Literature DB >> 22816524

Assessing county-level water footprints of different cellulosic-biofuel feedstock pathways.

Yi-Wen Chiu1, May Wu.   

Abstract

While agricultural residue is considered as a near-term feedstock option for cellulosic biofuels, its sustainability must be evaluated by taking water into account. This study aims to analyze the county-level water footprint for four biofuel pathways in the United States, including bioethanol generated from corn grain, stover, wheat straw, and biodiesel from soybean. The county-level blue water footprint of ethanol from corn grain, stover, and wheat straw shows extremely wide variances with a national average of 31, 132, and 139 L of water per liter biofuel (L(w)/L(bf)), and standard deviation of 133, 323, and 297 L(w)/L(bf), respectively. Soybean biodiesel production results in a blue water footprint of 313 L(w)/L(bf) on the national average with standard deviation of 894 L(w)/L(bf). All biofuels show a greater green water footprint than the blue one. This work elucidates how diverse spatial resolutions affect biofuel water footprints, which can provide detailed insights into biofuels' implications on local water sustainability.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22816524     DOI: 10.1021/es3002162

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Sci Technol        ISSN: 0013-936X            Impact factor:   9.028


  5 in total

1.  Bioenergy Development Policy and Practice Must Recognize Potential Hydrologic Impacts: Lessons from the Americas.

Authors:  David W Watkins; Márcia M G Alcoforado de Moraes; Heidi Asbjornsen; Alex S Mayer; Julian Licata; Jose Gutierrez Lopez; Thomas G Pypker; Vivianna Gamez Molina; Guilherme Fernandes Marques; Ana Cristina Guimaraes Carneiro; Hector M Nuñez; Hayri Önal; Bruna da Nobrega Germano
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Comparing scales of environmental effects from gasoline and ethanol production.

Authors:  Esther S Parish; Keith L Kline; Virginia H Dale; Rebecca A Efroymson; Allen C McBride; Timothy L Johnson; Michael R Hilliard; Jeffrey M Bielicki
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2012-12-02       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  Scenarios for Low Carbon and Low Water Electric Power Plant Operations: Implications for Upstream Water Use.

Authors:  Rebecca S Dodder; Jessica T Barnwell; William H Yelverton
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2016-10-19       Impact factor: 9.028

4.  Regional water footprints of potential biofuel production in China.

Authors:  Xiaomin Xie; Tingting Zhang; Liming Wang; Zhen Huang
Journal:  Biotechnol Biofuels       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 6.040

5.  Water impacts of U.S. biofuels: Insights from an assessment combining economic and biophysical models.

Authors:  Jacob Teter; Sonia Yeh; Madhu Khanna; Göran Berndes
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-09-28       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.