sound but realistic processes to assess biofuel sustainability.     

Life cycle analysis and cost of a molten carbonate fuel cell prototype

The LCA is a method enabling the performance of a complete study on the environmental impacts of the product, taking into consideration all its life cycle (“from the cradle to the tomb” or, better “from the cradle to the cradle” when also the maximum recycling/reusing of the materials is provided. There are many procedures to perform an LCA of the consumers’ products. In particular, the SUMMA method (Sustainability Multi-criteria Multi-scale Assessment) allows obtaining a number of indices of efficiency and environmental sustainability which make the LCA assessment much more complete and significant. LCA method often represents the basis for an additional assessment of industrial products and processes, the LCC (Life Cycle Costing) which, allowing the association of economic variables to any phase of the life cycle, represents a useful tool for financial planning and management. The case study analysed in the present work concerns an LCA analysis, using the SUMMA method and the LCC of one small size molten carbonate fuel cell, 2.5 kW, assembled in the Fuel Cells Laboratory within the Educational Pole of Terni at the Università degli Studi di Perugia. For sake of completeness of the results, the methods Ecoindicator99 and Impact2002 + were used in the analysis, as implemented in the used calculation software, the SimaPro 7.1 by PRè Consultants. From the registered results, it emerges that the environmental energy sustainability of the analysed element enables its widespread and in-depth employment in the phase subsequent to the optimisation of the connected economic frame; the scenarios opened by the present work envisage great margins of improvements of said aspects in the future experiments.     

生命周期评价方法及应用于我国可再生能源领域研究进展

近年来我国风力发电、太阳能发电的装机并网规模迅速增加。如何科学、准确、全面地评估可再生能源发展所带来的生态环境影响也成为政府、学界和公众普遍关注的问题。在众多的评估方法中,生命周期评价是一种常见和有代表性的方法。该方法起源于西方并逐渐引入我国,已经在我国可再生能源领域的研究中有所应用。本文综述了生命周期评价的生产流程分析法、环境扩展的投入产出法以及混合分析方法等方法学研究进展,然后综述了基于上述方法学的我国可再生能源领域的有关研究进展,包括生命周期方法的应用、本土数据库的发展以及影响评价方法的进展。认为研究高技术单元分辨率的混合生命周期研究方法、拓展建立本土化生命周期评价数据库和开发标准化的生命周期评价指标体系是我国可再生能源生命周期评价研究发展中应注意的问题。     

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.     

Sustainability impact assessment for local energy supplies' development – The case of the alpine area of Lake Como,Italy

The development of distributed energy systems has important environmental, social and economic implications. Local decision-making processes must be guided by a careful evaluation of the sustainability of production chains and alternative choices. The aim of this study is to explore if and how an integrated assessment can quantify the extent to which bioenergy supply chain development contributes to rural development and energy policy objectives. We applied a Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) for local bioenergy development in the alpine area of Lake Como (Italy). We modeled the local bioenergy chain in 2008 and eleven scenarios considering different biomass utilizations, mechanization levels, combustion technologies, and subsidies schemes at 2020. We calculated economic, social and environmental indicators. We interpret and discuss the scenario analysis in order to support the bioenergy planning under the light of its implications for the different policy aims and concerns.     

Harmonising methodological choices in life cycle assessment of hydrogen: A focus on acidification and renewable hydrogen

The environmental sustainability of hydrogen energy systems is often evaluated through Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). In particular, environmental suitability is usually determined by comparing the life-cycle indicators calculated for a specific hydrogen energy system with those of a reference system (e.g., conventional hydrogen from steam methane reforming, SMR-H₂). In this respect, harmonisation protocols for comparative LCA of hydrogen energy systems have recently been developed in order to avoid misleading conclusions in terms of carbon footprints and cumulative energy demand. This article expands the scope of these harmonisation initiatives by addressing a new life-cycle indicator: acidification. A robust protocol for harmonising the acidification potential of hydrogen energy systems is developed and applied to both SMR-H₂ and a sample of case studies of renewable hydrogen. According to the results, unlike other energy systems, there is no correlation between acidification and carbon footprint in the case of hydrogen energy systems, which prevents the estimation of harmonised acidification results from available harmonised carbon footprints. Nevertheless, an initial library of harmonised life-cycle indicators of renewable hydrogen is now made available.     

Determining the most sustainable lignocellulosic bioenergy system following a case study approach

The paradigm shift from fossil to renewable energy sources is driven, largely, by a growing sustainability awareness, necessitating more sophisticated measurements in terms of a wider range of criteria. Technical efficiency, financial profitability, environmental friendliness and social acceptance are some of the aspects determining the sustainability of renewable energy systems. The resulting complexity and sometimes conflicting nature of these criteria constitute major barriers to the implementation of renewable energy projects.The Worcester biomass procurement area in the Western Cape Province, South Africa, is used as a case study. It provides a blueprint for measuring the impacts of lignocellulosic bioelectricity systems – using life-cycle assessment (LCA), multi-period budgeting (MPB), geographic information systems (GIS) and multi-criteria decision-making analysis (MCDA), among others – and for prioritising the relevant criteria to determine the most sustainable technological option.Following the LCA approach, 37 plausible lignocellulosic bioenergy systems were assessed against five financial-economic, three socio-economic and five environmental criteria. On translating the quantitative performance data into a standardised ‘common language’ of relative performance, an expert group attached weights to the considered criteria, using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP). Assuming the prerequisite of financial-economic viability, the preferred option comprises a feller-buncher for harvesting, a forwarder for biomass extraction, mobile comminution at the roadside, secondary transport in truck-container-trailer combinations and an integrated gasification system for the conversion into electricity. This approach illustrates how to internalise externalities as typical market failures, aiding decision makers to choose the most sustainable bioenergy system.     

Environmental sustainability assessment of bioeconomy value chains

Bioeconomy has gained political momentum since 2012 when the European Commission adopted the strategy “Innovating for Sustainable Growth: A Bioeconomy for Europe”. Assessing the environmental performance of different bioeconomy value chains (divided in three pillars: food and feed, bio-based products and bioenergy) is key to facilitate solid and evidence-based policy making. The objectives of this work were: (1) to map and analyse accessible LCA data related to bioeconomy value chains in order to identify knowledge gaps; (2) provide a more robust and complete picture of the environmental performance of three bioeconomy value chains (i.e. one per each bioeconomy pillar). This analysis reveals that apart from few products (such as liquid biofuels, some biopolymers and food crops) the environmental assessment of bioeconomy value chains is still incipient and limited to few indicators (e.g. Global Warming Potential and energy efficiency). In this study, a harmonised procedure – the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF), which includes fourteen impact categories – is used to estimate the environmental performance of three exemplary case studies which are inter-related due to the use of sugar as feedstock: sugar (food and feed), bio-based ethanol (bioenergy) and polyhydroxyalkanoates (bio-based product). Results highlight the strong need for methodological harmonisation and coherence for LCA of bioeconomy value chains.     

Life cycle assessment in buildings: The ENSLIC simplified method and guidelines

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is currently used to a very limited extent in the building sector, for several reasons. Firstly, making an LCA evaluation of a building demands a specific tool to handle the large dataset needed and this tool has to be adaptable to the different decisions taken throughout the life cycle of the building. Such tools have been developed in a few countries, but they are exceptions. However, useful experience has been gained in these countries, providing a valuable source of data for developing guidelines for application in other countries. Since the results of a building LCA may contain complex information, the great challenge is to devise efficient ways for communication of the results to users and clients.The simplified methodology presented in this paper adopt a systematic approach guiding the user through the Life Cycle process and clarifying key issues that usually cause difficulty, e.g. choice of assessment tool, definition of system boundaries, options for simplifying the process, etc. The guidelines were developed within the framework of the ENSLIC Building Project, which was co-funded by the European Commission Intelligent Energy for Europe Programme and by nine European organisations that included more than 15 LCA experts and architects.     

Maximizing the greenhouse gas reductions from biomass: The role of life cycle assessment

Biomass can deliver significant greenhouse gas reductions in electricity, heat and transport fuel supply. However, our biomass resource is limited and should be used to deliver the most strategic and significant impacts. The relative greenhouse gas reduction merits of different bioenergy systems (for electricity, heat, chemical and biochar production) were examined on a common, scientific basis using consistent life cycle assessment methodology, scope of system and assumptions. The results show that bioenergy delivers substantial and cost-effective greenhouse gas reductions. Large scale electricity systems deliver the largest absolute reductions in greenhouse gases per unit of energy generated, while medium scale wood chip district heating boilers result in the highest level of greenhouse gas reductions per unit of harvested biomass. However, ammonia and biochar systems deliver the most cost effective carbon reductions, while biochar systems potentially deliver the highest greenhouse gas reductions per unit area of land.The system that achieves the largest reduction in greenhouse gases per unit of energy does not also deliver the highest greenhouse gas reduction per unit of biomass. So policy mechanisms that incentivize the reductions in the carbon intensity of energy may not result in the best use of the available resource.Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a flexible tool that can be used to answer a wide variety of different policy-relevant, LCA “questions”, but it is essential that care is taken to formulate the actual question being asked and adapt the LCA methodology to suit the context and objective.     

