Top

The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment

Published in:

01-06-2015 | LIFE CYCLE SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT

Prioritization of bioethanol production pathways in China based on life cycle sustainability assessment and multicriteria decision-making

Authors: Jingzheng Ren, Alessandro Manzardo, Anna Mazzi, Filippo Zuliani, Antonio Scipioni

Published in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment | Issue 6/2015

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Purpose

The study objectives are twofold: (i) combining the life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) framework and the multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) methodology for sustainability assessment and (ii) determining the most sustainable scenario for bioethanol production in China according to the preferences of the decision-makers/stakeholders.

Methods

Life cycle assessment (LCA), life cycle costing (LCC), and social life cycle assessment (SLCA) are combined to collect the corresponding criteria data on environmental, economic, and social aspects, respectively. The study develops a novel SLCA method for quantifying the social criteria. The decision-makers/stakeholders can use linguistic terms to assess these criteria, and fuzzy theory is used to transform the linguistic variables into real numbers. Once the sustainability assessment criteria are determined, the study develops an MCDM method that combines the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and the VIKOR method to prioritize the alternatives. The AHP is used to determine the criteria weights that are a prerequisite when using VIKOR; the VIKOR method is then used to determine the sustainability sequence of the scenarios.

Results and discussion

The study’s proposed method investigates an illustrative case about three alternative bioethanol production scenarios (wheat-based, corn-based, and cassava-based): The prior sequence (based on the sustainability performances) in descending order is cassava-based, corn-based, and wheat-based. The proposed methodology results allow Chinese decision-makers/stakeholders to select the most sustainable scenario among many alternatives. The proposed methodology is generic, meaning that further alternatives can be studied and the most sustainable option can be ultimately determined.

Conclusions

The main study contribution is to test the combination of an MCDM methodology and LCSA for sustainability decision-making by studying three alternative pathways for bioethanol production in China. The proposed method feasibly enables the decision-makers/stakeholders to find the most sustainable scenario to achieve their objectives among various alternatives.

previous article Scoping organizational LCA—challenges and solutions

next article Stochastic comparative assessment of life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions from conventional and electric vehicles

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Amindoust A, Ahmed S, Saghafinia A, Bahreininejad A (2012) Sustainable supplier selection: a ranking model based on fuzzy inference system. Appl Soft Comput 12:1668–1677CrossRef

Aparcana S, Salhofer S (2013) Application of a methodology for the social life cycle assessment of recycling systems in low income countries: three Peruvian case studies. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(5):1116–1128CrossRef

Bachmann TM (2013) Towards life cycle sustainability assessment: drawing on the NEEDS project’s total cost and multi-criteria decision analysis ranking methods. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(9):1698–1709CrossRef

Bazzazi AA, Osanloo M, Karimi B (2011) Deriving preference order of open pit mines equipment through MADM methods: application of modified VIKOR. Expert Syst Appl 38:2550–2556CrossRef

Benoît C, Norris GA, Valdivia S, Ciroth A, Moberg A, Bos U, Prakash S, Ugaya C, Beck T (2010) The guidelines for social life cycle assessment of products: just in time! Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(2):156–163CrossRef

Bojaca CR, Schrevens E (2010) Parameter uncertainty in LCA: stochastic sampling under correlation. Int J Life Cycle Assess 15(3):238–246CrossRef

Buchholz T, Rametsteiner E, Volk TA, Luzadis VA (2009) Multi criteria analysis for bioenergy systems assessments. Energy Policy 37(2):484–495CrossRef

Buonocore E, Paolo P, Ulgiati S (2012) Assessing the environmental performance and sustainability of bioenergy production in Sweden: a life cycle assessment perspective. Energy 37:69–78CrossRef

Cavallaro F (2009) Multi-criteria decision aid to assess concentrated solar thermal technologies. Renew Energy 34:1678–1685CrossRef

Cavallaro F (2010) A comparative assessment of thin-film photovoltaic production processes using the ELECTRE III method. Energy Policy 38:463–474CrossRef

