Attributional and Consequential Life-cycle Assessment in Biofuels: a Review of Recent Literature in the Context of System Boundaries
Tóm tắt
At the core of the debate over life-cycle assessment (LCA) modeling of the environmental impacts of biofuels is doubt that biofuels can mitigate climate change. Two types of LCA, attributional and consequential, have been applied to answer this question with competing results. These results turn on system boundary design, including feedstock considerations and assumptions of indirect land-use impacts. The broadening of the system boundary to include large scale land-use change of biofuel production has challenged the viability of biofuels to meet climate change goals. This paper reviews some of the latest literature in biofuels LCA exemplary of this debate and discusses the distinctions between attributional and consequential models in biofuels. We also present a generalized boundary map that can be used to convey LCA system boundaries clearly and succinctly within both attributional and consequential LCA.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Azapagic A, Clift R. Life cycle assessment as a tool for improving process performance: a case study on boron products. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 1999;4(3):133–42.
Barton JR, Issaias I, Stentiford EI. Carbon–making the right choice for waste management in developing countries. Waste Manag. 2008;28(4):690–8.
Burnham A, Jeongwoo H, Clark C, Wang M, Dunn J, Palou-Rivera, I. Life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions of shale gas, natural gas, coal, and petroleum. Environ Sci Technol. 2012;46:619–27.
Chester M, Martin E. Cellulosic ethanol from municipal solid waste: a case study of the economic, energy, and greenhouse gas impacts in California. Environ Sci Technol. 2009;43(14):5183–9. doi:10.1021/es802788z.
Christensen TH, Gentil E, Boldrin A, Larsen A, Weidema B, Hauschild M. C balance, carbon dioxide emissions and global warming potentials. Waste Manag Res. 2009;27(8):707–15.
Dale B, Kim S. Can the predictions of consequential life cycle assessment be tested in the real world? Comment on “Using Attributional Life Cycle Assessment to Estimate Climate-Change Mitigation...” J Ind Ecol. 2014;18(3):466–7. Dale and Kim (2014) provide another important discussion on the Plevin et al (2013) paper. They note that CLCA is subject to considerable uncertainty and that the definition of a CLCA study is itself subject to some variance. They also poignantly note that many recent analyses have been overwhelmingly focused on indirect land-use of biofuels without considering in a balanced way the indirect land-use (and other) impacts of petroleum use.
Earles J, Halog A. Consequential life cycle assessment: a review. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2011;16(5):445–53. doi:10.1007/s11367-011-0275-9.
Ekvall T, Assefa G, Bjorklund A, Eriksson O, Finnveden G. What life-cycle assessment does and does not do in assessments of waste management. Waste Manag. 2007;27(8):989–96.
Ekvall T, Weidema BP. System boundaries and input data in consequential life cycle inventory analysis. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2004;9(3):161–71. doi:10.1007/BF02994190.
Farrell AE, Plevin RJ, Turner BT, Jones AD, O’Hare M, Kammen DM. Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science. 2006;311(5760):506–8.
Finnveden G, Hauschild M, Ekvall T, Guinee J, Heijungs R, Hellweg S, et al. Recent development in life cycle assessment. J Environ Manag. 2009;91:1–21.
Gentil EC, Aoustin E, Christensen TH. Greenhouse gas accounting and waste management. Waste Manag Res. 2009;27(8):696–706.
Gentil EC, Clavreul J, Christensen TH. Global warming factor of MSW management in Europe. Waste Manag Res. 2009;27(9):850–60.
Heijungs R, Guinée J. Allocation and ‘what-if’ scenarios in life cycle assessment of waste management systems. Waste Manag. 2007;27(8):997–1005.
Hertel T, Golub A, Jones A, O’Hare M, Plevin R, Kammen D. Effects of US maize ethanol on global land use and greenhouse gas emissions: estimating market-mediated responses. Bioscience. 2010;60:223–31.
Hertwich, E. Understanding the climate mitigation benefits of product systems: comment on “Using Attributional Life Cycle Assessment to Estimate Climate-Change Mitigation…” J Ind Ecol. 2014;18(3):464–5. Hertwich (2014) provides a good discussion countering the critique of Plevin et al. Hertwich discusses some of the core ideas driving LCA methodology as about a product system. He points out that ALCA still has important applications for certain analyses, and raises some good questions about when CLCA should be most applicable.
Kalogo Y, Habibi S, Maclean H, Joshi S. Environmental implications of municipal solid waste-derived ethanol. Environ Sci Technol. 2007;41(1):35–41.
Kumar D, Murthy G. Life cycle assessment of energy and GHG emissions during ethanol production from grass straws using various pretreatment processes. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2012;17:388–401.
Liska AJ, Cassman KG. Towards standardization of life-cycle metrics for biofuels: greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and net energy yield. J Biobased Mater Bioenergy. 2008;2(3):187–203.
Liska A, Yang H, Bremer V, Klopfenstein T, Walters D, Erickson G, et al. Improvements in life cycle energy efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions of corn- ethanol. J Ind Ecol. 2009;13(1):58–74.
Marland G. Accounting for carbon dioxide emissions from bioenergy systems. J Ind Ecol. 2010;14(6):866–9.
McDougall F, White P, Franke M, Hindle P. Integrated solid waste management: a life cycle inventory. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Science; 2001.
Morrissey AJ, Browne J. Waste management models and their application to sustainable waste management. Waste Manag. 2004;24(3):297–308.
Murillo-Alvarado et al. Optimization of the supply chain associated to the production of bioethanol from residues of agave from the tequila process in Mexico. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2014;53:5524–38.
OECD. Estimation of greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: Final report from the OECD experts meeting, 18–21 February, 1991. Paris: OECD; 1991.
Plevin R, Delucchi M, Creutzig F. Using attributional life cycle assessment to estimate climate-change mitigation benefits misleads policy makers. J Ind Ecol. 2013;18(1):73–83. Plevin et al. (2013) opens an important critique of ALCA in contrast to CLCA. Some authors disagree with the critique. Overall however, the work is an important recent framing piece over the debate regarding which LCA approach to use for given purposes.
Rabl A, Benoist A, Dron D, Peuportier B, Spadaro J, Zoughaib A. How to account for CO2 emissions from biomass in an LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2007;12(5):281.
Raynolds M, Fraser R, Checkel D. The Relative Mass-Energy-Economic (RMEE) method for system boundary selection: part 1: a means to systematically and quantitatively select LCA boundaries. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2000;5(1):37–46.
Rehl T, Lansche J, Müller J. Life cycle assessment of energy generation from biogas—attributional vs. consequential approach. Renew Sust Energ Rev. 2012;16:3766–75.
Sanderson MA, Adler PR, Boateng AA, Casler MD, Sarath G. Switchgrass as a biofuels feedstock in the USA. Can J Plant Sci. 2006;86:1315–25.
Schmer MR, Vogel KP, Mitchell RB, Perrin RK. Net energy of cellulosic ethanol from switchgrass. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2008;105(2):464–9.
Searchinger T, Heimlich R, Houghton RA, Dong F, Elobeid A, Fabiosa J, et al. Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land use change. Science. 2008;319:1238.
Sills D, Paramita V, Franke M, Johnson M, Akabas T, Greene C, et al. Quantitative uncertainty analysis of life cycle assessment for algal biofuel production. Environ Sci Technol. 2013;47:687–94.
Spatari S, Zhang Y, Maclean H. Life cycle assessment of switchgrass- and corn stover-derived ethanol-fueled automobiles. Environ Sci Technol. 2005;39:9750–8.
Tonini D, Hamelin L, Wenzel H, Astrup T. Energy production from perennial energy crops: a consequential LCA of 12 bioenergy scenarios including land use changes. Envrion Sci Technol. 2012;46:13521–30. Tonini et al. (2012) provides a good example of a recent CLCA in biofuels production across a range of scenarios and feedstocks. They address uncertainty through a sensitivity analysis and consider impacts over a multi-decadal time horizon.
Vadas PA, Barnett KH, Undersander DJ. Economics and energy of ethanol production from alfalfa, corn, and switchgrass in the upper Midwest, USA. Bioenergy Resour. 2008;1:44–55.
van der Wal H, Sperber B, Houweling-Tan B, Bakker R, Brandenburg W, Contreras A. Production of acetone, butanol, and ethanol from biomass of the green seaweed Ulva lactuca. Bioresour Technol. 2013;128(2013):431–7.
Vázquez-Rowe I, Marvuglia A, Rege S, Benetto E. Applying consequential LCA to support energy policy: land use change effects of bioenergy production. Sci Total Environ. 2014;472:78–89.
Vergara S, Damagaard A, Horvath A. Boundaries matter: greenhouse gas emission reductions from alternative waste treatment strategies for California’s municipal solid waste. Resour Conserv Recycl. 2011;57:87–97.
Wang M, Wu M, Huo H. Life-cycle energy and greenhouse gas emission impacts of different corn ethanol plant types. Environ Res Lett. 2007;2:1–13.
Weidema BP. Market aspects in product life cycle inventory methodology. J Clean Prod. 1993;1(3–4):161–6.
Weidema B. New developments in the methodology for LCA. Presentation to the 3rd International Conference on Ecobalance. November 25–27, 1998. http://lca-net.com/files/developh.pdf.
Winkler J, Bilitewski B. Comparative evaluation of life cycle assessment models for solid waste management. Waste Manag. 2007;27(8):1021–31.
Yeh S, Jordaan S, Brandt AR, Turetsky MR, Spatari S, Keith DW. Land use greenhouse gas emissions from conventional oil production and oil sands. Environ Sci Technol. 2010;44(22):8766–72. Yeh et al. (2010) is one of the few studies that does look at the indirect impacts of petroleum production. It should serve as an important reference for further exploration in area of work.
Zamagni A, Guinée J, Heijungs R, Masoni P, Raggi A. Lights and shadows in consequential LCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2012;17:904–018.