Revealing the Environmental Advantages of Industrial Symbiosis in Wood‐Based Bioeconomy Networks: An Assessment From a Life Cycle Perspective

The German government has recently initiated funding schemes that incentivize strategies for wood‐based bioeconomy regions. Regional wood and chemical industries have been encouraged to act symbiotically, that is, share pilot plant facilities, couple processes where feasible, and cascade woody feedstock throughout their process networks. However, during the planning stages of these bioeconomy regions, options need to be assessed for sustainably integrating processes and energy integration between the various industries that produce bio‐based polymers and engineered wood products. The aim of this paper is to identify the environmental sustainability of industrial symbiosis for producing high‐value‐added, bio‐based products in the wood‐based bioeconomy region of Central Germany. An analysis was conducted of three possible future scenarios with varying degrees of symbiosis in the bioeconomy network. A life cycle assessment (LCA) approach was used to compare these three scenarios to a traditional fossil‐based production system. Eleven environmental impact categories were considered. The results show that, in most cases, the bioeconomy network outperformed the fossil‐based production system, mitigating environmental impacts by 25% to 130%.     

A framework for implementing holistic and integrated life cycle sustainability assessment of regional bioeconomy

Purpose

Currently, social, environmental, and economic risks and chances of bioeconomy are becoming increasingly a subject of applied sustainability assessments. Based on life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology, life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) aims to combine or integrate social, environmental, and economic assessments. In order to contribute to the current early stage of LCSA development, this study seeks to identify a practical framework for integrated LCSA implementation.

Methods

We select possible indicators from existing suitable LCA and LCSA approaches as well as from the literature, and allocate them to a sustainability concept for holistic and integrated LCSA (HILCSA), based on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In order to conduct a practical implementation of HILCSA, we choose openLCA, because it offers the best current state and most future potential for application of LCSA. Therefore, not only the capabilities of the software and databases, but also the supported methods of life cycle impact assessments (LCIA) are evaluated regarding the requirements of the indicator set and goal and scope of future case studies.

Results and discussion

This study presents an overview of available indicators and LCIAs for bioeconomy sustainability assessments as well as their link to the SDGs. We provide a practical framework for HILCSA of regional bioeconomy, which includes an indicator set for regional (product and territorial) bioeconomy assessment, applicable with current software and databases, LCIA methods and methods of normalization, weighting, and aggregation. The implementation of HILCSA in openLCA allows an integrative LCSA by conducting all steps in a single framework with harmonized, aggregated, and coherent results. HILCSA is capable of a sustainability assessment in terms of planetary boundaries, provisioning system and societal needs, as well as communication of results to different stakeholders.

Conclusions

Our framework is capable of compensating some deficits of S-LCA, E-LCA, and economic assessments by integration, and shows main advantages compared to additive LCSA. HILCSA is capable of addressing 15 out of 17 SDGs. It addresses open questions and significant problems of LCSAs in terms of goal and scope, LCI, LCIA, and interpretation. Furthermore, HILCSA is the first of its kind actually applicable in an existing software environment. Regional bioeconomy sustainability assessment is bridging scales of global and regional effects and can inform stakeholders comprehensively on various impacts, hotspots, trade-offs, and synergies of regional bioeconomy. However, significant research needs in LCIAs, software, and indicator development remain.

     

When considering no man is an island—assessing bioenergy systems in a regional and LCA context: a review

Purpose

With many environmental burdens associated with bioenergy production occurring at the regional level, there is a need to produce more regional and spatially representative life cycle assessment of bioenergy systems. On the other hand, such assessments also need to account for the global and cumulative impacts along the full bioenergy life cycle in order to support effective regional policy measures and decision making. Therefore, the challenge is to find a balance. In other words, how should we define the regional context for bioenergy system assessments in order to complement life cycle thinking? The aim of this review is to answer this question by providing an overview of important considerations when assessing bioenergy systems in a regional and LCA context and how these two contexts intersect. It also aims to help guide and orientate LCA practitioners interested in including more regional aspects in their bioenergy studies. Until now, such a review which explores the integration of regional and life cycle contexts in relation to bioenergy systems and their products has not been done.

Methods

As a first step, we define what we mean by the term region. We then look at the potential burdens relating to bioenergy systems and their relationship with the regional context. In a next step, we explore life cycle thinking and the intersection between the regional and LCA contexts by providing some examples from the literature. We then discuss the benefits and limitations of such regionally contextualized life cycle approaches in relation to bioenergy production systems and indeed other alternative biomass uses.

Results and discussion

Three regional contexts were identified to help orientate life cycle thinking aiming to assess the regional and nonregional environmental implications of bioenergy production. These contexts were as follows: “within regional,” “regional and ROW,” and “regionalized.” The added value of implementing a regionally contextualized life cycle approach is the ability, therefore, to include greater regional and spatial details in the assessments of bioenergy production systems, without losing the links to the diversity of global supply chains. Thus, providing greater geographical and regional insight into how such potential burdens can be reduced or shifted burdens avoided or how associated regional production activities could be optimized to mitigate such burdens.

Conclusions

The use of different regional contexts as proposed in this paper is not only useful to orientate life cycle thinking in relation to bioenergy systems but also for the assessment of alternative novel bio-based systems.

     

Social life cycle assessment: in pursuit of a framework for assessing wood-based products from bioeconomy regions in Germany

Purpose

With many policies in Germany steering towards a bioeconomy, there is a need for analytical tools that assess not only the environmental and economic implications but also the social implications of a transition to a bioeconomy. Wood is expected to become a major biomass resource in bioeconomy regions. Therefore, this paper develops a social life cycle assessment (sLCA) framework that can be applied specifically to a wood-based production system in one of Germany’s bioeconomy regions.

Methods

This paper reviews and analyses existing sLCA approaches, in terms of how applicable they are for assessing a wood-based production system in a German bioeconomy regional context. The analysis is structured according to the standard phases of environmental life cycle assessment (LCA). However, we use the term social effects rather than social impacts, to acknowledge the unknown cause–effect relationship between an organisation’s activities and its social impacts. We also consider the establishment of regional system boundaries, as well as the relationship between the social effects and the product being assessed. Additionally, an approach for the development and selection of social indicators and indices is outlined. Furthermore, we discuss data requirements and present an approach for a social life cycle impact assessment method.

Results and discussion

A new conceptual framework for a context-specific sLCA to assess wood-based products manufactured in a bioeconomy region was developed. It enables sLCA practitioners to identify “social hotspots” and “social opportunities” from a regional perspective. The location and characteristics of these social hotspots and opportunities can be analysed, in particular, for major production activities in a bioeconomy region in Germany. Therefore, according to this framework, the development of social indices and indicators, the collection of data and the approach used for characterising social effects need to relate to the geographical context of the product being assessed. The proposed framework can, thus, help to identify, monitor and evaluate the social sustainability of wood-based bioeconomy chains in a regional context.

Conclusions

This framework requires a high level of detail in the social inventory and impact assessment phase, in order to assess the regional foreground activities in a German wood-based bioeconomy region. It enables sLCA studies to identify which social hotspots and social opportunities occur and where they are located in the wood-based production system of a regional bioeconomy.