Advertisement

Circular Economy Synergistic Opportunities of Decentralized Thermochemical Systems for Bioenergy and Biochar Production Fueled with Agro-industrial Wastes with Environmental Sustainability and Social Acceptance: a Review

  • Despoina Fytili
  • Anastasia Zabaniotou
Biomass and Biofuels (P Fokaides, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Biomass and Biofuels

Abstract

Purpose of Review

This paper aims to shed light on the role of decentralized gasification and pyrolysis units for bioenergy and biochar production fueled with agro-industrial wastes with environmental sustainability and social acceptance in the transition to circular economy.

Recent Findings

The decentralized gasification and pyrolysis systems can offer local energy production without affecting local food security, providing an income for producers and management options of the agro-industrial sector wastes. Carbon sequestration and soil quality improvement coupled with bioenergy generation can be achieved. Closed-loop models of decentralized pyrolysis-based biochar units are new opportunities.

Summary

Decentralized gasification-based units for combined heat and power and pyrolysis for biochar is a rapidly deployable and efficient way to meet energy demands by using local biomass, avoiding transportation costs, creating business and employment in rural areas, improving resource efficiency, closing loops of nutrients, and providing synergistic opportunities for many sectors such as agro-industry, bioenergy, and waste management sectors, in the transition to circular economy.

