Social life cycle assessment of first and second-generation ethanol production technologies in Brazil

Purpose

The main goal of this study is to suggest quantitative social metrics to evaluate different sugarcane biorefinery systems in Brazil by exploring a novel hybrid approach integrating social life cycle assessment and input-output analysis.

Methods

Social life cycle assessment is the main methodology for evaluating social aspects based on a life-cycle approach. Using this framework, a hybrid model integrating social life cycle assessment and input-output analysis was introduced to evaluate different social effects of biorefinery scenarios considering workers as the stakeholder category. Job creation, occupational accidents, wage profile, education profile, and gender profile were selected as the main inventory indicators. A case study of three scenarios considering variations in agricultural and industrial technologies (including sugarcane straw recovery and second-generation ethanol production, for instance) was carried out for evaluating present first-generation (1G-basic, 1G-optimized) and future first- and second-generation ethanol production (1G2G).

Results and discussion

The 1G-basic scenario leads to higher job creation levels over the supply chain mainly because of the influence of agricultural stage whose workers are mostly employed in sugarcane manual operations. On the other hand, 1G-optimized and 1G2G present supply chains are more reliant on the manufacturing, trade, and services sectors whose workers are associated with a lower level of occupational accidents, higher average wages, higher education level, and more participation of women in the work force.

Conclusions

The use of a novel hybrid approach integrating social life cycle assessment (SLCA) and input-output analysis (IOA) was useful to quantitatively distinguish the social effects over different present and future sugarcane biorefinery supply chains. As a consequence, this approach is very useful to support decision-making processes aiming to improve the sustainability of sugarcane biorefineries taking social aspects into account.

     

Lifecycle assessment of fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Brazil

Background, aim, and scope

This paper presents the lifecycle assessment (LCA) of fuel ethanol, as 100% of the vehicle fuel, from sugarcane in Brazil. The functional unit is 10,000 km run in an urban area by a car with a 1,600-cm³ engine running on fuel hydrated ethanol, and the resulting reference flow is 1,000 kg of ethanol. The product system includes agricultural and industrial activities, distribution, cogeneration of electricity and steam, ethanol use during car driving, and industrial by-products recycling to irrigate sugarcane fields. The use of sugarcane by the ethanol agribusiness is one of the foremost financial resources for the economy of the Brazilian rural area, which occupies extensive areas and provides far-reaching potentials for renewable fuel production. But, there are environmental impacts during the fuel ethanol lifecycle, which this paper intents to analyze, including addressing the main activities responsible for such impacts and indicating some suggestions to minimize the impacts.

Materials and methods

This study is classified as an applied quantitative research, and the technical procedure to achieve the exploratory goal is based on bibliographic revision, documental research, primary data collection, and study cases at sugarcane farms and fuel ethanol industries in the northeast of São Paulo State, Brazil. The methodological structure for this LCA study is in agreement with the International Standardization Organization, and the method used is the Environmental Design of Industrial Products. The lifecycle impact assessment (LCIA) covers the following emission-related impact categories: global warming, ozone formation, acidification, nutrient enrichment, ecotoxicity, and human toxicity.

Results and discussion

The results of the fuel ethanol LCI demonstrate that even though alcohol is considered a renewable fuel because it comes from biomass (sugarcane), it uses a high quantity and diversity of nonrenewable resources over its lifecycle. The input of renewable resources is also high mainly because of the water consumption in the industrial phases, due to the sugarcane washing process. During the lifecycle of alcohol, there is a surplus of electric energy due to the cogeneration activity. Another focus point is the quantity of emissions to the atmosphere and the diversity of the substances emitted. Harvesting is the unit process that contributes most to global warming. For photochemical ozone formation, harvesting is also the activity with the strongest contributions due to the burning in harvesting and the emissions from using diesel fuel. The acidification impact potential is mostly due to the NOx emitted by the combustion of ethanol during use, on account of the sulfuric acid use in the industrial process and because of the NOx emitted by the burning in harvesting. The main consequence of the intensive use of fertilizers to the field is the high nutrient enrichment impact potential associated with this activity. The main contributions to the ecotoxicity impact potential come from chemical applications during crop growth. The activity that presents the highest impact potential for human toxicity (HT) via air and via soil is harvesting. Via water, HT potential is high in harvesting due to lubricant use on the machines. The normalization results indicate that nutrient enrichment, acidification, and human toxicity via air and via water are the most significant impact potentials for the lifecycle of fuel ethanol.

Conclusions

The fuel ethanol lifecycle contributes negatively to all the impact potentials analyzed: global warming, ozone formation, acidification, nutrient enrichment, ecotoxicity, and human toxicity. Concerning energy consumption, it consumes less energy than its own production largely because of the electricity cogeneration system, but this process is highly dependent on water. The main causes for the biggest impact potential indicated by the normalization is the nutrient application, the burning in harvesting and the use of diesel fuel.

Recommendations and perspectives

The recommendations for the ethanol lifecycle are: harvesting the sugarcane without burning; more environmentally benign agricultural practices; renewable fuel rather than diesel; not washing sugarcane and implementing water recycling systems during the industrial processing; and improving the system of gases emissions control during the use of ethanol in cars, mainly for NOx. Other studies on the fuel ethanol from sugarcane may analyze in more details the social aspects, the biodiversity, and the land use impact.     

Life cycle assessment of sugarcane ethanol production in India in comparison to Brazil

Purpose

India’s biofuel programme relies on ethanol production from sugarcane molasses. However, there is limited insight on environmental impacts across the Indian ethanol production chain. This study closes this gap by assessing the environmental impacts of ethanol production from sugarcane molasses in Uttar Pradesh, India. A comparative analysis with south-central Brazilian sugarcane ethanol is also presented to compare the performance of sugarcane molasses-based ethanol with sugarcane juice-based ethanol.

Methods

The production process is assessed by a cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment. The multifunctionality problem is solved by applying two variants of system expansion and economic allocation. Environmental impacts are assessed with Impact 2002+ and results are presented at the midpoint level for greenhouse gas emissions, non-renewable energy use, freshwater eutrophication and water use. Furthermore, results include impacts on human health and ecosystem quality at the damage level. Sensitivity analysis is also performed on key contributing parameters such as pesticides, stillage treatment and irrigation water use.

Results and discussion

It is found that, compared to Brazilian ethanol, Indian ethanol causes lower or comparable greenhouse gas emissions (0.09–0.64 kgCO_2eq/kg_ethanolIN, 0.46–0.63 kgCO_2eq/kg_ethanolBR), non-renewable energy use (?0.3–6.3 MJ/kg_ethanolIN, 1–4 MJ/kg_ethanolBR), human health impacts (3.6?·?10^?6 DALY/kg_ethanolIN, 4?·?10^?6 DALY/kg_ethanolBR) and ecosystem impairment (2.5 PDF?·?m²?·?year/kg_ethanolIN, 3.3 PDF?·?m²?·?year/kg_ethanolBR). One reason is that Indian ethanol is exclusively produced from molasses, a co-product of sugar production, resulting in allocation of the environmental burden. Additionally, Indian sugar mills and distilleries produce surplus electricity for which they receive credits for displacing grid electricity of relatively high CO₂ emission intensity. When economic allocation is applied, the greenhouse gas emissions for Indian and Brazilian ethanol are comparable. Non-renewable energy use is higher for Indian ethanol, primarily due to energy requirements for irrigation. For water use and related impacts, Indian ethanol scores worse due groundwater irrigation, despite the dampening effect of allocation. The variation on greenhouse gas emissions and non-renewable energy use of Indian mills is much larger for high and low performance than the respective systems in Brazil.

Conclusions

Important measures can be taken across the production chain to improve the environmental performance of Indian ethanol production (e.g. avoiding the use of specific pesticides, avoiding the disposal of untreated stillage, transition to water efficient crops). However, to meet the targets of the Indian ethanol blending programme, displacement effects are likely to occur in countries which export ethanol. To assess such effects, a consequential study needs to be prepared.     

