A review of comparative life cycle assessment of dry, wet, and microwave torrefaction pathways for sustainable bioenergy systems

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61989100%3A27650%2F25%3A10257727" target="_blank" >RIV/61989100:27650/25:10257727 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032125005489" target="_blank" >https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032125005489</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2025.115875" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.rser.2025.115875</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

A review of comparative life cycle assessment of dry, wet, and microwave torrefaction pathways for sustainable bioenergy systems

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Understanding the lifecycle carbon impacts of different torrefaction methods is critical to advancing sustainable bioenergy solutions. While prior research has explored individual torrefaction pathways, comprehensive comparisons of carbon flows and global warming potential (GWP) across dry (conventional), wet (hydrothermal carbonization), and microwave-assisted torrefaction remain limited. This review compares the life cycle assessment (LCA) results of these torrefaction technologies, focusing on their carbon footprints, GWP per experimental configuration, and net carbon benefits (NCB). Conventional torrefaction exhibits GWP values ranging from 0.1 to 0.4 kg CO2 eq per kg biomass, while electricity generation from torrefied biochar generally ranges between 0.1 and 0.3 kg CO2 eq·kWh−1. Microwave-assisted torrefaction demonstrates the lowest GWP (∼0.110 kg CO2 eq·kWh−1), making it a promising route for producing coal-like solid fuels. Conversely, hydrochar-based electricity from hydrothermal carbonization tends to yield higher GWP. Feedstock type, energy source, process temperature, and LCA boundary conditions influence environmental impacts across torrefaction methods. Among the pathways evaluated, microwave torrefaction offers higher NCB, lower emissions, and greater process efficiency for energy recovery. This review also outlines methodological challenges in LCA harmonization and highlights opportunities for carbon credit validation and policy support toward net-zero biomass energy systems.

Název v anglickém jazyce

A review of comparative life cycle assessment of dry, wet, and microwave torrefaction pathways for sustainable bioenergy systems

Popis výsledku anglicky

Understanding the lifecycle carbon impacts of different torrefaction methods is critical to advancing sustainable bioenergy solutions. While prior research has explored individual torrefaction pathways, comprehensive comparisons of carbon flows and global warming potential (GWP) across dry (conventional), wet (hydrothermal carbonization), and microwave-assisted torrefaction remain limited. This review compares the life cycle assessment (LCA) results of these torrefaction technologies, focusing on their carbon footprints, GWP per experimental configuration, and net carbon benefits (NCB). Conventional torrefaction exhibits GWP values ranging from 0.1 to 0.4 kg CO2 eq per kg biomass, while electricity generation from torrefied biochar generally ranges between 0.1 and 0.3 kg CO2 eq·kWh−1. Microwave-assisted torrefaction demonstrates the lowest GWP (∼0.110 kg CO2 eq·kWh−1), making it a promising route for producing coal-like solid fuels. Conversely, hydrochar-based electricity from hydrothermal carbonization tends to yield higher GWP. Feedstock type, energy source, process temperature, and LCA boundary conditions influence environmental impacts across torrefaction methods. Among the pathways evaluated, microwave torrefaction offers higher NCB, lower emissions, and greater process efficiency for energy recovery. This review also outlines methodological challenges in LCA harmonization and highlights opportunities for carbon credit validation and policy support toward net-zero biomass energy systems.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

20700 - Environmental engineering

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/TQ16000072" target="_blank" >TQ16000072: Recyklovatelné sorbenty z odpadů pro udržitelné řízení provozních emisí skleníkových plynů</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2025

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

ISSN

1364-0321

e-ISSN

1364-0321

Svazek periodika

219

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

115875

Stát vydavatele periodika

GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

Počet stran výsledku

20

Strana od-do

1-20

Kód UT WoS článku

001502069700001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—