The role of sustainability assessment tools in realizing bioenergy and bioproduct systems

Document Type : Review Paper

Authors

1 UniversDepartment of Mechanical Engineering of Agricultural Machinery, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran.ity of Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Mechanical Engineering of Agricultural Machinery, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran.

3 Higher Institution Centre of Excellence (HICoE), Institute of Tropical Aquaculture and Fisheries (AKUATROP), Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, 21030 Kuala Nerus, Terengganu, Malaysia.

4 Henan Province Engineering Research Center for Forest Biomass Value-added Products, School of Forestry, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou, Henan, China.

Abstract

The pressing global challenges, including global warming and climate change, the Russia-Ukraine war, and the Covid-19 pandemic, all are indicative of the necessity of a transition from fossil-based systems toward bioenergy and bioproduct to ensure our plans for sustainable development. Such a transition, however, should be thoroughly engineered, considering the sustainability of the different elements of these systems. Advanced sustainability tools are instrumental in realizing this important objective. The present work critically reviews these tools, including techno-economic, life cycle assessment, emergy, energy, and exergy analyses, within the context of the bioenergy and bioproduct systems. The principles behind these methods are briefly explained, and then their pros and cons in designing, analyzing, and optimizing bioenergy and bioproduct systems are highlighted. Overall, it can be concluded that despite the promises held by these tools, they cannot be regarded as perfect solutions to address all the issues involved in realizing bioenergy and bioproduct systems, and integration of these tools can provide more reliable and accurate results than single approaches.

Graphical Abstract

The role of sustainability assessment tools in realizing bioenergy and bioproduct systems

Highlights

  • Sustainability assessment tools in the context of bioenergy and bioproduct are critically reviewed.
  • The pros and cons of various sustainability assessment tools are highlighted to guide future research.
  • There is no perfect tool that address all the sustainability issues of bioenergy and bioproduct systems.
  • Integration of sustainability tools can provide more reliable and accurate results than single approaches.
  • Exergy-based analyses can outperform other sustainability tools in providing more informative indicators.

Keywords

References

  1. Aghbashlo, M., Khounani, Z., Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha, H., Gupta, V.K., Amiri, H., Lam, S.S., Morosuk, T., Tabatabaei, M., 2021. Exergoenvironmental analysis of bioenergy systems: A comprehensive review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 149, 111399.
  2. Aghbashlo, M., Rosen, M.A., 2018a. Exergoeconoenvironmental analysis as a new concept for developing thermodynamically, economically, and environmentally sound energy conversion systems. J. Clean. Prod. 187, 190–204.
  3. Aghbashlo, M., Rosen, M.A., 2018b. Consolidating exergoeconomic and exergoenvironmental analyses using the emergy concept for better understanding energy conversion systems. J. Clean. Prod. 172, 696–708.
  4. Aghbashlo, M., Tabatabaei, M., Hosseinpour, S., Khounani, Z., Hosseini, S.S., 2017. Exergy-based sustainability analysis of a low power, high frequency piezo-based ultrasound reactor for rapid biodiesel production. Energy Convers. Manag. 148, 759–769.
  5. Amid, S., Aghbashlo, M., Tabatabaei, M., Karimi, K., Nizami, A.-S., Rehan, M., Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha, H., Soufiyan, M.M., Peng, W., Lam, S.S., 2021. Exergetic, exergoeconomic, and exergoenvironmental aspects of an industrial-scale molasses-based ethanol production plant. Energy Convers. Manag. 227, 113637.
  6. Bastianoni, S., Facchini, A., Susani, L., Tiezzi, E., 2007. Emergy as a function of exergy. Energy 32, 1158–1162.
  7. Brandao, M., Heijungs, R., Cowie, A.L., 2022. On quantifying sources of uncertainty in the carbon footprint of biofuels: crop/feedstock, LCA modelling approach, land-use change, and GHG metrics. Biofuel Res. J. 9, 1608–1616.
  8. Cherubini, F., Bird, N.D., Cowie, A., Jungmeier, G., Schlamadinger, B., Woess-Gallasch, S., 2009. Energy-and greenhouse gas-based LCA of biofuel and bioenergy systems: Key issues, ranges and recommendations. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 53, 434–447.
  9. Cherubini, F., Strømman, A.H., Ulgiati, S., 2011. Influence of allocation methods on the environmental performance of biorefinery products-A case study. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 55, 1070–1077.
  10. Cornelissen, R.L., 1997. Thermodynamics and sustainable development: The use of exergy analysis and the reduction of irreversibility. Technical University of Twente. PhD Dissertation.
  11. Correspondent, H., 2022. Scientists link outbreaks such as Covid-19 to biodiversity loss. Hindustan times.
  12. Dincer, I., Rosen, M.A., 2013. Exergy energy, environment and sustainable development, Second. ed. Elsevier Ltd.
  13. Ecoinvent Database, 2016. Ecoinvent Database, Version 3.2.
  14. Finnveden, G., Hauschild, M.Z., Ekvall, T., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Hellweg, S., Koehler, A., Pennington, D., Suh, S., 2009. Recent developments in life cycle assessment. J. Environ. Manage. 91, 1–21.
  15. Frangopoulos, C.A., Caralis, Y.C., 1997. A method for taking into account environmental impacts in the economic evaluation of energy systems. Energy Convers. Manag. 38, 1751–1763.
  16. Gong, M., Wall, G., 1997. On exergetics, economics and optimization of technical processes to meet environmental conditions. TAIES’97, Beijing, China.
  17. Gutiérrez Ortiz, F.J., 2020. Techno-economic assessment of supercritical processes for biofuel production. J. Supercrit. Fluids 160, 1–15.
  18. Hau, J.L., Bakshi, B.R., 2004. Promise and problems of emergy analysis. Ecol. Modell. 178, 215–225.
  19. Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha, H., Aghbashlo, M., Tabatabaei, M., 2021. Life cycle assessment of bioenergy product systems: A critical review. e-Prime-Advances Electr. Eng. Electron. Energy 1, 100015.
  20. Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha, H., Nizami, A.-S., Kalogirou, S.A., Gupta, V.K., Park, Y.-K., Fallahi, A., Sulaiman, A., Ranjbari, M., Rahnama, H., Aghbashlo, M., 2022. Environmental life cycle assessment of biodiesel production from waste cooking oil: A systematic review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 161, 112411.
  21. Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha, H., Tabatabaei, M., Aghbashlo, M., Hoang, A.T., Yang, Y., Jouzani, G.S., 2020. Life Cycle Analysis for Biodiesel Production from Oleaginous Fungi, in: Fungi in Fuel Biotechnology. Springer, pp. 199–225.
  22. ISO, 2006. 14044 International standard. Environmental Management–Life cycle assessment–principles and framework, international organisation for standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
  23. Lee, M., Lin, Y.-L., Chiueh, P.-T., Den, W., 2020. Environmental and energy assessment of biomass residues to biochar as fuel: A brief review with recommendations for future bioenergy systems. J. Clean. Prod. 251, 119714.
  24. Li, P., Wang, X., Luo, Y., Yuan, X., 2022. Sustainability evaluation of microalgae biodiesel production process integrated with nutrient close-loop pathway based on emergy analysis method. Bioresour. Technol. 346, 126611.
  25. Liu, H., Huang, Y., Yuan, H., Yin, X., Wu, C., 2018. Life cycle assessment of biofuels in China: status and challenges. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 97, 301–322.
  26. Liu, W., Zhang, Z., Xie, X., Yu, Z., Von Gadow, K., Xu, J., Zhao, S., Yang, Y., 2017. Analysis of the global warming potential of biogenic CO2 emission in life cycle assessments. Sci. Rep. 7, 1–8.
  27. Mahmud, R., Moni, S.M., High, K., Carbajales-Dale, M., 2021. Integration of techno-economic analysis and life cycle assessment for sustainable process design – A review. J. Clean. Prod. 317, 128247.