Life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Argentina

Purpose

The production of bioethanol in Argentina is based on the sugarcane plantation system, with extensive use of agricultural land, scarce use of fertilizers, pesticides, and artificial irrigation, and burning of sugarcane prior to harvesting. The objective of this paper is to develop a life cycle assessment (LCA) of the fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Tucumán (Argentina), assessing the environmental impact potentials to identify which of them cause the main impacts.

Methods

Our approach innovatively combined knowledge about the main impact pathways of bioethanol production with LCA which covers the typical emission-related impact categories at the midpoint life cycle impact assessment. Real data from the Argentinean industry subsystems have been used to perform the study: S1—sugarcane production, S2—milling process, S3—sugar production, and S4—ethanol production from molasses, honey, or sugarcane juice.

Results and discussion

The results are shown in the three alternative pathways to produce bioethanol. Different impact categories are assessed, with global warming potential (GWP) having the highest impact. So, the production of 1 kg of ethanol from molasses emitted 22.5 kg CO₂ (pathway 1), 19.2 kg CO₂ from honey (pathway 2), and 15.0 kg CO₂ from sugarcane juice (pathway 3). Several sensitivity analyses to study the variability of the GWP according to the different cases studied have been performed (changing the agricultural yield, including economic and calorific allocation in sugar production, and modifying the sugar price).

Conclusions

Agriculture is the subsystem which shows the highest impact in almost all the categories due to fossil fuel consumption. When an economic and calorific allocation is considered to assess the environmental impact, the value is lower than when mass allocation is used because ethanol is relatively cheaper than sugars and it has higher calorific value.     

Comparative attributional life cycle assessment of European cellulase enzyme production for use in second-generation lignocellulosic bioethanol production

Purpose

The production of cellulase enzymes (CE) has been identified as one major contributor towards the life cycle environmental and economic impacts of second-generation lignocellulosic bioethanol (LCB) production. Despite this knowledge, the literature lacks consistent and transparent life cycle assessments (LCA) which compare CE production based on the three more commonly proposed carbon sources: cornstarch glucose, sugar cane molasses and pre-treated softwood. Furthermore, numerous LCAs of LCB omit CE production from their system boundaries, with several authors citing the lack of available production data.

Methods

In this article, we perform a comparative attributional LCA for the on-site production of 1 kg CE in full broth via submerged aerobic fermentation (SmF) based on the three alternative carbon sources, cases A, B and C, respectively. We determine life cycle inventory (LCI) material consumption using stoichiometric equations and volume flow, supplemented with information from the literature. All LCIs are provided in a consistent and transparent manner, filling the existing data gaps towards performing representative LCAs of LCB production with on-site CE production. Life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) results are determined with SimaPro 8 software using CML 1A baseline and non-baseline methods along with cumulative energy demand and are compared to results of similar studies. Sensitivity analysis is performed both for all major assumptions and for market changes with the application of advanced attributional LCA (AALCA).

Results and discussion

We find that CE production from pre-treated softwood (case C) provides the lowest environmental impacts, followed by sugar cane molasses (case B) and then cornstarch glucose (case A), with global warming potentials of 7.9, 9.1 and 10.6 kg CO₂ eq./kg enzyme, respectively. These findings compare well with those of similar studies, though great variation exists in the literature. Through sensitivity analysis, we determine that results are sensitive to assumptions made concerning carbon source origin, applied allocation, market changes, process efficiency and electricity supply.

Conclusions

Furthermore, we find that the contribution of CE production towards the overall life cycle impacts of LCB is significant and that the omission of this sub-process in LCAs of LCB production can compromise their representativeness.

     

Comparative life cycle assessment and life cycle costing of lodging in the Himalaya

Purpose

The main aim of the study is to assess the environmental and economic impacts of the lodging sector located in the Himalayan region of Nepal, from a life cycle perspective. The assessment should support decision making in technology and material selection for minimal environmental and economic burden in future construction projects.

Methods

The study consists of the life cycle assessment and life cycle costing of lodging in three building types: traditional, semi-modern and modern. The life cycle stages under analysis include raw material acquisition, manufacturing, construction, use, maintenance and material replacement. The study includes a sensitivity analysis focusing on the lifespan of buildings, occupancy rate and discount and inflation rates. The functional unit was formulated as the ‘Lodging of one additional guest per night’, and the time horizon is 50 years of building lifespan. Both primary and secondary data were used in the life cycle inventory.

