A meta-analysis of the life cycle greenhouse gas balances of microalgae biodiesel

Purpose

Microalgae biodiesel has attracted considerable attention as a potential substitute for fossil fuels and biodiesel from food crops. Nevertheless, its reported climate impacts in the scientific literature vary significantly. This article describes and synthesizes the range of results found in the life cycle assessment (LCA) literature regarding microalgae biodiesel studies to investigate whether particular parameters, e.g. technologies, were associated with higher or lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions so that a best practice can be inferred from currently available LCA data and thereby recommended.

Methods

A systematic literature review and meta-regression analysis (MRA) of 36 LCA studies that report on the GHG emissions of microalgae biodiesel was conducted. An assessment of key aspects, including modelling choices and technologies, was performed. Furthermore, MRA models were formulated considering several variables of interest describing both technical and modelling choices to identify the main causes for the variability in GHG emissions per MJ of biodiesel. Variables chosen include: microalgae species; culture medium; cultivation system; source of CO₂; extraction technology; conversion technology; system boundary; geographical scope; inclusion or exclusion of capital goods; and how multifunctionality was handled.

Results and discussion

The reviewed studies altogether reported 308 results ranging from ?0.7 to 3.8 kg CO₂ eq. MJ^?1_biodiesel, portraying 19 different system configurations. Despite the comprehensive range of variables assessed, the models generated could not plausibly explain that the variability in GHG emissions depends either on the technologies considered or on the methodological choices adopted. However, the following relationships could be observed: location in Europe and high oil productivity were associated with lower emissions, whilst dry extraction should be avoided for leading to higher GHG emissions, on average.

Conclusions

There is a large degree of variability within the technologies considered, as well as the methodological choices adopted, so that no robust conclusions could be drawn from the MRA. Notwithstanding, average GHG emissions reported were more than twice as high as fossil diesel and, while there are some studies showing large benefits, none of the various algae technologies performed consistently better than fossil diesel, questioning the climate-mitigation potential of microalgae biodiesel.