Assessing the environmental sustainability of grass silage and cattle slurry for biogas production

被引:21
作者
Beausang, Ciara [1 ]
McDonnell, Kevin [1 ]
Murphy, Fionnuala [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Coll Dublin, Sch Biosyst & Food Engn, Room 3-29, Dublin 4, Ireland
关键词
Anaerobic digestion; Consequential life cycle assessment; Biomethane; Bioenergy; Agricultural feedstocks; LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT; CO-DIGESTION; ENERGY; MANURE; CONSEQUENCES; PERFORMANCE; FUTURE; POLICY;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126838
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Grass silage and cattle slurry have been identified as potential significant resources for biogas produc-tion. While a higher proportion of grass silage enables a higher specific methane yield to be achieved, there are concerns that using high shares of grass silage may have negative environmental impacts. Previous studies which consider grass as a feedstock have focused on environmental sustainability in the context of greenhouse gas mitigation. However, there is a potential risk of burden shifting occurring if other environmental impacts, such as eutrophication and terrestrial acidification, are not taken into account. A consequential life cycle assessment was conducted to examine mono-digestion of cattle slurry and co-digestion with grass silage in different ratios on a volatile solids (VS) basis. The prior uses of the feedstocks were considered, along with the processes displaced by the biogas and digestate produced. The net environmental impact varied according to the proportion of silage and slurry digested. Higher environmental burdens were observed for mixes with a greater ratio of grass silage to slurry. The op-timum environmental performance for the baseline scenario was observed at a VS ratio of 0.4:0.6 for silage and slurry, where there is a net reduction for all impact categories considered. The choice of marginal technologies that are displaced has a significant influence on the results, as have the as-sumptions about how the grass silage is sourced. This study provides greater insight into the environ-mental impacts of co-digesting an energy crop with animal manure in varying proportions. (c) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 70 条
[1]  
ADAS, 2013, MANNER NPK MANURE NI
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2020, From farm to fork
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2011, Global guidance principles for life cycle assessment databases
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2018, IEA Bioenergy Task 39: Comparison of Biofuel Life Cycle Analysis Tools Phase 2, Part 1: FAME and HVO/HEFA
[5]   Agricultural anaerobic digestion plants: What LCA studies pointed out and what can be done to make them more environmentally sustainable [J].
Bacenetti, Jacopo ;
Sala, Cesare ;
Fusi, Alessandra ;
Fiala, Marco .
APPLIED ENERGY, 2016, 179 :669-686
[6]   Anaerobic digestion of poultry litter - A consequential life cycle assessment [J].
Beausang, Ciara ;
McDonnell, Kevin ;
Murphy, Fionnuala .
SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2020, 735
[7]   Green biomass to biogas - A study on anaerobic digestion of residue grass [J].
Bedoic, Robert ;
Cucek, Lidija ;
Cosic, Boris ;
Krajnc, Damjan ;
Smoljanic, Goran ;
Kravanja, Zdravko ;
Ljubas, Davor ;
Puksec, Tomislav ;
Duic, Neven .
JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2019, 213 :700-709
[8]   Evaluation of the energy and greenhouse gases impacts of grass harvested on riverbanks for feeding anaerobic digestion plants [J].
Boscaro, Davide ;
Pezzuolo, Andrea ;
Sartori, Luigi ;
Marinello, Francesco ;
Mattioli, Andrea ;
Bolzonella, David ;
Grigolato, Stefano .
JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2018, 172 :4099-4109
[9]  
Central Statistics Office, 2020, STATBANK CSO MAIN DA
[10]   Empirically based uncertainty factors for the pedigree matrix in ecoinvent [J].
Ciroth, Andreas ;
Muller, Stephanie ;
Weidema, Bo ;
Lesage, Pascal .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2016, 21 (09) :1338-1348