Comparing GHG Emissions of Residue-Based BECCS to Alternative Biomass Uses

IF 4.9 3区 工程技术 Q1 AGRONOMY
Susan Caroline Alvarado Cummings, Martin Junginger, Steef V. Hanssen, Floor van der Hilst, Anna Sarah Duden
{"title":"Comparing GHG Emissions of Residue-Based BECCS to Alternative Biomass Uses","authors":"Susan Caroline Alvarado Cummings,&nbsp;Martin Junginger,&nbsp;Steef V. Hanssen,&nbsp;Floor van der Hilst,&nbsp;Anna Sarah Duden","doi":"10.1111/gcbb.70089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) holds promise for achieving negative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions while generating electricity. When using forestry or agricultural residues as feedstock, BECCS may also avoid or reduce land-use based impacts compared to dedicated energy crops. It is, however, unclear how negative emissions from residue-based BECCS compare to alternative uses (bioenergy with no CCS, 2G ethanol, paper and boards, animal feed and decomposition) and how quickly BECCS can achieve climate benefits compared to these other uses. In this study, we used life-cycle assessment (LCA) to quantify supply chain emissions of BECCS for two power plants in the Netherlands, using residue-based wood pellets from Louisiana, USA, and sugarcane bagasse pellets from Louisiana and São Paulo, Brazil, as feedstock. Using an attributional LCA approach, we showed that the two BECCS plants combined use 7.5 Mt of biomass<sub>dry</sub> per year. This system generates between 10.3 and 11.1 TWh of electricity and provides 11.0 and 11.3 Mt CO<sub>2</sub>-eq. of negative emissions annually, for wood or bagasse, respectively. This results in a footprint of −0.63 (wood) and −0.65 (bagasse) t CO<sub>2</sub>-eq./t<sub>wet biomass</sub>. Following a consequential approach, we contrasted the GHG emissions per tonne of biomass residue used for BECCS with those associated with alternative uses, accounting for the (avoided) emissions from any substituted products and electricity. Here, BECCS negative emissions of approximately −0.6 t CO<sub>2</sub>-eq./t<sub>wet biomass</sub> compare favourably to emissions of alternative uses, which range from −0.3 to +0.12 t CO<sub>2</sub>-eq./t<sub>wet biomass</sub>. This study showed BECCS' potential for achieving negative emissions and climate benefits compared to other biomass uses.</p>","PeriodicalId":55126,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Biology Bioenergy","volume":"17 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gcbb.70089","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Change Biology Bioenergy","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcbb.70089","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) holds promise for achieving negative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions while generating electricity. When using forestry or agricultural residues as feedstock, BECCS may also avoid or reduce land-use based impacts compared to dedicated energy crops. It is, however, unclear how negative emissions from residue-based BECCS compare to alternative uses (bioenergy with no CCS, 2G ethanol, paper and boards, animal feed and decomposition) and how quickly BECCS can achieve climate benefits compared to these other uses. In this study, we used life-cycle assessment (LCA) to quantify supply chain emissions of BECCS for two power plants in the Netherlands, using residue-based wood pellets from Louisiana, USA, and sugarcane bagasse pellets from Louisiana and São Paulo, Brazil, as feedstock. Using an attributional LCA approach, we showed that the two BECCS plants combined use 7.5 Mt of biomassdry per year. This system generates between 10.3 and 11.1 TWh of electricity and provides 11.0 and 11.3 Mt CO2-eq. of negative emissions annually, for wood or bagasse, respectively. This results in a footprint of −0.63 (wood) and −0.65 (bagasse) t CO2-eq./twet biomass. Following a consequential approach, we contrasted the GHG emissions per tonne of biomass residue used for BECCS with those associated with alternative uses, accounting for the (avoided) emissions from any substituted products and electricity. Here, BECCS negative emissions of approximately −0.6 t CO2-eq./twet biomass compare favourably to emissions of alternative uses, which range from −0.3 to +0.12 t CO2-eq./twet biomass. This study showed BECCS' potential for achieving negative emissions and climate benefits compared to other biomass uses.

Abstract Image

比较残基BECCS与替代生物质利用的温室气体排放
具有碳捕获和储存(BECCS)的生物能源有望在发电的同时实现负温室气体(GHG)排放。当使用林业或农业残留物作为原料时,与专用能源作物相比,BECCS还可以避免或减少基于土地利用的影响。然而,与其他用途(不含CCS的生物能源、2G乙醇、纸和纸板、动物饲料和分解)相比,基于残留物的BECCS的负排放如何,以及与这些其他用途相比,BECCS实现气候效益的速度有多快,目前尚不清楚。在这项研究中,我们使用生命周期评估(LCA)来量化荷兰两家发电厂的BECCS供应链排放,这些发电厂使用来自美国路易斯安那州的残基木屑颗粒,以及来自路易斯安那州和巴西圣保罗的甘蔗渣颗粒作为原料。使用归因LCA方法,我们发现两个BECCS工厂每年总共使用750万吨生物质。该系统产生10.3至11.1太瓦时的电力,并提供11.0至11.3亿吨二氧化碳当量。木材和甘蔗渣的负排放。这导致二氧化碳当量的足迹为- 0.63(木材)和- 0.65(甘蔗渣)。/ twet生物量。根据相应的方法,我们将用于BECCS的每吨生物质残渣的温室气体排放量与替代用途相关的温室气体排放量进行了对比,其中考虑了任何替代产品和电力的(避免的)排放。这里,BECCS负排放约为- 0.6 t co2当量。/twet生物质比其他替代用途的排放更有利,其范围为- 0.3至+0.12吨二氧化碳当量。/ twet生物量。这项研究表明,与其他生物质利用相比,BECCS具有实现负排放和气候效益的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Change Biology Bioenergy
Global Change Biology Bioenergy AGRONOMY-ENERGY & FUELS
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
96
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: GCB Bioenergy is an international journal publishing original research papers, review articles and commentaries that promote understanding of the interface between biological and environmental sciences and the production of fuels directly from plants, algae and waste. The scope of the journal extends to areas outside of biology to policy forum, socioeconomic analyses, technoeconomic analyses and systems analysis. Papers do not need a global change component for consideration for publication, it is viewed as implicit that most bioenergy will be beneficial in avoiding at least a part of the fossil fuel energy that would otherwise be used. Key areas covered by the journal: Bioenergy feedstock and bio-oil production: energy crops and algae their management,, genomics, genetic improvements, planting, harvesting, storage, transportation, integrated logistics, production modeling, composition and its modification, pests, diseases and weeds of feedstocks. Manuscripts concerning alternative energy based on biological mimicry are also encouraged (e.g. artificial photosynthesis). Biological Residues/Co-products: from agricultural production, forestry and plantations (stover, sugar, bio-plastics, etc.), algae processing industries, and municipal sources (MSW). Bioenergy and the Environment: ecosystem services, carbon mitigation, land use change, life cycle assessment, energy and greenhouse gas balances, water use, water quality, assessment of sustainability, and biodiversity issues. Bioenergy Socioeconomics: examining the economic viability or social acceptability of crops, crops systems and their processing, including genetically modified organisms [GMOs], health impacts of bioenergy systems. Bioenergy Policy: legislative developments affecting biofuels and bioenergy. Bioenergy Systems Analysis: examining biological developments in a whole systems context.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书