• Energy Research
• 7. Clean energy close
• IT close
• GB close
• DE close
• Sustainability close

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report that to limit warming to 1.5 °C, Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) is required. Integrated assessment models (IAMS) predict that a land area between the size of Argentina and Australia is required for bioenergy crops, a 3–7 time increase in the current bioenergy planting area globally. The authors pose the question of whether vertical farming (VF) technology can enable BECCS deployment, either via land sparing or supply. VF involves indoor controlled environment cultivation, and can increase productivity per unit land area by 5–10 times. VF is predominantly being used to grow small, high value leafy greens with rapid growth cycles. Capital expenditure, operational expenditure, and sustainability are challenges in current VF industries, and will affect the ability to utilise this technology for other crops. The authors argue that, whilst challenging, VF could help reach wider climate goals. Application of VF for bioenergy crops could be a game changer in delivering BECCS technologies and may reduce the land footprint required as well as the subsequent associated negative environmental impacts. VF bioenergy could allow us to cultivate the future demand for bioenergy for BECCS on the same, or less, land area than is currently used globally.

Climate change, environmental degradation, and limited resources are motivations for sustainable forest management. Forests, the most abundant renewable resource on earth, used to make a wide variety of forest-based products for human consumption. To provide a scientific measure of a product’s sustainability and environmental performance, the life cycle assessment (LCA) method is used. This article provides a comprehensive review of environmental performances of forest-based products including traditional building products, emerging (mass-timber) building products and nanomaterials using attributional LCA. Across the supply chain, the product manufacturing life-cycle stage tends to have the largest environmental impacts. However, forest management activities and logistics tend to have the greatest economic impact. In addition, environmental trade-offs exist when regulating emissions as indicated by the latest traditional wood building product LCAs. Interpretation of these LCA results can guide new product development using biomaterials, future (mass) building systems and policy-making on mitigating climate change. Key challenges include handling of uncertainties in the supply chain and complex interactions of environment, material conversion, resource use for product production and quantifying the emissions released.

In the transition from linear production systems, unsustainable from the point of view of resources, to a model that finds strength in environmental, social and economic sustainability, the circular economy paradigm is the foundation that facilitates the planetary agro-ecological transition. The European Union has taken a number of steps (including the Circular Economy Package of Directives) shaping circularity as a wide-ranging driver measure involving many sectors. The paper intends to provide a regulatory framework on the current general situation regarding circularity in European Union, in order to extrapolate and give evidence to the aspects that intersect the agri-food sector. This is not only because they are poorly addressed in the literature, but also because there is a lack of regulatory instruments on the circular economy specifically addressing this area of interest. For this purpose, the analysis focuses on waste and residue/scrap management issues, recognized by law as by-products and end-of-waste status, as they are covered by circular economy legislation and as they can be applied to the agri-food sector. The latter allow the implementation of circularity strategies in the agri-food sector and, given the numerousness of production chains and the peculiarities of each of them, various regeneration and/or reuse processes of specific resources may be depicted. The intent is to provide useful knowledge on how to implement sustainable waste management, also proposing a concrete case on a by-product of olive oil processing, through which it is possible to highlight how the correct application of regulations favors the adoption of circular economic and management models in the firms involved, as well as informing the relevant economic operators on the possible profiles of legal liability that may arise from insufficient knowledge. Furthermore, this paper delves into the European Green Deal’s Strategy as it enriches the circular economy paradigm with new facets. NextGenerationEU and the National Recovery and Resilience Plan financially support this strategy in the aftermath of the socioeconomic crisis from COVID-19 in the EU Member States. This is in order to achieve the objective of achieving the agro-ecological transition.

Due to climate change and current efforts to reduce emissions in the construction sector, this study evaluates and discusses the results of a comparative cradle-to-grave Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), with a main focus on Global Warming Potential for functionally equivalent carbon-reinforced concrete (CRC) and steel-reinforced concrete (SRC) façade panels for the first time. The novelty of this study is the focus on construction waste and, in particular, the worst-case application of non-recycled construction waste. The use of CRC requires a lower concrete thickness than SRC because the carbon fiber reinforcement does not corrode, in contrast to steel reinforcement. Façade panels of the same geometrical dimensions and structural performance were defined as functional units (FU). Assuming an End-of-Life (EoL) scenario of 50% landfill and 50% recycling, the Global Warming Potential (GWP, given in CO2 equivalent (CO2e)) of the CRC façade (411–496 kg CO2e) is shown to perform better than or equal to the SRC façade (492 kg CO2e). Changing the assumption of CRC to a worst-case scenario, going fully to landfill and not being recycled (single life cycle), turns the GWP results in favor of the SRC façade. Assuming a 50-year service life for the SRC façade panel and relativizing the emissions to the years, the more durable CRC façade performs much better. Finally, depending on the system boundary, the assumed EoL and lifetime, CRC can represent a lower-emission alternative to a functionally equivalent component made of SRC. The most important and “novel” result in this study, which also leads to future research opportunities, is that delicate adjustments (especially concerning EoL scenarios and expected service life) can lead to completely different recommendations for decision-makers. Only by combining the knowledge of LCA experts, structural engineers, and builders optimal decisions can be made regarding sustainable materials and building components.

Global warming (GW) and urban pollution focused a great interest on hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) and battery electric vehicles (BEVs) as cleaner alternatives to traditional internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs). The environmental impact related to the use of both ICEV and HEV mainly depends on the fossil fuel used by the thermal engines, while, in the case of the BEV, depends on the energy sources employed to produce electricity. Moreover, the production phase of each vehicle may also have a relevant environmental impact, due to the manufacturing processes and the materials employed. Starting from these considerations, the authors carried out a fair comparison of the environmental impact generated by three different vehicles characterized by different propulsion technology, i.e., an ICEV, an HEV, and a BEV, following the life cycle analysis methodology, i.e., taking into account five different environmental impact categories generated during all phases of the entire life of the vehicles, from raw material collection and parts production, to vehicle assembly and on-road use, finishing hence with the disposal phase. An extensive scenario analysis was also performed considering different electricity mixes and vehicle lifetime mileages. The results of this study confirmed the importance of the life cycle approach for the correct determination of the real impact related to the use of passenger cars and showed that the GW impact of a BEV during its entire life amounts to roughly 60% of an equivalent ICEV, while acidifying emissions and particulate matter were doubled. The HEV confirmed an excellent alternative to ICEV, showing good compromise between GW impact (85% with respect to the ICEV), terrestrial acidification, and particulate formation (similar to the ICEV). In regard to the mineral source deployment, a serious concern derives from the lithium-ion battery production for BEV. The results of the scenario analysis highlight how the environmental impact of a BEV may be altered by the lifetime mileage of the vehicle, and how the carbon footprint of the electricity used may nullify the ecological advantage of the BEV.

Closed-loop supply chain networks are gaining research popularity due to environmental, economic and social concerns. Such networks are primarily designed to overcome carbon footprints and to retrieve end of life products from customers. This study considers a multi echelon closed-loop supply chain in the presence of machine disruption. A multi-objective model is presented to optimize the total cost, the total time and emissions in a closed-loop supply chain network. The aim is to analyze the trade-off between the objectives of cost, time, and emissions and how these decisions are impacted by the selection of different available machines. A number of solution approaches are tested on a case study from the tire industry. The results suggest the improved performance of the hybrid heuristic and the importance of controlling disruption in a closed-loop supply chain network. Furthermore, there is a trade-off between the different objective functions which can help the decision maker to choose a particular solution according to the preference of an organization. Finally, conclusion and future research avenues are provided.

Is it true that a nuclear technology approach to generate electric energy offers a clean, safe, reliable and affordable, i.e., sustainable option? In principle yes, however a technology impact on the environment strongly depends on the actual implementation bearing residual risks due to technical failures, human factors, or natural catastrophes. A full response is thus difficult and can be given first when the wicked multi-disciplinary issues get well formulated and “resolved”. These problems are lying at the interface between: the necessary R&D effort, the industrial deployment and the technology impact in view of the environmental sustainability including the management of produced hazardous waste. As such, this problem is clearly of multi-dimensional nature. This enormous complexity indicates that just a description of the problem might cause a dilemma. The paper proposes a novel holistic approach applying Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to assess the potential of nuclear energy systems with respect to a sustainable performance. It shows how to establish a multi-level criteria structure tree and examines the trading-off techniques for scoring and ranking of options. The presented framework allows multi-criteria and multi-group treatment. The methodology can be applied to support any pre-decisional process launched in a country to find the best nuclear and/or non-nuclear option according to national preferences and priorities. The approach addresses major aspects of the environmental footprint of nuclear energy systems. As a case study, advanced nuclear fuel cycles are analyzed, which were previously investigated by the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA/OECD) expert group WASTEMAN. Sustainability facets of waste management, resource utilization and economics are in focus.