From waste to wheel: Comparative life cycle assessment of sustainable bio-CNG pathways for Tehran's public transport

IF 6.9 2区环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENGINEERING, CHEMICAL

Process Safety and Environmental Protection Pub Date : 2025-03-27 DOI:10.1016/j.psep.2025.107071

Seyed Mohsen Hosseini , Armin Ardehali , Hossein Yousefi

{"title":"From waste to wheel: Comparative life cycle assessment of sustainable bio-CNG pathways for Tehran's public transport","authors":"Seyed Mohsen Hosseini , Armin Ardehali , Hossein Yousefi","doi":"10.1016/j.psep.2025.107071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study evaluates various bio-compressed natural gas (bio-CNG) production pathways from a life cycle perspective to identify the most sustainable scenarios for addressing the CNG shortage in Tehran’s public transport fleet. The energy, cost, and environmental impacts of fossil CNG production were assessed and compared with bio-CNG from anaerobic digestion of bio-waste, manure, used vegetable cooking oil (UVCO), and grass biorefinery. The system boundary includes all significant life cycle inputs, outputs, and emissions, excluding end-of-life impacts. Processes were modeled using the ecoinvent database and analyzed in OpenLCA software, with the functional unit set to 1 kg of CNG. The grass-refinery scenario is the most sustainable, with life-cycle costs and environmental impacts comparable to fossil CNG but lower than anaerobic digestion-derived bio-CNG. Grass-based bio-CNG shows lower impacts on human health but higher impacts on ecosystems. Fossil CNG has a resource damage potential 10.8 times higher and a non-renewable energy demand 10.7 times higher than grass-based bio-CNG, while the production cost of grass-based bio-CNG is only 17 % higher. The UVCO-based scenario ranks second, with lower ecosystem damage but higher human health impacts. Manure-based bio-CNG is more sustainable than bio-waste-based bio-CNG, which has the highest environmental and cost burdens, making it economically non-viable. Future research should address end-of-life impacts, socio-economic factors, and advanced technologies to enhance bio-CNG sustainability.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":20743,"journal":{"name":"Process Safety and Environmental Protection","volume":"197 ","pages":"Article 107071"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Process Safety and Environmental Protection","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957582025003386","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CHEMICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study evaluates various bio-compressed natural gas (bio-CNG) production pathways from a life cycle perspective to identify the most sustainable scenarios for addressing the CNG shortage in Tehran’s public transport fleet. The energy, cost, and environmental impacts of fossil CNG production were assessed and compared with bio-CNG from anaerobic digestion of bio-waste, manure, used vegetable cooking oil (UVCO), and grass biorefinery. The system boundary includes all significant life cycle inputs, outputs, and emissions, excluding end-of-life impacts. Processes were modeled using the ecoinvent database and analyzed in OpenLCA software, with the functional unit set to 1 kg of CNG. The grass-refinery scenario is the most sustainable, with life-cycle costs and environmental impacts comparable to fossil CNG but lower than anaerobic digestion-derived bio-CNG. Grass-based bio-CNG shows lower impacts on human health but higher impacts on ecosystems. Fossil CNG has a resource damage potential 10.8 times higher and a non-renewable energy demand 10.7 times higher than grass-based bio-CNG, while the production cost of grass-based bio-CNG is only 17 % higher. The UVCO-based scenario ranks second, with lower ecosystem damage but higher human health impacts. Manure-based bio-CNG is more sustainable than bio-waste-based bio-CNG, which has the highest environmental and cost burdens, making it economically non-viable. Future research should address end-of-life impacts, socio-economic factors, and advanced technologies to enhance bio-CNG sustainability.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Process Safety and Environmental Protection 环境科学-工程：化工

CiteScore

11.40

自引率

15.40%

发文量

929

审稿时长

8.0 months

期刊介绍： The Process Safety and Environmental Protection (PSEP) journal is a leading international publication that focuses on the publication of high-quality, original research papers in the field of engineering, specifically those related to the safety of industrial processes and environmental protection. The journal encourages submissions that present new developments in safety and environmental aspects, particularly those that show how research findings can be applied in process engineering design and practice. PSEP is particularly interested in research that brings fresh perspectives to established engineering principles, identifies unsolved problems, or suggests directions for future research. The journal also values contributions that push the boundaries of traditional engineering and welcomes multidisciplinary papers. PSEP's articles are abstracted and indexed by a range of databases and services, which helps to ensure that the journal's research is accessible and recognized in the academic and professional communities. These databases include ANTE, Chemical Abstracts, Chemical Hazards in Industry, Current Contents, Elsevier Engineering Information database, Pascal Francis, Web of Science, Scopus, Engineering Information Database EnCompass LIT (Elsevier), and INSPEC. This wide coverage facilitates the dissemination of the journal's content to a global audience interested in process safety and environmental engineering.