Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

LCA of a biorefinery concept producing bioethanol, bioenergy, and chemicals from switchgrass

  • LCA FOR AGRICULTURE PRACTICES AND BIOBASED INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background, aim, and scope

The availability of fossil resources is predicted to decrease in the near future: they are a non-renewable source, they cause environmental concerns, and they are subjected to price instability. Utilization of biomass as raw material in a biorefinery is a promising alternative to fossil resources for production of energy carriers and chemicals, as well as for mitigating climate change and enhancing energy security. This paper focuses on a biorefinery concept which produces bioethanol, bioenergy, and biochemicals from switchgrass, a lignocellulosic crop. Results are compared with a fossil reference system producing the same products/services from fossil sources.

Materials and methods

The biorefinery system is investigated using a Life Cycle Assessment approach, which takes into account all the input and output flows occurring along the production chain. This paper elaborates on methodological key issues like land use change effects and soil N2O emissions, whose influence on final outcomes is weighted in a sensitivity analysis. Since climate change mitigation and energy security are the two most important driving forces for biorefinery development, the assessment has a focus on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and cumulative primary energy demand (distinguished into fossil and renewable), but other environmental impact categories (e.g., abiotic depletion, eutrophication, etc.) are assessed as well.

Results

The use of switchgrass in a biorefinery offsets GHG emissions and reduces fossil energy demand: GHG emissions are decreased by 79% and about 80% of non-renewable energy is saved. Soil C sequestration is responsible for a large GHG benefit (65 kt CO2-eq/a, for the first 20 years), while switchgrass production is the most important contributor to total GHG emissions of the system. If compared with the fossil reference system, the biorefinery system releases more N2O emissions, while both CO2 and CH4 emissions are reduced. The investigation of the other impact categories revealed that the biorefinery has higher impacts in two categories: acidification and eutrophication.

Discussion

Results are mainly affected by raw material (i.e., switchgrass) production and land use change effects. Steps which mainly influence the production of switchgrass are soil N2O emissions, manufacture of fertilizers (especially those nitrogen-based), processing (i.e., pelletizing and drying), and transport. Even if the biorefinery chain has higher primary energy demand than the fossil reference system, it is mainly based on renewable energy (i.e., the energy content of the feedstock): the provision of biomass with sustainable practices is then a crucial point to ensure a renewable energy supply to biorefineries.

Conclusions

This biorefinery system is an effective option for mitigating climate change, reducing dependence on imported fossil fuels, and enhancing cleaner production chains based on local and renewable resources. However, this assessment evidences that determination of the real GHG and energy balance (and all other environmental impacts in general) is complex, and a certain degree of uncertainty is always present in final results. Ranges in final results can be even more widened by applying different combinations of biomass feedstocks, conversion routes, fuels, end-use applications, and methodological assumptions.

Recommendations and perspectives

This study demonstrated that the perennial grass switchgrass enhances carbon sequestration in soils if established on set-aside land, thus, considerably increasing the GHG savings of the system for the first 20 years after crop establishment. Given constraints in land resources and competition with food, feed, and fiber production, high biomass yields are extremely important in achieving high GHG emission savings, although use of chemical fertilizers to enhance plant growth can reduce the savings. Some strategies, aiming at simultaneously maintaining crop yield and reduce N fertilization application through alternative management, can be adopted. However, even if a reduction in GHG emissions is achieved, it should not be disregarded that additional environmental impacts (like acidification and eutrophication) may be caused. This aspect cannot be ignored by policy makers, even if they have climate change mitigation objectives as main goal.

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
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alzate CAC, Toro OJS (2006) Energy consumption analysis of integrated flowsheets for production of fuel ethanol from lignocellulosic biomass. Energy 31:2447–2459

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Balat M, Balat H (2009) Recent trends in global production and utilization of bio-ethanol fuel. Appl Energ 11:2273–2282

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Berglund M, Börjesson P (2006) Assessment of energy performance in the life-cycle of biogas production. Biomass Bioenerg 30(2006):254–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Blottnitz H, Curran MA (2007) A review of assessments conducted on bio-ethanol as a transportation fuel from a net energy, greenhouse gas, and environmental life cycle perspective. J Cleaner Prod 15:607–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bullard M, Metcalfe P (2001) Estimating the energy requirements and CO2 emissions from production of the perennial grasses miscanthus, switchgrass and reed canary grass. ETSU Report Number B/U1/00645/REP. DTI/Pub URN 01/797, Contractor ADAS Consulting Ltd

