Wilts H.,Wuppertal Institute for Climate |
Dehoust G.,Oeko - Institute e.V. |
Jepsen D.,Okopol |
Science of the Total Environment | Year: 2013
Several studies in Germany aimed at the development of a sound database on existing waste prevention measures by public bodies at the local, regional and federal levels. These results are the starting point for the creation of a national prevention program, which has to be presented by all European Member States until the end of 2013 - due to the revised European Waste Framework Directive.Based on this empirical foundation, this paper draws conclusions with regard to drivers and barriers for eco-innovations in the field of waste prevention. The analysis shows that an optimized adaptation of information on waste prevention to the needs of specific target groups is still missing but could be a relevant driver. With regard to barriers the results of the study show that waste prevention is by no means always a win-win-situation. Institutional frameworks are missing to coordinate the different interests and for the exchange of experiences that could help to realize learning effects regarding innovation approaches. © 2013.
Rettenmaier N.,IFEU |
Koppen S.,IFEU |
Gartner S.O.,IFEU |
Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining | Year: 2010
Life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology is increasingly used to determine the potential environmental impacts of biofuels and bioenergy. This paper presents the outcomes of screening LCAs of 13 future energy crops for Europe summarizing the results of the EC-funded project 4F CROPS - Future Crops for Food, Feed, Fiber and Fuel. For analysis, these dedicated energy crops - representing seven environmental zones in Europe - are combined with a multitude of processing and utilization options, resulting in 120 different biofuel and bioenergy chains. Compared to fossil fuels and energy carriers, all biofuel and bioenergy chains show environmental advantages in terms of life-cycle energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions but mostly disadvantages regarding other environmental impact categories. Quantitative results vary widely across environmental zones, depending on crop species, agricultural inputs, and yield. Moreover, coproduct accounting and coproduct utilization, as well as the agricultural and fossil reference system play an important role. In view of environmental advantages and disadvantages, subjective trade-offs are required between the environmental impact categories. If saving GHG emissions is given the highest environmental priority, combined heat and power generation from herbaceous lignocellulosic crops is the most efficient option in terms of land use, provided that the biomass is cultivated on surplus agricultural land, thus avoiding indirect land-use change. © 2010 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.