Does biobased polymer achieve better environmental impacts than fossil polymer? Comparison of fossil HDPE and biobased HDPE produced from sugar beet and wheat

Belboom, Sandra; Léonard, Angélique

doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2015.12.014

Article (Scientific journals)

Does biobased polymer achieve better environmental impacts than fossil polymer? Comparison of fossil HDPE and biobased HDPE produced from sugar beet and wheat

Belboom, Sandra; Léonard, Angélique

2016 • In Biomass and Bioenergy, 85, p. 159-167

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/2268/190051

DOI
10.1016/j.biombioe.2015.12.014

Files (1)Send to Details Statistics Bibliography Similar publications

Files

Full Text

Publié.pdf

Publisher postprint (1.26 MB)

Request a copy

All documents in ORBi are protected by a user license.

Send to

RIS BibTex APA Chicago Permalink X Linkedin

Details

Keywords :

High-density polyethylene (HDPE); Life-cycle assessment (LCA); Biobased polymer

Abstract :

[en] Polymers are one of the most used materials and the majority of their production is based on fossil fuels. Due to the decrease of oil resources and concerns about climate change, alternatives are needed, the transformation of biobased ethanol into biobased polymer being one of them. This paper undertakes an environmental evaluation of the production of biobased polymer produced from two different feedstock cultivated in Belgium: sugar beet and wheat. Both crops cultivation are studied as well as their transformation into biobased ethanol, first, and then to biobased ethylene, focusing on high-density polyethylene (HDPE) as final product. These scenarios are analyzed and compared with the production of conventional polymer using the life-cycle assessment (LCA) methodology with reference to relevant environmental impact categories. This study shows a reduction of impact of around 60% for both climate change and fossil fuel depletion categories when using biobased HDPE instead of its fossil counterpart. For all other impact categories, fossil HDPE achieves better results than the biobased product.

Disciplines :

Chemical engineering
Energy

Author, co-author :

Belboom, Sandra ; Université de Liège > Department of Chemical Engineering > Génie chimique - Procédés et développement durable

Léonard, Angélique ; Université de Liège > Department of Chemical Engineering > Génie chimique - Procédés et développement durable

Language :

English

Title :

Does biobased polymer achieve better environmental impacts than fossil polymer? Comparison of fossil HDPE and biobased HDPE produced from sugar beet and wheat

Publication date :

February 2016

Journal title :

Biomass and Bioenergy

ISSN :

0961-9534

eISSN :

1873-2909

Publisher :

Pergamon, Oxford, United Kingdom

Volume :

Pages :

159-167

Peer reviewed :

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Additional URL :

[fr] http://reflexions.ulg.ac.be/PolymersBiobases
[en] http://reflexions.ulg.ac.be/en/BiobasedPolymers

Available on ORBi :

since 04 January 2016

Statistics

Number of views

267 (15 by ULiège)

Number of downloads

8 (3 by ULiège)

