The carbon-nitrogen nexus of transportation fuels

The carbon-nitrogen nexus of transportation fuels The advocation of a biobased economy has created a compelling case for consideration of biofuels as an alternative to conventional fossil fuels. However, biofuels must be evaluated on multiple criteria to ensure they truly are an improvement over the fossil fuels they are to replace. This study evaluates the carbon (C) footprint (emissions – sequestration) and reactive nitrogen (Nr) emissions footprint of two fossil fuels, two first generation biofuels, and eight cellulosic fuels, many with process inputs allocated multiple ways to allow for different valuation of inputs and products. For both C and Nr results, fossil and first generation fuels were often the worst options, while cellulosic fuels look notably better, often in both criteria. For most fuels, there is a trade-off between a low C footprint and low Nr emissions footprint, which is investigated throughout the entire nutrient cycles here. Biofuels usually have lower C footprints and higher Nr emissions due to intensive farming processes, while fossil fuels have a high C footprint and lower Nr emissions. However, cellulosic fuels from feedstocks with low farming inputs switchgrass and low intensity high diversity grassland, or from waste feedstocks, such as municipal solid waste and newsprint have low C and Nr footprints, making them better options for transportation fuels. However, just because these fuels have smaller C and Nr footprints than other fuels does not imply they are absolutely sustainable. The capacity of ecosystems to supply ecosystem services should also be considered before sustainability claims are made. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Cleaner Production Elsevier

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/the-carbon-nitrogen-nexus-of-transportation-fuels-oP9lCJ6PmV
Publisher
Elsevier
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd
ISSN
0959-6526
D.O.I.
10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.090
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The advocation of a biobased economy has created a compelling case for consideration of biofuels as an alternative to conventional fossil fuels. However, biofuels must be evaluated on multiple criteria to ensure they truly are an improvement over the fossil fuels they are to replace. This study evaluates the carbon (C) footprint (emissions – sequestration) and reactive nitrogen (Nr) emissions footprint of two fossil fuels, two first generation biofuels, and eight cellulosic fuels, many with process inputs allocated multiple ways to allow for different valuation of inputs and products. For both C and Nr results, fossil and first generation fuels were often the worst options, while cellulosic fuels look notably better, often in both criteria. For most fuels, there is a trade-off between a low C footprint and low Nr emissions footprint, which is investigated throughout the entire nutrient cycles here. Biofuels usually have lower C footprints and higher Nr emissions due to intensive farming processes, while fossil fuels have a high C footprint and lower Nr emissions. However, cellulosic fuels from feedstocks with low farming inputs switchgrass and low intensity high diversity grassland, or from waste feedstocks, such as municipal solid waste and newsprint have low C and Nr footprints, making them better options for transportation fuels. However, just because these fuels have smaller C and Nr footprints than other fuels does not imply they are absolutely sustainable. The capacity of ecosystems to supply ecosystem services should also be considered before sustainability claims are made.

Journal

Journal of Cleaner ProductionElsevier

Published: Apr 10, 2018

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Unlimited reading

Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.

Stay up to date

Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.

Organize your research

It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve Freelancer

DeepDyve Pro

Price
FREE
$49/month

$360/year
Save searches from Google Scholar, PubMed
Create lists to organize your research
Export lists, citations
Access to DeepDyve database
Abstract access only
Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles
Print
20 pages/month
PDF Discount
20% off