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]

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) is regarded as a crucial negative emission technology (NET) in many prospective climate change mitigation scenarios that limit global warming below 2 °C. However, there is still insufficient understanding of the overall life cycle environmental performance of different BECCS configurations. Despite the fact that BECCS entails many technological combinations, the technology is still regarded as a single "black box" technology in most climate scenarios. This study presents a critical review of life cycle assessment (LCA) on a wide range of BECCS options: biomass direct-fired power generation, biomass gasification power generation, bio-hydrogen production, biomass application in industry sectors and other biomass conversion processes, such as pyrolysis and fermentation. It is evident from the review that the biomass direct-fired and gasification power plant with a 100% biomass firing ratio and the gasification-based bio-hydrogen processes have a strong potential to achieve negative emissions. However, the net negative life cycle emissions range widely among studies for each configuration due to variations in technology, LCA methodology and assumptions. Additionally, there is an insufficient assessment of comprehensive environmental impacts for BECCS systems other than GWP, making it still unclear about the trade-offs between the benefit from climate change mitigation and potential negative impacts. Main recommendations for improving LCA on BECCS include developing a generalized guideline and standardization for BECCS LCA, conducting LCAs with comprehensive impact categories, focusing on BECCS configurations being overlooked, considering the impact of land use change and the global warming potential of biomass, and extending LCA in both temporal and spatial dimension. [Display omitted] • Systematically review of life cycle assessment on BECCS systems. • Detailed review on various biomass conversion technologies. • Net negative life cycle emissions range widely among studies. • Insufficient studies of some biomass conversion pathways. • Insufficient studies on multi-environmental environment impact categories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Intergovernmental panel on climate change raised awareness on the urgent need for action to limit climate change. Answers include bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), which could theoretically generate negative emissions. The life cycle assessment (LCA) method needs to be applied to BECCS systems to assess their negative emission potential and prevent transfers from one environmental impact category to another. To allow for informed decision-making, the quality of LCA results should be evaluated. The quality of results is related to the quality of the data used. The purpose of this article is thus to review the life cycle inventory data that are used for BECCS LCA. To this end, 35 recent BECCS LCA were selected and the inventory data they used was collected. Synthesis inventory tables were then compiled, including the observed range of variability for each data item. These tables cover biomass harvesting, pre-treatment, combustion, gasification, and carbon dioxide capture with a monoethanolamine (MEA) based solvent. Data quality is also reviewed, through the representativeness, reproducibility and completeness of the life cycle inventories highlighted in the selected articles. Only a third of the articles (13/35) provide life cycle inventory tables. Only half of the articles assess the impact on climate change leading to inventory cut-offs. BECCS systems including combustion followed by MEA-based capture have been most referenced (12/35 articles). More transparency on data quality is recommended. Certain promising BECCS systems should also be further studied. This applies, for instance, to BECCS systems that involve second-generation solvents. • A review of the data quality used in life cycle assessment (LCA) of BECCS is assessed. • Only a third of the studied articles provide their life cycle inventory tables. • Inventory data currently used in LCA of BECCS is compiled into synthesis tables. • BECCS systems including MEA-based capture are most frequently referenced. • BECCS systems that should be further assessed with LCA are identified. [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]