Search

• Biogas upgrading is environmentally and energetically favourable over combustion. • Storage or utilisation of the captured CO 2 has larger savings than biogas upgrading. • Upgrading, CO 2 storage or utilisation perform well in all impact categories. • The energy system has a substantial impact on the environmental performance. • Methanation provides large climate change savings only in renewable energy systems. Biogas from anaerobic digestion is an important renewable energy source. Combining its utilisation with carbon capture and storage (CCS) or carbon capture and utilisation (CCU) may improve climate change performance. This study uses life cycle assessment to evaluate the environmental impacts of 17 biogas management technology configurations (TCs). The technologies include biogas combustion, upgrading to natural gas quality, CCS, direct utilisation of CO 2 and methanation. The focus is mainly on energy balances and climate change impacts, and the results are subjected to sensitivity-, uncertainty-, and energy system analysis. The TCs with CCS and CCU provide the largest climate change savings (-1400 to - 2100 kg CO 2 -eq/1000 Nm3 biogas). Specifically, the methanation TCs provide the highest savings, but they also depend strongly on the energy sources. When combustion and upgrading TCs are amended with CCS, the resulting climate change savings are robust across the energy systems. The biogas upgrading TCs exhibit substantial climate change savings, mainly due to the natural gas substitution. Combustion TCs without CCS have the lowest climate change savings and the highest quantified uncertainties. The biogas upgrading TCs with storage or direct utilisation of CO 2 provide a good compromise between climate change savings and energy recovery. In the remaining impact categories, the CCU TCs generally perform best, followed by the upgrading TCs and finally, the combustion TCs. The CCS TCs consistently perform worse than their counterparts without CCS, opposite to the climate change results. Overall, amending biogas utilisation with CCS or CCU can contribute to climate change mitigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Substitution factors for forest products for the Canadian context were developed. • Substitution factors ranging from 0.51 to 0.91 tC/tC were found. • They will lead to more accurate assessments of the forest GHG mitigation potential. • These factors will help governments to manage forest and fight climate change. Evaluating the climate change mitigation potential of the forest sector requires a holistic approach based on forest carbon (C) sequestration, C storage in harvested wood products (HWP) and substitution on markets. High uncertainty is associated with substitution factors, that express avoided fossil greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the use of forest-based products in replacement of GHG-intensive materials and fossil fuels. Few studies have focused on the development of substitution factors in Canada, resulting in the use of unrepresentative generic data. Here, we provide a framework to reduce uncertainties related to substitution factors for primary wood products in a Canadian context. A life cycle assessment framework is used to quantify fossil GHG emissions for a baseline and a wood-intensive scenario. For solid product substitution, we focused on the construction sector and analyzed a range of innovative wood buildings with steel and reinforced concrete as alternative materials. We found non-weighted averages of 0.80 tC/tC for sawnwood and 0.81 tC/tC for panels. For energy substitution, we analyzed cases with different specifications on biomass product, facility type and alternative fossil fuel source in non-residential heat production and biofuel transportation sectors. We found a non-weighted average of 0.80 tC/tC for non-residential heat production and 0.51 tC/tC for biofuel transportation, that can be interpreted as 0.91 tC/tC for heavy fuel oil, 0.69 tC/tC for light fuel oil and 0.68 tC/tC for natural gas substitution. These results provide a benchmark for substitution factors in Canada, to help guide forest management strategies for climate change mitigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]