Chang CL, Hsu CH (2009) Multi-criteria analysis via the VIKOR method for prioritizing land-use restraint strategies in the Tseng-Wen reservoir watershed. J Environ Manage 90:3226–3230CrossRef

Chang YJ, Schau EM, Finkbeiner M (2012) Application of life cycle sustainability assessment to the bamboo and aluminum bicycles in surveying social risks of developing countries. 2nd World Sustainability Forum:1–24

Cristóbal JRS (2011) Multi-criteria decision-making in the selection of a renewable energy project in Spain: the Vikor method. Renew Energy 36:498–502CrossRef

Dreyer L, Hauschild M, Schierbeck J (2006) A framework for social life cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 11(2):88–97CrossRef

Ediger VS, Hosgor E, Surmeli AN, Tathdil HT (2007) Fossil fuel sustainability index: an application of resource management. Energy Policy 35:2969–2977CrossRef

Finkbeiner M, Schau EM, Lehmann A, Traverso M (2010) Towards life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustainability 2(10):3309–3322CrossRef

Foolmaun RK, Ramjeeawon T (2012) Comparative life cycle assessment and life cycle costing of four disposal scenarios for used polyethylene terephthalate bottles in Mauritius. Environ Techn 33(17):2007–2018

Foolmaun RK, Ramjeawon T (2013) Life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) of four disposal scenarios for used polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles in Mauritius. Environ Dev Sustain 15:783–806CrossRef

Gangadharan P, Zanwar A, Zheng K, Gossage J, Lou HH (2012) Sustainability assessment of polygeneration processes based on syngas derived from coal and natural gas. Comput Chem Eng 39:105–117

Gnansounou E (2011) Assessing the sustainability of biofuels: a logic-based model. Energy 36:2089–2096CrossRef

Goedkoop M, Heijungs R, Huijbregts MAJ, de Schryver A, Struijs J, Van Zelm R (2009) ReCiPE 2008. A life-cycle impact assessment method which comprises harminizes category indicators of the midpoint and the endpoint level

Halog A, Manik Y (2011) Advancing integrated systems modelling framework for life cycle sustainability assessment. Sustainability 3(2):469–499CrossRef

Heijungs R, Huppes G, Guinee JB (2010) Life cycle assessment and sustainability analysis of products, materials and technologies. Toward a scientific framework for sustainability life cycle analysis. Polym Degrad Stab 95:422–428CrossRef

Heller MC, Keoleian GA. (2000). Life cycle-based sustainability indicators for assessment of the U.S. food system. This file is available at: http://css.snre.umich.edu/css_doc/CSS00-04.pdf

Huang JK, Chou HG (2010) The social-economic effect and strategies and policies of biofuel ethanol of China. Science Press, Beijing, China (in Chinese)

Jahan A, Edwards KL (2013) VIKOR method for material selection problems with interval umbers and target-based criteria. MaterDesign 47:759–765

Jayswal A, Li X, Zanwar A, Lou HH, Huang Y (2011) A sustainability root case analysis methodology and its application. Comput Chem Eng 35:2786–2798CrossRef

Jørgensen A, Le Bocq A, Nazarkina L, Hauschild M (2008) Methodologies for social life cycle assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(2):96–103CrossRef

Jørgensen A, Dreyer LC, Wangel A (2012) Addressing the effect of social life cycle assessments. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(6):828–839CrossRef

Kloepffer W (2008) Life cycle sustainability assessment of products. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(2):89–95CrossRef

Kurka T (2013) Application of the analytic hierarchy process to evaluate the regional sustainability of bioenergy developments. Energy 62:393–402CrossRef

Lehmann A, Zschieschang E, Traverso M, Finkbeiner M, Schebek L (2013) Social aspects for sustainability assessment of technologies—challenges for social life cycle assessment (SLCA). Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(8):1581–1592CrossRef

Li D (2003) Fuzzy multiobjective many-person decision makings nd games, 1st edn. Beijing, National Defense Industry Press (in Chinese)

Manik Y, Leahy J, Halog A (2013) Social life cycle assessment of palm oil biodiesel: a case study in Jambi Province of Indonesia. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(7):1386–1392CrossRef

Manzardo A, Ren J, Mazzi A, Scipioni A (2012) A grey-based group decision-making methodology for the selection of hydrogen technologies in life cycle sustainability perspective. Int J Hydrogen Energy 37:17663–17670CrossRef

Mazloumzadeh SM, Shamsi M, Nezamabadi-pour H (2008) Evaluation of general-purpose lifters for the date harvest industry based on a fuzzy inference system. Comput Electron Agr 60:60–66CrossRef

Ong HC, Mahlia TMI, Masjuki HH, Honnery D (2012) Life cycle cost and sensitivity analysis of palm biodiesel production. Fuel 98:131–139CrossRef

Othman MR, Repke JU, Wozny G, Huang Y (2010) A Modular Approach to Sustainability Assessment and Design Support in Chemical Process Design. Ind Eng Chem Res 49:7870–7881CrossRef

Pesonen HL, Horn S (2013) Evaluating the sustainability SWOT as a streamlined tool for life cycle sustainability assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(9):1780–1792CrossRef

Piluso C, Huang J, Liu Z, Huang Y (2010) Sustainability assessment of industrial systems under uncertainty: a fuzzy logic based approach to short-term to Midterm Predictions. Ind Eng Chem Res 49:8633–8643CrossRef

Pintaric ZN, Kravanja Z (2006) Selection of the economic objective functions for the optimization of process flow sheets. Ind Eng Chem Res 45:4222–4232CrossRef

Reitinger C, Dumke M, Barosevcic M, Hillerbrand R (2011) A conceptual framework for impact assessment within SLCA. Int J Life Cycle Assess 16(4):380–388CrossRef

Ren J, Sovacool BK (2015) Prioritizing low-carbon energy sources to enhance China’s energy security. Energy Convers Manage 92:129–136CrossRef

Ren J, Manzardo A, Toniolo S, Scipioni A (2013a) Sustainability of hydorgen supply chain. Part II: prioritizing and classifying the sustainability of hydrogen supply chains based on the combination of extension and AHP. Int J Hydrogen Energy 38:13845–13855CrossRef

Ren J, Manzardo A, Mazzi A, Fedele A, Scipioni A (2013b) Emergy analysis and sustainability efficiency analysis of different crop-based biodiesel in life cycle perspective. Sci World J 2013:1–12

Ren J, Fedele A, Mason M, Manzardo A, Scipioni A (2013c) Fuzzy Multi-actor Multi-criteria Decision Making for sustainability assessment of biomass-based technologies for hydrogen production. Int J Hydrogen Energy 38:9111–9120CrossRef

Ren J, Manzardo A, Toniolo S, Scipioni A, Tan S, Dong L, Gao S (2013d) Design and modeling of sustainable bioethanol supply chain by minimizing the total ecological footprint in life cycle perspective. Bioresour Tech 146:771–774CrossRef

Ren J, Tan S, Dong L, Mazzi A, Scipioni A, Sovacool BK (2014a) Determining the life cycle energy efficiency of six biofuel systems in China: a data envelopment analysis. Bioresour Tech 162:1–7CrossRef

Ren J, Andreasen KP, Sovacool BK (2014b) Viability of hydrogen pathways that enhance energy security: a comparison of China and Denmark. Int J Hydrogen Energy 39(28):15320–15329CrossRef

Ren J, Gao S, Tan S, Dong L (2015a) Hydrogen economy in China: strengths–weaknesses–opportunities–threats analysis and strategies prioritization. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 41:1230–1243CrossRef

Ren J, Gao S, Tan S, Dong L, Scipioni A, Mazzi A (2015b) Role prioritization of hydrogen production technologies for promoting hydrogen economy in the current state of China. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 41:1217–1229CrossRef

