Page 301 - Biofuels for a More Sustainable Future

266 Biofuels for a More Sustainable Future

– Ren et al. (2015): This study uses a MCDM methodology for LCSA
applied to an illustrative case about three alternatives of bioethanol produc-
tion in China (wheat-based, maize-based, and cassava-based). The proposed
methodology has the following advantages: (i) The sustainability assessment
is concluded from a life cycle perspective; (ii) LCSA integrates LCA, LCC,
and SLCA methods that are used to obtain environmental, economic, and
social criteria, respectively; (iii) social criteria can be quantified using fuzzy
set theory; and (iv) MCDM is used to help decision makers/stakeholders
make the right decision about the most sustainable scenario.
– Valente et al. (2018): The study uses the ELCA and SLCA methodologies
to test environmental and social indicators related to a future biorefinery
considering two possible hypothetical sites, Norway and the United
States. Where we present the results of the analysis of social hotspots
for the chemical, rubber, and plastic sector in Norway and the United
States in a bar graph as a social hotspot index aggregated for five social
categories: community infrastructure, governance, health and safety,
human rights, and labor rights and decent work. According to the
authors, there is a lack of LCA studies on the production of second gen-
eration biofuels in biorefineries, and no case study applying SLCA is cur-
rently available. Only a bibliographic review of Macombe et al. (2013)
was found, considering the SLCA of the production of biofuels at the
company, regional, and state levels. They conclude that the ELCA and
SLCA allow to highlight the main environmental and social challenges
in the production of biochemical compounds. The social hotspot database
has potential as a social screening tool, although social indicators are still
not well established. For this reason, a specific evaluation is necessary to
validate the results in the social dimension.
ˇ
c
– Zivkovi et al. (2017) analyzethetechnological,technical,economic,envi-
ronmental, social, toxicological, and human health risks of the production
and use of biodiesel. They conclude that the environmentally sustainable
production of biodiesel requires that sustainability standards cover direct
and indirect impacts on the environment, that is, soil, water, and air. Com-
bining technological, economic, social, and environmental issues will
increase the benefits of biodiesel and may lead to integrated biorefineries
to be able to produce sustainable biodiesel and other valuable chemicals.
Government policies will be the main driving force for further increases
in biodiesel production. There is a need to increase cooperation between
governmentsandvariousstakeholderstodevelopandapplythecorrespond-
ingsustainabilitycriteriaconsistentlyaroundtheworldasquicklyaspossible.