Developing a sustainability framework for the assessment of bioenergy systems

The potential for biomass to contribute to energy supply in a low-carbon economy is well recognised. However, for the sector to contribute fully to sustainable development in the UK, specific exploitation routes must meet the three sets of criteria usually recognised as representing the tests for sustainability: economic viability in the market and fiscal framework within which the supply chain operates; environmental performance, including, but not limited to, low carbon dioxide emissions over the complete fuel cycle; and social acceptability, with the benefits of using biomass recognised as outweighing any negative social impacts. This paper describes an approach to developing a methodology to establish a sustainability framework for the assessment of bioenergy systems to provide practical advice for policy makers, planners and the bioenergy industry, and thus to support policy development and bioenergy deployment at different scales. The approach uses multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) and decision-conferencing, to explore how such a process is able to integrate and reconcile the interests and concerns of diverse stakeholder groups.     

A participatory systems approach to modeling social, economic, and ecological components of bioenergy

Availability of and access to useful energy is a crucial factor for maintaining and improving human well-being. Looming scarcities and increasing awareness of environmental, economic, and social impacts of conventional sources of non-renewable energy have focused attention on renewable energy sources, including biomass.

The complex interactions of social, economic, and ecological factors among the bioenergy system components of feedstock supply, conversion technology, and energy allocation have been a major obstacle to the broader development of bioenergy systems. For widespread implementation of bioenergy to occur there is a need for an integrated approach to model the social, economic, and ecological interactions associated with bioenergy. Such models can serve as a planning and evaluation tool to help decide when, where, and how bioenergy systems can contribute to development.

One approach to integrated modeling is by assessing the sustainability of a bioenergy system. The evolving nature of sustainability can be described by an adaptive systems approach using general systems principles. Discussing these principles reveals that participation of stakeholders in all components of a bioenergy system is a crucial factor for sustainability.

Multi-criteria analysis (MCA) is an effective tool to implement this approach. This approach would enable decision-makers to evaluate bioenergy systems for sustainability in a participatory, transparent, timely, and informed manner.     

Ecological assessment of integrated bioenergy systems using the Sustainable Process Index

Biomass utilisation for energy production presently faces an uphill battle against fossil fuels. The use of biomass must offer additional benefits to compensate for higher prices: on the basis of a life cycle assessment (using BEAM to evaluate a variety of integrated bioenergy systems in connection with the Sustainable Process Index as a highly aggregated environmental pressure index) it is shown that integrated bioenergy systems are superior to fossil fuel systems in terms of environmental compatibility. The implementation of sustainability measures provides additional valuable information that might help in constructing and optimising integrated bioenergy systems. For a set of reference processes, among them fast pyrolysis, atmospheric gasification, integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC), combustion and steam cycle (CS) and conventional hydrolysis, a detailed impact assessment is shown. Sensitivity analyses of the most important ecological parameters are calculated, giving an overview of the impacts of various stages in the total life cycle and showing ‘what really matters’. Much of the ecological impact of integrated bioenergy systems is induced by feedstock production. It is mainly the use of fossil fuels in cultivation, harvesting and transportation as well as the use of fertilisers in short-rotation coppice production that impose considerable ecological pressure. Concerning electricity generation the most problematic pressures are due to gaseous emissions, most notably the release of NO_x. Moreover, a rather complicated process (high amount of grey energy) and the use of fossil pilot fuel (co-combustion) leads to a rather weak ecological performance in contrast to other 100% biomass-based systems.     

Using rye as cover crop for bioenergy production: An environmental and economic assessment

The use of cover crops (CCs) during winter can improve the structure and water retention capacity of the soil. Additionally, the harvested CCs could be used as substrate in an anaerobic digestion (AD) plant. This paper aims at assessing the environmental and economic consequences of planting rye as a winter CC (after maize) and its use as co-substrate in an AD plant (Rye scenario) instead of leaving the land fallow during winter and use solely maize for co-digestion with manure (NoRye scenario). The life cycle assessment (LCA) of 1 MJ of produced bioenergy (36% electricity and 64% heat) shows significant benefits for marine eutrophication for the Rye scenario due to reductions in nitrate leaching. However, the lower specific yield of rye and the biogas potential for the Rye scenario resulted in higher total impacts on climate change and resource depletion (higher use of machinery and infrastructures for 1 MJ of produced bioenergy), as compared to the use of maize in the NoRye scenario. Based on the analysis, possible methodological improvements are highlighted, in particular for the simulation of field emissions and regionalization of impacts. From an economic point-of-view, planting rye during winter could generate additional revenues for the farmer. However, the calculation incorporates large uncertainties, linked mainly to price volatility, seasonal weather conditions (and related yield variations), and to the possible influence of CCs on the summer crop yield. In conclusion, this paper presents a first overview of the sustainability performances of using rye as a CC for energy purposes.