Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Value chain for next-generation biofuels: resilience and sustainability of the product life cycle

  • Published:
Environment Systems and Decisions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Multiple factors including climate change, price uncertainties, and geopolitical instability have prompted many industries to investigate the feasibility of replacing traditional petroleum-based fuels with biofuel alternatives. However, to make this transition successful, these new biofuels must be environmentally sustainable and the necessary support infrastructure must be in place to make the production, distribution, and storage of these biofuels technologically feasible and cost effective. Developing a value chain, spanning from feedstock production to distribution to end users, requires garnering buy-in from multiple stakeholders by demonstrating environmental, economic, and social benefits and incentives. Two critical factors are the environmental benefits achieved from the use of the biofuel technology and the degree of resilience of the value chain to emergent conditions to ensure steady supply to consumers. Moreover, different biofuel pathways have different costs, benefits, and risks which must be compared. In this paper, we describe how environmental sustainability can be modeled using life cycle assessment (LCA) and how the resilience of value chain initiatives can be modeled using a scenario-based decision model. We then describe how sustainability and resilience assessments can be integrated in an iterative, anticipatory LCA framework. These assessments can be used as the basis for a business case for various investments, as well as a means for promoting responsible innovations, with the aviation industry used as a case study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

adapted from Connelly et al. (2015b)

Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agusdinata DB, Zhao F, Ileleji K, DeLaurentis D (2011) Life cycle assessment of potential biojet fuel production in the United States. Environ Sci Technol 45(21):9133–9143

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Argonne National Laboratory (2015) Greenhouse gases, regulated emissions, and energy use in transportation (GREET) computer model. Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois. http://greet.es.anl.gov

  • Baker E, Keisler JM (2011) Cellulosic biofuels: expert views on prospects for advancement. Energy 36:595–605

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Baral A, Malins C (2014) Assessing the climate mitigation potential of biofuels derived from residues and wastes in the European context. The International Council on Clean Transportation. http://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/ICCT_biofuels_wastes-residues_20140130.pdf

  • Bauen A, Howes J, Bertuccioli L, Chudziak C (2009) Review of the potential for biofuels in aviation. Prod. E4Tech. Lausanne, Switzerland

  • Belton V, Stewart T (2002) Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • CAAFI (2013) Research and development investment position paper. Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative. http://www.caafi.org/information/pdf/CAAFI_Research_and_Development_Team_Position_Paper_updated_FINAL_2013_06_05.pdf

  • CAPA (2015) “Oil prices are down, so why is United Airlines buying into biofuels? Symbolic or sound strategy?” CAPA Centre for Aviation. http://centreforaviation.com/analysis/oil-prices-are-down-so-why-is-united-airlines-buying-into-biofuels-symbolic-or-sound-strategy-233866

  • Carter N, Stratton R, Bredehoeft M, Hileman J (2011) Energy and environmental viability of select alternative jet fuel pathways. In: 47th AIAA/ASME/SAU/ASEE joint propulsion conference & exhibit, San Diego, California

  • Carvalho H, Cruz-Machado V (2011) Integrating lean, agile, resilience and green paradigms in supply chain management (LARG_SCM). In: Li P (ed) Supply chain management. InTech, Rijeka, pp 27–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherubini F, Strømman AH (2011) Life cycle assessment of bioenergy systems: state of the art and future challenges. Bioresour Technol 102(2):437–451

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Collier ZA, Connelly EB, Thorisson H, Lambert JH (2016) Resilience of initiatives to shifting management priorities under emergent and future conditions. In: 2016 IEEE international systems conference (SysCon), 18–21 April, Orlando, FL, USA

  • Connelly EB (2016) Resilience analysis and value of information with application to aviation biofuels (Ph.D. Dissertation). Retrieved from http://search.lib.virginia.edu/catalog/libra-oa:10885

  • Connelly EB, Colosi LM, Clarens AF, Lambert JH (2015a) Life cycle assessment of biofuels from algae hydrothermal liquefaction: the upstream and downstream factors affecting regulatory compliance. Energy Fuels 29:1653–1661

