Wastewater-grown microalgae biomass as a source of sustainable aviation fuel: Life cycle assessment comparing hydrothermal routes.

Autor: Marangon BB; Department of Civil Engineering, Federal University of Viçosa (Universidade Federal de Viçosa/UFV), Av. Peter Henry Rolfs, S/n, Campus Universitario, Viçosa, Minas Gerais, 36570-900, Brazil. Electronic address: bianca.marangon@ufv.br., Castro JS; Department of Civil Engineering, Federal University of Viçosa (Universidade Federal de Viçosa/UFV), Av. Peter Henry Rolfs, S/n, Campus Universitario, Viçosa, Minas Gerais, 36570-900, Brazil. Electronic address: jackeline.castro@ufv.br., Assemany PP; Federal University of Lavras (Universidade Federal de Lavras/UFLA), Post-Graduate Program in Environmental Engineering, Department of Environmental Engineering, Campus Universitario, 37200-900, Lavras, MG, Brazil. Electronic address: paula.assemany@ufla.br., Machado NA; Department of Civil Engineering, Federal University of Viçosa (Universidade Federal de Viçosa/UFV), Av. Peter Henry Rolfs, S/n, Campus Universitario, Viçosa, Minas Gerais, 36570-900, Brazil. Electronic address: nadia.machado@ufv.br., Calijuri ML; Department of Civil Engineering, Federal University of Viçosa (Universidade Federal de Viçosa/UFV), Av. Peter Henry Rolfs, S/n, Campus Universitario, Viçosa, Minas Gerais, 36570-900, Brazil. Electronic address: calijuri@ufv.br.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Journal of environmental management [J Environ Manage] 2024 Jun; Vol. 360, pp. 121164. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 May 19.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.121164
Abstrakt: The present paper compared, through life cycle assessment (LCA), the production of aviation biofuel from two hydrothermal routes of microalgae cultivated in wastewater. Hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) and gasification followed by Fischer-Tropsch synthesis (G + FT) were compared. Both routes included biomass production, hydrotreatment for biofuel upgrading, and product fractionation. Secondary data obtained from the literature were used for the cradle-to-gate LCA. G + FT had a higher impact than HTL in the 18 impact categories assessed, with human carcinogenic toxicity exerting the most harmful pressure on the environment. The catalysts were the inputs that caused the most adverse emissions. The solvent used for bio-oil separation also stood out in terms of impacts. In HTL, emissions for global warming were -51.6 g CO 2 eq/MJ, while in G + FT, they were 250 g CO 2 eq/MJ. At the Endpoint level, HTL resulted in benefits to human health and ecosystems, while G + FT caused environmental damage in these two categories, as well as in the resources category. In the improvement scenarios, besides considering solid, aqueous, and gaseous products as co-products rather than just as waste/emissions, a 20% reduction in catalyst consumption and 90% recovery were applied. Thus, in HTL, 39.47 kg CO 2 eq was avoided, compared to 35.44 kg CO 2 eq in the base scenario. In G + FT, emissions decreased from 147.55 kg CO 2 eq to the capture of 8.60 kg CO 2 eq.
Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: