High-value low-volume bioproducts coupled to bioenergies with potential to enhance business development of sustainable biorefineries

Budzianowski, Wojciech M.

doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.260

Cited by 179 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Biofuels are currently the most visible output of the existing bioeconomy for replacing petroleum refineries. Waste biorefineries are characterized as producing either highvalue low-volume or low-value high-volume products from biogenic wastes [63,64]. In this context, AD has recognized potential to contribute to high-volume biogas production.…”

Section: Anaerobic Digestionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A critical review: emerging bioeconomy and waste-to-energy technologies for sustainable municipal solid waste management

Tsui

Wong

2019

Waste Dispos. Sustain. Energy

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Municipal solid waste (MSW) management has emerged as probably the most pressing issue many governments nowadays are facing. Traditionally, Waste-to-Energy(WtE) is mostly associated with incineration, but now, with the emergence of the bioeconomy, it embraces a broader definition comprising any processing technique that can generate electricity/heat or produce a waste-derived fuel. Under the ambit of the circular economy many nations are looking for, additional effort must be made to be sure of acquiring the most updated information and paving a sustainable path for managing MSW in such a frame. In this regard, we have undertaken a critical review of various technologies, with their updated progress, involved in the exploitation of MSW as a renewable resource, along with the critical advantages and limitations on energy and material cycling for sustainable MSW management. Incineration, the most widely used method, is nowadays difficult to further apply due to its dubious reputation and social opposition. Meanwhile, to address the organic fraction of MSW which currently is mostly unrecycled and causes disposal issues, the biological approach presents an attractive option. The new emphasis of bioeconomy leads us to understand how environmental biotechnologies should be better connected/integrated for more sustainable MSW management. This article is concluded with advances of future prospects, which can serve as a timely reminder to encourage competent authorities/researchers to work towards further improvement of the present MSW management system.

show abstract

Section: Anaerobic Digestionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A critical review: emerging bioeconomy and waste-to-energy technologies for sustainable municipal solid waste management

Tsui

Wong

2019

Waste Dispos. Sustain. Energy

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Biowaste transport cost ranged between 0.41 and 1.2 €/t [34] but over 100 km distance and water content over 30%, the transport is considered unsustainable [35]. From an environmental point of view, collection and transport of biowaste are sustainable if there is a reduction of GHG of 40%-60% compared to current situation [36]. Another important parameter affecting waste biomass collection and transport is the seasonal variation of the available biomass [36].…”

Section: Biowaste Quantitative Analysis and Geo-localizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From an environmental point of view, collection and transport of biowaste are sustainable if there is a reduction of GHG of 40%-60% compared to current situation [36]. Another important parameter affecting waste biomass collection and transport is the seasonal variation of the available biomass [36]. Figure 5.…”

Section: Biowaste Quantitative Analysis and Geo-localizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All the considered waste flows exhibited at least 40% carbon content and carbon-nitrogen ratio was between 10 and 30, which make them suitable feedstocks for 2G biorefinery systems, according to [20,36]. The high carbon content of these biowaste flows represents an important renewable carbon resource, which could be valorized and exploited to produce both platform chemicals and bioenergy, significantly contributing to the reduction of the use of non-renewable resources.…”

Section: Biowaste Qualitative Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Biowaste Management in Italy: Challenges and Perspectives

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this work is the development of a methodology for the technical and environmental assessment of biowaste valorization in 2G biorefineries. Italy was chosen as case study, considering years 2016–2017. Approach: the Italian context was evaluated through the following key parameters: Gross domestic power, climate, demography, and population density distribution described the Italian framework. The four most abundant biowaste categories were defined through their amounts and geo-localization: wastewater and sewage sludge (WSS, 4.06 Mt/y), organic fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW, 1.7 Mt/y), agricultural livestock waste (ALW, 5.7 Mt/y), and waste deriving from the food industry (FIW, 2.6 Mt/y). The geo-localization and quantitative evaluations of the available biowaste amounts were aimed at defining the dimension and localization of the biorefinery plant and at optimizing supply and transport chains, while the qualitative characteristic were aimed to evaluate the most promising process among thermo-valorization (TH) and anaerobic digestion (AD). Results: All considered biowastes were appropriate for biorefinery processes, since carbon content exceeds 40% and the carbon–nitrogen ratio was between 10 and 30. All biowaste categories were evaluated as feedstocks for two biorefinery processes: anaerobic digestion (AD) and thermo-valorization (TH) with energy recovery. Compared to TH, AD achieved in all cases the best performances in terms of produced energy and avoided CO2 emissions. The primary energy production of AD and TH for WSS, OFMSW, ALW, and FIW were respectively: 7.89 vs. 2.4 kWh/kg; 8.7 vs. 2.6 kWh/kg; 10.85 vs. 5.5 kWh/kg; and 12.5 vs. 7.8 kWh/kg. The main findings of this work were: the adoption of AD was technically more suitable than TH; AD increased the avoided CO2 emissions of 10%–89.9% depending on biowaste category.

show abstract

“…The products of major commercial importance produced in biorefineries are biofuels (biogas, syngas, hydrogen, biomethane, bioethanol, biodiesel and bio-oil), chemicals (fine chemicals, building blocks, bulk chemicals and bioactive compounds), organic acids (succinic, lactic and itaconic), polymers and resins (starch-based plastics, phenol resins and furan resins), biomaterials (wood panels, pulp, paper and cellulose), food and animal feed and fertilizers [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%