Review of methodological decisions in life cycle assessment (LCA) of biorefinery systems across feedstock categories

The application of life cycle assessment (LCA) to biorefineries is a necessary step to estimate their environmental sustainability. This review explores contemporary LCA biorefinery studies, across different feedstock categories, to understand approaches in dealing with key methodological decisions which arise, including system boundaries, consequential or attributional approach, allocation, inventory data, land use changes, product end-of-life (EOL), biogenic carbon storage, impact assessment and use of uncertainty analysis. From an initial collection of 81 studies, 59 were included within the final analysis, comprising 22 studies which involved dedicated feedstocks, 34 which involved residue feedstocks (including by-products and wastes), and a further 3 studies which involved multiple feedstocks derived from both dedicated and secondary sources. Many studies do not provide a comprehensive LCA assessment, often lacking detail on decisions taken, omitting key parts of the value chain, using generic data without uncertainty analyses, or omitting important impact categories. Only 28% of studies included some level of primary data, while 39% of studies did not undertake an uncertainty or sensitivity analysis. Just 8% of studies included data related to dLUC with a further 8% including iLUC, and only 14% of studies considering product end of life within their scope. The authors recommend more transparency in biorefinery LCA, with justification of key methodological decisions. A full value-chain approach should be adopted, to fully assess burdens and opportunities for biogenic carbon storage. We also propose a more prospective approach, taking into account future use of renewable energy sources, and opportunities for increasing circularity within bio-based value chains. [Display omitted] •59 studies were included in the analysis of biorefinery LCA's.•Review compared biorefinery LCA's as applied to dedicated and residue feedstocks.•Many studies lack detail on decisions taken, omit key parts of the value chain, use generic data without uncertainty analyses, or exclude important impact categories. .•Factors like biogenic carbon storage and iLUC typically not fully evaluated.•Circularity, future renewable energy, and carbon capture and utilisation lacking.