Views
5 years ago

BIOENERGY FOR EUROPE: WHICH ONES FIT BEST?

BIOENERGY FOR EUROPE: WHICH ONES FIT BEST?

116 7 Annex Ecological

116 7 Annex Ecological aspects I: land use efficiency – Denmark Use of fossil fuels Greenhouse effect Acidification Eutrophication Summer smog Nitrous oxide** Human toxicity** * How to interpret the diagram Advantages for biofuel Advantages for fossil fuel Willow RME Triticale Miscanthus 6700 -2000 -1000 0 1000 2000 3000 6700 Danish inhabitant equivalents* per 1,000 ha The figure shows the results of complete life cycle comparisons where willow, RME, triticale and Miscanthus respectively are used for energy production instead of their respective fossil counterparts. The results are given for an area of 1,000 ha being cultivated with the respective crop. In this case for example the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that is being saved when 1,000 ha of Miscanthus are cultivated and used to substitute light oil, is equal to the amount which about 350 Danish citizens would on average generate in one year. (This is what is meant by “Danish inhabitant equivalents”). Conclusion Comparing the four investigated bioenergy carriers (in turn compared to their fossil counterparts) against each other, the following result emerges: Growing 1000 ha of willow or triticale will give the greatest advantages in the categories use of fossil fuels and greenhouse effect. Triticale furthermore shows the best results with regard to nitrous oxide and acidification. RME shows the worst or second worst results in all categories, except from an insignificant advantage with regard to summer smog. Miscanthus shows the smallest advantages with regard to use of fossil fuels and greenhouse effect and has average disadvantages with regard to all other categories than human toxicity, and these data should not be included in the final assessment because of a relatively high uncertainty. (**For more information on this and the other environmental parameters investigated see Chapters 3.3 and 3.4 as well as 4.1.2.) It is important to realise that the final assessment of which biofuel is to be preferred depends on the subjective judgements and priorities of the individual decision maker.

7.1 Country specific life cycle comparisons 117 Ecological aspects II: impacts related to saved energy – Denmark Use of fossil fuels Greenhouse effect Acidification Eutrophication Summer smog Nitrous oxide** Human toxicity** * How to interpret the diagram Advantages for biofuel Advantages for fossil fuel -2000 -1500 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Danish inhabitant equivalents* per 100 TJ 15,000 RME Biogas Triticale Straw Willow Miscanthus The figure can be used to give an answer in the situation where a decision maker wants to support a given amount of bioenergy measured in Joule, and wants to know which energy will give maximum environmental benefits from this support. The figure shows the results of complete life cycle comparisons where RME, biogas, triticale, straw, willow and Miscanthus respectively are used for energy production instead of their respective fossil counterparts (light oil is chosen for Miscanthus, willow and straw). The results are given for an amount of 100 TJ. This is equivalent to the average heat requirement of 4,700 Danes. In this case for example the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that is being saved by substituting light oil by RME is equal to the amount which about 800 Danish citizens would on average generate in one year. (This is what is meant by “Danish inhabitant equivalents”). Conclusion Comparing the six investigated bioenergy carriers (in turn compared to their fossil counterparts) against each other, the following result emerges: RME shows the greatest advantages with regard to use of fossil fuels, summer smog, and human toxicity. Triticale has greatest advances with regard to greenhouse effect, and for use of fossil fuels the advantage is almost as big as for RME. Straw show the smallest disadvantages with regard to nitrous oxide, acidification and eutrophication. A further assessment of what biofuel is most environmental advantageous cannot be carried out on a scientific basis, because for this purpose subjective value judgements regarding the individual environmental categories are required which differ from person to person. (**For more information on this and the other environmental parameters investigated see Chapters 3.3 and 3.4 as well as 4.1.2.)

Bioenergy Update 10-02 - General*Bioenergy
Maximising the environmental benefits of Europe's bioenergy potential
Bioenergy Value Chain Research And Development Stakes ... - FARA
LCA of a biorefinery concept producing bioethanol, bioenergy - avniR
Desktop Management Tools — Which One Is the Best?
Choose The One That Best Fits Your Lifestyle! - Java Fundraiser
One Size Fits One: Best Practices for Building - Right Management
Hot vs. Cold Ionization Gauges: Which One is Best for Me?