Review of methodological choices in LCA of biorefinery systems - key issues and recommendations

Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining

Volumn 9, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 606-619

  Ahlgren, Serina ^a   Björklund, Anna ^b   Ekman, Anna ^c   Karlsson, Hanna ^a   Berlin, Johanna ^d   Börjesson, Pål ^e   Ekvall, Tomas ^f   Finnveden, Göran ^b   Janssen, Matty ^g   Strid, Ingrid ^a  

^a SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

^b ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^c LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^d SP TECHNICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF SWEDEN   (Sweden)

^e LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^f IVL SWEDISH ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^g CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Allocation; Biogenic carbon; Biorefinery; Functional unit; Land use; Life cycle assessment; Review

Indexed keywords

BIOCONVERSION; BIOMASS; FEEDSTOCKS; LAND USE; REFINING; REVIEWS;

ALLOCATION; BIOMASS CONVERSION TECHNOLOGIES; BIOMASS FEEDSTOCK; BIOREFINERIES; FUNCTIONAL UNITS; LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT (LCA); RESEARCH QUESTIONS; STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES;

LIFE CYCLE;

EID: 84941735953     PISSN: 1932104X     EISSN: 19321031     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bbb.1563     Document Type: Review

References (54)

1. Berntsson T, Sandén B, Olsson L and Åsblad A, What is a biorefinery? in Systems Perspectives on Biorefineries, ed. by Sandén B and Pettersson K. Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden (2013).
2. Ahlgren S, Ekman A, Karlsson H and Björklund A, Methodology for LCA of Biorefineries - A Literature Review, in The 6th International Conference on Life Cycle Management, Gothenburg, Sweden 25-28 August (2013).
3. Ahlgren S, Björklund A, Ekman A, Karlsson H, Berlin J, Börjesson P et al., LCA of Biorefineries - Identification of Key Issues and Methodological Recommendations. [Online]. Report No. 2013:25, f3 The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Renewable Transportation Fuels, Sweden. (2013). Available at http://www.f3centre.se [July 14, 2014].
4. Valente C, Saur Modahl I and Askham C, Method Development for Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) of New Norwegian Biorefinery, Report No. OR.39.13. Østfoldforskning, Kråkerøy, Norway (2013).
5. Sandén B and Pettersson K (eds), Systems Perspectives on Biorefineries. Version 2.1. [Online]. Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden. Availlable at: http://www.chalmers.se/en/areas-of-advance/energy/cei/Pages/Systems-Perspectives.aspx [August 15, 2014].
6. Cherubini F, Strømman AH and Ulgiati S, Influence of allocation methods on the environmental performance of biorefinery products--A case study. Resour Conserv Recy 55(11):1070-1077 (2011).
7. De Meester S, Life Cycle Assessment in Biorefineries: Case Studies and Methodological Development, doctoral thesis. Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium (2013).
8. Sacramento-Rivero JC, A methodology for evaluating the sustainability of biorefineries: Framework and indicators. Biofuel Bioprod Bioref 6(1):32-44 (2012).
9. Eriksson M and Ahlgren S, LCAs of Gasoline and Diesel - A Literature Review, Report 2013:058. Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Uppsala, Sweden (2013).
10. International Organization for Standardization, Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Principles and Framework (ISO 14040:2006). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium (2006).
11. International Organization for Standardization, Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Requirements and Guidelines (ISO 14044:2006). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium (2006).
12. JRC Joint Research Centre, ILCD Handbook. International Reference Life Cycle Data System. General Guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed Guidance. First Edition. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (2010).
13. World Resources Institute, Greenhouse Gas Protocol. Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard. [Online]. Washington DC, USA (2011). Available at: http://www.ghgprotocol.org/standards/product-standard [June 17, 2014].
14. European Commission, Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) Guide to the Commission Recommendation on the Use of Common Methods to Measure and Communicate the Life Cycle Environmental Performance of Products and Organizations, Annex II. EC, Brussels (2013).
15. European Commission, Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) Guide to the Commission Recommendation on the Use of Common Methods to Measure and Communicate the Life Cycle Environmental Performance of Products and Organizations, Annex III. EC, Brussels (2013).
16. International Organization for Standardization, Environmental Labels and Declarations -- Type III Environmental Declarations - Principles and Procedures. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium (2006).
17. The International EPD®system, Product Category Rules (PCR) for Preparing an Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) for CPC Division 341, Basic Organic Chemicals, PCR 2011:17 Version 1.1. (2013).
18. European Commission, Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the Promotion of the Use of Energy from Renewable Sources and Amending and Subsequently Repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC. COD(2008)0016. EC, Brussels (2009).
19. European Committee for Standardization, Sustainably Produced Biomass for Energy Applications - Principles, Criteria, Indicators and Verifiers for Biofuels and Bioliquids - Part 4: Calculation Methods of the Greenhouse Gas Emission Balance using a Life Cycle Analysis. EC, Brussels (2013).
20. International Organization for Standardization, Greenhouse Gases - Carbon Footprint of Products -- Requirements and Guidelines for Quantification and Communication. ISO, Geneva (2013).
21. British Standards, Specification for the Assessment of the Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Goods and Services. PAS 2050:2008. Publicly Available Specification. BS, London (2011).
22. Zamagni A, Guinée J, Heijungs R, Masoni P and Raggi A, Lights and shadows in consequential LCA. Int J Life Cycle Ass 17(7):904-918 (2012).
23. Ekvall T, Assefa G, Björklund A, Eriksson O and Finnveden G, What life-cycle assessment does and does not do in assessments of waste management. Waste Manage 27(8):989-996 (2007).
24. Guinée JB, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Zamagni A, Masoni P, Buonamici R et al., Life cycle assessment: Past, present, and future†. Environ Sci Technol 45(1):90-96 (2010).
25. Iswanto Wiloso E and Heijungs R, Key issues in conducting life cycle assessment of bio-based renewable energy sources, in Life Cycle Assessment of Renewable Energy Sources, ed. by Singh A, Pant D and Olsen SI. Springer, London, pp. 13-36 (2013).
26. Cherubini F and Strømman AH, Life cycle assessment of bioenergy systems: State of the art and future challenges. Bioresource Technol 102(2):437-451 (2011).
27. Parajuli R, Dalgaard T, Jørgensen U, Adamsen APS, Knudsen MT, Birkved M et al., Biorefining in the prevailing energy and materials crisis: A review of sustainable pathways for biorefinery value chains and sustainability assessment methodologies. Renew Sust Energ Rev 43:244-263 (2015).
28. Kajaste R, Chemicals from biomass - managing greenhouse gas emissions in biorefinery production chains - a review. J Clean Prod 75:1-10 (2014).
29. Pawelzik P, Carus M, Hotchkiss J, Narayan R, Selke S, Wellisch M et al., Critical aspects in the life cycle assessment (LCA) of bio-based materials. Reviewing methodologies and deriving recommendations. Resour Conserv Recy 73:211-228 (2013).
30. Heimersson S, Morgan-Sagastume F, Peters GM, Werker A and Svanström M, Methodological issues in life cycle assessment of mixed-culture polyhydroxyalkanoate production utilising waste as feedstock. New Biotechnol 31(4):383-393 (2014).
31. Ekvall T and Finnveden G, Allocation in ISO 14041-a critical review. J Clean Prod 9(3):197-208 (2001).
32. Heijungs R and Guinée JB, Allocation and 'what-if' scenarios in life cycle assessment of waste management systems. Waste Manage 27(8):997-1005 (2007).
