Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Comparative waterfootprint
profile of vegetable oils for
biodiesel production
Carla Caldeira1, Paula Quinteiro2, Erica Castanheira1, Ana C. Dias2
Luís Arroja2, Fausto Freire1
1: Center for Industrial Ecology, ADAI-LAETA Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
University of Coimbra
2: Centre for Environmental and Marine Studies (CESAM), Department of Environment and Planning
University of Aveiro
• Waterfootprint profile (water consumption and water degradability) assessment
of four different vegetable oils used for biodiesel production following the ISO
14046 guidelines
• Compare two methods to assess water consumption: WSI (Pfister et al. 2009;
Pfister & Ridoutt 2013)) and AWARE (Boulay et al. 2015)
• Comparison of 4 alternative feedstocks for biodiesel: rapeseed, soybean, palm
and waste cooking oil (Functional unit: 1 kg of oil)
• Addressing cultivation in different countries
• The results will be used by a biodiesel producer to support decision planning on
the selection of “oil blends” for biodiesel production
2
1. GOAL AND SCOPE
System Boundaries
1. GOAL AND SCOPE
Impact categories
• Water comsumption (Pfister 2009, Aware 2015)
• Eutrophication (Recipe)
• Acidification (Impact 2002 +)
• Ecotoxicity (Usetox)
• Human toxicity (Usetox)
Water
degradability
General assumptions
• No infraestructures
• No specific agricultural activities/ general process for diesel agricultural machinary
• Transportation of chemicals and materials not included
• Transportation Seeds/beans/oil /WCO collection included
Water
consumption
4
1. GOAL AND SCOPE
Multifunctionality
• Energy allocation (Renewable Energy Directive approach)
5
2. LIFE-CYCLE INVENTORY
STAGE DATA SOURCE
CULTIVATION
(1) Pfister, S., Bayer, P., 2014. Monthly water stress: spatially and temporally explicit consumptive water footprint of global crop production. J. Clean. Prod. 73, 52–62 (2) Malça, J., Coelho, A., Freire, F., 2013. Environmental Life-Cycle Assessment of Rapeseed-Based Biodiesel: Alternative Cultivation Systems and Locations. Appl. Energy. (3) Castanheira, É.G., Acevedo, H., Freire, F., 2014. Greenhouse gas intensity of palm oil produced
in Colombia addressing alternative land use change and fertilization scenarios. Appl. Energy 114, 958–967 (4) Castanheira, É.G., Freire, F., 2013. Greenhouse gas assessment of soybean production: Implications of land use change and different cultivation systems. J. Clean. Prod. 54, 49–60 (5) Castanheira, É.G., Grisoli, R., Coelho, S., Anderi da Silva, G., Freire, F., 2015. Life-cycle assessment of soybean-based biodiesel in Europe: comparing grain, oil and biodiesel import from
Brazil. J. Clean. Prod. 102, 188–201. (6) Ecoinvent database
EXTRACTION (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
TRANSPORTATION
WCO COLLECTION (7) Caldeira C., Queirós J., Freire F., 2015. Biodiesel from Waste Cooking Oils in Portugal: alternative collection systems. Waste and Biomass Valorization 6, 771–779.
PRE-TREATMENT (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
6
3. IMPACT ASSESSMENT
FOREGROUND DATA
BACKGROUND DATA
CF country specific
CF GENERIC
Sensitivity Analysis
RER /RoW
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
m3
eq
/kg
oil
AWARE
Refining
Transp / Collec
Extraction
Cultivation
7
3. IMPACT ASSESSMENT – WATER SCARCITY
LC STAGE CONTRIBUITION
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
m3
eq
/kg
oil
WSI
Refining
Transp / Collec
Extraction
Cultivation
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
160.0
m3
eq
/ kg
oil
AWARE
RER
ROW
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
m3
eq
/kg
oil
WSI
RER
ROW
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
WCO_PT _High % FFA
WCO_PT Low % FFA
m3
eq
/kg
oil
WSI
0.0
0.2
0.4
WCO_PT _High % FFA
WCO_PT Low % FFA
m3
eq
/kg
oil
AWARE
8
3. IMPACT ASSESSMENT – WATER SCARCITY
Sensitivity analysis on the background CF – RER or RoW
Similar results using the RER or
ROW CF in the background
system
Eutrophication and Acidification
9
3. IMPACT ASSESSMENT – WATER QUALITY RELATED IMPACTS
Virgin Oils
Cultivation stage
WCO
Collection
0
0.0004
0.0008
0.0012
0.0016
0.002
kg P
eq
/kg
oil
Freshwater eutrophication
Refining
Transp / Collec
Extraction
Cultivation
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
kg N
eq
/kg
Oil
Marine eutrophication
Refining
Transp / Collec
Extraction
Cultivation
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
kg S
O2
eq
/kg
Oil
Aquatic acidification
Refining
Transp / Collec
Extraction
Cultivation
Feedstocks with higher impacts
WATER CONSUMPTION
WSI/AWARE Rapeseed_SP Soya_AR Rapeseed_FR
WATER QUALITY RELATED IMPACTS
Freshwater eutrophication
Rapeseed_US Soya_Br Soya_AR
Marine eutrophication
Rapeseed_US Rapeseed_FR Rapeseed_SP
Aquatic Acidification
Rapeseed_US Rapeseed_SP Rapeseed_CN
10
4. FEEDSTOCKS WITH HIGHER IMPACTS
Cultivation Cultivation
• Impacts in water quality of the cultivation stage are due to the fertilizers use
(Phosphates – FE; Ammonia and Nitrates, Nitrogen fertilizers – ME; Ammonia and
Ammonium nitrate – AA)
11
5. MAIN CONCLUSIONS
• Both methods (WSI and AWARE) used to address water scarcity
provide the same conclusions
• The higher water scarcity impact was calculated for Rapeseed _Sp
• The higher water degradability impacts was calculated for
Rapeseed_US
• Cultivation is the stage that contibutes the most to water scarcity
and water degradability
