Choosing co-substrates to supplement biogas production from animal slurry - a life cycle assessment of the environmental consequences

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

Choosing co-substrates to supplement biogas production from animal slurry - a life cycle assessment of the environmental consequences. / Croxatto Vega, Giovanna Catalina; ten Hoeve, Marieke; Birkved, Morten; Sommer, Sven G.; Bruun, Sander.

In: Bioresource Technology, Vol. 171, 2014, p. 410-420.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Croxatto Vega, GC, ten Hoeve, M, Birkved, M, Sommer, SG & Bruun, S 2014, 'Choosing co-substrates to supplement biogas production from animal slurry - a life cycle assessment of the environmental consequences', Bioresource Technology, vol. 171, pp. 410-420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.08.099

APA

Croxatto Vega, G. C., ten Hoeve, M., Birkved, M., Sommer, S. G., & Bruun, S. (2014). Choosing co-substrates to supplement biogas production from animal slurry - a life cycle assessment of the environmental consequences. Bioresource Technology, 171, 410-420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.08.099

Vancouver

Croxatto Vega GC, ten Hoeve M, Birkved M, Sommer SG, Bruun S. Choosing co-substrates to supplement biogas production from animal slurry - a life cycle assessment of the environmental consequences. Bioresource Technology. 2014;171:410-420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.08.099

Author

Croxatto Vega, Giovanna Catalina ; ten Hoeve, Marieke ; Birkved, Morten ; Sommer, Sven G. ; Bruun, Sander. / Choosing co-substrates to supplement biogas production from animal slurry - a life cycle assessment of the environmental consequences. In: Bioresource Technology. 2014 ; Vol. 171. pp. 410-420.

Bibtex

@article{9cf19e977bbe44639d8e0681fe0d89a5,
title = "Choosing co-substrates to supplement biogas production from animal slurry - a life cycle assessment of the environmental consequences",
abstract = "Biogas production from animal slurry can provide substantial contributions to reach renewable energy targets, yet due to the low methane potential of slurry, biogas plants depend on the addition of co-substrates to make operations profitable. The environmental performance of three underexploited co-substrates, straw, organic household waste and the solid fraction of separated slurry, were assessed against slurry management without biogas production, using LCA methodology. The analysis showed straw, which would have been left on arable fields, to be an environmentally superior co-substrate. Due to its low nutrient content and high methane potential, straw yields the lowest impacts for eutrophication and the highest climate change and fossil depletion savings. Co-substrates diverted from incineration to biogas production had fewer environmental benefits, due to the loss of energy production, which is then produced from conventional fossil fuels. The scenarios can often provide benefits for one impact category while causing impacts in another.",
keywords = "Biogas, Life cycle assessment, Organic fraction household waste, Separated slurry, Straw",
author = "{Croxatto Vega}, {Giovanna Catalina} and {ten Hoeve}, Marieke and Morten Birkved and Sommer, {Sven G.} and Sander Bruun",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1016/j.biortech.2014.08.099",
language = "English",
volume = "171",
pages = "410--420",
journal = "Bioresource Technology",
issn = "0960-8524",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Choosing co-substrates to supplement biogas production from animal slurry - a life cycle assessment of the environmental consequences

AU - Croxatto Vega, Giovanna Catalina

AU - ten Hoeve, Marieke

AU - Birkved, Morten

AU - Sommer, Sven G.

AU - Bruun, Sander

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Biogas production from animal slurry can provide substantial contributions to reach renewable energy targets, yet due to the low methane potential of slurry, biogas plants depend on the addition of co-substrates to make operations profitable. The environmental performance of three underexploited co-substrates, straw, organic household waste and the solid fraction of separated slurry, were assessed against slurry management without biogas production, using LCA methodology. The analysis showed straw, which would have been left on arable fields, to be an environmentally superior co-substrate. Due to its low nutrient content and high methane potential, straw yields the lowest impacts for eutrophication and the highest climate change and fossil depletion savings. Co-substrates diverted from incineration to biogas production had fewer environmental benefits, due to the loss of energy production, which is then produced from conventional fossil fuels. The scenarios can often provide benefits for one impact category while causing impacts in another.

AB - Biogas production from animal slurry can provide substantial contributions to reach renewable energy targets, yet due to the low methane potential of slurry, biogas plants depend on the addition of co-substrates to make operations profitable. The environmental performance of three underexploited co-substrates, straw, organic household waste and the solid fraction of separated slurry, were assessed against slurry management without biogas production, using LCA methodology. The analysis showed straw, which would have been left on arable fields, to be an environmentally superior co-substrate. Due to its low nutrient content and high methane potential, straw yields the lowest impacts for eutrophication and the highest climate change and fossil depletion savings. Co-substrates diverted from incineration to biogas production had fewer environmental benefits, due to the loss of energy production, which is then produced from conventional fossil fuels. The scenarios can often provide benefits for one impact category while causing impacts in another.

KW - Biogas

KW - Life cycle assessment

KW - Organic fraction household waste

KW - Separated slurry

KW - Straw

U2 - 10.1016/j.biortech.2014.08.099

DO - 10.1016/j.biortech.2014.08.099

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 25226057

AN - SCOPUS:84907647261

VL - 171

SP - 410

EP - 420

JO - Bioresource Technology

JF - Bioresource Technology

SN - 0960-8524

ER -

ID: 130102254