Results and discussion

The modern building has the highest global warming potential (kg CO_2-eq) as well as higher costs over 50 years of building lifespan. The results show that the use stage is responsible for the largest share of environmental impacts and costs, which are related to energy use for different household activities. The use of commercial materials in the modern building, which have to be transported mostly from the capital in the buildings, makes the higher GWP in the construction and replacement stages. Furthermore, a breakdown of the building components shows that the roof and wall of the building are the largest contributors to the production-related environmental impact.

Conclusions

The findings suggest that the main improvement opportunities in the lodging sector lie in the reduction of impacts on the use stage and in the choice of materials for wall and roof.

     

Enriching the results of screening social life cycle assessment using content analysis: a case study of sugarcane in Brazil

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - Screening social life cycle assessment (S-LCA) can be applied to identify the social hotspots associated with a production activity or supply...     

Comparative life cycle assessment and social life cycle assessment of used polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles in Mauritius

Purpose

Improper disposal of used polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles constitute an eyesore to the environmental landscape and is a threat to the flourishing tourism industry in Mauritius. It is therefore imperative to determine a suitable disposal method of used PET bottles which not only has the least environmental load but at the same time has minimum harmful impacts on peoples employed in waste disposal companies. In this respect, the present study investigated and compared the environmental and social impacts of four selected disposal alternatives of used PET bottles.

Methods

Environmental impacts of the four disposal alternatives, namely: 100 % landfilling, 75 % incineration with energy recovery and 25 % landfilling, 40 % flake production (partial recycling) and 60 % landfilling and 75 % flake production and 25 % landfilling, were determined using ISO standardized life cycle assessment (ISO 14040:2006) and with the support of SimaPro 7.1 software. Social life cycle assessments were performed based on the UNEP/SETAC Guidelines for Social Life Cycle Assessment of products. Three stakeholder categories (worker, society and local community) and eight sub-category indicators (child labour, fair salary, forced labour, health and safety, social benefit/social security, discrimination, contribution to economic development and community engagement) were identified to be relevant to the study. A new method for aggregating and analysing the social inventory data is proposed and used to draw conclusions.

Results and discussion

Environmental life cycle assessment results indicated that highest environmental impacts occurred when used PET bottles were disposed by 100 % landfilling while disposal by 75 % flake production and 25 % landfilling gave the least environmental load. Social life cycle assessment results indicated that least social impacts occurred with 75 % flake production and 25 % landfilling. Thus both E-LCA and S-LCA rated 75 % flake production and 25 % landfilling to be the best disposal option.

Conclusions

Two dimensions of sustainability (environmental and social) when investigated using the Life Cycle Management tool, favoured scenario 4 (75 %?% flake production and 25 % landfilling) which is a partial recycling disposal route. One hundred percent landfilling was found out to be the worst scenario. The next step will be to explore the third pillar of sustainability, economic, and devise a method to integrate the three dimensions with a view to determine the sustainable disposal option of used PET bottles in Mauritius.     

Comparative life cycle assessment of three biohydrogen pathways

A life cycle assessment was performed to quantify and compare the energetic and environmental performances of hydrogen from wheat straw (WS-H₂), sweet sorghum stalk (SSS-H₂), and steam potato peels (SPP-H₂). Inventory data were derived from a pilot plant. Impacts were assessed using the impact 2002+ method. When co-product was not considered, the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were 5.60 kg CO_2eq kg⁻¹ H₂ for WS-H₂, 5.32 kg CO_2eq kg⁻¹ H₂ for SSS-H₂, and 5.18 kg CO_2eq kg⁻¹ H₂ for SPP-H₂. BioH₂ pathways reduced GHG emissions by 52-56% compared to diesel and by 54-57% compared to steam methane reforming production of H₂. The energy ratios (ER) were also comparable: 1.08 for WS-H₂, 1.14 for SSS-H₂ and 1.17 for SPP-H₂. A shift from SPP-H₂ to WS-H₂ would therefore not affect the ER and GHG emissions of these BioH₂ pathways. When co-product was considered, a shift from SPP-H₂ to WS-H₂ or SSS-H₂ decreased the ER, while increasing the GHG emissions significantly. Co-product yield should be considered when selecting BioH₂ feedstocks.     

