Gasification versus fast pyrolysis bio-oil production: A life cycle assessment
A life cycle assessment was performed to compare the sustainability of gasification and fast pyrolysis processes for producing bio-oil using agricultural wastes from biomass. The objective was to carry out the environmental analysis associated with the production of 1 MJ bio-oil using different agri...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2022 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha |
| Repositorio: | RUIdeRA. Repositorio Institucional de la UCLM |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ruidera.uclm.es:10578/30114 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/10578/30114 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Life cycle assessment Gasification-FTFast pyrolysis Agricultural waste biomass GWP Aspen Plus® Evaluación del ciclo de vida Gasificación-Pirólisis rápida Biomasa de residuos agrícolas Aspen Plus |
| id |
ES_330280fd7cf2b562c9cbbb0c5ee7c900 |
|---|---|
| oai_identifier_str |
oai:ruidera.uclm.es:10578/30114 |
| network_acronym_str |
ES |
| network_name_str |
España |
| repository_id_str |
|
| spelling |
Gasification versus fast pyrolysis bio-oil production: A life cycle assessmentAlcazar Ruiz, AngelOrtiz, M.L.Sánchez Silva, María LuzDorado Fernández, FernandoSánchez Silva, María LuzLife cycle assessmentGasification-FTFast pyrolysisAgricultural waste biomassGWPAspen Plus®Evaluación del ciclo de vidaGasificación-Pirólisis rápidaBiomasa de residuos agrícolasGWPAspen PlusA life cycle assessment was performed to compare the sustainability of gasification and fast pyrolysis processes for producing bio-oil using agricultural wastes from biomass. The objective was to carry out the environmental analysis associated with the production of 1 MJ bio-oil using different agricultural wastes biomasses for both thermochemical processes to determine which process is more respectful with the environment. The life cycle assessment revealed that gasification was more detrimental to the environment for all agricultural biomasses under study. In addition, greenhouse gas emissions over a 100-year time horizon were calculated, thereby demonstrating that CO2 yield emissions were higher than those for CH4 and N2O in both thermochemical processes. Furthermore, to gain a comprehensive overview, both thermochemical processes were divided into different equipment blocks to evaluate their individual impacts. Almond shell, pistachio shell and olive stone were identified as the biomasses for which minor amount of feed was needed to produce 1 MJ bio-oil. This assessment determined that the gasification stage of the gasification process and the separation stage for fast pyrolysis, were the main contributors to all mid-point impact categories. Finally, fast pyrolysis was the most environmentally friendly option for producing 1 MJ bio-oil.Se realizó una evaluación del ciclo de vida para comparar la sostenibilidad de los procesos de gasificación y pirólisis rápida para producir bioaceite a partir de residuos agrícolas a partir de biomasa. El objetivo fue realizar el análisis ambiental asociado a la producción de 1 MJ de bioaceite utilizando diferentes biomasas de residuos agrícolas para ambos procesos termoquímicos para determinar qué proceso es más respetuoso con el medio ambiente. La evaluación del ciclo de vida reveló que la gasificación era más perjudicial para el medio ambiente para todas las biomasas agrícolas en estudio. Además, se calcularon las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero en un horizonte temporal de 100 años, lo que demuestra que el COLas emisiones de rendimiento de 2 fueron superiores a las de CH 4 y N 2 O en ambos procesos termoquímicos. Además, para obtener una visión general completa, ambos procesos termoquímicos se dividieron en diferentes bloques de equipos para evaluar sus impactos individuales. La cáscara de almendra, la cáscara de pistacho y el hueso de aceituna se identificaron como las biomasas para las que se necesitaba una cantidad menor de alimento para producir 1 MJ de bioaceite. Esta evaluación determinó que la etapa de gasificación del proceso de gasificación y la etapa de separación para pirólisis rápida fueron los principales contribuyentes a todas las categorías de impacto de punto medio. Finalmente, la pirólisis rápida fue la opción más respetuosa con el medio ambiente para producir 1 MJ de biopetróleoElsevier202220222022info:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttps://hdl.handle.net/10578/30114reponame:RUIdeRA. Repositorio Institucional de la UCLMinstname:Universidad de Castilla-La ManchaInglésinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:ruidera.uclm.es:10578/301142026-05-27T07:36:41Z |
| dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Gasification versus fast pyrolysis bio-oil production: A life cycle assessment |
| title |
Gasification versus fast pyrolysis bio-oil production: A life cycle assessment |
| spellingShingle |
Gasification versus fast pyrolysis bio-oil production: A life cycle assessment Alcazar Ruiz, Angel Life cycle assessment Gasification-FTFast pyrolysis Agricultural waste biomass GWP Aspen Plus® Evaluación del ciclo de vida Gasificación-Pirólisis rápida Biomasa de residuos agrícolas GWP Aspen Plus |
| title_short |
Gasification versus fast pyrolysis bio-oil production: A life cycle assessment |
| title_full |
Gasification versus fast pyrolysis bio-oil production: A life cycle assessment |
| title_fullStr |
Gasification versus fast pyrolysis bio-oil production: A life cycle assessment |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Gasification versus fast pyrolysis bio-oil production: A life cycle assessment |
| title_sort |
Gasification versus fast pyrolysis bio-oil production: A life cycle assessment |
| dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Alcazar Ruiz, Angel Ortiz, M.L. Sánchez Silva, María Luz Dorado Fernández, Fernando Sánchez Silva, María Luz |
| author |
Alcazar Ruiz, Angel |
| author_facet |
Alcazar Ruiz, Angel Ortiz, M.L. Sánchez Silva, María Luz Dorado Fernández, Fernando |
| author_role |
author |
| author2 |
Ortiz, M.L. Sánchez Silva, María Luz Dorado Fernández, Fernando |
| author2_role |
author author author |
| dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
Life cycle assessment Gasification-FTFast pyrolysis Agricultural waste biomass GWP Aspen Plus® Evaluación del ciclo de vida Gasificación-Pirólisis rápida Biomasa de residuos agrícolas GWP Aspen Plus |
| topic |
Life cycle assessment Gasification-FTFast pyrolysis Agricultural waste biomass GWP Aspen Plus® Evaluación del ciclo de vida Gasificación-Pirólisis rápida Biomasa de residuos agrícolas GWP Aspen Plus |
| description |
A life cycle assessment was performed to compare the sustainability of gasification and fast pyrolysis processes for producing bio-oil using agricultural wastes from biomass. The objective was to carry out the environmental analysis associated with the production of 1 MJ bio-oil using different agricultural wastes biomasses for both thermochemical processes to determine which process is more respectful with the environment. The life cycle assessment revealed that gasification was more detrimental to the environment for all agricultural biomasses under study. In addition, greenhouse gas emissions over a 100-year time horizon were calculated, thereby demonstrating that CO2 yield emissions were higher than those for CH4 and N2O in both thermochemical processes. Furthermore, to gain a comprehensive overview, both thermochemical processes were divided into different equipment blocks to evaluate their individual impacts. Almond shell, pistachio shell and olive stone were identified as the biomasses for which minor amount of feed was needed to produce 1 MJ bio-oil. This assessment determined that the gasification stage of the gasification process and the separation stage for fast pyrolysis, were the main contributors to all mid-point impact categories. Finally, fast pyrolysis was the most environmentally friendly option for producing 1 MJ bio-oil. |
| publishDate |
2022 |
| dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022 2022 2022 |
| dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| format |
article |
| dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
https://hdl.handle.net/10578/30114 |
| url |
https://hdl.handle.net/10578/30114 |
| dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
Inglés |
| language_invalid_str_mv |
Inglés |
| dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
| dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf |
| dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier |
| publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier |
| dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:RUIdeRA. Repositorio Institucional de la UCLM instname:Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha |
| instname_str |
Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha |
| reponame_str |
RUIdeRA. Repositorio Institucional de la UCLM |
| collection |
RUIdeRA. Repositorio Institucional de la UCLM |
| repository.name.fl_str_mv |
|
| repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
| _version_ |
1869405719117168640 |
| score |
15,198674 |