Abstract
Purpose
The commercial-scale production of torrefied plastic-fiber fuel pellets from waste plastics and waste fibers may offer a viable alternative to fossil fuel–based energy. In this study, the environmental impact of fuel pellets produced and consumed in Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA is evaluated and compared to the status quo of grid energy production from fossil fuels (i.e., coal or natural gas).
Methods
A cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment was conducted using a functional unit of 1 kWh of energy produced using torrefied plastic-fiber fuel pellets versus production of energy from coal or natural gas. Regional data along with relevant manufacturing data was used to inform the inventory of the production of the torrefied fuel pellets, which are manufactured using waste fibers and waste plastics sourced from within 5 km of the torrefaction facility and consumed within 50 km of the facility. Since fuel pellets are produced from waste inputs and contain biogenic carbon sources, impacts were assessed with/without credit for biogenic carbon and with/without the burden of the torrefaction inputs.
Results and discussion
The production of 1 kWh of energy using torrefied plastic-fiber fuel pellets was determined to produce between 0.303 and 0.757 kg CO2 eq emissions due to combustion and between 0.062 and 1.105 kg CO2 eq additional emissions as a result of the manufacturing process, with the ranges dependent upon the allocation method selected. Under a burden-free allocation due to waste materials used as inputs, along with a credit for biogenic carbon emissions, the system produces 0.365 kg CO2 eq per 1 kWh of energy; however, under a full-burden allocation with no credit for biogenic carbon emissions, 1.862 kg CO2 eq per 1 kWh of energy is produced. This highlights the differences between allocation scenarios and role of credits for biogenic carbon emissions when evaluating systems.
Conclusions
The usage of torrefied plastic-fiber fuel pellets produced using waste plastics and fibers is a reasonable alternative to the status quo of waste disposal coupled with the production of grid energy from fossil fuels. In addition to the reduction in GHG emissions, the use of the process would also help to alleviate the environmental burden of waste plastics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
Author calculations and life cycle inventory are included in the supplemental data. Third-party data sets used in calculations are available through the Federal LCA Commons with the values used listed as part of Electronic Supplementary information, Table S1. Outputs from openLCA calculations are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
References
American Chemistry Council (2022) US resin production and sales 2021 vs 2020. American Chemistry Council
Bare J, Young D, Hopton M (2012) Tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts (TRACI) TRACI version 2.1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. OH, Cincinnati
Batidzirai B, Mignot APR, Schakel WB et al (2013) Biomass torrefaction technology: techno-economic status and future prospects. Energy 62:196–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.09.035
Brown TR (2015) A techno-economic review of thermochemical cellulosic biofuel pathways. Bioresour Technol 178:166–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.09.053
Cabernard L, Pfister S, Oberschelp C, Hellweg S (2022) Growing environmental footprint of plastics driven by coal combustion. Nat Sustain 5:139–148. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00807-2
Cahyanti MN, Doddapaneni TRKC, Kikas T (2020) Biomass torrefaction: an overview on process parameters, economic and environmental aspects and recent advancements. Bioresour Technol 301:122737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.122737
Chen W-H, Lin B-J, Lin Y-Y et al (2021) Progress in biomass torrefaction: principles, applications and challenges. Prog Energy Combust Sci 82:100887. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2020.100887
Cooney G, Skone TJ, Jamieson M, Zaimes GG (2019) Open-source life cycle baseline for electricity consumption in the United States - LCI public release (pp A41D-04)
Demetrious A, Crossin E (2019) Life cycle assessment of paper and plastic packaging waste in landfill, incineration, and gasification-pyrolysis. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 21:850–860. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-019-00842-4
Edelen A, Hottle T, Cashman S, Ingwersen W (2019) The federal LCA commons elementary flow list: background, approach, description and recommendations for use. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, DC
Environmental Protection Agency (1997) Measuring recycling: a guide for state and local governments. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
Environmental Protection Agency (2007) Regulatory Impact Analysis: Renewable Fuel Standard Program (Regulatory Impact Analysis No. EPA420-R-07–004). Assessment and Standards Division Office of Transportation and Air Quality U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-08/documents/420r07004.pdf
Filiciotto L, Rothenberg G (2021) Biodegradable plastics: standards, policies, and impacts. Chemsuschem 14:56–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/cssc.202002044
Frey HC, Rasdorf W, Lewis P (2010) Comprehensive field study of fuel use and emissions of nonroad diesel construction equipment. Transp Res Rec 2158:69–76. https://doi.org/10.3141/2158-09
GreenDelta (2022) openLCA
Gug J, Cacciola D, Sobkowicz MJ (2015) Processing and properties of a solid energy fuel from municipal solid waste (MSW) and recycled plastics. Waste Manag 35:283–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.09.031
Heijungs R, Guinée JB (2007) Allocation and ‘what-if’ scenarios in life cycle assessment of waste management systems. Waste Manag 27(8):997–1005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2007.02.013
Hemmer G, Kasper G, Wang J, Schaub G (2002) Removal of particles and acid gases (SO2 or HCl) with a ceramic filter by addition of dry sorbents. Morgantown, WV, p 12
ISO (2006) Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Principles and framework. ISO, Geneva
Kahn E, Antognoli E, Arbuckle P (2022) The LCA commons—how an open-source repository for US federal life cycle assessment (LCA) data products advances inter-agency coordination. Appl Sci 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12020865
Klinger J, Bar-Ziv E, Shonnard D (2015) Predicting properties of torrefied biomass by intrinsic kinetics. Energy Fuels 29:171–176. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef501456p
Kolapkar SS, Zinchik S, Burli P et al (2022) Integrated torrefaction-extrusion system for solid fuel pellet production from mixed fiber-plastic wastes: techno-economic analysis and life cycle assessment. Fuel Process Technol 226:107094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2021.107094
Lako P, Koyama M, Nakada S (2015) Biomass for heat and power: technology brief. IEA-ETSAP and IRENA
Lee U, Han J, Wang M (2017) Evaluation of landfill gas emissions from municipal solid waste landfills for the life-cycle analysis of waste-to-energy pathways. J Clean Prod 166:335–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.016
Liamsanguan C, Gheewala SH (2007) Environmental assessment of energy production from municipal solid waste incineration. Int J Life Cycle Assess 12(7):529–536. https://doi.org/10.1065/lca2006.10.278
MacLeod M, Arp HPH, Tekman MB, Jahnke A (2021) The global threat from plastic pollution. Science 373:61–65. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abg5433
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (2012) U.S. Life Cycle Inventory Database
Niu Y, Lv Y, Lei Y et al (2019) Biomass torrefaction: properties, applications, challenges, and economy. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 115:109395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109395
Nunes LJR (2020) A case study about biomass torrefaction on an industrial scale: solutions to problems related to self-heating, difficulties in pelletizing, and excessive wear of production equipment. Appl Sci 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10072546
OECD (2022) Global plastics outlook. OECD Publishing, Paris
Olofsson J, Börjesson P (2018) Residual biomass as resource – life-cycle environmental impact of wastes in circular resource systems. J Clean Prod 196:997–1006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.115
Pelton REO, Smith TM (2015) Hotspot Scenario Analysis J Ind Eco 19(3):427–440. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12191
Pryshlakivsky J, Searcy C (2021) Life Cycle Assessment as a decision-making tool: Practitioner and managerial considerations. J Clean Prod 309:127344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127344
Rajagopal D, Plevin RJ (2013) Implications of market-mediated emissions and uncertainty for biofuel policies. Energy Policy 56:75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.09.076
Sharma S, Basu S, Shetti NP et al (2020) Waste-to-energy nexus: a sustainable development. Environ Pollut 267:115501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115501
Solomon BD, Krishna K (2011) The coming sustainable energy transition: history, strategies, and outlook. Asian Energy Secur 39:7422–7431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.09.009
Sun X, **e M, Mai L, Zeng EY (2022) Biobased plastic: a plausible solution toward carbon neutrality in plastic industry? J Hazard Mater 435:129037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.129037
Tejaswini MSSR, Pathak P, Ramkrishna S, Ganesh PS (2022) A comprehensive review on integrative approach for sustainable management of plastic waste and its associated externalities. Sci Total Environ 825:153973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153973
U.S. Energy Information Administration (2022) Wisconsin state energy profile. In: US Energy Inf. Adm. https://www.eia.gov/state/print.php?sid=WI. Accessed 15 Jun 2022
Wilson IAG, Staffell I (2018) Rapid fuel switching from coal to natural gas through effective carbon pricing. Nat Energy 3:365–372. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-018-0109-0
Xu Z, Albrecht JW, Kolapkar SS et al (2020) Chlorine removal from U.S. solid waste blends through torrefaction. Appl Sci 10:. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10093337
Xu Z, Kolapkar SS, Zinchik S et al (2021) Kinetic study of paper waste thermal degradation. Polym Degrad Stab 191:109681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2021.109681
Xu Z, Zinchik S, Kolapkar SS et al (2018) Properties of torrefied U.S. waste blends. Front Energy Res 6:. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2018.00065
Yang Y (2016) Two sides of the same coin: Consequential life cycle assessment based on the attributional framework. J Clean Prod 127:274–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.089
Zinchik S, Klinger JL, Westover TL et al (2018) Evaluation of fast pyrolysis feedstock conversion with a mixing paddle reactor. Fuel Process Technol 171:124–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2017.11.012
Zinchik S, Xu Z, Kolapkar SS et al (2020) Properties of pellets of torrefied U.S. waste blends. Waste Manag 104:130–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.01.009
Zink T, Geyer R, Startz R (2016) A market-based framework for quantifying displaced production from recycling or reuse. J Ind Ecol 20(4):719–729. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12317
Funding
RZ is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (NAID R01AI153355) and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-005517). SSK and SZ are supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF-STTR Award #2052302).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interests.
Additional information
Communicated by Yi Yang.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Zupko, R., Kolapkar, S.S. & Zinchik, S. Torrefied plastic-fiber fuel pellets as a replacement for fossil fuels — a case study life cycle assessment for Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 28, 1316–1325 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-023-02198-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-023-02198-2