The modelling approach determines the carbon footprint of biofuels: The role of LCA in informing decision makers in government and industry

Brandão, Miguel; Azzi, Elias Sebastian; Novaes, Renan Milagres Lage; Cowie, Annette

doi:10.1016/j.cesys.2021.100027

Cited by 24 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…After estimating the changes in supply of the marginal crops, and respective areas and locations, we calculated emissions for the LUC in those counties from data previously modeled in Brandão et al (2021a), based on the share of current production of those marginal crops that comes from expanding cropland in those countries. Land diverted from other agricultural uses is excluded from the delimitations of our system and, thus, is not subject to LUC considerations, unlike the land requirements for producing the marginal crops or the marginal feed crops and associated land displaced by the co-production of DDGS.…”

Section: System Boundary Delimitationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indirect Effects Negate Global Climate Change Mitigation Potential of Substituting Gasoline With Corn Ethanol as a Transportation Fuel in the USA

Brandão

2022

Front. Clim.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concerns over climate change have led to the promotion of biofuels for transport, particularly biodiesel from oilseed crops and ethanol from sugar and starch crops. However, additional concerns arose on whether the climate change mitigation potential of biofuels is negated by the associated direct land requirements (dLUC) for growing biofuel feedstocks, or by the indirect land requirements (iLUC) that compensate for the diversion of food/feed crops into biofuels, both cases leading to greenhouse gas emissions. We investigated data over the last 20-year period to estimate the magnitude of the effects ethanol production in the USA has had on land use domestically and abroad. The data analyzed suggests that, over the period, the use of corn for ethanol increased by 118 Mt per year, most of it coming from displacement of other uses of corn, mainly feed, which were compensated by increased feed production elsewhere. Results suggest a relatively low dLUC but a significant iLUC effect, mainly due to the compensation for the foregone feed production as a result of diverting corn into ethanol production. The resulting 18.0 Mt CO2-eq. associated with meeting the renewable-energy target of 15 billion gallons of corn ethanol more than negates the climate benefits from avoided use of gasoline, indicating that promoting corn ethanol for global climate change mitigation may be counter-productive as, despite decreasing domestic emissions, global emissions increase. We suggest that the policy be revised accordingly.

show abstract

Section: System Boundary Delimitationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indirect Effects Negate Global Climate Change Mitigation Potential of Substituting Gasoline With Corn Ethanol as a Transportation Fuel in the USA

Brandão

2022

Front. Clim.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The production of functional equivalents of NSW dairy products and co-products required an additional 66,000 ha of global agricultural land than required for dairy production. It is common for global production to play a critical role in food security with research suggesting that less than one-third of the global population can exist on locally supplied food 38 so where additional demand of crop land is required to meet demands it is imperative that the climate change impacts of LUC are considered 39 . In our study, this additional land was required for global soybean production, vegetable oil and protein meal and also to compensate for the loss of non-arable land on which trees were planted to sequester atmospheric C. The GHG emissions associated with these changes are included in our results either embedded in the climate change impacts of global commodities or as iLUC impacts (Figure 5).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The environmental consequences of ceasing dairy production

Simmons

Ritchie

Perović

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change and water scarcity are major challenges facing the planet. Agriculture generates considerable GHG emissions and consumes water from rivers, streams and lakes. Reducing consumption of agricultural products with a relatively high carbon or water footprint, such as dairy, is often promoted as a mechanism to reduce the environmental impacts of food production. Using footprints to inform decisions is problematic because they represent the impacts of current production and not the consequences of re-allocating constrained resources such as land and water when demand for products change. We used consequential life cycle assessment to assess the water and climate change consequences of replacing NSW dairy production, and co-products of dairy production, with plant-based alternatives. Ceasing dairy production required the production of 125 kt of soybeans for soymilk and tofu, 38 kt of soymeal to replace meat meal and 8 kt of vegetable oil as a cream alternative and also increased demand for agricultural land. We concluded that water savings associated with the change would be limited and emissions reductions would be ~ 70% of that as estimated by the C footprint of production. We also assessed the climate change consequences of replacing NSW dairy production with plant-based alternatives when two GHG emissions reduction strategies, enteric methane inhibitors and flaring methane from effluent ponds, were implemented across the industry. Results from this analysis suggested that replacing NSW dairy production if emissions reductions strategies are put in place will result in a net increase in GHG emissions of 0.57 Mt CO2-e. This work has important messages for setting climate change mitigation strategies including net-zero targets.

show abstract

“…While urban applications of biochar are expanding, the potential environmental impacts of these new products have not yet been quantified in life cycle assessment (LCA) studies or benchmarked against current technologies. In addition, the bioeconomy poses the challenge that the climate impact of bio-based products (whether bioenergy, biomaterials, or biorefineries) is usually highly dependent on the type of biomass used, its supply-chain, the time perspective, reference land uses, and modelling choices (Ahlgren et al 2015;Brandão et al 2021). In the case of biochar-based products, the type of biomass, the biochar properties, and the design of the biochar product may significantly influence the environmental footprint of the final product.…”

Section: Biochar In Urban Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life cycle assessment of urban uses of biochar and case study in Uppsala, Sweden

Azzi

Karltun

Sundberg

2022

Biochar

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biochar is a material derived from biomass pyrolysis that is used in urban applications. The environmental impacts of new biochar products have however not been assessed. Here, the life cycle assessments of 5 biochar products (tree planting, green roofs, landscaping soil, charcrete, and biofilm carrier) were performed for 7 biochar supply-chains in 2 energy contexts. The biochar products were benchmarked against reference products and oxidative use of biochar for steel production. Biochar demand was then estimated, using dynamic material flow analysis, for a new city district in Uppsala, Sweden. In a decarbonised energy system and with high biochar stability, all biochar products showed better climate performance than the reference products, and most applications outperformed biomass use for decarbonising steel production. The climate benefits of using biochar ranged from − 1.4 to − 0.11 tonne CO2-eq tonne−1 biochar in a decarbonised energy system. In other environmental impact categories, biochar products had either higher or lower impacts than the reference products, depending on biochar supply chain and material substituted, with trade-offs between sectors and impact categories. However, several use-phase effects of biochar were not included in the assessment due to knowledge limitations. In Uppsala’s new district, estimated biochar demand was around 1700 m3 year−1 during the 25 years of construction. By 2100, 23% of this biochar accumulated in landfill, raising questions about end-of-life management of biochar-containing products. Overall, in a post-fossil economy, biochar can be a carbon dioxide removal technology with benefits, but biochar applications must be designed to maximise co-benefits.

show abstract

The modelling approach determines the carbon footprint of biofuels: The role of LCA in informing decision makers in government and industry

Cited by 24 publications

References 23 publications

Indirect Effects Negate Global Climate Change Mitigation Potential of Substituting Gasoline With Corn Ethanol as a Transportation Fuel in the USA

Indirect Effects Negate Global Climate Change Mitigation Potential of Substituting Gasoline With Corn Ethanol as a Transportation Fuel in the USA

The environmental consequences of ceasing dairy production

Life cycle assessment of urban uses of biochar and case study in Uppsala, Sweden

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About