Keywords

Circular economy Synergistic opportunities Decentralized Thermochemical systems Bioenergy Biochar Agro-industrial wastes 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    • Bocci E, Sisinni M, Moneti M, Vecchione L, Di Carlo A, Villarini M. State of art of small scale biomass gasification power systems: a review of the different typologies. Energy Procedia. 2014;45:247–56.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro. In this study, the authors advocate the adoption of a new development model, focusing on the target of sustainable bioeconomy, around which other development themes and topics will crystallize. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Koukios E, Monteleone M, Texeira Carrondo MJ, Charalambous A, Zabaniotou A. Targeting sustainable bioeconomy: a new development strategy for southern European countries. The manifesto of the European Mezzogiorno. J Clean Prod. 2018;172:3931–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    García-Olivares A, Oleg Osychenko J-S. Transportation in a 100% renewable energy system. Energy conversion and management. Energy Convers Manag. 2018;158:266–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dominković DF, IBačeković I, Pedersena AS, Krajačićc G. The future of transportation in sustainable energy systems: opportunities and barriers in a clean energy transition. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2018;82(2):1823–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    EU Commission. Energy roadmap 2050. COM; 2011. 885 final 15.12.2011. https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/2012_energy_roadmap_2050_en_0.pdf.
  6. 6.
    Narodoslawsky M. Bioenergy provision: utilizing contextual resources. Curr Opin Chem Eng. 2017;17:93–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Morris D. (2006). Toward a community-owned, decentralized biofuel future. FILL 'ER UP: ON BIOFUELS. Available from: https://grist.org/article/morris/
  8. 8.
    •• Zabaniotou A, Rovas D, Delivand MK, Francavilla M, Monteleone M. Conceptual vision of bioenergy sector development in Mediterranean regions based on decentralized thermochemical systems. Sustain Energy Technol Assess. 2017;23:33–47. The study is an integrate approach of bioenergy systems. It discusses the issue of biomass supply and availability and proposes estimation methods and it sheds light to thermochemical process feedstock implications . Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    •• Mangoyana RB, Smith TF. Decentralised bioenergy systems: a review of opportunities and threats. Energy Policy. 2011;39(3):1286–95. This study is very important because it presents the opportunities through integrating small-scale decentralized bioenergy systems with other production systems. It supports closed-loop models, and synergistic opportunities along the bioenergy production chain . CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    •• Zabaniotou A, Rovas D, Libutti A, Monteleone M. Boosting circular economy and closing the loop in agriculture: case study of a small-scale pyrolysis–biochar based system integrated in an olive farm in symbiosis with an olive mill. Environ Dev. 2015;14:22–36. This study is very important because it presents the opportunities of small-scale decentralized pyrolysis-biochar and bioenergy systems for closing the loop in agriculture. It supports closed-loop model, and synergistic opportunities . CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    EU, 2013 Horizon 2020. Work Programme 2014–15 Secure, clean and efficient energy (Revised) European Commission Decision C (2015)2453 of 17 April 2015. https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/wp/2014_2015/main/h2020-wp1415-infrastructures_en.pdf.
  12. 12.
    European Commission. Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources. Off J Eur Union. 2009:16–62.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    EUROPEAN COMMISSION COM(2015) 614 final Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Closing the loop—An EU action plan for the Circular Economy.2.12.2015.Brussels.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    EUROPEAN COMMISSION. COM (2017). The role of waste-to-energy in the circular economy 34 final communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.26.1.2017.Brussels.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Eräjää S. Opinion EU Bioenergy, Birdlife Europe and the European Environmental Bureau. 2016.Available from: https://www.eubioenergy.com/2016/01/05/biomass-and-the-eus-circular-economy-equation/.
  16. 16.
    Boukis I, Vassilakos N, Kontopoulos G, Karellas S. Policy plan for the use of biomass and biofuels in Greece: part I: available biomass and methodology. Renew Sust Energ Rev. 2009;13(5):971–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Castillo A., Panoutsou C. Outlook on Market Segments for Biomass Uptake by 2020 in Greece. Imperial College. BIOMASS FUTURES. Available from: http://www.biomassfutures.eu/public_docs/final_deliverables/WP2/D2.3%20Outlook%20on%20market%20segmenst%20for%20biomass%20uptake%20by%202020%20in%20Greece.pdf.
  18. 18.
    Bakos GC, Tsioliaridou E, Potolias C. Technoeconomic assessment and strategic analysis of heat and power co-generation (CHP) from biomass in Greece. Biomass Bioenergy. 2008;32(6):558–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Smart Specialisation Platform. Arctic Smartness decentralised bioenergy solutions Available from: http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/arctic-smartness-decentralised-bioenergy-solutions.
  20. 20.
    Gumisiriza R, Hawumba JF, Okure M, Hensel O. Biomass waste-to-energy valorisation technologies: a review case for banana processing in Uganda. Biotechnol Biofuels. 2017;10:11.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-016-0689-5.
  21. 21.
    McKendry P. Energy production from biomass (part 2): conversion technologies. Bioresour Technol. 2002;83(1):47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ververk PJ, Anttila P, Eggers J, Lindner M, Asikainen A. The realizable potential supply of woody biomass from forests in the European Union. For Ecol Manag. 2011;261:2007–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kumar B. D., Hoque N. S. M. Assessment of the potential of biomass gasification for electricity generation in Bangladesh. J Renew Energy.2014;(2014) Article ID 429518;10 pages.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Karmakar M, Datta A. Generation of hydrogen rich gas through fluidized bed gasification of biomass. Bio/Technology. 2011;102(2):1907–13.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Butterman HC, Castaldi MJ. CO2 as a carbon neutral fuel source via enhanced biomass gasification. Environ Sci Technol. 2009;43:9030–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Klinghoffer N. Beneficial use of ash and char from biomass gasification Proceedings of the 19th Annual North American Waste-to-Energy Conference NAWTEC19.May 16–18. 2011.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Consonni S, Viganò F. Waste gasification vs. conventional waste-to-energy: a comparative evaluation of two commercial technologies. Waste Manag. 