Search

This research aims to explore the current evidence on the sustainability of Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage under a life cycle approach and to understand how research on this topic has evolved in the last decade. A systematic literature review was performed, and the main focus was identifying methodological shortcomings and analysing Global Warming Potential results. Forty-seven studies were selected for in-depth revision. Results show that the number of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies on BECCS has increased in the last couple of years and that most of these studies report near-carbon neutral or carbon-negative results for electricity, biofuel energy, and other products. However, in many cases, some aspects have been omitted from the discussion, such as proper accounting of land use impacts, impact allocation procedure, accounting of leakage from storage sites, and impacts related to carbon utilisation. Despite this methodological variability, Global Warming Potential results are mostly carbon-negative and carbon-neutral for both power BECCS and industrial BECCS systems. Consequently, current scientific evidence suggests climate change mitigation benefits from BECCS despite methodological variability. However, it is still insufficient to reach a consensus on the sustainability of this technology as a solution for a global energy transition. It is recommended that further LCA research deals carefully with methodological and product systems variability, which may affect environmental impact results. Moreover, carbon capture approaches with high potential benefits should be further analysed, and the most optimal BECCS typologies should be identified. Finally, additional life cycle impact categories should be reported, along with the assessment of the economic and social dimensions of BECCS. [Display omitted] • Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) was reviewed. • LCA methodology choices were discussed. • Global Warming Potential ranges between −3.873 and 0.366 kg CO 2 eq per MJ. • Current evidence is insufficient to confirm that BECCS is a sustainable solution for climate change mitigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Generation of goods and services are highly dependent on the use of natural resources. Until very recently, there was an implicit belief that the physical expansion of the economic system could be unlimited, as if the planet would have conditions and time enough to recover and continue to supply resources. This belief implies a confidence in an economic system that would provide whatever is necessary for a continuous growing production and consumption. Even believing that technology alone is not enough to solve the current environmental problems, it is certain that it can collaborate to mitigate climate change and to adaptation to changes in the environment. By bringing environmental aspects into discussions, eco-innovations can affect and transform the innovation system in order to create sustainable processes. However, the main challenge towards the transition to a more sustainable, cleaner and more equitable society is to set innovation in a new context, as until very recently it only considered the economic variables. This change means to value the social and environmental dimension of the innovation. In addition to eco-innovation, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is spreading in the industrial environment, offering promising perspectives. LCA is considered a valuable methodology in the environmental sustainability of industry. In this context, the present study addresses LCA and its relationship with the generation of eco-innovations. Drawing on contributions from literature on eco-innovation and LCA, the paper analyses available evidence on this relationship in a context of the transition towards sustainable development. To structure the debate, the paper offers a conceptual approach and an illustrative case on international researchers' and practitioners’ perceptions on the potentially positive relationship between eco-innovation and LCA. The study gathers data in the Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection and in Scopus, in order to provide a picture of the distribution of documents retrieved from these databases, dealing with both eco-innovation and LCA topics. The paper concludes that the convergence of the eco-innovation and LCA studies is quite plausible, but at least in its initial phase, the literature that unites both themes is scarcely found in publications in the area of innovation, being more frequent in the area of engineering and management that usually addresses LCA studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Display omitted] • Midpoint and endpoint environmental profiles for bio-based isobutene are performed. • Pre-treatment represents the largest environmental burden due to steam demand. • From a system approach, co-produce lignin increases the impacts of the biorefinery. • In a product point view, the isobutene profile benefits sharing impacts with lignin. • Allocation method is a relevant decision to declare an environmental profile product. Moving toward a bioeconomy system is fundamental to climate change mitigation, nevertheless, the biotechnological routes should guarantee an environmental sustainability. Isobutene, a precursor in several industrial applications, is one of those chemicals that the environmental effects of its bio-based production have been scarcely explored. This study aims to assess the environmental performance of two biorefinery systems: the first one focuses only on the production of isobutene (I) and the second one on the co-production with lignin (I + L), both from the valorisation of wheat straw. The Life Cycle Assessment methodology is used to determine the environmental impacts considering mid-point and end-point categories. Biorefineries report 0.65 and 1.32 kg CO 2 -eq per kg of biomass processed for I and I + L system, respectively. The most affected endpoint damage category corresponds to Human Health, regardless of the scenarios. Moreover, the pre-treatment stage constitutes the main hotspot of both systems considering midpoint and endpoint perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To address global food demand and sustainability challenges, aquaculture has appeared as an essential element in food systems, and an increasing number of national aquaculture policies have emerged over the past decades. However, several of these policies have failed because of an often-argued inability to anticipate their far-reaching implications on environmental and socio-economic variables. To tackle this gap, we propose a step-wise framework to assess the national environmental impacts from aquaculture industries with a prospective and systemic approach. Starting from identifying policy-based national targets, the methodology relies on economic equilibrium modeling to develop realistic future-oriented scenarios of the aquaculture sector, and couples them with life cycle assessment principles. To evidence its operability, we apply the framework to two distinct case countries: Norway and Singapore. Beyond our key findings from the analyses of the policies in both countries, we observed that feed production and usage are important drivers of impacts, hence calling for new and more environmentally-friendly feed options. Our results additionally show that the development of aquaculture following existing governmental policies may not directly reduce greenhouse gases emissions and, hence, not support climate change mitigation objectives. These findings should however be cautioned as potential shifts of diets due to the increasing seafood availability might occur, leading to indirect environmental benefits. We therefore advocate the further expansion of our framework to cover the entire food system, so it can integrate such indirect effects. Meanwhile, we recommend its interim application to support policy-making and help move towards more environmentally sustainable aquaculture systems. • A framework to assess prospective environmental impacts of aquaculture is developed. • It combines economic equilibrium modeling and life cycle assessment at national scale. • It is operationalized to assess aquaculture policies in Singapore and Norway until 2040. • Conclusions for each country are issued, and common findings are discussed. • We call for a wide application of our framework to support aquaculture sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]