| Title | The Application of Circular Footprint Formula in Bioenergy/Bioeconomy: Challenges, Case Study, and Comparison with Life Cycle Assessment Allocation Methods |
|---|---|
| ID_Doc | 26116 |
| Authors | Farrapo, AC Jr; Matheus, TT; Lagunes, RM; Filleti, R; Yamaji, F; Silva, DAL |
| Title | The Application of Circular Footprint Formula in Bioenergy/Bioeconomy: Challenges, Case Study, and Comparison with Life Cycle Assessment Allocation Methods |
| Year | 2023 |
| Published | Sustainability, 15, 3 |
| Abstract | Allocation methodological choices in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a relevant issue for the Circular Bioeconomy context. The recent Product Environmental Footprint Guide from the European Commission includes the Circular Footprint Formula (CFF) as a new way to deal with energy recovery/recycling processes. This paper investigated CFF vs. other different LCA allocation methods in Brazilian briquette production. A cradle-to-gate LCA study was conducted considering 1 MJ of energy from recovered and dedicated Eucalyptus briquette production. Global Warming Potential (GWP) and Cumulative Energy Demand (CED) were selected as the impact categories to evaluate the allocation methods choice that influences the potential impacts. LCA results were compared regarding four allocation methods. Eucalyptus wood as a biomass supply scenario achieved impact results up to 4.3 kg CO2-eq. for GWP and 0.0272 MJ-eq. for CED. The recovery wood scenario presented LCA burdens reduction by up to 206% for GWP, however a 492% increase in the CED results. CFF provided the lowest results for both impact categories. However, the CFF method still doesn't address particular aspects of circular bioenergy systems. Biomass and bioenergy LCA require further adjustments focusing on biochemical flows in the CFF calculation procedure to lead the development of innovative circular business models. |
Similar Articles
| ID | Score | Article |
|---|---|---|
16531
|
Garcia, R; Alvarenga, RAF; Huysveld, S; Dewulf, J; Allacker, K Accounting for biogenic carbon and end-of-life allocation in life cycle assessment of multi-output wood cascade systems(2020) | |
| 16299
|
Gursel, IV; Elbersen, B; Meesters, KPH Monitoring circular biobased economy - Systematic review of circularity indicators at the micro level(2023) | |
| 16653
|
Ingrao, C; Faccilongo, N; Di Gioia, L; Messineo, A Food waste recovery into energy in a circular economy perspective: A comprehensive review of aspects related to plant operation and environmental assessment(2018) | |
| 16662
|
Mesa, JA; Sierra-Fontalvo, L; Ortegon, K; Gonzalez-Quiroga, A Advancing circular bioeconomy: A critical review and assessment of indicators(2024) | |
| 2608
|
Kovacs, E; Hoaghia, MA; Senila, L; Scurtu, DA; Varaticeanu, C; Roman, C; Dumitras, DE Life Cycle Assessment of Biofuels Production Processes in Viticulture in the Context of Circular Economy(2022)Agronomy-Basel, 12, 6 | |
| 16377
|
Duque-Acevedo, M; Belmonte-Ureña, LJ; Yakovleva, N; Camacho-Ferre, F Analysis of the Circular Economic Production Models and Their Approach in Agriculture and Agricultural Waste Biomass Management(2020)International Journal Of Environmental Research And Public Health, 17, 24 | |
| 348
|
Gursel, IV; Elbersen, B; Meesters, KPH; van Leeuwen, M Defining Circular Economy Principles for Biobased Products(2022)Sustainability, 14, 19 | |
| 1561
|
Longo, S; Cellura, M; Luu, L; Nguyen, TQ; Rincione, R; Guarino, F Circular economy and life cycle thinking applied to the biomass supply chain: A review(2024) | |
| 6882
|
Gonçalves, M; Freire, F; Garcia, R Material flow analysis of forest biomass in Portugal to support a circular bioeconomy(2021) | |
| 28423
|
Toplicean, IM; Datcu, AD An Overview on Bioeconomy in Agricultural Sector, Biomass Production, Recycling Methods, and Circular Economy Considerations(2024)Agriculture-Basel, 14.0, 7 |