2012;32(4):653–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Salomón M, Savola T, Martina A, Fogelholmb C-J, Franssona T. Small-scale biomass CHP plants in Sweden and Finland. Renew Sust Energ Rev. 2011;15:4451–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Okello C, Pindozzi S, Faugno, Boccia L. Development of bioenergy technologies in Uganda: a review of progress. Renew Sust Energ Rev. 2013;18:55–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yaman S. Pyrolysis of biomass to produce fuels and chemical feedstocks. Energy Convers Manag. 2004;45(5):651–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Oladeji JT, Itabiyi EA, Okekunle PO. A comprehensive review of biomass pyrolysis as a process of renewable energy generation. J Nat Sci Res. 2015;5:p99.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Brownsort A.P. (2009). Biomass pyrolysis processes: performance parameters and their influence on biochar system benefits. University of Edinburgh. A dissertation presented for the degree of Master of Science.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Brownsort P.A., Carter S., Cook J., Cunningham C., Gaunt J., Hammond J. S, Ibarrola R., Mašek O., Sims K., Thornley P. (2011).An assessment of the benefits and issues associated with application of biochar to soil. School of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Saxena RC, Adhikari DK, Goyal HB. Biomass-based energy fuel through biochemical routes: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev. 2009;13(1):167–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Roberts KG, Gloy BA, Joseph S, Scott NR, Lehmann J. Life cycle assessment of biochar systems: estimating the energetic, economic, and climate change potential. Environ Sci Technol. 2010;44(2):827–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Knoef H. Handbook biomass gasification. Enschede: BTG Biomass Technology Group; 2012.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hunt S, Konaris T, Bellanca R., Grant B-T. Small-scale bioenergy initiatives: lessons from case studies in Asia, Latin America and Africa. Bioener Sustain Dev Africa.2011:pp 335–344.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Denntice d’Accacia M, Sasso M, Sibilio S, Vanoli L. Micro-combined heat and power in residential and light commercial applications. Appl Therm Eng. 2003;23:1247–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Adams PWR, McManus MC. Small-scale biomass gasification CHP utilisation in industry: energy and environmental evaluation. Sustain Energy Technol Assess. 2014;6:129–40.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Adams P.W.R. An assessment of UK bioenergy production, resource availability, biomass gasification, and life cycle environmental impacts. PhD Thesis, University of Bath, Bath. 2011. Available at: http://opus.bath.ac.uk/27930/.
  41. 41.
    Vaze P., Tindale S. Repowering communities: small-scale solutions for largescale energy problems. 2011.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kaundinya DP, Balachandra P, Ravindranath NH. Grid-connected versus stand-alone energy systems for decentralized power—a review of literature. Renew Sust Energ Rev. 2009;13:2041–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    •• Zabaniotou A. Redesigning a bioenergy sector in EU in the transition to circular waste-based bioeconomy—a multidisciplinary review. J Cleaner Prod. 2018;177:197–206. The study is very important being a multidisciplinary, comprehensive review of recent published papers, setting several legal, environmental, technical, economic, and social settings of bioenergy and designing the new role of bioenergy in the waste-based circular bioeconomy transition. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    • Manara P, Zabaniotou A. Indicator-based economic, environmental, and social sustainability assessment of a small gasification bioenergy system fuelled with food processing residues from the Mediterranean agro-industrial sector. Sustain Energy Technol Assess. 2014;8:159–71. In the present study, an indicator-based estimation of sustainability was performed for a gasification-based bioenergy system considering not only economic but also environmental and social issues. Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Zabaniotou A. Agro-residues implication in decentralized CHP production through a thermochemical conversion system with SOFC. Sustain Energy Technol Assess. 2014;6:34–50.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Nsamba HK, Hale SE, Cornelissen G, Bachmann R-T. Sustainable technologies for small-scale biochar production—a review. J Sustain Bioener Syst. 2015;5:10–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    World Energy Council MONITORING THE SUSTAINABILITY OF NATIONAL ENERGY SYSTEMS In Partnership with OLIVER W. World Energy Trilemma Index | 2017 Available from: https://www.worldenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Energy-Trilemma-Index-2017-Report.pdf
  48. 48.
    Knowles J. (2011). Overview of small and micro combined heat and power (CHP) systems. Small and micro combined heat and power (CHP) systems—advanced design, performance, materials and applications. Woodhead Publishing Series in Energy:3–16.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Singh J, Chauhan A. Assessment of biomass resources for decentralized power generation in Punjab. Int J Appl Eng Res. 2014;9:869–75.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Demirbas F, Balat M, Balat H. Potential contribution of biomass to sustainable energy development. Energy Convers Manag. 2009;50:1746–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Borello D., Pantaleo A.M., Caucci M., De Caprariis B., De Filippis P., Shah N. Modeling and experimental study of a small scale olive pomace gasifier for cogeneration: energy and profitability analysis 1. Energies 2017, 10.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Coaffe J. Risk, resilience and environmentally sustainable cities. Energy Policy. 2008;36(12):4633–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Hiremath RB, Shikha S, Ravindranath NH. Decentralized energy planning; modeling and application—a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev. 2007;11(5):729–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Nguyen TLT, Hermansen JE, Nielsen RG. Environmental assessment of gasification technology for biomass conversion to energy in comparison with other alternatives: the case of wheat straw. J Clean Prod. 2013;53:133–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Cole RJ. Motivating stakeholders to deliver environmental change. Build Res Inf. 2011;39(5):491–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Wüstenhagen R, Wolsink M, Bürer MJ. Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: an introduction to the concept. Energy Policy. 2007;35(5):2683–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Chmutina K, Wiersma B, Goodier CI, Devine-Wright P. Concern or compliance? Drivers of urban decentralised energy initiatives. Sustain Cities Soc. 2014;10:122–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018
corrected publication June/2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemical EngineeringAristotle University of ThessalonikiThessalonikiGreece

Personalised recommendations