life cycle cycle assessment assessment tools/methodologies...

Materials Science & Technology

Life Life CycleCycle AssessmentAssessment tools/methodologiestools/methodologies forfor GHG GHG calculationscalculations in in thethe RSB RSB workingworking groupgroup

Marcel GauchMarcel Gauch TSL Technology and Society Lab @ EMPATSL Technology and Society Lab @ EMPA

IEA IEA BioenergyBioenergy; Dubrovnik, 25. ; Dubrovnik, 25. OctoberOctober 20072007


RSB Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels

1. Methodology and Results of LCA-Study

2. Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels RSB

2Materials Science & Technology

Environmental impacts of fuel production?

BiodiversityBiodiversity lossloss

For fossil fuels

Air pollution

Water Water contaminationcontamination

Climate changeRessource depletion

Soil degradation

Ecotoxicity

… and for biofuels

Vorführender

Präsentationsnotizen

Main issue for Switzerland: climate change For India: energy security However, integrated assessment is important for all cases

http://www.ikzm-d.de/abbildungen/60_Icebergsbig.jpg


Why Life Cycle Assessment? Example: Fossil Energy Demand of Biofuels

Fossil fuel Biofuel

On a first approach 100% savings of fossil energy sources


Example: Fossil Energy Demand of Biofuels

Cultivation HarvestingSewing Processing Transport

Seed Production

Fertilizer Production

Tractor Production

Auxiliaries Production

Truck Production

Car Production

Building of Fertilizer

Plant

Building of Tractor Plant

Building of Chemical

Plant

Building of Truck Plant

Building of Car

Plant

Setting up Seed

Plantation

Material flowsFossil Energy flows


Assessment of Environmental Impacts

Overall-Indicator:

Environmental burdenas one only number-> ‘Ecobalance’

[GWP]

[SMOG]

[EUTR]

[PM]

[ACID]

[LAND]

[FOSS]

[ETOX]

Midpoint-Indicators

[EI99] [UBP06]


Largest impact fromagriculture -> land use

Differences are great within fuelclasses

In every fuel class there aregood and bad pathways

Global Warming Potential CO2-eq.

-0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25

100% Rape ME CH

100% Rape ME RER

100% Palmoil ME MY

100% Soy ME US

100% Soy ME BR

100% Recycled plant oil ME CH

100% Recycled plant oil ME FR

Methanol fixed bed CH

Methanol fluidized bed CH

Ethanol grass CH

Ethanol potatoes CH

Ethanol sugar beets CH

Ethanol whey CH

Ethanol wood CH

Ethanol sweet sorghum CN

Ethanol rye RER

Ethanol corn US

Ethanol sugar cane BR

Methane grass biorefinery

Methane manure

Methane manure+cosubstrate

Methane manure, optimized

Methane manure+cosubstrate, optimized

Methane biowaste

Methane sewage sludge

Methane wood

Diesel, low sulphur EURO3

Petrol, low sulphur EURO3

Natural gas, EURO3

CO2-eq. [kg/pkm]

Infrastructure

Cultivation

Production

Transport

Operation

Foss

il

B

iodi

esel

Alc

ohol

Met

hane

Total chain from cultivation to use


GHG-Emissions are dominated byfossil CO2Clear cutting forests up to 50%N2O emissions from soils: up to 40%Production of biogas is dominatedby Methane emissions

Treibhauspotential-0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25

RapsME CH

PalmME MY

SojaME US

SojaME BR

AltspeiseölME FR

Ethanol Biomasse CH

Ethanol Zuckerhirse CN

Ethanol Roggen RER

Ethanol Mais US

Ethanol Zuckerrohr BR

Methan Gras Bioraffinerie

Methan Gülle

Methan Gülle opt.

Methan Bioabfall

Methan Klärschlamm

Methan Holz-SynGas

Diesel schwefelarm EURO3

Benzin schwefelarm EURO3

Erdgas EURO3

CO2, fossil CO2, land transformation

CO, fossil N2O

Methan, biogen Methan, fossil

Foss

il

B

iodi

esel

Alk

ohol

Met

han

Global Warming Potential kg CO2-eq. per MJ of fuels energy

Contribution distinctionRapeME CH

PalmME MY

SoyME US

SoyME BR

used VegOilME FR

Ethanol Biomass CH

Ethanol Sorghum CN

Ethanol Rye RER

Ethanol Corn US

Ethanol Sugarcane BR

Methane Grass Biorefinery CH

Methane Manure CH

Methane Manure opt

Methane Biowaste CH

Methane Sew.sludge

Methane Wood SynGas

Diesel lowS EURO3

Gasoline lowS EURO3

Natural Gas EURO3


GWP

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%




Ethanol w hey CH


Methanol f ixed bed CH

Methane w ood

Methanol f luidized bed CH


Ethanol grass CH

Ethanol w ood CH

Ethanol sw eet sorghum CN


Methane sew age sludge


100% Soy ME US

Methane biow aste

100% Palmoil ME MY

100% Rape ME CH


Methane manure

100% Rape ME RER

Ethanol corn US

Ethanol rye RER

Ethanol potatoes CH

100% Soy ME BR

Natural gas, EURO3



CED

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%

SMOG

0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500%

EUTR

0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500%

ECOTOX

0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500%

Not only Greenhousegas mattersselected midpoint indicators

Greenhousegas CO2-eq. Non-renewable Energy Smog Eutrophication Ecotoxicity

GHG

Petrol = reference 100%

green = better than petrolred = worse than petrol


UBP 06

0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500%

Eco-indicator 99

0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500%

GWP

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%




Ethanol w hey CH


Methanol f ixed bed CH

Methane w ood

Methanol f luidized bed CH


Ethanol grass CH

Ethanol w ood CH

Ethanol sw eet sorghum CN


Methane sew age sludge


100% Soy ME US

Methane biow aste

100% Palmoil ME MY

100% Rape ME CH


Methane manure

100% Rape ME RER

Ethanol corn US

Ethanol rye RER

Ethanol potatoes CH

100% Soy ME BR

Natural gas, EURO3



Greenhousegas CO2-eq. UBP 06 Eco-Indicator 99

Not only Greenhousegas mattersoverall indicatorsGHG


GHG emissions vs. total environmental impact


Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels RSB

Ensuring that biofuels deliver on their promise of sustainability

Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels E n e r g y C e n t e r

www.bioenergywiki.net

Secretariat:Energy Center, EPFL

[email protected]

[email protected]

http://EnergyCenter.epfl.ch/Biofuels

Vorführender


The Energy Center of the EPFL coordinates the work of laboratories, which work on energy questions at the EPFL. It also runs specific projects such as on nuclear fusion or biofuels…


ConceptA multi-stakeholder initiative to coordinate and develop principles and criteria for sustainable biofuels production that are:

Simple, accessible and implemented worldwide

Generic to all crops

Adaptable to new information

Efficient and cheap to measure

In line with WTO rules


Vorführender


There is an increasing demand for transparency and accurate criteria to ensure that producing, selling, buying and consuming biofuels will not make the situation worst for rural livelihood, ecosystems, climate,etc…In order to bring a quick response to this demand, the Energy Center of the EPFL coordinates a multi-stakeholder initiative, with the aim to use all the available expertise and experience in biofuels to define social and environmental sustainability standards. This initiative tries to build on the fantastic work that has already been achieved in certain countries and for certain biofuel channels: the RTFO in UK, the Cramer’s commission in the Netherlands, standards from the RSPO, the FSC, the Rainforest Alliance and others…


Governance

One Steering Board composed of international stakeholders

One secretariat based at EPFL. Coordination of the RSB.

Four Working Groups + expert panels to make recommendations to the Steering Board. 142 participants from international organisations, NGOs, private sector and academic institutions.

Global stakeholder feedback at every step (blogs, meetings, wiki technology, pilot projects, regional outreaches)


Vorführender


The initiative is directed by a Steering Board, which gathers representatives of all the important stakeholders. The SB interacts closely with 4 Working Groups, who work in depth on the different topics. An original set of draft principles has served as a basis for the working groups, who in turn have reworked on them and proposed a new wording for the principles. They will now start working more in depth on the criteria that develop the broad principles, as well as the indicators that will allow a transparent and simple follow-up. The public communication, the connection between the SB and the WGs and the general coordination are ensured by the secretariat.


The Steering Board

Steering Board members:include WWF, BP, Shell, National Wildlife Fed, FSC, Petrobras, Mali Folkecenter, Univ. Cal Berkeley, TERI India, Toyota, UNCTAD

Chair: Mr Claude Martin (former CEO of WWF)

Mission:Through a thorough consultation of the working groups, final validation of principles, criteria and implementation plan.


Vorführender


The steering board is the governing body of the RSB. Although it tries not to exerce authority, it can be requested to take position on points that remain debated within the working groups. As it is constituted of senior experts, it has the duty to comment, accept or refuse and readjust the outputs of the working groups. The SB has met virtually at the beginning of the RSB (late 2006) and will meet in person for the first time early November 2007. In between, communication through emails and teleconference permits the members to keep interacting.


The 4 Working Groups

Greenhouse gases efficiency: Validation of a reliable method to measure GHG balance on a Life Cycle perspective. About 80 members+ 1 Expert Advisory GroupEnvironment: Definition of principles and criteria that ensure biofuels to be a clean alternative (conservation, maintenance of soil, water and air sustainability, ensuring best practices in the use of technologies). More than 120 members + Expert panels on each topics to be coveredSocial: Definition of principles and criteria ensuring that biofuel channelsare in accordance with WTO rules and prove beneficial for local livelihood and national economies. 75 members + Expert panelsImplementation: Validation/adjustment of the principles and criteriaagainst field reality and through pilot projects. 75 members + fieldpartnerships


Vorführender


The Working Groups are ran by a coordinator and a chair, which ensures the good functioning, the democratic process and input key elements into the discussion. The GHG group aims to discuss all the available LCA methodologies and agrees on the most accurate one for GHG accounting. This needs to be associated with a guideline for producers to use this methodology in a user-friendly and simple way. The working group on environment has to deal with all the adverse issues that need to be avoided to keep biofuels acceptable. These issues are mainly the loss of high conservation values areas and biodiversity, the contamination or depletion of water resources, the soil exhaustion or erosion, the air pollution and the specific risks related to the use of biotechnologies such as GMOs. As each group has been joined by many participants, expert panels are designated within the group to make the discussions move forward and in depth. There are expert panels for each topic to be covered and they formulate recommendations to the rest of the group, which in turn can accept or discuss them. The Working Group on Social Impacts needs to ensure that biofuels are in accordance with fundamental labor rights and possibly deliver on the promise of improving rural livelihood, or at least not worsen the situation in countryside (inequities, unemployment, rural exodus, etc…). The Working Group on Implementation is delegated the special role to ensure that the standards set in the other groups are compatible with reality, feasible and easy to implement at the field level. Through the expertise of its members and pilot projects, the implementation will give feedbacks to the other groups in order to adjust their outputs to the reality of producers, consumers and others…


Timeline

Two rounds of commentson principlesWorking Groups recommend text for criteria to meet theseprinciples (in progress)By end 2007, consensus on principlesBy May/June 2008, good draft of criteria, next stepsdefined (Pilot projects)


Vorführender


The working groups on GHG and Environment have started functioning around May 2007 whereas the working group on Social Issues and Implementation were launched during Summer 2007. We hope to come with draft standards by the end of 2008, the end of 2007 being expected to deliver draft principles. However, it looks like principles need to remain open until all the subsequent criteria have not all been listed and agreed on by the group.


First Round: Draft Principles

National Law –especially respective to land ownership, labor, water rights

GHG –positive balance over lifecycle, including direct & indirect effects

Environmental –conserve and protect high conservation values, soil, water, air; responsibleuse of biotechnologies

Social –biofuels should benefit to rural communities and workers; should not contribute to food insecurity


Vorführender


These principles have already been reworked, as compared with the original set of principles agreed on by the Steering Board. They will possibly change again in the future, especially after the working groups and the expert panels will have decided about criteria and indicators, as a preceding step to finalise the principles above.


Thanks for your attention !

[email protected]

www.bioenergywiki.net/index.php/Roundtable_on_Sustainable_Biofuels

www.empa.ch/tsl Technology and Society Lab @ EMPA Switzerland

http://EnergyCenter.epfl.ch/Biofuels

source: unknown

Charlotte Opal / Sebastien Haye

life cycle cycle assessment assessment tools/methodologies...

Documents