  • CAST—Council for Agricultural Science and Technology (2004) Climate change and greenhouse gas mitigation: challenges and opportunities for agriculture. CAST, Ames, IA, p 120

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherubini F, Ulgiati S (2009) Crop residues as raw materials for biorefinery systems - A LCA case study. Appl Energy 53(8):434–447

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherubini F, Bird N, Cowie A, Jungmeier G, Schlamadinger B, Woess-Gallasch S (2009a) Energy and GHG-based LCA of biofuel and bioenergy systems: key issues, ranges and recommendation. Resourc Conserv Recy 53:434–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cherubini F, Jungmeier G, Mandl M, Philips C, Wellisch M, Jørgensen H, Skiadas I, Boniface L, Dohy M, Pouet JC, Willke T, Walsh P, van Ree R, de Jong E (2009b) IEA Bioenergy Task 42: Report on Participating Countries. Document of IEA Bioenergy Task 42 ‘Biorefineries’, www.biorefinery.nl/ieabioenergy-task42/

  • Cherubini F, Jungmeier G, Wellisch M, Willke T, Skiadas I, van Ree R, de Jong E (2009c) Towards a classification approach for biorefinery systems. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining 3(5):534–546

  • Conant RT, Paustian K, Elliot ET (2001) Grassland management and conversion into grassland: effects on soil carbon. Ecol Appl 11:343–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crutzen PJ, Mosier AR, Smith KA, Winiwarter W (2007) N2O release from agro-biofuel production negates global warming reduction by replacing fossil fuels. Atmos Chem Phys Discuss 7:11191–11205

    Google Scholar 

  • De Feber MAPC, Gielen DJ (2000) Biomass for greenhouse gas emission reduction, Task 7: Energy Technology Characterization. ECN-C-99-078

  • Delucchi MA, Lipman T (2003) A Lifecycle Emissions Model (LEM): lifecycle emissions from transportation fuels, motor vehicles, transportation modes, electricity use, heating and cooking fuels, and materials. Appendix C: emissions related to cultivation and fertilizer use. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis, CA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Downing M, Walsh M, McLaughlin S (1995) Perennial grasses for energy and conservation: evaluating some ecological, agriculture and economic issues. Environmental Enhancement Through Agriculture, Conference Proceedings, Boston Massacusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • EERE (2009) Biomass Feedstock Composition and Property Database (biomass sample type: Switchgrass Alamo Whole Plant #94). Biomass Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/feedstock_databases.html (Accessed 07 June 2009)

  • Elsayed MA, Matthews R, Mortimer ND (2003) Carbon and energy balances for a range of biofuels options. Sheffield Hallam University/Resources Research Unit, Sheffield UK

    Google Scholar 

  • EU (2006) Biofuels in the European Union—a vision for 2030 and beyond. Final report of the Biofuels Research Advisory Council, June 2006

  • Farrell AE, Plevin RJ, Turner BT, Jones AD, O’Hare M, Kammen DM (2006) Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science 311:506–508

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Franck AB, Berdahl JD, Hanson JD, Liebig MA, Johnson HA (2004) Biomass and carbon partitioning in switchgrass. Crop Sci 44:1391–1396

    Google Scholar 

  • Galloway JN, Dentener FJ, Capone DG et al (2004) Nitrogen cycles, past, present and future. Biogeochemistry 70:153–226

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gani A, Naruse I (2007) Effect of cellulose and lignin content on pyrolysis and combustion characteristics for several types of biomass. Renew Energ 32(4):649–661

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Garten CT, Wullschleger SD (2000) Soil carbon dynamics beneath switchgrass as indicated by stable isotope analysis. J Environ Qual 29:645–653

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gebhart DL, Johnson HB, Mayeux HS, Polley HW (1994) The CRP increases soil organic carbon. J Soil Water Conserv 49:488–492

    Google Scholar 

  • Gemis (2009) Global Emission Model for Integrated Systems, Version 4.5. Data set on bioenergy for heat, electricity and transportation biofuel systems, Joanneum Research, Graz, Austria 2008. LCA software tool website: http://www.oeko.de/service/gemis/en/index.htm

  • Halleux H, Lassaux S, Renzoni R, Germain A (2008) Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of two biofuels: ethanol from sugar beet and Rapeseed Methyl Ester. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(3):184–190