More statistics

Scopus citations^®

Scopus citations^®
without self-citations

OpenCitations

Bibliography

Cherubini F. GHG balances of bioenergy systems - overview of key steps in the production chain and methodological concerns. Renew. Energy 2010, 35(7):1565-1573.
Cherubini F., Strømman A.H. Life cycle assessment of bioenergy systems: state of the art and future challenges. Bioresour. Technol. 2011, 102(2):437-451.
Ojeda T. Polymers and the environment. Polymer Science 2013, 1-34. InTech. F. Yilmaz (Ed.).
Braskem Ethanol-to-Ethylene Plant [Internet]. ; c2011 [cited 2015 Dec 1]. Available from: . http://www.chemicals-technology.com/projects/braskem-ethanol/.
Broeren M. Production of Bio-ethylene-tecnology brief 2013 Jan, IEA-ETSAP, IRENA.
van der Harst E., Potting J. A critical comparison of ten disposable cup LCAs. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2013 Nov, 43:86-96.
Eerhart A., Faaij A., Patel M. Replacing fossil based PET with biobased PEF; process analysis, energy and GHG balance. Energy Environ. Sci. 2012, 5(4):6407-6422.
Hottle T., Bilec M., Landis A. Sustainability assessments of bio-based polymers. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2013, 98(9):1898-1907.
Liptow C., Tillman A.-M. A comparative life cycle assessment study of polyethylene based on sugarcane and crude oil. J. Ind. Ecol. 2012, 16(3):420-435.
Alvarenga R., Dewulf J., De Meester S., Wathelet A., Villers J., Thommeret R., et al. Life cycle assessment of bioethanol-based PVC: part 2: consequential approach. Biofuels Bioprod. Biorefin. 2013, 7(4):396-405.
Alvarenga R., Dewulf J. Plastic vs. fuel: which use of the Brazillian ethanol can bring more environmental gains?. Renew. Energy 2013 Nov, 59:49-52.
Alvarenga R., Dewulf J., De Meester S., Wathelet A., Villers J., Thommeret R., et al. Life cycle assessment of bioethanol-based PVC: part 1: attributional approach. Biofuels Bioprod. Bioref 2013, 7(4):385-396.
Van Uytvanck P., Hallmark B., Haire G., Marshall P., Dennis J. Impact of biomass on industry: using ethylene derived from bioethanol within the polyester value chain. ACS Sustain Chem. Eng. 2014, 2(5):1098-1105.
European Commission - Joint Research Centre - Institute for Environment and Sustainability International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook - General Guide for Life Cycle Assessment - Detailed Guidance 2010 Mar, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, Report No.: EUR 24708 EN. first ed.
European Commission - Joint Research Centre - Institute for Environment and Sustainability International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Handbook - Recommendations for Life Cycle Impact Assessment in the European Context 2011 Nov, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, Report No.: EUR 24571 EN. first ed.
Goedkoop M., Heijungs R., Huijbregts M., De Schryver A., Struijs J., van Zelm R. ReCiPe 2008 - A Life Cycle Impact Assessment Method Which Comprises Harmonised Category Indicators at the Midpoint and the Endpoint Level 2009 Jan, (Report I: Charaterisation). first ed.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) ISO 14040: Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Principles and Framework 2006, ISO.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) ISO 14044: Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment - Requirements and Guidelines 2006, ISO.
Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories The Life Cycle Inventory Data Version 2.2, Ecoinvent 2010.
Crops statistic - Area - Production - Yield [Internet] FAO; c2010 [cited 2015 Dec 1]. Available from: . http://faostat.fao.org/site/567/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=567#ancor.
Jossart J., Vanhemelryck J.-L., Ledent J.-F. Impact environnemental de trois cultures énergétiques et bilan d'énergie. Cah. Agric. 1995, 4:377-382.
IFA, IFDC, IPI, PPI, FAO Fertilizer Use by Crop 2002, FAO, Rome. fifth ed.
Tits M., Misonne J.-F. Betterave sucrière et environnement 2002, IRBAB-KBIVB, Belgium.
Robinet D. Bilan environnemental et énergétique de la culture du miscanthus 2009, Valbiom, Belgium.
Vandergeten J.-P., Legrand G., Wauters A., Manderyck B., Vanstallen M., Keleman J., et al. Compte-rendu Recherche & Vulgarisation 2010, IRBAB-KBIVI, Belgium.
Bodson B. La culture de la betterave - Caractéristiques, personnal communication 2012.
Vancutsem F., Seutin B., Destain J., Roisin C., Monfort B., Vandenberghe C., et al. La fumure azotée. Livre Blanc Céréales 2012, ULg Agro-Bio Tech, CRA-W, Belgium. J. Destain, B. Bodson (Eds.).
Elsayed M., Matthews R., Mortimer N. Carbon and energy balances for a range of biofuels options. United Kingdom: Resources Research Unit 2003, Sheffield Hallam University, Project No.: B/B6/00784/REP URN/03/836.
Mortimer N., Elsayed M., Horne R. Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Bioethanol Production from Wheat Grain and Sugar Beet 2004 Jan, Final Report, Resources Research Unit School of Environment and Development, Sheffield Hallam University, United Kingdom, Report No.: 23/1.
Tzilivakis J., Jaggard K., Lewis K., May M., Warner D. Environmental impact and economic assessment for UK sugar beet production systems. Agr. Ecosyst. Env. 2005, 107(4):341-358.
Tzilivakis J., Warner D., May M., Lewis K., Jaggard K. An assessment of the energy inputs and greenhouse gas emissions in sugar beet (Beta Vulgaris) production in the UK. Agric. Syst. 2005, 85(2):101-119.
BIO Intelligence Service Analyses de Cycle de Vie appliquées aux biocarburants de première génération consommés en France 2010 Feb, ADEME, France.
Bernesson S., Nilsson D., Hansson P.-A. A limited LCA comparing large-and small-scale production of ethanol for heavy engines under Swedish conditions. Biomass Bioener. 2006, 30(1):46-57.
IPCC Agriculture, forestry and other land use. Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 2006, 4. IGES, Japan. S. Eggleston, L. Buendia, K. Miwa, T. Ngara, K. Tanabe (Eds.).
Poitrat E. Les performances énergétiques des filières de production d'éthanol et leur impact sur l'effet de serre 2007, 13-23. Bilan énergétique la Filière Céréalière.
Région Wallonne Rapport analytique sur l'état de l'environnement wallon 2006-2007 2007, Chapitre 11-Les sols et l'environnement terrestre. Région Wallonne.
Renouf M., Wegener M., Nielsen L. An environmental life cycle assessment comparing Australian sugarcane with US corn and UK sugar beet as producers of sugars for fermentation. Biomass Bioener. 2008, 32(12):1144-1155.
Cherubini F., Bird N., Cowie A., Jungmeier G., Schlamadinger B., Woess-Gallasch S. Energy-and greenhouse gas-based LCA of biofuel and bioenergy systems: key issues, ranges and recommendations. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2009, 53(8):434-447.
BIO Intelligence Service Analyses de Cycle de Vie appliquées aux biocarburants de première génération consommés en France 2010, Rapport Final, ADEME, France.
Cherubini F. GHG balances of bioenergy systems - overview of key steps in the production chain and methodological concerns. Renew. Energy 2010, 35(7):1565-1573.
Saunders J., Izydorczyk M., Levin D. Limitations and challenges for wheat-based bioethanol production. Economics Effects of Biofuel Production 2011, InTech. M. dos Santos Bernardes (Ed.).
Ballerini D., Lemarchand J.-L. Le plein de biocarburants? Enjeux et réalités 2007, IFP, France. first ed. Ademe, Technip (Eds.).
CIBE, CEFS The EU beet and sugar sector: a model of environmental sustainability. CIBE CEFS 2010.
BioWanze S.A. [Internet], CropEnergies biowanze. Available from: . http://www.biowanze.be/fr/Homepage/.
Sánchez Ó., Cardona C. Trends in biotechnological production of fuel ethanol from different feedstocks. Bioresour. Technol. 2008, 99(13):5270-5295.
Hot B., Laine E., Pinta P., Terrain C., Tillous-Borde P., Tubery G. Biocarburants-Une contribution au débat sur les énergies renouvelables 2009.
Panagiotopoulos J., Bakker R., de Vrije T., Urbaniec K., Koukios E., Claassen P. Prospects of utilization of sugar beet carbohydrates for biological hydrogen production in the EU. J. Clean. Prod. 2010, 18(S1):S9-S14.
Ballerini D., AlzarToux N. Les biocarburants : Etat des lieux, perspectives et enjeux du développement 2006, IFP, Paris. Technip (Ed.).
De Ruyck J., Jossart J., Palmers G., Lavric S., Bram S., Novak A., et al. Liquid Biofuels in Belgium in a Global Bio-energy Context 2006 Jan, Final Report, VUB, UCL, 3E, Ecofys, Belgium.
Edwards R., Larivé J.-F., Béziat J. Well-to-wheels Analysis of Future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains in the European Context 2011, Version 3c, Concawe, European Commission and EUCAR, Luxembourg.
Speichim, Bioéthanol, catalog.
Santek B., Gwehenberger G., Santek M., Narodoslawsky M., Horvat P. Evaluation of energy demand and the sustainability of different bioethanol production processes from sugar beet. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2010, 54(11):872-877.
Commune de Wanze Permis unique: implanter et exploiter une usine de production de bioéthanol, du gluten et d'aliments pour bétails-arrêté 2005.
Fluzin C. Projet BioWanze-Usine de production de bioéthanol (300 000 m3/an) sur le site de Wanze - Notice descriptive générale 2007, BioWanze, Belgium.
Belboom S., Bodson B., Léonard A. Does the production of Belgian bioethanol fit with European requirements on GHG emissions? Case of wheat. Biomass Bioener. 2015 Mar, 74:58-65.
Kochar N., Merims R., Padia A. Ethylene from ethanol. CEP 1981, 77(6):66-70.
Bruscino M. Biorefineries: fact or fiction? Technology advances facilitate building integrated chemical complexes based on renewable feedstocks that can cost-effectively process ethylene derivatives. Hydrocarb. Process 2009 Aug, 65-70.
PlasticsEurope Plastiques 2012 - Faits et chiffres: Analyse de la production et de la demande en plastiques & de la gestion des déchets en Europe en 2011 2012, PlasticsEurope, Bruxelles.
Belboom S., Digneffe J.-M., Renzoni R., Germain A., Léonard A. Comparing technologies for municipal solid waste management using life cycle assessment methodology: a Belgian case study. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2013, 18(8):1513-1523.
International Energy Agency. Key World Energy Statistics [Internet] c2012 [cited 2015 Dec 1]. Available from: . http://www.iea.org.
Heikkinen J., Hordijk J., de Jong W., Spliethoff H. Thermogravimetry as a tool to classify waste components to be used for energy generation. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2004, 71(2):883-900.
Dornburg V., Lewandowski I., Patel M. Comparing the land requirements, energy savings, and greenhouse gas emissions reduction of biobased polymers and bioenergy. J. Ind. Ecol. 2003, 7(3-4):93-116.
Weiss M., Haufe J., Carus M., Brandão M., Bringezu S., Hermann B., et al. A review of the environmental impacts of biobased materials. J. Ind. Ecol. 2012, 16(S1):S169-S181.
Jolliet O., Saadé M., Crettaz P., Shaked S. Analyse de l'impact environmental. Analyse Du Cycle Vie-Comprendre et Réaliser Un écobilan 2010, 79-106. Presses polytechniques et universitaires romandes, Suisse, Chapitre 5.
Grabowski A., Selke S., Auras R., Patel M., Narayan R. Life cycle inventory data quality issues for bioplastics feedstocks. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2015, 20(5):584-596.
Cherubini F., Strømman A., Ulgiati S. Influence of allocation methods on the environmental performance of biorefinery products-a case study. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2011, 55(11):1070-1077.