Sustainability Assessment of Combined Animal Fodder and Fuel Production from Microalgal Biomass

We present a comparative environmental and social life cycle assessment (ELCA and SLCA) of algal fuel and fodder co-production (AF + fodder) versus algal fuel and energy co-production (AF + energy). Our ELCA results indicate that fodder co-production offers an advantage in the following categories:...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Benjamin W. Portner, Antonio Valente, Sandy Guenther
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	MDPI AG 2021
Materias:	microalgae biorefinery fuel fodder feed life cycle assessment Medicine R
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/7d13ca8ba6114fa6a61cba30da27876c
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:7d13ca8ba6114fa6a61cba30da27876c
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:7d13ca8ba6114fa6a61cba30da27876c2021-11-11T16:28:56ZSustainability Assessment of Combined Animal Fodder and Fuel Production from Microalgal Biomass10.3390/ijerph1821113511660-46011661-7827https://doaj.org/article/7d13ca8ba6114fa6a61cba30da27876c2021-10-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11351https://doaj.org/toc/1661-7827https://doaj.org/toc/1660-4601We present a comparative environmental and social life cycle assessment (ELCA and SLCA) of algal fuel and fodder co-production (AF + fodder) versus algal fuel and energy co-production (AF + energy). Our ELCA results indicate that fodder co-production offers an advantage in the following categories: climate change (biogenic land use and land use change total), ecotoxicity, marine eutrophication, ionizing radiation, photochemical ozone creation, and land use. By contrast, the AF + energy system yields lower impacts in the other 11 out of 19 Environmental Footprint impact categories. Only AF + fodder offers greenhouse gas reduction compared to petroleum diesel (−25%). Our SLCA results indicate that AF + fodder yields lower impacts in the following categories: fair salaries, forced labor, gender wage gap, health expenditure, unemployment, and violation of employment laws and regulations. AF + energy performs favorably in the other three out of nine social indicators. We conclude that the choice of co-products has a strong influence on the sustainability of algal fuel production. Despite this, none of the compared systems are found to yield a consistent advantage in the environmental or social dimension. It is, therefore, not possible to recommend a co-production strategy without weighing environmental and social issues.Benjamin W. PortnerAntonio ValenteSandy GuentherMDPI AGarticlemicroalgaebiorefineryfuelfodderfeedlife cycle assessmentMedicineRENInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol 18, Iss 11351, p 11351 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	microalgae biorefinery fuel fodder feed life cycle assessment Medicine R
spellingShingle	microalgae biorefinery fuel fodder feed life cycle assessment Medicine R Benjamin W. Portner Antonio Valente Sandy Guenther Sustainability Assessment of Combined Animal Fodder and Fuel Production from Microalgal Biomass
description	We present a comparative environmental and social life cycle assessment (ELCA and SLCA) of algal fuel and fodder co-production (AF + fodder) versus algal fuel and energy co-production (AF + energy). Our ELCA results indicate that fodder co-production offers an advantage in the following categories: climate change (biogenic land use and land use change total), ecotoxicity, marine eutrophication, ionizing radiation, photochemical ozone creation, and land use. By contrast, the AF + energy system yields lower impacts in the other 11 out of 19 Environmental Footprint impact categories. Only AF + fodder offers greenhouse gas reduction compared to petroleum diesel (−25%). Our SLCA results indicate that AF + fodder yields lower impacts in the following categories: fair salaries, forced labor, gender wage gap, health expenditure, unemployment, and violation of employment laws and regulations. AF + energy performs favorably in the other three out of nine social indicators. We conclude that the choice of co-products has a strong influence on the sustainability of algal fuel production. Despite this, none of the compared systems are found to yield a consistent advantage in the environmental or social dimension. It is, therefore, not possible to recommend a co-production strategy without weighing environmental and social issues.
format	article
author	Benjamin W. Portner Antonio Valente Sandy Guenther
author_facet	Benjamin W. Portner Antonio Valente Sandy Guenther
author_sort	Benjamin W. Portner
title	Sustainability Assessment of Combined Animal Fodder and Fuel Production from Microalgal Biomass
title_short	Sustainability Assessment of Combined Animal Fodder and Fuel Production from Microalgal Biomass
title_full	Sustainability Assessment of Combined Animal Fodder and Fuel Production from Microalgal Biomass
title_fullStr	Sustainability Assessment of Combined Animal Fodder and Fuel Production from Microalgal Biomass
title_full_unstemmed	Sustainability Assessment of Combined Animal Fodder and Fuel Production from Microalgal Biomass
title_sort	sustainability assessment of combined animal fodder and fuel production from microalgal biomass
publisher	MDPI AG
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/7d13ca8ba6114fa6a61cba30da27876c
work_keys_str_mv	AT benjaminwportner sustainabilityassessmentofcombinedanimalfodderandfuelproductionfrommicroalgalbiomass AT antoniovalente sustainabilityassessmentofcombinedanimalfodderandfuelproductionfrommicroalgalbiomass AT sandyguenther sustainabilityassessmentofcombinedanimalfodderandfuelproductionfrommicroalgalbiomass
_version_	1718432305456873472

Sustainability Assessment of Combined Animal Fodder and Fuel Production from Microalgal Biomass

Ejemplares similares