Comparative life cycle assessment of fired brick production in Thailand

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment - Fired bricks are an essential construction material in Thailand where the majority of fired brick kilns use rice husk as feedstock. Given the...     

Comparative life cycle assessment of rapeseed oil and palm oil

Background, aim and scope  

The environmental effect of globalisation has been debated intensively in the last decades. Only few well-documented analyses of global versus local product alternatives exist, whilst recommendations on buying local are vast. At the same time, the European Environmental Agency’s Third Assessment concludes that the resource use within the EU is stabilising at the expense of increased resource use for import of products to the EU. Taking its point of departure in vegetable oils, this article compares rapeseed oil and palm oil as a local and a global alternative for meeting the increasing demand for these products in the EU. By using detailed life cycle assessment (LCA), this study compares the environmental impacts and identifies alternative ways of producing rapeseed oil and palm oil to the EU market in order to reduce environmental impacts.     

Comparative life cycle assessment of re-use and replacement for video projectors

Purpose

The current focus of environmental legislation for energy-using products is an efficient energy consumption in the use stage. However, the production and waste treatment of electronic products are also related to environmental impacts in terms of declining metal resources and growing waste streams. This paper investigates the environmental impacts of life time extension versus energy efficiency for the product group video projector using life cycle assessment (LCA).

Methods

The product under study was an average video projector based on three LCD projectors. The studied systems included two possibilities after a regular first usage period: reconditioning for a second use or replacement by a primary successor with an energy efficiency increase of 5 and 10%. All impacts addressed were accounted using the ReCiPe 2008 method. The impact contribution of projector components was identified at midpoint and endpoint levels, while life cycle impacts were calculated with a focus on three impact categories. Furthermore, the amortization period of production emissions was quantified.

Results and discussion

LCA results showed that the use stage dominates life cycle impacts of the global warming potential and primary energy demand. For the metal depletion potential, the production stage accounts for most of the total life cycle load. The highest shares in production emissions were identified for electronic components, namely printed wired boards and integrated circuits. Reconditioning and reuse of a secondary projector resulted in minor environmental impacts compared to the replacement and use of a primary projector with an energy efficiency increase of 5%. The saving potential of the primary energy demand is higher only in the case of a 10% more efficient device as compared to the secondary projector.

Conclusions

The study concluded that production emissions and their amortization period are relevant factors offsetting any environmentally beneficial measures applied during the use phase. The study suggests that life time extension of video projectors can provide higher environmental improvement potentials, while energy efficiency increase during usage is less beneficial, given that major improvements in energy efficiency do not occur. Recommendations are valid for this particular case study. The study suggests that the current focus of mandatory product requirements for energy-using products on energy efficiency increase should be extended to measures of life time extension in order to serve the intent of an integrated product policy.

     

Comparative life cycle assessment of reused versus disposable dental burs

Purpose

Health care infection control has led to increased utilization of disposable medical devices, which has subsequently led to adverse environmental effects attributed to health care and its supply chain. In dental practice, the dental bur is a commonly used instrument that can be either reused or used once and then disposed. To evaluate the disparities in environmental impacts of disposable and reusable dental burs, a comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) was performed.

Methods

The functional unit was defined as one reusable dental bur, where the maximum instances reused was 30 (or in the case of a disposable, the equivalent functional unit would be 30 disposable dental burs). The system boundary included all cradle-to-grave aspects of both single-use and reused burs, including raw material extraction, manufacturing, packaging, distribution, reuse, and disposal. Primary data included the following: operating parameters for ultrasonic cleaning, manual cleaning, and autoclaving of the burs. The secondary data for raw material extraction and production of dental bur and packaging were obtained directly from life cycle inventory databases. Sensitivity analyses were also performed with respect to ultrasonic and autoclave loading.

Results and discussion

Findings from this research showed that when the ultrasonic and autoclave were loaded optimally, reusable burs had 40 % less of an environmental impact than burs used on a disposable basis. When the autoclave and ultrasonic were loaded to approximately two-third capacity, four environmental impact categories favored reusable burs (i.e., ozone depletion, smog, respiratory effects, exotoxicity), and four impact categories environmentally favored disposables (i.e., acidification, eutrophication, carcinogenics, and non-carcinogenics). When the autoclave and ultrasonic were loaded to approximately one-third capacity, reusable dental burs posed more negative environmental impacts in eight of nine environmental impact categories when compared to disposable burs.

Conclusions

Operational efficiency of ultrasonic and autoclave cleaning equipment should be emphasized to enhance the environmental performance of bur reuse. In fact, improper loading of the ultrasonic and autoclave can lead to greater adverse environmental impacts than if the burs were treated as disposables. The environmental and economic impacts associated with bur reuse are expected to be similar with other dental devices that are designated as disposable but are capable of being reused (e.g., scalpels, forceps).     

Life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol from cassava in Thailand

Goal and Scope  A well-to-wheel analysis has been conducted for cassava-based ethanol (CE) in Thailand. The aim of the analysis is to assess the potentials of CE in the form of gasohol E10 for promoting energy security and reducing environmental impacts in comparison with conventional gasoline (CG). Method  In the LCA procedure, three separate but interrelated components: inventory analysis, characterization and interpretation were performed for the complete chain of the fuel life cycle. To compare gasohol E10 and CG, this study addressed their impact potentials per gasoline-equivalent litre, taking into account the performance difference between gasohol and gasoline in an explosion motor. Results and Discussions  The results obtained show that CE in the form of E10, along its whole life cycle, reduces certain environmental loads compared to CG. The percentage reductions relative to CG are 6.1% for fossil energy use, 6.0% for global warming potential, 6.8% for acidification, and 12.2% for nutrient enrichment. Using biomass in place of fossil fuels for process energy in the manufacture of ethanol leads to improved overall life cycle energy and environmental performance of ethanol blends relative to CG. Conclusions and Outlook  The LCA brings to light the key areas in the ethanol production cycle that researchers and technicians need to work on to maximize ethanol’s contribution to energy security and environmental sustainability ESS-Submission Editor: Mark Goedkoop (goedkoop@pre.nl)     

Comparative life cycle assessment of graphitic carbon nitride synthesis routes

Graphitic carbon nitride (g-C₃N₄) has gained great interest as a visible-light-activated photocatalyst. As an emerging nanomaterial for environmental applications, its competitive performance and environmentally responsible synthesis are critical to its success. A powerful tool for informing material development with reduced environmental impacts is life cycle assessment (LCA). In this study, LCA is used to evaluate the environmental impacts of g-C₃N₄ nanosheet produced via eight existing synthesis routes. The results reveal electricity as the main contributor to the cumulative impacts of all eight g-C₃N₄ syntheses. There are opportunities to reduce energy demand, and consequently the synthesis impacts, by revising synthesis procedures (i.e., removing or reducing time of use of a piece of equipment), optimizing the calcination step (i.e., faster heating rate, lower heating time, lower temperature), and moving to cleaner electricity sources. Further, benchmarking the environmental impacts of g-C₃N₄ nanosheets to a well-established metal-based photocatalyst, titanium dioxide nanoparticles (nano-TiO₂), reveals mixed comparative results. The synthesis method substantially influences the comparative impacts. Considering use-phase benefits of activating g-C₃N₄ with visible wavelength light emitting diodes compared to ultraviolet (UV) wavelengths for nano-TiO₂ results in a 52% energy demand reduction (in kWh). Performance of g-C₃N₄ compared to a high-energy disinfection approach (i.e., conventional UV) reveals an inability to meet drinking water disinfection standards for viral load reduction (4-log reduction) with any mass of g-C₃N₄, given its high embodied resource footprint. This work establishes a foundation to inform and direct g-C₃N₄ nanosheets toward improved sustainable development.