Environmental Sustainability of Heating Systems Based on Pellets Produced in Mobile and Stationary Plants from Vineyard Pruning Residues

Alessio Ilari, Giuseppe Toscano, Ester Foppa Pedretti, Sara Fabrizi and Daniele Duca
Additional contact information
Alessio Ilari: Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Ambientali, Università Politecnica delle Marche Via Brecce Bianche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
Giuseppe Toscano: Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Ambientali, Università Politecnica delle Marche Via Brecce Bianche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
Ester Foppa Pedretti: Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Ambientali, Università Politecnica delle Marche Via Brecce Bianche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
Sara Fabrizi: Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Ambientali, Università Politecnica delle Marche Via Brecce Bianche, 60131 Ancona, Italy
Daniele Duca: Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie, Alimentari e Ambientali, Università Politecnica delle Marche Via Brecce Bianche, 60131 Ancona, Italy

Resources, 2020, vol. 9, issue 8, 1-14

Abstract: The impact of heat production from vineyard pruning pellets has been evaluated in this paper. The study considers two different systems: the first one based on a mobile pelletizer (PS1) and the second one based on a stationary pellet plant (PS2). The analysis conducted is from “cradle to grave”; the systems under analysis includes pruning harvesting, transport to storage area, pelletization (mobile system or stationary production plant), transport to consumer and combustion. The functional unit selected is 1 MJ of thermal energy produced. The impact assessment calculation methods selected are Eco-Indicator 99 (H) LCA Food V2.103/Europe EI 99 H/A with a midpoint and endpoint approach, and ReCiPe Midpoint (H) V1.10. Considering Life Cycle Assessment results, Eco-indicator shows a total impact of 4.25 and 4.07 mPt for mobile pelletizer and stationary pellet plant, respectively. Considering the three damage categories, PS1 has values of 2.4% (Human Health), 3.8% (Ecosystem Quality) and 17.3% (Resources), more impactful than PS2. Contribution analysis shows that direct emissions are the major damage contributor, followed by wood ash management. From a comparison between the baseline scenario and a scenario with an avoided product (wood ash as a standard potassium fertilizer), PS1 and PS2 with an avoided product approach are 41% and 40% less impactful than in the baseline scenarios. When testing the impact of mobile pelletizer while considering transportation as a factor, a reduction of distance for pellet has been evaluated. Reducing the distance from 100 to 10 km, the total impact of PS1 almost reaches the impact of PS2 with a difference of around 4.6% (Eco-indicator 99 method). The most impactful processes are pellet production, direct emissions and ash management, while a less impactful factor is the electricity consumption. Transportation shows the lowest impact. Considering the ReCiPe impact calculation method with a midpoint approach, the results confirm what was found with Eco-indicator 99; the PS1 shows a slightly higher impact than PS2.

Keywords: LCA; wood residues; pellet emissions; ash; agripellet (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/9/8/94/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/9/8/94/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jresou:v:9:y:2020:i:8:p:94-:d:398919

Access Statistics for this article

Resources is currently edited by Ms. Donchian Ma

More articles in Resources from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().