33. Pettersson K and Grahn M, How much can biofuels reduce greenhouse gas emissions? in Systems Perspectives on Biorefineries, ed. by Sandén B and Pettersson K. Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden (2013).
34. Finnveden G, Methodological aspects of life cycle assessment of integrated solid waste management systems. Resour Conserv Recy 26(3/4):173-187 (1999).
35. Gnansounou E, Dauriat A, Villegas J and Panichelli L, Life cycle assessment of biofuels: Energy and greenhouse gas balances. Bioresource Technol 100(21):4919-4930 (2009).
36. Weidema BP, Market Information in Life Cycle Assessment. Environmental Project No. 863. Danish Environmental Protection Agency (2003).
37. Tillman A-M, Significance of decision-making for LCA methodology. Environ Impact Assess Rev 20(1):113-123 (2000).
38. Finnveden G, Hauschild MZ, Ekvall T, Guinée J, Heijungs R, Hellweg S et al., Recent developments in life cycle assessment. J Environ Manage 91(1):1-21 (2009).
39. Singh A, Pant D, Korres NE, Nizami A-S, Prasad S and Murphy JD, Key issues in life cycle assessment of ethanol production from lignocellulosic biomass: Challenges and perspectives. Bioresource Technol 101(13):5003-5012 (2010).
40. Luo L, van der Voet E, Huppes G and de Haes HAU, Allocation issues in LCA methodology: A case study of corn stover-based fuel ethanol. Int J Life Cycle Ass 14(6):529-539 (2009).
41. Ardente F and Cellura M, Economic allocation in life cycle assessment. J Ind Ecol 16(3):387-398 (2012).
42. Weidema BP, Ekvall T and Heijungs R, Guidelines for Consequential and Hybrid LCA. Deliverable D18 of work package 5 of the CALCAS project, Project No.037075, Co-ordination Action for innovation in Life-Cycle Analysis for Sustainability Leiden University, Leiden (2009).
43. Sandin G, Røyne F, Berlin J, Peters GM and Svanström M, Allocation in LCAs of biorefinery products: Implications for results and decision-making. J Clean Prod DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.01.013 (2015).
44. Wiloso EI, Heijungs R and de Snoo GR, LCA of second generation bioethanol: A review and some issues to be resolved for good LCA practice. Renew Sust Energ Rev 16(7):5295-5308 (2012).
45. Mattila T, Helin T, Antikainen R, Soimakallio S, Pingoud K and Wessman H, Land Use in Life Cycle Assessment. The Finnish Environment 24/2011. Finnish Environment Institute, Helsinki (2011).
46. Mathews JA and Tan H, Biofuels and indirect land use change effects: The debate continues. Biofuel Bioprod Bioref 3(3):305-317 (2009).
47. Ahlgren S and Di Lucia L, Indirect land use changes of biofuel production - a review of modelling efforts and policy developments in the European Union. Biotechnol Biofuel 7(1):1-10 (2014).
48. Finkbeiner M, Indirect land use change - Help beyond the hype? Biomass Bioenerg 62(0):218-221 (2014).
49. Brandão M, Levasseur A, Kirschbaum MUF, Weidema BP, Cowie AL, Jorgensen SV et al., Key issues and options in accounting for carbon sequestration and temporary storage in life cycle assessment and carbon footprinting. Int J Life Cycle Ass 18(1):230-240 (2013).
50. International Organization for Standardization, ISO/TR 14047:2012, Environmental Management -- Life Cycle Assessment -- Illustrative Examples on How to Apply ISO 14044 to Impact Assessment Situations (2012).
51. Agostini A, Giuntoli J, Boulamanti A and Marelli L, Carbon Accounting of Forest Bioenergy. Conclusions and Recommendations from a Critical Literature Review. JRC Technical Reports, Report EUR 25354 EN. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (2013).
52. Peters GP, Aamaas B, Lund MT, Solli C and Fuglestvedt JS, Alternative global warming metrics in life cycle assessment: A case study with existing transportation data. Environ Sci Technol 45(20):8633-8641 (2011).
53. 2 emissions from biomass combustion for bioenergy: Atmospheric decay and contribution to global warming. GCB Bioenerg 3(5):413-426 (2011).
54. Ericsson N, Porsö C, Ahlgren S, Nordberg Å, Sundberg C and Hansson P-A, Time-dependent climate impact of a bioenergy system - methodology development and application to Swedish conditions. GCB Bioenergy 5(5):580-590 (2013).