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hamelinck NC, van Hooijdonk G, Faaij APC (2005) Ethanol from lignocellulosic biomass: techno-economic performance in short-, middle- and long-term. Biomass Bioenerg 28:384–410

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hammerschlag R (2006) Ethanol energy return on investment: a survey of the literature 1990-present. Environ Sci Technol 40(6):1744–1750

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heijungs R et al (1992) Environmental life cycle assessment of products, Guide. October 1992 CML. Leiden, The Netherlands NOH report 9266

    Google Scholar 

  • IEA (2008) IEA (International Energy Agency) Bioenergy Task 42 on Biorefineries. Minutes of the third Task meeting, Copenhagen, Denmark, 25 and 26 March 2008 (www.biorefinery.nl\IEABioenergy-Task42)

  • IPCC (2006) Guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Volume 4: Agriculture, forestry and other land use

  • IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group 1 to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

  • Jungmeier G, Lingitz A, Spitzer J, Hofbauer H and Fürnsinn S (2007) Wood to biofuels: feasibility study for a biofuel plant in the Austrian province of Styria. Proceedings of the 15th European Biomass Conference and Exhibition—From Research to Market Deployment, Berlin, 7–11 May 2007

  • Kim S, Dale BE (2005) Life cycle assessment of various cropping systems utilized for producing biofuels: Bioethanol and biodiesel. Biomass Bioenerg 29:426–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lal R, Kimble LM, Follet RF, Cole CV (1998) The potential of U.S. cropland to sequester carbon and mitigate the greenhouse effect. Ann Arbor Press, Chelsea, MI

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson E (2005) A review of LCA studies on liquid biofuels for the transport sector. Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel of the Global Environment Facility (STAP) workshop on Liquid Biofuels, 29 August to 1 September 2005. New Delhi, India

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynd LR (1996) Overview and evaluation of fuel ethanol from celllulosic bomass: technology, economics, the environment, and policy. Ann Rev Energy Environ 21:403–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin SB, de la Torre Ugarte DG, JrCT C, Lynd LR, Sanderson MA, Tolbert VR, Wolf DD (2002) High value renewable energy from prairie grasses. Environ Sci Technol 36:2122–2129

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Meister JJ (2002) Modification of lignin. J Macromol Sci-Pol R 42(2):235–289

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell R, Vogel KP, Sarath G (2008) Managing and enhancing switchgrass as a bioenergy feedstock. Biofuels Bioprod Bior 2(6):530–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulkey VR, Owens VN, Lee DK (2006) Management of switchgrass-dominated Conservation Reserve Program lands for biomass production in South Dakota. Crop Sci 46:712–720

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Narodoslawsky M, Niederl-Schmidinger A, Halasz L (2008) Utilising renewable resources economically: new challenges and chances for process development. J Cleaner Prod 16(2):164–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • North Energy (2008) Report to AEA for the RFA review of indirect effects of biofuels. Published on RFA website www.renewablefuelsagency.org, Renewable Fuels Agency

  • Ojima DS, Valentine DW, Mosier AR, Parton WJ, Schimel DS (1993) Effect of land use change on methane oxidation in temperate forest and grassland soils. Chemosphere 26(1–4):675–685

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Palmqvist E, Hahn-Hägerdal B (2000) Fermentation of lignocellulosic hydrolysates. I: inhibition and detoxification and II: inhibitors and mechanisms of inhibition. Bioresource Technol 74(1):17–33

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Paustian K, Antle JM, Sheehan J, Paul EA (2006) Agriculture's role in greenhouse gas mitigation. Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington (VA) Canada, September 2006

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimentel D, Patzek T (2005) Ethanol production using corn, switchgrass, and wood; biodiesel production using soybean and sunflower. Nat Resour Res 14(1):65–76

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Prather M, Ehhalt D et al (2001) Atmospheric chemistry and greenhouse gases. In: Houghton JT, Ding Y, Griggs DJ et al (eds) Climate change 2001. The Scientific Basis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, pp 239–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Punter G, Rickeard D, Larivé JF, Edwards R, Mortimer N, Horne R, Bauen A, Woods J (2004) Well-to-wheel evaluation for production of ethanol from wheat. A report by the LowCVP fuels working group, WTW sub-group, FWG-P-04-024, October 2004

  • RFA—Renewable Fuels Agency (2008) The Gallagher Review of the indirect effects of biofuels production. Published on RFA website (July, 2008): www.dft.gov.uk/rfa/_db/_documents/Report_of_the_Gallagher_review.pdf

  • Romano RT, Zhang R (2008) Co-digestion of onion juice and wastewater sludge using an anaerobic mixed biofilm reactor. Bioresource Technol 99(3):631–637

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Samson R, Mani S, Boddey R, Sokhansanj S, Quesada D, Urquiaga S, Reis V, Lem CH (2005) The potential of C4 perennial grasses for developing a global BIO-HEAT industry. Critical Rev Plant Sci 24:461–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson MA, Jones RM, McFarland MJ, Stroup J, Reed RL, Muir JP (2001) Nutrient movement and removal in a switchgrass biomass-filter strip system treated with dairy manure. J Environ Qual 30:210–216

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Scholze B (2002) Long-term stability, catalytic upgrading, and application of pyrolysis Ioils—improving the properties of a potential substitute for fossil fuels. Hamburg University, PhD Dissertation

    Google Scholar 

  • Searchinger T, Heimlich R, Houghton RA, Dong F, Elobeid A, Fabiosa J, Tokgoz S, Hayes D, Yu T (2008) Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change. Science 319:1238–1240

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Senneca O (2007) Kinetics of pyrolysis, combustion and gasification of three biomass fuels. Fuel Process Technol 88(1):87–97

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Smeets EMW, Lewandowski IM, Faij APC (2009) The economical and environmental performance of miscanthus and switchgrass production and supply chains in a European setting. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 13(6–7):1230–1245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sokhansanj S, Mani S, Turhollow A, Kumar A, Bransby D, Lynd L, Laser M (2009) Large-scale production, harvest and logistics of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.)—current technology and envisioning a mature technology. Biofuels Bioproducts Biore 3(2):124–141

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stehfest E, Bouwman L (2006) N2O and NO emission from agricultural fields and soils under natural vegetation: summarizing available measurement data modelling of global annual emissions. Nutr Cycl Agroecosys 74:207–228

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stoeglehner G, Narodoslawsky M (2009) How sustainable are biofuels? Answers and further questions arising from an ecological footprint perspective. Bioresource Technol 16:3825–3830

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Suh YJ, Rousseaux P (2001) Considerations in Life Cycle Inventory analysis of municipal wastewater treatment systems. Oral presentation at COST 624 WG Meeting, Bologna, Italy. http://www.ensic.inpl-nancy.fr/COSTWWTP/

  • Sun Y, Cheng J (2002) Hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials for ethanol production: a review. Bioresource Technol 83(1):1–11

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thustos P, Willison TW, Baker JC, Murphy DV, Pavlikova D, Goulding KWT, Powlson DS (1998) Short-term effects of nitrogen on methane oxidation in soils. Biol Fert Soils 28:64–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uihlein A, Schebeck L (2009) Environmental impacts of a lignocellulose feedstock biorefinery system: an assessment. Biomass Bioenergy 33(5):793–802

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zah R, Boni H, Gauch M, Hischier R, Lehmann M, Wager P (2007) Life Cycle Assessment of energy products: Environmental assessment of biofuels. Final Report, EMPA—Technology and society Lab, Auftrag des Bundesamtes für Energie, des Bundesamtes für Umwelt und des Bundesamtes für Landwirtschaft, Bern, 2007

  • Zan CS, Fyles JW, Girouard P, Samson RA (2001) Carbon sequestration in perennial bioenergy, annual corn and uncultivated systems in Soothern Quebec. Agr Ecosys Eviron 86:135–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Q, Chang J, Wang T, Xu Y (2007) Review of biomass pyrolysis oil properties and upgrading research. Energ Convers Manage 48:87–92

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Energy and Process Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Høgskoleringen 5 -E1, NO-7491, Trondheim, Norway

    Francesco Cherubini

  2. Joanneum Research, Institute of Energy Research, Elisabethstr. 5, 8010, Graz, Austria

    Gerfried Jungmeier

Authors
  1. Francesco Cherubini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gerfried Jungmeier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francesco Cherubini.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Seungdo Kim

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cherubini, F., Jungmeier, G. LCA of a biorefinery concept producing bioethanol, bioenergy, and chemicals from switchgrass. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15, 53–66 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-009-0124-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-009-0124-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation