Comparative LCA of ethanol versus gasoline in Brazil using different LCIA methods

dc.creatorCavalett, O
dc.creatorChagas, MF
dc.creatorSeabra, JEA
dc.creatorBonomi, A
dc.date2013
dc.dateMAR
dc.date2014-07-30T13:59:59Z
dc.date2015-11-26T17:41:21Z
dc.date2014-07-30T13:59:59Z
dc.date2015-11-26T17:41:21Z
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-29T00:23:08Z
dc.date.available2018-03-29T00:23:08Z
dc.identifierInternational Journal Of Life Cycle Assessment. Springer Heidelberg, v. 18, n. 3, n. 647, n. 658, 2013.
dc.identifier0948-3349
dc.identifierWOS:000314900600011
dc.identifier10.1007/s11367-012-0465-0
dc.identifierhttp://www.repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/56129
dc.identifierhttp://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/56129
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/1286986
dc.descriptionFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
dc.descriptionThe main objective of this study is to expand the discussion about how, and to what extent, the environmental performance is affected by the use of different life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) illustrated by the case study of the comparison between environmental impacts of gasoline and ethanol form sugarcane in Brazil. The following LCIA methods have been considered in the evaluation: CML 2001, Impact 2002+, EDIP 2003, Eco-indicator 99, TRACI 2, ReCiPe, and Ecological Scarcity 2006. Energy allocation was used to split the environmental burdens between ethanol and surplus electricity generated at the sugarcane mill. The phases of feedstock and (bio)fuel production, distribution, and use are included in system boundaries. At the midpoint level, comparison of different LCIA methods showed that ethanol presents lower impacts than gasoline in important categories such as global warming, fossil depletion, and ozone layer depletion. However, ethanol presents higher impacts in acidification, eutrophication, photochemical oxidation, and agricultural land use categories. Regarding to single-score indicators, ethanol presented better performance than gasoline using ReCiPe Endpoint LCIA method. Using IMPACT 2002+, Eco-indicator 99, and Ecological Scarcity 2006, higher scores are verified for ethanol, mainly due to the impacts related to particulate emissions and land use impacts. Although there is a relative agreement on the results regarding equivalent environmental impact categories using different LCIA methods at midpoint level, when single-score indicators are considered, use of different LCIA methods lead to different conclusions. Single-score results also limit the interpretability at endpoint level, as a consequence of small contributions of relevant environmental impact categories weighted in a single-score indicator.
dc.description18
dc.description3
dc.description647
dc.description658
dc.descriptionFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
dc.descriptionFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
dc.languageen
dc.publisherSpringer Heidelberg
dc.publisherHeidelberg
dc.publisherAlemanha
dc.relationInternational Journal Of Life Cycle Assessment
dc.relationInt. J. Life Cycle Assess.
dc.rightsfechado
dc.rightshttp://www.springer.com/open+access/authors+rights?SGWID=0-176704-12-683201-0
dc.sourceWeb of Science
dc.subjectBiorefinery
dc.subjectCategories of impact
dc.subjectEnvironmental impacts
dc.subjectLife cycle impact assessment (LCIA)
dc.subjectMidpoint modeling
dc.subjectSingle score
dc.subjectSugarcane
dc.subjectLife-cycle Assessment
dc.subjectImpact Assessment Methods
dc.subjectSugarcane Products
dc.subjectGhg Emissions
dc.subjectFuel Ethanol
dc.subjectFocus
dc.titleComparative LCA of ethanol versus gasoline in Brazil using different LCIA methods
dc.typeArtículos de revistas


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución