Life Cycle Assessments of Ethanol Production via Gas Fermentation: Anticipated Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Cellulosic and Waste Gas Feedstocks

2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (12) ◽  
pp. 3253-3261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert M. Handler ◽  
David R. Shonnard ◽  
Evan M. Griffing ◽  
Andrea Lai ◽  
Ignasi Palou-Rivera
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. E. Andersen ◽  
F. N. Rasmussen ◽  
G. Habert ◽  
H. Birgisdóttir

Buildings play a vital role in reaching the targets stated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees. Increasing the use of wood in construction is a proposed upcoming strategy to reduce the embodied greenhouse gas emissions of buildings. This study examines existing life cycle assessments of wooden buildings. The aim is to investigate embodied greenhouse gas emission results reported, as well as methodological approaches applied in existing literature. The study applies the protocol for Systematic Literature Reviews and finds 79 relevant papers. From the final sample, the study analyses 226 different scenarios in-depth in terms of embodied emissions, life cycle assessment method, life cycle inventory modelling and biogenic carbon approach. The analysis shows that the average reported values of embodied greenhouse gas emissions of wooden buildings are one-third to half of the embodied emissions reported from buildings in general. Additionally, from the analysis of the final sample we find that the majority of wooden building life cycle assessments apply similar methods and often leave out biogenic carbon from the assessment or simply do not declare it. This implies that the focus on variability in the different methods applied in wooden building life cycle assessments needs to be increased to establish the relationship between methodological choices and embodied emissions of wooden buildings. Further, transparency and conformity in biogenic carbon accounting in life cycle assessments is essential to enhance comparability between life cycle assessment studies and to avoid distortions in embodied GHG emission results.


2010 ◽  
Vol 44 (22) ◽  
pp. 8670-8677 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dexin Luo ◽  
Zushou Hu ◽  
Dong Gu Choi ◽  
Valerie M. Thomas ◽  
Matthew J. Realff ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 88 (6) ◽  
pp. 2088-2097 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos A. García ◽  
Alfredo Fuentes ◽  
Anna Hennecke ◽  
Enrique Riegelhaupt ◽  
Fabio Manzini ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (17) ◽  
pp. 9926
Author(s):  
Anna Kustar ◽  
Dalia Patino-Echeverri

This paper’s purpose is to shed light on the current understanding of the environmental benefits of vegetarian and vegan diets, considering the inclusion of a significant share of processed foods, such as plant-based burgers. We review recent Environmental Life Cycle Assessments of the three main diet types, omnivore, vegetarian, and vegan, and then assesses the environmental impacts of adding two commercial brands of plant-based burgers to vegetarian and vegan diets. The recent literature confirms that compared to omnivore diets adhering to the same dietary guidelines, vegan diets reduce land-use impacts by 50–86%, water use by 22–70%, and greenhouse gas emissions by 21–70%, while vegetarian diets achieve reductions of 27–84% in land use, 15–69% in water use, and 24–56% in greenhouse emissions. The environmental benefits of vegan and vegetarian diets are not affected by the consumption of highly processed plant-based burgers. Consumers reduce land use, water use, and greenhouse gas emissions between 87% and 96% by choosing a Beyond or Impossible burger instead of a regular beef patty. These results are robust to the uncertainties associated with a variety of beef production systems; there is no indication that a situation or condition may make beef burgers more environmentally friendly than these two plant-based alternatives, or that the addition of plant-based meats to vegan and vegetarian diets may reduce their environmental benefits.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document