Environmental and Economic Sustainability of Biomass Heat in the UK. Issue 11 (11th November 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Jeswani, Harish Kumar; Whiting, Andrew; Azapagic, Adisa
• Other Names: Fthenakis Vasilis guestEditor.; Raugei Marco guestEditor.
• Is Part Of: Energy technology. Volume 8:Issue 11(2020:Nov.)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2019-11-11
• Subjects: biomass -- heat -- life cycle assessments -- life cycle costs -- renewable energies; Energy development -- Periodicals; Power resources -- Periodicals; 333.79
• DOI: 10.1002/ente.201901044
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2194-4288

Abstract

Abstract : Heat from biomass is being promoted in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, the full life cycle environmental and economic implications of biomass heat are currently unknown and are therefore explored herein. The results indicate that heat from solid biomass can reduce global warming potential as well as depletion of fossil resources and the ozone layer by >90% compared to fossil fuels. However, acidification, eutrophication, and human and eco‐toxicities are much higher than for heat from natural gas. Biomass heat is also 23% more expensive than heat from gas boilers. However, with the subsidies available in the UK, it is 52% cheaper. Using the waste wood and energy crops available in the UK, it can meet 5% of the national heat demand and save 7.3 Mt CO2 eq. year −1 or 1.5% of UK emissions. Increasing cultivation of energy crops can provide 20% of heat demand by 2030 and save 5.1% of national emissions. Therefore, the government should continue to incentivize biomass heat while tightening regulations to prevent an increase in other impacts. However, increasing biomass heat provision will be challenging due to a large number of installations needed (27 000–85 000) and lack of district heating networks in the UK. Abstract : Biomass heat has 94% lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and is 52% cheaper than natural gas heat. It could supply 20% of UK's annual demand by 2030 and save 5.1% of GHG emissions. However, this would require a large number of installations (27 000–85 000) and would increase other environmental impacts significantly, including acidification, human and eco‐toxicity.