BIOENERGY FOR EUROPE: WHICH ONES FIT BEST?

More documents

Recommendations

Info

150 7 Annex Summer smog – The Netherlands g ethen. eq./MJ useful energy 0,16 0,14 0,12 0,1 0,08 0,06 0,04 0,02 0 willow heat natural gas heat Processing & utilisation Agriculture/forestry part Fossil fuel life cycle Agricultural reference system Miscanthus heat natural gas heat hemp electricity natural gas electricity sugar beet ETBE transport MTBE transport biogas electricity + heat natural gas electricity + heat All biofuels cause a smaller effect on summer smog than the reference system. In general, this is caused by a higher emission of VOC (Volatile Organic Compounds) in the fossil fuel chain. Replacing natural gas by biogas as an energy source gives the largest result in lowering summer smog. In the agricultural part of the reference for biogas the impact on summer smog is very high compared to the impact of biogas and to other chains. This is caused by the emission of methane during storage and spreading of non-fermented manure which does not occur when the manure is fermented to biogas. Compared with the other energy crops, Miscanthus gives only a minor advantage compared with the reference. This is due to a higher emission of pollutants like VOCs and benzene during the combustion of Miscanthus compared with the combustion of willow and hemp.
7.1 Country specific life cycle comparisons 151 Nitrous oxide – The Netherlands g N2O/MJ useful energy 0,04 0,035 0,03 0,025 0,02 0,015 0,01 0,005 0 willow heat natural gas heat Miscanthus heat natural gas heat hemp electricity natural gas electricity Processing & utilisation Agriculture/forestry part Fossil fuel life cycle Agricultural reference system sugar beet ETBE transport MTBE transport biogas electricity + heat natural gas electricity + heat The figure shows that using energy crops as biofuel causes more ozone depletion by N2O than using fossil fuels. Especially for hemp, which causes a ten times higher emission of N2O than using natural gas for producing electricity. For willow, hemp and sugar beet for ETBE this difference is mainly due to a high N2O emission during the agricultural part. This is caused by more intensive fertilisation of the energy crops in comparison with fallow. For Miscanthus the difference is caused by the agricultural part as well as the energy production part. Combustion of Miscanthus causes a 10 times higher N2O emission than the combustion of the cleaner natural gas. Finally, the use of biogas leads to zero emission of N2O.
Page 1 and 2:
BIOENERGY FOR EUROPE: WHICH ONES FI
Page 3 and 4:
Contents Executive summary.........
Page 5:
Contents III 5.3.2 Variation in col
Page 8 and 9:
2 Executive summary Table 1 Investi
Page 10 and 11:
4 Executive summary Result of the c
Page 12 and 13:
6 Executive summary Economic aspect
Page 15 and 16:
1 Goals, target groups and general
Page 17:
1 Goals, target groups and general
Page 20 and 21:
14 2 Biofuels under study The resul
Page 22 and 23:
16 2 Biofuels under study 2.3 Life
Page 24 and 25:
18 2 Biofuels under study 2.3.3 Mis
Page 26 and 27:
20 2 Biofuels under study 2.4.2 Sun
Page 28 and 29:
22 2 Biofuels under study 2.5 Life
Page 30 and 31:
24 2 Biofuels under study 2.5.3 Bio
Page 33 and 34:
3 Life cycle assessment of biofuels
Page 35 and 36:
3.2 Scope definition of the investi
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
3.3 Inventory analysis 35 then. Eve
Page 43 and 44:
3.3 Inventory analysis 37 using the
Page 45 and 46:
3.4 Impact assessment 39 energy cro
Page 47 and 48:
3.4 Impact assessment 41 The IPCC p
Page 49 and 50:
3.5 Interpretation 43 of the indivi
Page 51 and 52:
3.5 Interpretation 45 Fossil fuel p
Page 53 and 54:
4 Environmental results: presentati
Page 55 and 56:
4.1 Introduction 49 case excluding
Page 57 and 58:
4.2 European results: biofuels comp
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
4.3 European results: biofuels for
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
4.4 Summary of country specific res
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83:
4.5 Summary of comparisons between
Page 86 and 87:
80 5 Socio-economic and political a
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
90 6 Conclusions and recommendation
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 103 and 104:
7 Annex 7.1 Country specific life c
Page 105 and 106: 7.1 Country specific life cycle com
Page 155: 7.1 Country specific life cycle com
Page 165 and 166: 7.2 Comparisons between the countri
Page 175 and 176: 7.4 List of authors and addresses 1
Page 181 and 182: 7.5 Data availability 175 7.5 Data
Page 183 and 184: 7.6 Literature 177 Hauschild and We
show all

BIOENERGY FOR EUROPE: WHICH ONES FIT BEST?

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?