  28. Mohd Hamzah, M.A.A., Hasham, R., Nik Malek, N.A.N., Hashim, Z., Yahayu, M., Abdul Razak, F.I., Zakaria, Z.., 2022. Beyond conventional biomass valorisation: pyrolysis-derived products for biomedical applications. Biofuel Res. J. 35, 1648–1658.
  29. Mortimer, N.D., 1991. Energy analysis of renewable energy sources. Energy Policy 19, 374–385.
  30. Portha, J.-F., Jaubert, J.-N., Louret, S., Pons, M.-N., 2008. Definition of a thermodynamic parameter to calculate carbon dioxide emissions in a catalytic reforming process. Int. J. Thermodyn. 11, 81–89.
  31. Portha, J.-F., Louret, S., Pons, M.-N., Jaubert, J.-N., 2010. Estimation of the environmental impact of a petrochemical process using coupled LCA and exergy analysis. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 54, 291–298.
  32. Raugei, M., Rugani, B., Benetto, E., Ingwersen, W.W., 2014. Integrating emergy into LCA: potential added value and lingering obstacles. Ecol. Modell. 271, 4–9.
  33. Romanello, M., McGushin, A., Di Napoli, C., Drummond, P., Hughes, N., Jamart, L., et al., 2021. The 2021 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: code red for a healthy future. Lancet 398, 1619–1662.
  34. Rosen, M.A., 2002. Does industry embrace exergy? Exergy, An Int. J. 2, 221–223.
  35. Sciubba, E., 2001. Beyond thermoeconomics? The concept of extended exergy accounting and its application to the analysis and design of thermal systems. Exergy, an Int. J. 1, 68–84.
  36. Shahbeig, H., Nosrati, M., 2020. Pyrolysis of municipal sewage sludge for bioenergy production: Thermo-kinetic studies, evolved gas analysis, and techno-socio-economic assessment. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 119, 109567.
  37. Shams Esfandabadi, Z., Ranjbari, M., Scagnelli, S.D., 2022. The imbalance of food and biofuel markets amid Ukraine-Russia crisis: A systems thinking perspective. Biofuel Res. J. 9, 1640–1647.
  38. Soltanian, S., Aghbashlo, M., Almasi, F., Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha, H., Nizami, A.-S., Ok, Y.S., Lam, S.S., Tabatabaei, M., 2020. A critical review of the effects of pretreatment methods on the exergetic aspects of lignocellulosic biofuels. Energy Convers. Manag. 212, 112792.
  39. Soltanian, S., Kalogirou, S.A., Ranjbari, M., Amiri, H., Mahian, O., Khoshnevisan, B., Jafary, T., Nizami, A.-S., Gupta, V.K., Aghaei, S., 2022. Exergetic sustainability analysis of municipal solid waste treatment systems: A systematic critical review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 156, 111975.
  40. Song, C., Kitamura, Y., Li, S., 2014. Energy analysis of the cryogenic CO2 capture process based on Stirling coolers. Energy 65, 580–589.
  41. Song, M., Zhuang, Y., Zhang, L., Wang, C., Du, J., Shen, S., 2021. Advanced exergy analysis for the solid oxide fuel cell system combined with a kinetic-based modeling pre-reformer. Energy Convers. Manag. 245, 114560.
  42. Sun, L., Lee, J.W., Yook, S., Lane, S., Sun, Z., Kim, S.R., Jin, Y.-S., 2021. Complete and efficient conversion of plant cell wall hemicellulose into high-value bioproducts by engineered yeast. Nat. Commun. 12, 1–9.
  43. Szargut, J., 1978. Minimization of consumption of natural-resources. Bull. L Acad. Pol. DES Sci. DES Sci. Tech. 26, 41–45.
  44. Szargut, J., Ziębik, A., Stanek, W., 2002. Depletion of the non-renewable natural exergy resources as a measure of the ecological cost. Energy Convers. Manag. 43, 1149–1163.
  45. Thomassen, G., Van Dael, M., Van Passel, S., You, F., 2019. How to assess the potential of emerging green technologies? Towards a prospective environmental and techno-economic assessment framework. Green Chem. 21, 4868–4886.
  46. Tilman, D., Hill, J., Lehman, C., 2006. Carbon-negative biofuels from low-input high-diversity grassland biomass. Science (80-. ). 314, 1598–1600.
  47. Tsatsaronis, G., Morosuk, T., 2008. A general exergy-based method for combining a cost analysis with an environmental impact analysis. Part I–theoretical development, in: Proc of the ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, IMECE, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. p. 67218.
  48. Ubando, A.T., Rivera, D.R.T., Chen, W.H., Culaba, A.B., 2019. A comprehensive review of life cycle assessment (LCA) of microalgal and lignocellulosic bioenergy products from thermochemical processes. Bioresour. Technol. 291, 121837.
  49. Ulgiati, S., Brown, M.T., 2002. Quantifying the environmental support for dilution and abatement of process emissions: the case of electricity production. J. Clean. Prod. 10, 335–348.
  50. Valero, A., Lozano, M.A., Muñoz, M., 1986. A general theory of exergy saving. I. On the exergetic cost. Comput. Eng. energy Syst. Second law Anal. Model. 3, 1–8.
  51. Wang, J., Hou, D., Liu, Zibiao, Tao, J., Yan, B., Liu, Zuoxi, Yang, T., Su, H., Tahir, M.H., Chen, G., 2022. Emergy analysis of agricultural waste biomass for energy-oriented utilization in China: Current situation and perspectives. Sci. Total Environ. 157798.
  52. Yang, Y., Tilman, D., 2020. Soil and root carbon storage is key to climate benefits of bioenergy crops. Biofuel Res. J. 7, 1143–1148.
  53. Zamagni, A., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Masoni, P., Raggi, A., 2012. Lights and shadows in consequential LCA. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 17, 904–918.
  54. Zimmermann, A.W., Wunderlich, J., Müller, L., Buchner, G.A., Marxen, A., Michailos, S., Armstrong, K., Naims, H., McCord, S., Styring, P., Sick, V., Schomäcker, R., 2020. Techno-economic assessment guidelines for CO2 Front. Energy Res. 8.

Files

Cited by

Share

How to cite

Statistics