3.8 Article

Carbon Footprint and Feedstock Quality of a Real Biomass Power Plant Fed with Forestry and Agricultural Residues

期刊

RESOURCES-BASEL
卷 11, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/resources11020007

关键词

residues; energy; sustainability; wood; carbon savings; green; global warming; climate change

资金

  1. SanMarco Bioenergie SpA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the quality of biomass residues from orchards and silviculture and the carbon footprint of a biomass power plant in Italy. The results showed that sourcing residual biomass materials for electricity generation close to power plants significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to conventional fossil fuels.
Phasing out fossil fuels to renewables is currently a global priority due to the climate change threat. Advocacy for biomass use as an energy source requires assessing the quality biomass and ecological impacts of bioenergy supply chains. This study evaluated the quality of biomass residues from orchards and silviculture transported from different Northern and Central Italy locations and the carbon footprint of a biomass power plant. The total greenhouse emissions were calculated based on primary data for 2017 according to the ISO/TS 14067. All the residue samples showed their suitability for biofuel use. Ash content was relatively low on average (3-5% d.m.), except for grapevine residues (18% d.m.). The lower heating value was within the expected range of 15-21 MJ kg 1 for plant species. The average GHG emission from the power plant was 17.4 g CO2 eq./MJ of electrical energy, with the energy conversion (38%) and transportation of biomass (34%) phases being the main impact contributors. For this study, impacts of residual agricultural residue were about half that of residues from forest management, mainly due to chipping and greater transport distance. Results show that sourcing residual biomass materials for electricity generation close to power plants significantly reduce GHG emissions compared to conventional fossil fuels.

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

3.8
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