Open AccessLife cycle assessment of forest biomass energy feedstock in the Northeast United States
Author(s) -
Quinn Ryan J.,
Ha HakSoo,
Volk Timothy A.,
Brown Tristan R.,
Bick Steven,
Malmsheimer Robert W.,
Fortier MarieOdile P.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
gcb bioenergy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.378
H-Index - 63
eISSN - 1757-1707
pISSN - 1757-1693
DOI - 10.1111/gcbb.12725
Subject(s) - raw material , bioenergy , environmental science , life cycle assessment , biomass (ecology) , greenhouse gas , supply chain , production (economics) , baseline (sea) , biofuel , agricultural science , environmental engineering , waste management , engineering , business , agronomy , ecology , economics , oceanography , macroeconomics , marketing , biology , geology
Abstract Life cycle assessment (LCA) was combined with primary data from nine forest harvesting operations in New York, Maine, Massachusetts, and Vermont, from 2013 to 2019 where forest biomass (FB) for bioenergy was one of several products. The objective was to conduct a data‐driven study of greenhouse gas emissions associated with FB feedstock harvesting operations in the Northeast United States. Deterministic and stochastic LCA models were built to simulate the current FB bioenergy feedstock supply chain in the Northeast US with a cradle‐to‐gate scope (forest harvest through roadside loading) and a functional unit of 1.0 Mg of green FB feedstock at a 50% moisture content. Baseline LCA, sensitivity analysis, and uncertainty analyses were conducted for three different FB feedstock types—dirty chips, clean chips, and grindings—enabling an empirically driven investigation of differences between feedstock types, individual harvesting process contributions, and literature comparisons. The baseline LCA average impacts were lower for grindings (4.57 kg CO 2eq /Mg) and dirty chips (7.16 kg CO 2eq /Mg) than for clean chips (23.99 kg CO 2eq /Mg) under economic allocation, but impacts were of similar magnitude under mass allocation, ranging from 24.42 to 27.89 kg CO 2eq /Mg. Uncertainty analysis showed a wider range of probable results under mass allocation compared to economic allocation. Sensitivity analysis revealed the impact of variations in the production masses and total economic values of primary products of forest harvests on the LCA results due to allocation of supply chain emissions. The high variability in fuel use between logging contractors also had a distinct influence on LCA results. The results of this study can aid decision‐makers in energy policy and guide emissions reductions efforts while informing future LCAs that expand the system boundary to regional FB energy pathways, including electricity generation, transportation fuels, pellets for heat, and combined heat and power.