Ren J, Tan S, Yang L, Goodsite ME, Pang C, Dong L (2015c) Optimization of emergy sustainability index for biodiesel supply network design. Energy Convers Manage 92:312–321CrossRef

Saaty TL (1980) The analytical hierarchy process. McGraw Hill, NewYork

Sadeghzadeh K, Salehi MB (2011) Mathematical analysis of fuel cell strategc technologies development solutions in the automotive industry by the TOPSIS multi-criteria decision making method. Int J Hydrogen Energy 36:13272–13280CrossRef

Sala S, Farioli F, Zamagni A (2013) Life cycle sustainability assessment in the context of sustainability science progress (part 2). Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(9):1686–1697CrossRef

SimaPro7 (2006) Operating manual. Amersfoort, The Netherlands: pre consultants BV

Singh RK, Murty HR, Gupta SK, Dikshit AK (2012) An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies. Ecol Indic 15:281–299CrossRef

Stylios CD, Georgopoulos VC, Malandraki GA, Chouliara S (2008) Fuzzy cognitive map architectures for medical decision support systems. Appl Soft Comput 8:1243–1251CrossRef

Toniolo S, Mazzi A, Niero M, Zuliani F, Scipioni A (2013) Comparative LCA to evaluate how much recycling is environmentally favourable for food packaging. Resour Conserv Recycl 77:61–68CrossRef

Traverso M, Asdrubali F, Francia A, Finkbeiner M (2012) Towards life cycle sustainability assessment: an implementation to photovoltaic modules. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17:1068–1079CrossRef

Tzeng GH, Lin CW, Opricovic S (2005) Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation. Energy Policy 33:1373–1383CrossRef

UNEP/SETAC (2011) Towards a life cycle sustainability assessment. UNEP/SETAC, Paris

Utne IB (2009) Life cycle cost (LCC) as a tool for improving sustainability in the Norwegian fishing fleet. J Clean Prod 17:335–344CrossRef

WCED-World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Our Common Future. Oxford Univ, Press, Oxford

Xia XF, Zhang J, Xi BD (2012a) Assessment and Policy study of fuel ethanol based on life cycle thinking. China Environmental Science Press, Beijing, China (in Chinese)

Xia X, Zhang J, Xi B (2012b) Study on fuel bioethanol assessment and policy based on life cycle thinking, 1st edn. China Environmental Science Press, Beijing, China (in Chinese)

Yu M, Halog A (2015) Solar photovoltaic development in Australia-A life cycle sustainability assessment study. Sustainability 7:1213–1247CrossRef

Zamagni A, Pesonen HL, Swarr T (2013) From LCA to Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment: concept, practice and future directions. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(9):1637–1641CrossRef

Zhang X, Jiang W, Deng S, Peng K (2009) Emergy evaluation of the sustainability of Chinese steel production during 1998–2004. J Clean Prod 17:1030–1038CrossRef

Zhou Z, Jiang H, Qin L (2007) Life cycle sustainability assessment of fuels. Fuel 86:256–263CrossRef

Title: Prioritization of bioethanol production pathways in China based on life cycle sustainability assessment and multicriteria decision-making
Authors: Jingzheng Ren
Alessandro Manzardo
Anna Mazzi
Filippo Zuliani
Antonio Scipioni
Publication date: 01-06-2015
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment / Issue 6/2015
Print ISSN: 0948-3349
Electronic ISSN: 1614-7502
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-0877-8

Springer Professional

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results and discussion

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Other articles of this Issue 6/2015

Environmental life cycle assessment of a small hydropower plant in China

Evaluation of life cycle inventory at macro level: a case study of mechanical coke production in China

NativeLCA - a systematic approach for the selection of environmental datasets as generic data: application to construction products in a national context

Life-cycle assessment framework for adaptation planning to climate change: linking regional climate impact with product design

Construction cost of plant compounds provides a physical relationship for co-product allocation in life cycle assessment

Modelling spatially explicit impacts from phosphorus emissions in agriculture