4.8 Article

Challenges in Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Impacts of Waste-Based Biofuels in EU and US Biofuel Policies: Case Study of Butanol and Ethanol Production from Municipal Solid Waste

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 53, 期 20, 页码 12141-12149

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.9b04286

关键词

-

资金

  1. Bioenergy Sustaining the Future 2 MSWBH Project [620103]
  2. Industrial Biotechnology Catalyst (Innovate UK)
  3. Industrial Biotechnology Catalyst (BBSRC)
  4. Industrial Biotechnology Catalyst (EPSRC)
  5. BBSRC [BB/N023773/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Conversion of wastes to biofuels is a promising route to provide renewable low-carbon fuels, based on a low- or negative-cost feedstock, whose use can avoid negative environmental impacts of conventional waste treatment. However, current policies that employ LCA as a quantitative measure are not adequate for assessing this type of fuel, given their cross-sector interactions and multiple potential product/service streams (energy, fuels, materials, waste treatment service). We employ a case study of butanol and ethanol production from mixed municipal solid waste to demonstrate the challenges in using life cycle assessment to appropriately inform decision-makers. Greenhouse gas emissions results vary from -566 gCO(2) eq/MJ(biofuel) (under US policies that employ system expansion approach) to +86 gCO(2) eq/MJ(biofuel) and +23 gCO(2) eq/MJ(biofuel) fuel (under initial and current EU policies that employ energy-based allocation), relative to gasoline emissions of +94 gCO(2) eq. LCA methods used in existing policies thus provide contradictory information to decision-makers regarding the potential for waste-based biofuels. A key factor differentiating life cycle assessment methodologies is the inclusion of avoided impacts of conventional waste treatment in US policies and their exclusion in EU policies. Present EU rules risk discouraging the valorisation of wastes to biofuels thus forcing waste toward lower-value treatment processes and products.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据