4.6 Article

Life Cycle Assessment Analysis of Alfalfa and Corn for Biogas Production in a Farm Case Study

Journal

PROCESSES
Volume 8, Issue 10, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/pr8101285

Keywords

alfalfa; corn; LCA; biogas; bioenergy

Funding

  1. Regione Umbria, Italy, project Agroenergy [PSR 2007/2013-1.2.4]
  2. ENEA Trisaia Research Center, Italy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the last years the greenhouse effect has been significantly intensified due to human activities, generating large additional amounts of Greenhouse gases (GHG). The fossil fuels are the main causes of that. Consequently, the attention on the composition of the national fuel mix has significantly grown, and the renewables are becoming a more significant component. In this context, biomass is one of the most important sources of renewable energy with a great potential for the production of energy. The study has evaluated, through an LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) study, the attitude of alfalfa (Medicago sativa) as no food biomass alternative to maize silage (corn), in the production of biogas from anaerobic digestion. Considering the same functional unit (1 m(3) of biogas from anaerobic digestion) and the same time horizon, alfalfa environmental impact was found to be much comparable to that of corn because it has an impact of about 15% higher than corn considering the total score from different categories and an impact of 5% higher of corn considering only greenhouse gases. Therefore, the analysis shows a similar environmental load in the use of alfalfa biomass in energy production compared to maize. Corn in fact, despite a better yield per hectare and yield of biogas, requires a greater amount of energy inputs to produce 1m(3) of biogas, while alfalfa, which requires less energy inputs in its life cycle, has a lower performance in terms of yield. The results show the possibility to alternate the two crops for energy production from an environmental perspective.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available