Life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Argentina
PURPOSE: The production of bioethanol in Argentina is based on the sugarcane plantation system, with extensive use of agricultural land, scarce use of fertilizers, pesticides, and artificial irrigation, and burning of sugarcane prior to harvesting. The objective of this paper is to develop a life cy...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The international journal of life cycle assessment 2013-08, Vol.18 (7), p.1344-1357 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1357 |
---|---|
container_issue | 7 |
container_start_page | 1344 |
container_title | The international journal of life cycle assessment |
container_volume | 18 |
creator | Amores, María José Mele, Fernando Daniel Jiménez, Laureano Castells, Francesc |
description | PURPOSE: The production of bioethanol in Argentina is based on the sugarcane plantation system, with extensive use of agricultural land, scarce use of fertilizers, pesticides, and artificial irrigation, and burning of sugarcane prior to harvesting. The objective of this paper is to develop a life cycle assessment (LCA) of the fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Tucumán (Argentina), assessing the environmental impact potentials to identify which of them cause the main impacts. METHODS: Our approach innovatively combined knowledge about the main impact pathways of bioethanol production with LCA which covers the typical emission-related impact categories at the midpoint life cycle impact assessment. Real data from the Argentinean industry subsystems have been used to perform the study: S1—sugarcane production, S2—milling process, S3—sugar production, and S4—ethanol production from molasses, honey, or sugarcane juice. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The results are shown in the three alternative pathways to produce bioethanol. Different impact categories are assessed, with global warming potential (GWP) having the highest impact. So, the production of 1 kg of ethanol from molasses emitted 22.5 kg CO₂ (pathway 1), 19.2 kg CO₂ from honey (pathway 2), and 15.0 kg CO₂ from sugarcane juice (pathway 3). Several sensitivity analyses to study the variability of the GWP according to the different cases studied have been performed (changing the agricultural yield, including economic and calorific allocation in sugar production, and modifying the sugar price). CONCLUSIONS: Agriculture is the subsystem which shows the highest impact in almost all the categories due to fossil fuel consumption. When an economic and calorific allocation is considered to assess the environmental impact, the value is lower than when mass allocation is used because ethanol is relatively cheaper than sugars and it has higher calorific value. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11367-013-0584-2 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1671497819</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3028611491</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-d147063cf7cf9660f91782c6402c74c2d49ffddc2649e2bfabd9fc3cd5ca1bcf3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkDtPwzAQgC0EEuXxA5iwxMISuHMcOx6ripdUiQE6W65jh1R5FLsZ-u9xFQbEANMt33e6-wi5QrhDAHkfEXMhM8A8g6LkGTsiMxTIM1kAOyYzULzM8pyrU3IW4waAIahiRubLxjtq97Z11MToYuxcv6ODp350LXW7D9MPLfVh6GgcaxOs6R1tejoPdQKb3lyQE2_a6C6_5zlZPT68L56z5evTy2K-zCzncpdVyCWI3HppvRICvEJZMis4MCu5ZRVX3leVZYIrx9berCvlbW6rwhpcW5-fk9tp7zYMn6OLO9010bq2TQcNY9QoJHIlS1T_o1wxkQIwntCbX-hmGEOfHkkUMp5aQpEonCgbhhiD83obms6EvUbQh_566q9Tf33or1ly2OTExPa1Cz82_yFdT5I3gzZ1aKJevTFADoBFWQqZfwEUKpAs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1412458405</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Argentina</title><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Amores, María José ; Mele, Fernando Daniel ; Jiménez, Laureano ; Castells, Francesc</creator><creatorcontrib>Amores, María José ; Mele, Fernando Daniel ; Jiménez, Laureano ; Castells, Francesc</creatorcontrib><description>PURPOSE: The production of bioethanol in Argentina is based on the sugarcane plantation system, with extensive use of agricultural land, scarce use of fertilizers, pesticides, and artificial irrigation, and burning of sugarcane prior to harvesting. The objective of this paper is to develop a life cycle assessment (LCA) of the fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Tucumán (Argentina), assessing the environmental impact potentials to identify which of them cause the main impacts. METHODS: Our approach innovatively combined knowledge about the main impact pathways of bioethanol production with LCA which covers the typical emission-related impact categories at the midpoint life cycle impact assessment. Real data from the Argentinean industry subsystems have been used to perform the study: S1—sugarcane production, S2—milling process, S3—sugar production, and S4—ethanol production from molasses, honey, or sugarcane juice. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The results are shown in the three alternative pathways to produce bioethanol. Different impact categories are assessed, with global warming potential (GWP) having the highest impact. So, the production of 1 kg of ethanol from molasses emitted 22.5 kg CO₂ (pathway 1), 19.2 kg CO₂ from honey (pathway 2), and 15.0 kg CO₂ from sugarcane juice (pathway 3). Several sensitivity analyses to study the variability of the GWP according to the different cases studied have been performed (changing the agricultural yield, including economic and calorific allocation in sugar production, and modifying the sugar price). CONCLUSIONS: Agriculture is the subsystem which shows the highest impact in almost all the categories due to fossil fuel consumption. When an economic and calorific allocation is considered to assess the environmental impact, the value is lower than when mass allocation is used because ethanol is relatively cheaper than sugars and it has higher calorific value.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0948-3349</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1614-7502</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11367-013-0584-2</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Agricultural land ; Allocations ; bioethanol ; Biofuels ; burning ; Carbon dioxide ; Categories ; Climate change ; Earth and Environmental Science ; Economics ; energy use and consumption ; Environment ; Environmental assessment ; Environmental Chemistry ; Environmental Economics ; Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology ; Environmental impact ; Ethanol ; ethanol production ; Ethyl alcohol ; fertilizers ; Food processing industry ; Fossil fuels ; Global warming ; Harvesting ; Honey ; industry ; irrigation ; Lca for Renewable Resources ; Life cycle analysis ; Life cycle assessment ; Life cycle engineering ; life cycle impact assessment ; Life cycles ; milling ; Molasses ; Pathways ; Pesticides ; prices ; Renewable resources ; Sensitivity analysis ; Sugar ; Sugarcane ; sugarcane juice ; Sugars</subject><ispartof>The international journal of life cycle assessment, 2013-08, Vol.18 (7), p.1344-1357</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-d147063cf7cf9660f91782c6402c74c2d49ffddc2649e2bfabd9fc3cd5ca1bcf3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-d147063cf7cf9660f91782c6402c74c2d49ffddc2649e2bfabd9fc3cd5ca1bcf3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11367-013-0584-2$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11367-013-0584-2$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906,41469,42538,51300</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Amores, María José</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mele, Fernando Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiménez, Laureano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Castells, Francesc</creatorcontrib><title>Life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Argentina</title><title>The international journal of life cycle assessment</title><addtitle>Int J Life Cycle Assess</addtitle><description>PURPOSE: The production of bioethanol in Argentina is based on the sugarcane plantation system, with extensive use of agricultural land, scarce use of fertilizers, pesticides, and artificial irrigation, and burning of sugarcane prior to harvesting. The objective of this paper is to develop a life cycle assessment (LCA) of the fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Tucumán (Argentina), assessing the environmental impact potentials to identify which of them cause the main impacts. METHODS: Our approach innovatively combined knowledge about the main impact pathways of bioethanol production with LCA which covers the typical emission-related impact categories at the midpoint life cycle impact assessment. Real data from the Argentinean industry subsystems have been used to perform the study: S1—sugarcane production, S2—milling process, S3—sugar production, and S4—ethanol production from molasses, honey, or sugarcane juice. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The results are shown in the three alternative pathways to produce bioethanol. Different impact categories are assessed, with global warming potential (GWP) having the highest impact. So, the production of 1 kg of ethanol from molasses emitted 22.5 kg CO₂ (pathway 1), 19.2 kg CO₂ from honey (pathway 2), and 15.0 kg CO₂ from sugarcane juice (pathway 3). Several sensitivity analyses to study the variability of the GWP according to the different cases studied have been performed (changing the agricultural yield, including economic and calorific allocation in sugar production, and modifying the sugar price). CONCLUSIONS: Agriculture is the subsystem which shows the highest impact in almost all the categories due to fossil fuel consumption. When an economic and calorific allocation is considered to assess the environmental impact, the value is lower than when mass allocation is used because ethanol is relatively cheaper than sugars and it has higher calorific value.</description><subject>Agricultural land</subject><subject>Allocations</subject><subject>bioethanol</subject><subject>Biofuels</subject><subject>burning</subject><subject>Carbon dioxide</subject><subject>Categories</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>energy use and consumption</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>Environmental assessment</subject><subject>Environmental Chemistry</subject><subject>Environmental Economics</subject><subject>Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology</subject><subject>Environmental impact</subject><subject>Ethanol</subject><subject>ethanol production</subject><subject>Ethyl alcohol</subject><subject>fertilizers</subject><subject>Food processing industry</subject><subject>Fossil fuels</subject><subject>Global warming</subject><subject>Harvesting</subject><subject>Honey</subject><subject>industry</subject><subject>irrigation</subject><subject>Lca for Renewable Resources</subject><subject>Life cycle analysis</subject><subject>Life cycle assessment</subject><subject>Life cycle engineering</subject><subject>life cycle impact assessment</subject><subject>Life cycles</subject><subject>milling</subject><subject>Molasses</subject><subject>Pathways</subject><subject>Pesticides</subject><subject>prices</subject><subject>Renewable resources</subject><subject>Sensitivity analysis</subject><subject>Sugar</subject><subject>Sugarcane</subject><subject>sugarcane juice</subject><subject>Sugars</subject><issn>0948-3349</issn><issn>1614-7502</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkDtPwzAQgC0EEuXxA5iwxMISuHMcOx6ripdUiQE6W65jh1R5FLsZ-u9xFQbEANMt33e6-wi5QrhDAHkfEXMhM8A8g6LkGTsiMxTIM1kAOyYzULzM8pyrU3IW4waAIahiRubLxjtq97Z11MToYuxcv6ODp350LXW7D9MPLfVh6GgcaxOs6R1tejoPdQKb3lyQE2_a6C6_5zlZPT68L56z5evTy2K-zCzncpdVyCWI3HppvRICvEJZMis4MCu5ZRVX3leVZYIrx9berCvlbW6rwhpcW5-fk9tp7zYMn6OLO9010bq2TQcNY9QoJHIlS1T_o1wxkQIwntCbX-hmGEOfHkkUMp5aQpEonCgbhhiD83obms6EvUbQh_566q9Tf33or1ly2OTExPa1Cz82_yFdT5I3gzZ1aKJevTFADoBFWQqZfwEUKpAs</recordid><startdate>20130801</startdate><enddate>20130801</enddate><creator>Amores, María José</creator><creator>Mele, Fernando Daniel</creator><creator>Jiménez, Laureano</creator><creator>Castells, Francesc</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7U6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130801</creationdate><title>Life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Argentina</title><author>Amores, María José ; Mele, Fernando Daniel ; Jiménez, Laureano ; Castells, Francesc</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-d147063cf7cf9660f91782c6402c74c2d49ffddc2649e2bfabd9fc3cd5ca1bcf3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Agricultural land</topic><topic>Allocations</topic><topic>bioethanol</topic><topic>Biofuels</topic><topic>burning</topic><topic>Carbon dioxide</topic><topic>Categories</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>energy use and consumption</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>Environmental assessment</topic><topic>Environmental Chemistry</topic><topic>Environmental Economics</topic><topic>Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology</topic><topic>Environmental impact</topic><topic>Ethanol</topic><topic>ethanol production</topic><topic>Ethyl alcohol</topic><topic>fertilizers</topic><topic>Food processing industry</topic><topic>Fossil fuels</topic><topic>Global warming</topic><topic>Harvesting</topic><topic>Honey</topic><topic>industry</topic><topic>irrigation</topic><topic>Lca for Renewable Resources</topic><topic>Life cycle analysis</topic><topic>Life cycle assessment</topic><topic>Life cycle engineering</topic><topic>life cycle impact assessment</topic><topic>Life cycles</topic><topic>milling</topic><topic>Molasses</topic><topic>Pathways</topic><topic>Pesticides</topic><topic>prices</topic><topic>Renewable resources</topic><topic>Sensitivity analysis</topic><topic>Sugar</topic><topic>Sugarcane</topic><topic>sugarcane juice</topic><topic>Sugars</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Amores, María José</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mele, Fernando Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiménez, Laureano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Castells, Francesc</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The international journal of life cycle assessment</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Amores, María José</au><au>Mele, Fernando Daniel</au><au>Jiménez, Laureano</au><au>Castells, Francesc</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Argentina</atitle><jtitle>The international journal of life cycle assessment</jtitle><stitle>Int J Life Cycle Assess</stitle><date>2013-08-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1344</spage><epage>1357</epage><pages>1344-1357</pages><issn>0948-3349</issn><eissn>1614-7502</eissn><abstract>PURPOSE: The production of bioethanol in Argentina is based on the sugarcane plantation system, with extensive use of agricultural land, scarce use of fertilizers, pesticides, and artificial irrigation, and burning of sugarcane prior to harvesting. The objective of this paper is to develop a life cycle assessment (LCA) of the fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Tucumán (Argentina), assessing the environmental impact potentials to identify which of them cause the main impacts. METHODS: Our approach innovatively combined knowledge about the main impact pathways of bioethanol production with LCA which covers the typical emission-related impact categories at the midpoint life cycle impact assessment. Real data from the Argentinean industry subsystems have been used to perform the study: S1—sugarcane production, S2—milling process, S3—sugar production, and S4—ethanol production from molasses, honey, or sugarcane juice. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The results are shown in the three alternative pathways to produce bioethanol. Different impact categories are assessed, with global warming potential (GWP) having the highest impact. So, the production of 1 kg of ethanol from molasses emitted 22.5 kg CO₂ (pathway 1), 19.2 kg CO₂ from honey (pathway 2), and 15.0 kg CO₂ from sugarcane juice (pathway 3). Several sensitivity analyses to study the variability of the GWP according to the different cases studied have been performed (changing the agricultural yield, including economic and calorific allocation in sugar production, and modifying the sugar price). CONCLUSIONS: Agriculture is the subsystem which shows the highest impact in almost all the categories due to fossil fuel consumption. When an economic and calorific allocation is considered to assess the environmental impact, the value is lower than when mass allocation is used because ethanol is relatively cheaper than sugars and it has higher calorific value.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><doi>10.1007/s11367-013-0584-2</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0948-3349 |
ispartof | The international journal of life cycle assessment, 2013-08, Vol.18 (7), p.1344-1357 |
issn | 0948-3349 1614-7502 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1671497819 |
source | Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
subjects | Agricultural land Allocations bioethanol Biofuels burning Carbon dioxide Categories Climate change Earth and Environmental Science Economics energy use and consumption Environment Environmental assessment Environmental Chemistry Environmental Economics Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology Environmental impact Ethanol ethanol production Ethyl alcohol fertilizers Food processing industry Fossil fuels Global warming Harvesting Honey industry irrigation Lca for Renewable Resources Life cycle analysis Life cycle assessment Life cycle engineering life cycle impact assessment Life cycles milling Molasses Pathways Pesticides prices Renewable resources Sensitivity analysis Sugar Sugarcane sugarcane juice Sugars |
title | Life cycle assessment of fuel ethanol from sugarcane in Argentina |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T23%3A38%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Life%20cycle%20assessment%20of%20fuel%20ethanol%20from%20sugarcane%20in%20Argentina&rft.jtitle=The%20international%20journal%20of%20life%20cycle%20assessment&rft.au=Amores,%20Mar%C3%ADa%20Jos%C3%A9&rft.date=2013-08-01&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1344&rft.epage=1357&rft.pages=1344-1357&rft.issn=0948-3349&rft.eissn=1614-7502&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11367-013-0584-2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3028611491%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1412458405&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |