Export file:


  • RIS(for EndNote,Reference Manager,ProCite)
  • BibTex
  • Text


  • Citation Only
  • Citation and Abstract

Life Cycle Assessment of renewable filler material (biochar) produced from perennial grass (Miscanthus)

1 School of Engineering, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road East, Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1, Canada
2 Bioproduct Discovery and Development Centre, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road East, Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1, Canada

Special Issues: Sustainable bioenergy and biomaterials from agri-food waste/lignocellulosic biomass

Biochar, a hydrophobic biomaterial produced from lignocellulosic biomass is a promising alternative to conventional filler materials. Although a variety of feedstocks have been analyzed for producing biomaterials to a limited extend, a complete LCA study of Miscanthus biochar is scarce. This study evaluates the life cycle of biochar produced from Miscanthus that is grown on the marginal land in Ontario, Canada. Life cycle environmental impacts are determined by using the SimaPro LCA software adopting the TRACI method. The global warming potential (GWP) of the life cycle of biochar is found to be 117.6 kg CO2eq/t. Miscanthus cultivation (93.0 kg CO2eq/t) is the main contributor in the life cycle of Miscanthus biochar followed by pyrolysis (23.3 kg CO2eq/t) and transportation (4.8 kg CO2eq/t). Miscanthus cultivation is also the main contributor to acidification potential and non-carcinogenic potential; however, transportation and pyrolysis are the hotspots in the case of eutrophication, smog and ecotoxicity, and carcinogenic potential, ozone depletion potential and fossil fuel depletion, respectively. The sensitivity analysis reveals that the environmental impacts decrease with an increase of Miscanthus yield. The study provides information on the life cycle environmental impacts of biomaterial which would facilitate in selecting environmentally favorable filler material to replace conventional filler materials to mitigate environmental impacts.
  Article Metrics


1. Dominique M, Sophie F (2013) Ontario Switchgrass and Miscanthus Farm Gate Carbon Footprints, Ontario Federation of Agriculture, Canada.

2. Falano T, Jeswani HK, Azapagic A (2014) Assessing the environmental sustainability of ethanol from integrated biorefineries. Biotechnol J 9: 753–765.    

3. Mohanty AK, Vivekanandhan S, Anstey A, et al. (2015) Sustainable composites from renewable biochar and engineering plastic. In 20th International Conference on Composite Materials, At Copenhagen, Denmark.

4. Kludze H, Deen B, Dutta A (2011) Report on Literature Review of Agronomic Practices for Energy Crop Production Under Ontario Conditions, Ontario Federation of Agriculture, Canada.

5. Allison GG, Morris C, Clifton-brown J, et al. (2011) Genotypic variation in cell wall composition in a diverse set of 244 accessions of Miscanthus. Biomass Bioenerg 35: 4740–4747.    

6. Clifton-brown J, Hastings A, Mos M, et al. (2017) Progress in upscaling Miscanthus biomass production for the European bio-economy with seed-based hybrids. GCB Bioenergy 9: 6–17.    

7. Mimmo T, Panzacchi P, Baratieri M, et al. (2014) ScienceDirect Effect of pyrolysis temperature on miscanthus ( Miscanthus 3 giganteus ) biochar physical , chemical and functional properties. Biomass Bioenerg 62: 149–157.    

8. Sanscartier D, Deen B, Dias G, et al (2014) Implications of land class and environmental factors on life cycle GHG emissions of Miscanthus as a bioenergy feedstock. Gcb Bioenergy 6: 401–413.    

9. Homagain K, Chander S, Nancy L, et al. (2016) Life cycle cost and economic assessment of biochar-based bioenergy production and biochar land application in Northwestern Ontario, Canada. For Ecosyst 3: 21.    

10. Ahmetli G, Kocaman S, Ozaytekin I, et al. (2013) Epoxy Composites Based on Inexpensive Char Filler Obtained From Plastic Waste and Natural Resources. Polym Composite 34: 500–509.    

11. Shemfe MB, Whittaker C, Gu S, et al. (2016) Comparative evaluation of GHG emissions from the use of Miscanthus for bio-hydrocarbon production via fast pyrolysis and bio-oil upgrading. Appl Energ 176: 22–33.    

12. McNamara NP, Whitaker J, Davies CA, et al (2016) A Miscanthus plantation can be carbon neutral without increasing soil carbon stocks. GCB Bioenergy 9: 645–661.

13. Brassard P (2018) Biochar production in an auger pyrolysis reactor and its amendment to soil as a tool to mitigate climate change, Department of Bioresource Engineering,   McGill University Libraries, Canada.

14. Hastings A, Mos M, Yesufu JA, et al. (2017) Economic and Environmental Assessment of Seed and Rhizome Propagated Miscanthus in the UK. Front Plant Sci 8: 1058.

15. Behazin E, Manjusri M, Mohanty AK (2017) Sustainable biocarbon from pyrolyzed perennial grasses and their effects on impact modified polypropylene biocomposites. Compos Part B-Eng 118: 116–24.    

16. Wang T, Arturo RU, Manjusri M, et al. (2018) Sustainable carbonaceous biofiller from miscanthus: Size reduction, characterization, and potential bio-composites applications. BioResources 13: 3720–3739.

17. Ogunsona E, Manjusri M, Mohanty AK (2017). Sustainable biocomposites from biobased polyamide 6,10 and biocarbon from pyrolyzed miscanthus fibers. J Appl Polym Sci 134: 1–11.

18. Roberts KG, Gloy BA, Joseph S, et al. (2009) Life cycle assessment of biochar systems: estimating the energetic, economic, and climate change potential. Environ Sci Technol 44: 827–833.

19. Lu HR, Hanandeh A El (2019) Life cycle perspective of bio-oil and biochar production from hardwood biomass ; what is the optimum mix and what to do with it ? J Clean Prod 212: 173–189.    

20. Cuthbertson DM (2018) The Production of Pyrolytic Biochar for Addition in Value-Added Composite Material.

21. Brassard P, Godbout S, Pelletier F, et al. (2018) Pyrolysis of switchgrass in an auger reactor for biochar production: A greenhouse gas and energy impacts assessment. Biomass Bioenerg 116: 99–105.    

22. Jahirul MI, Rasul MG, Chowdhury AA, et al. (2012) Biofuels Production through Biomass Pyrolysis -A Technological Review. Energies 5: 4952–5001.    

23. Bare J (2011) TRACI 2.0: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts 2.0. Clean Technol Envir 13: 687–696.

24. Lask J, Wagner M, Trindade LM, et al. (2019) Life cycle assessment of ethanol production from miscanthus: A comparison of production pathways at two European sites. GCB Bioenergy 11: 269–288.    

25. McCalmont JP, Robson P, McNamara NP, et al (2015) Environmental costs and benefits of growing Miscanthus for bioenergy in the UK . GCB Bioenergy 9: 489–507.

26. Mishra U, Torn MS, Fingerman K (2013) Miscanthus biomass productivity within US croplands and its potential impact on soil organic carbon. GCB Bioenergy 5: 391–399.    

27. Murphy F, Devlin G, McDonnell K (2013) Miscanthus production and processing in Ireland: An analysis of energy requirements and environmental impacts. Renew Sust Energ Rev 23: 412–420.    

28. Pawelzik P, Carus M, Hotchkiss J, et al. (2013) Critical aspects in the life cycle assessment (LCA) of bio-based materials–Reviewing methodologies and deriving recommendations. Resour Conserv Recy 73: 211–228.    

© 2019 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licese (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Download full text in PDF

Export Citation

Article outline

Show full outline
Copyright © AIMS Press All Rights Reserved