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Connelly EB, Colosi LM, Clarens AF, Lambert JH (2015b) Risk analysis of biofuels industry for aviation with scenario-based expert elicitation. Syst Eng 18(2):178–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connelly EB, Thorisson H, Valverde LJ Jr, Lambert JH (2016) Asset risk management and resilience for flood control, hydropower, and waterways. ASCE J Risk Uncertain Eng Syst. doi:10.1061/AJRUA6.0000862

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson C, Newes E, Schwab A, Vimmerstedt L (2014) An overview of aviation fuel markets for biofuels stakeholders. NREL/TP-6A20-60254. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), US Department of Energy, Golden, CO

  • Daystar J, Gonzalez R, Reeb C, Venditti R, Treasure R, Abt R, Kelley S (2014) Economics, environmental impacts, and supply chain analysis of cellulosic biomass for biofuels in the southern US: pine, eucalyptus, unmanaged hardwoods, forest residues, switchgrass, and sweet sorghum. BioResources 9(1):393–444

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Derissen S, Quaas MF, Baumgärtner S (2011) The relationship between resilience and sustainability of ecological-economic systems. Ecol Econ 70:1121–1128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dufour J, Iribarren D (2012) Life cycle assessment of biodiesel production from free fatty acid-rich wastes. Renew Energy 38(1):155–162

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Elgowainy A, Han J, Wang M, Carter N, Stratton R, Hileman J et al (2012) Life-cycle analysis of alternative aviation fuels in GREET. Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory: ANL/ESD/12-8

  • FAA (2011) FAA destination 2025. Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC. www.faa.gov/about/plans_reports/media/Destination2025.pdf

  • Fiksel J (2006) Sustainability and resilience: toward a systems approach. Sustain Sci Pract Policy 2(2):14–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiksel J, Polyviou M, Croxton KL, Pettit TJ (2015) From risk to resilience: learning to deal with disruption. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 56(2):1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortier M-OP, Roberts GW, Stagg-Williams SM, Sturm BSM (2014) Life cycle assessment of bio-jet fuel from hydrothermal liquefaction of microalgae. Appl Energy 122:73–82

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gegg PK, Budd LCS, Ison SG (2014) The market development of aviation biofuel: drivers and constraints. J Air Transp Manag 39:34–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin P, Wright G (2001) Enhancing strategy evaluation in scenario planning: a role for decision analysis. J Manag Stud 38:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guinée JB (2002) Handbook on life cycle assessment operational guide to the ISO standards. Int J Life Cycle Assess 7(5):311–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gust KA, Mayo M, Collier ZA (2015) Ranking the relative importance of toxicological observations based on subject matter expertise. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on sustainable systems and technologies (ISSST), 18–20 May, Dearborn, MI, USA. doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.1517802

  • Hamilton MC, Lambert JH, Valverde LJ Jr (2015) Climate and related uncertainties influencing research and development priorities. ASCE-ASME J Risk Uncertain Eng Syst Part A Civ Eng 1(2):04015005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton MC, Lambert JH, Connelly EB, Barker K (2016) Resilience analytics with disruption of preferences and lifecycle cost analysis for energy microgrids. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 150:11–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han J, Elgowainy A, Cai H, Wang M (2013) Life-cycle analysis of bio-based aviation fuels. Bioresour Technol 150:447–456

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Iribarren D, Peters JF, Dufour J (2012) Life cycle assessment of transportation fuels from biomass pyrolysis. Fuel 97:812–821

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • ISO (1997) “ISO 14040: environmental management—life cycle assessment—principles and framework. International Standards Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO (2009) 31000—risk management—principles and guidelines. International Standards Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Ji Q, Fan Y (2012) How does oil price volatility affect non-energy commodity markets? Appl Energy 89:273–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kannegiesser M (2008) Value chain management in the chemical industry: global value chain planning of commodities. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson H, Börjesson P, Hansson P-A, Ahlgren S (2014) Ethanol production in biorefineries using lignocellulosic feedstock—GHG performance, energy balance and implications of life cycle calculation methodology. J Clean Prod 83:420–427

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Karvetski CW, Lambert JH, Linkov I (2009) Emergent conditions and multiple criteria analysis in infrastructure: prioritization for developing countries. J Multi-Criteria Decis Anal 16:125–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karvetski CW, Lambert JH, Linkov I (2010) Scenario and multiple criteria decision analysis for energy and environmental security of military and industrial installations. Integr Environ Assess Manag 7(2):228–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karvetski CW, Lambert JH, Keisler JM, Linkov I (2011) Integration of decision analysis and scenario planning for coastal engineering and climate change. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A 41(1):63–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kou N, Zhao F (2011) Techno-economical analysis of a thermo-chemical biofuel plant with feedstock and product flexibility under external disturbances. Energy 36:6745–6752

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kou N, Zhao F (2013) Operational flexibility: a key factor in the development of biofuel technologies. Sustain Energy Technol Assess 1:28–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lietaer B, Ulanowicz RE, Goerner SJ, McLaren N (2010) Is our monetary structure a systemic cause for financial instability? Evidence and remedies from nature. J Futures Stud 14(3):89–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Linkov I, Seager TP (2011) Coupling multi-criteria decision analysis, life-cycle assessment, and risk assessment for emerging threats. Environ Sci Technol 45:5068–5074

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liu X, Saydah B, Eranki P, Colosi LM, Mitchell GB, Rhodes J, Clarens AF (2013) Pilot-scale data provide enhanced estimates of the life cycle energy and emissions profile of algae biofuels produced via hydrothermal liquefaction. Bioresour Technol 148:163–171

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lokesh K, Sethi V, Nikolaidis T, Goodger E, Nalianda D (2015) Life cycle greenhouse gas analysis of biojet fuels with a technical investigation into their impact on jet engine performance. Biomass Bioenergy 77:26–44

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • MacFarlane R, Mazza P, Allan J (2011) Sustainable aviation fuels northwest: powering the next generation of flight. http://climatesolutions.org/sites/default/files/uploads/safn_2011report.pdf

  • Marchese K, Paramasivam S (2013) The ripple effect: how manufacturing and retail executives view the growing challenge of supply chain risk. Deloitte. http://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/Process-and-Operations/gx-operations-consulting-the-ripple-effect-041213.pdf

  • MASBI (2013) Fueling a sustainable future for aviation. Midwest aviation sustainable biofuels initiative. http://www.masbi.org/content/assets/MASBI_Report.pdf

  • Mayo M, Collier ZA, Hoang V, Chappell M (2014) Uncertainty in multi-media fate and transport models: a case study for TNT life cycle assessment. Sci Total Environ 494–495:104–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayo M, Collier ZA, Winton C, Chappell M (2015) Data-driven method to estimate nonlinear chemical equivalence. PLoS ONE 10(7):e0130494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller B et al (2013) Assessing opportunities for alternative fuel distribution programs. ACRP Report 83, Airport Cooperative Research Program, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/acrp/acrp_rpt_083.pdf

  • Mu D, Seager TP, Rao PSC, Park J, Zhao F (2011) A resilience perspective on biofuel production. Integr Environ Assess Manag 7(3):348–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novelli P (2011) Sustainable way for alternative fuels and energy in aviation final report. SWAFEA formal report D.9.2 v1.1. http://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/GFAAF/Documents/SW_WP9_D.9.1%20Final%20report_released%20July2011.pdf

  • Olukoya IA, Bellmer D, Whiteley JR, Aichele CP (2015) Evaluation of the environmental impacts of ethanol production from sweet sorghum. Energy Sustain Dev 24:1–8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Owens JW (1998) Life cycle impact assessment: the use of subjective judgements in classification and characterization. Int J Life Cycle Assess 3(1):43–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park J, Seager TP, Rao PSC, Convertino M, Linkov I (2013) Integrating risk and resilience approaches to catastrophe management in engineering systems. Risk Anal 33:356–367

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pokrivčák J, Rajčaniová M (2011) Crude oil price variability and its impact on ethanol prices. Agric Econ 57(8):394–403

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter ME, Millar VE (1985) How information gives you competitive advantage. Harv Bus Rev 63(4):149–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Prado-Lopez V, Seager TP, Chester M, Laurin L, Bernardo M, Tylock S (2014) Stochastic multi-attribute analysis (SMAA) as an interpretation method for comparative life-cycle assessment (LCA). Int J Life Cycle Assess 19(2):405–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prado-Lopez V, Wender BA, Seager TP, Laurin L, Chester M, Arslan E (2015) Tradeoff evaluation improves comparative life cycle assessment. J Ind Ecol 20(4):710–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pressley PN, Aziz TN, DeCarolis JF, Barlaz MA, He F, Li F, Damgaard A (2014) Municipal solid waste conversion to transportation fuels: a life-cycle estimation of global warming potential and energy consumption. J Clean Prod 70:145–153

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ram C, Montibeller G, Morton A (2011) Extending the use of scenario planning and MCDA for the evaluation of strategic options. J Oper Res Soc 62(5):817–829

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regional Economic Models, Inc. (2004) Economic impact of a bio-diesel industry in New York State. Regional Economic Models, Inc., Amherst, MA. http://www.remi.com/uploads/File/Articles/Economic_Impact_of_Bio-Diesel_Industry_in_New_York.pdf

  • Richard TL (2010) Challenges in scaling up biofuels infrastructure. Science 329:793–796

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Seber G, Malina R, Pearlson MN, Olcay H, Hileman JI, Barrett SRH (2014) Environmental and economic assessment of producing hydroprocessed jet and diesel fuel from waste oils and tallow. Biomass Bioenergy 67:108–118

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shonnard DR, Williams L, Kalnes TN (2010) Camelina-derived jet fuel and diesel: sustainable advanced biofuels. Environ Progress Sustain Energy 29(3):382–392

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sims REH, Mabee W, Saddler JN, Taylor M (2010) An overview of second generation biofuel technologies. Bioresour Technol 101:1570–1580

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stratton RW, Wong HM, Hileman JI (2010) Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from alternative jet fuels. PARTNER project 28 report, version 1.2, report no. PARTNER-COE-2010-001. http://www.obsa.org/Lists/Documentacion/Attachments/352/Life_cycle_greenhouse_gas_emissions_alternative_jet_fuels_V.1.2_EN.pdf

  • Timilsina G, Mevel S, Shrestha A (2011) World oil price and biofuels. Policy research working paper 5673. World Bank, Washington, DC

  • US EPA (2010) Renewable fuel standard program (RFS2) regulatory impact analysis. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA (2012) Agriculture and aviation: partners in prosperity. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. http://www.usda.gov/documents/usda-farm-to-fly-report-jan-2012.pdf

  • Walters D, Rainbird M (2004) The demand chain as an integral component of the value chain. J Consum Mark 21(7):465–475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisbrod G, Lin X (1996) The economic impact of generating electricity from biomass in Iowa: a general equilibrium analysis. Economic Development Research Group, Boston, MA. http://www.edrgroup.com/pdf/biomass-iowa-paper.pdf

  • Wender BA, Foley RW, Prado-Lopez V, Ravikumar D, Eisenberg DA, Hottle TA, Sadowski J, Flanagan WP, Fisher A, Laurin L, Bates ME, Linkov I, Seager TP, Fraser MP, Guston DH (2014a) Illustrating anticipatory life cycle assessment for emerging photovoltaic technologies. Environ Sci Technol 48:10531–10538

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wender BA, Foley RW, Hottle TA, Sadowski J, Prado-Lopez V, Eisenberg DA, Laurin L, Seager TP (2014b) Anticipatory life-cycle assessment for responsible research and innovation. J Responsib Innov 1(2):200–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkens I, Schmuck P (2012) Transdisciplinary evaluation of energy scenarios for a German village using multi-criteria decision analysis. Sustainability 4:604–629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu M, Zhang Z, Chiu Y (2014) Life-cycle water quantity and water quality implications of biofuels. Curr Sustain Renew Energy Rep 1(1):3–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This effort was supported in part by the National Science Foundation Grant 1541165 “CRISP Type 2: Collaborative Research: Resilience Analytics: A Data-Driven Approach for Enhanced Interdependent Network Resilience.” Additional support for this effort was provided by FAA/ACRP fellowship, the Virginia Department of Aviation, the Virginia Center for Innovative Technology, Virginia Transportation Research Council, and the Commonwealth Center for Advanced Logistics Systems (CCALS).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA

    Zachary A. Collier, Elizabeth B. Connelly, Thomas L. Polmateer & James H. Lambert

  2. Commonwealth Center for Advanced Logistics Systems, Prince George, VA, USA

    Thomas L. Polmateer & James H. Lambert

Authors
  1. Zachary A. Collier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elizabeth B. Connelly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas L. Polmateer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. James H. Lambert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James H. Lambert.

Appendix: Decision model initiatives

Appendix: Decision model initiatives

The initiatives considered in the decision model are as follows:

  1. 1.

    Invest in R&D of more productive feedstocks (i.e., higher yielding per area of land)

  2. 2.

    Cultivate lignocellulosic feedstocks (e.g., switchgrass, miscanthus, etc.)

  3. 3.

    Cultivate oilseed crops as feedstock (e.g., camelina, jatropha, soybean, canola, pennycress, etc.)

  4. 4.

    Cultivate halophyte feedstocks (e.g., seashore mallow, salicornia, etc.)

  5. 5.

    Cultivate algae as feedstock

  6. 6.

    Develop collection infrastructure for woody residue biomass as feedstock (e.g., wood chips)

  7. 7.

    Develop collection infrastructure for agricultural residue biomass as feedstock (e.g., corn stover, wheat straw)

  8. 8.

    Develop collection infrastructure for municipal solid waste (MSW) as feedstock

  9. 9.

    Provide long-term contracts for feedstock supply (volume and price)

  10. 10.

    Develop workforce

  11. 11.

    Locate biorefinery in close proximity of feedstock cultivation

  12. 12.

    Locate biorefinery in close proximity of city or metropolitan area

  13. 13.

    Distribute preprocessing depots with transportation infrastructure to biorefineries

  14. 14.

    Invest in hydroprocessing (HEFA) biorefining technologies

  15. 15.

    Invest in Fischer–Tropsch (FT) biorefining technologies

  16. 16.

    Invest in alcohol-to-jet (ATJ) biorefining technologies

  17. 17.

    Invest in fermentation renewable jet (FRJ) biorefining technologies

  18. 18.

    Invest in pyrolysis biorefining technologies

  19. 19.

    Invest in hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) biorefining technologies

  20. 20.

    Develop market for coproducts (e.g., chemicals)

  21. 21.

    Diversify demand for biofuels (e.g., marine shipping, railroad, avgas, etc.)

  22. 22.

    Provide low-cost financing for biorefineries

  23. 23.

    Provide tax credits for biofuels

  24. 24.

    Commit to biojet fuel purchase agreements

  25. 25.

    Establish airports as biofuel fueling stations for non-aircraft vehicles

  26. 26.

    Encourage user-friendly biofuel accounting methods

  27. 27.

    Colocate biorefinery with petroleum refinery

  28. 28.

    Locate biorefinery in proximity of pipeline access

  29. 29.

    Locate biorefinery in close proximity of seaport for biofuel distribution via barge

  30. 30.

    Locate biorefinery in close proximity of rail line for biofuel distribution via train

  31. 31.

    Site blending facility on airport grounds

  32. 32.

    Site blending facility at biorefinery

  33. 33.

    Site blending facility at existing fuel terminal

  34. 34.

    Convert petroleum pipeline to biofuel pipeline for biofuel distribution

  35. 35.

    Establish trucking infrastructure for fuel distribution

  36. 36.

    Increase number of storage tanks on airport grounds

  37. 37.

    Establish coalitions encompassing all parts of the supply chain.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Collier, Z.A., Connelly, E.B., Polmateer, T.L. et al. Value chain for next-generation biofuels: resilience and sustainability of the product life cycle. Environ Syst Decis 37, 22–33 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-016-9618-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-016-9618-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation