4.7 Article

Technical, economic and environmental assessement of bioethanol biorefinery from waste biomass

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
Volume 277, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124111

Keywords

Biorefinery; Economic analysis; Energy balance; Life cycle analysis (LCA); Material flow analysis (MFA)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study presents a sequential three-steps methodology for the technical, economic and environmental assessment (TEEA) of bioethanol production from waste biomass. In EU the most abundant waste biomasses produced in 2018 could be ascribed to three main categories: lignocellulosic (329.41 Mt), starch (160 Mt) and sugar-based (58.56 Mt). The technical assessment compiled an inventory of the waste biomasses and subsequently designed their biological conversion into ethanol through integrated biorefinery processes by means of material flow analysis (MFA); the economic assessment was aimed at the definition of the cut-off size of the biorefinery plant necessary to achieve profitability; the environmental assessment was based on Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) and energy balance (i.e. energy input consumption). For each of the three waste biomass categories, at least one that was significant as available amount and representative in terms of physico-chemical characteristics, was evaluated: sugarcane for sugar-based, potatoes for starch-based and rice straw, cattle manure and organic fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW) for lignocellulosic biomasses. The technical assessment of the biorefinery routes lead to the following yields (kg of bioethanol per kg of biomass): 0.16, 0.17, 0.22, 0.19 and 0.14 respectively. The economic profitability was reached by all biorefineries and Net Present Value (MV) were: 0.85 for sugarcane, 0.11 for potatoes, 0.09 for rice straw, 0.11 for cattle manure and 0.39 for OFMSW. From the environmental perspective, cattle manure reached the highest reduction of climate change and acidification impacts compared to other biomasses, while sugarcane achieved the lowest energy input consumption (around 64%). (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available