Competitive priorities to address optimisation in biomass value chains: The case of biomass CHP

2022

Energies

Self Cite

The greatest challenge in accelerating the realisation of a sustainable and competitive bioeconomy is to demonstrate that enshrining sustainability principles at the very heart of a production line can generate value and improve its overall system. Strategies for reducing emissions, pollutants, indirect land use change or soil depreciation are all perceived as costs or necessary inconveniences to comply with stringent, climate change-focused policy frameworks. System dynamics modelling and competitive priorities are tools that can accurately and intelligently expand on the cross-value chain approach, which integrates both technical and environmental performances, to address the issue of harmonising sustainability and technical operations as one overall dimension of performance. A stock-and-flow model is developed to map a full biofuel value chain and quantitatively and coherently integrate factors of emissions, carbon, land, production, and technology. As such, environmental and operational impacts of innovative practices are measured, and subsequently linked to a qualitative framework of competitive priorities, as defined by transparency, quality, innovation and flexibility. Sustainability and productivity functions are found to reinforce each other when all competitive priorities are optimised. Equally, the framework provides a clear understanding of trade-offs engendered by value chain interventions. Advantages and limitations in the accessibility, scope and transferability of the multi-pronged analytical approach are discussed.

Section: Indicators and Competitive Priorities Per Value Chain Stagementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Advanced Biofuel Value Chains through System Dynamics Modelling and Competitive Priorities

Christensen

2022

Energies

Self Cite

“…These are particularly important for the assessment of biobased systems that are often complex combinations of technologies and practices over geographically dispersed and long distances and with wide and uncertain sets of indicators [ 10 ]. The indicators may also be sensitive to land use patterns and change over time, to biomass supply logistics, to the combinations of highly innovative and conventional technologies deployed in the value chain [ 11 ], to the production and use of by- and co-products and to cultural preferences (e.g. diet or amenity value of landscapes) as discussed below.…”

Section: Applying Lca To Guide the Development Of A Sustainable Circular Bioeconomymentioning

confidence: 99%

Life cycle assessment (LCA): informing the development of a sustainable circular bioeconomy?

Sevigné‐Itoiz

Mwabonje

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A.

et al. 2021

Self Cite

The role of life cycle assessment (LCA) in informing the development of a sustainable and circular bioeconomy is discussed. We analyse the critical challenges remaining in using LCA and propose improvements needed to resolve future development challenges. Biobased systems are often complex combinations of technologies and practices that are geographically dispersed over long distances and with heterogeneous and uncertain sets of indicators and impacts. Recent studies have provided methodological suggestions on how LCA can be improved for evaluating the sustainability of biobased systems with a new focus on emerging systems, helping to identify environmental and social opportunities prior to large R&D investments. However, accessing economies of scale and improved conversion efficiencies while maintaining compatibility across broad ranges of sustainability indicators and public acceptability remain key challenges for the bioeconomy. LCA can inform, but not by itself resolve this complex dimension of sustainability. Future policy interventions that aim to promote the bioeconomy and support strategic value chains will benefit from the systematic use of LCA. However, the LCA community needs to develop the mechanisms and tools needed to generate agreement and coordinate the standards and incentives that will underpin a successful biobased transition. Systematic stakeholder engagement and the use of multidisciplinary analysis in combination with LCA are essential components of emergent LCA methods. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Bio-derived and bioinspired sustainable advanced materials for emerging technologies (part 1)’.

Social considerations for the cultivation of industrial crops on marginal agricultural land as feedstock for bioeconomy

Biofuels Bioprod Bioref

Cossel

Ciria³

et al. 2022

Self Cite

Marginal agricultural land (MAL) has received much attention in research and policy formation as a potential resource for cultivating biomass for energy and biobased products. However, it is still unclear whether biomass from MAL meets the requirements of social sustainability. This study develops a conceptual linkage between value‐chain analysis and social life‐cycle analysis (S‐LCA), and assesses both positive impacts (handprints) and negative impacts (footprints). A participatory approach including interviews and surveys was used to understand views and perceptions of the relevant stakeholders. A systemic strategy was applied to analyze value‐chain activities, understand challenges, and identify competitive advantages and disadvantages. For S‐LCA, the variety of impacts and indicators was met through a literature review and a consistent scoring system. The cultivation of perennial crops on MAL tends to cause skepticism among stakeholders, who are concerned about long‐term commitment and biodiversity risks. Annual crops, on the other hand, are perceived by all stakeholder categories as very promising opportunities across all impact categories and indicators. They can facilitate income diversification and offer smart sustainable cropping options through crop rotation, agroforestry, etc. Most of the technological pathways examined are highly innovative, have a low technological readiness level, and are still at the early market development stage. As such they are ranked by stakeholders as medium opportunities for short‐term implementation. In contrast, pyrolysis to industrial heat, ethanol from switchgrass, insulation material from hemp, and biogas/biomethane from sorghum are considered opportunities with good chances of being implemented in the short term. © 2022 The Authors. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining published by Society of Industrial Chemistry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.