1. Emergy Accounting evaluation of power generation from animal by-products R. Santagata 1, M. Ripa 1, S. Viglia 1, S. Ulgiati 1,2 (1) Department of Science and Technology, Parthenope University of Naples, Italy (2) School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, China 9 th Biennal Emergy Conference Gainesville – January 8, 2016 Remo Santagata r.santagata@gmail.com

2. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS INTRODUCTION INCREASING POPULATION INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT RESULTS

3. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS 130 times more animal waste than human waste is produced in the US. 1.4 billion tons from the meat industry annually. 5 tons of animal waste is produced per person in the US. Source: US General Accounting Office The recovery and utilization of waste represent an example of giving new purposes to those materials that have already accomplished their first “task” and would otherwise require additional investments to be properly disposed. RESULTS

4. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS RESULTS World Meat Consumption

5. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS RESULTS Animal by-products

6. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS MATERIALS & METHODS The choice of spatial scale and boundary conditions strongly affect the results. A ‘bio-refinery’ represents a link between the production phase (rural) and the consumers (urban). The boundaries of the entire rural/urban process are shown. RESULTS

7. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS RESULTS Two possible windows of interest

8. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS Case study Proteg S.P.A. - Caivano (Italy) Local data, collected on site, is referred to the production of 1 MWh of electric energy from animal by-products. Baseline used: Brown & Ulgiati (2010) – (15.24E+24) Goal: Exploring the sensitivity of the EMA results when dealing with different methodological assumptions in waste management. RESULTS

9. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS RESULTS

10. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS Two sub-processes: 1.Rendering process 2.Electricity generation process Different assumptions: Meat / By- products SPLIT CO- PROD. FAT / MEAL SPLIT FAT / MEAL CO- PROD. CO- PROD. ZERO BURDEN PRODUCTION RESULTS

11. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS RESULTS CASE 1-ACASE 1-B CASE 2-ACASE 2-B

12. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS RESULTS Emergy accounting – Animal Fat production (CASE 1 – A). ItemUnitInputUEVEmergy Animal by-productsg1.80E+060.00E+00 MethaneJ4.67E+091.70E+057.94E+14 Diesel for transportationJ1.30E+091.81E+052.36E+14 Electricity FeedbackJ0.00E+00... Total Animal Fat (with L&S)g4.33E+057.56E+087.03E+14 Animal Meal (with L&S)g4.97E+054.03E+083.75E+14 Animal Fat (without L&S)g4.33E+057.33E+086.81E+14 Animal Meal (without L&S)g4.97E+053.91E+083.64E+14 Emergy accounting – Electricity generation (CASE 1 – A). ItemUnitInputUEVEmergy Animal fat (without L&S)g2.32E+05 7.33E+081.70E+14 Animal fat (withL&S)g2.32E+05 7.56E+081.75E+14 Urea g2.86E+046.12E+091.75E+14... Total Electricity (with L&S)MWh 8.59E-011.37E+161.18E+16 J 3.09E+093.82E+061.18E+16 Electricity (without L&S)MWh 8.59E-014.08E+143.50E+14 J 3.09E+091.13E+053.50E+14 RESULTS

13. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS UEVs of the electric energy generated (1 MWh) RESULTS

14. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS Emergy accounting indicators of the rendering process, with and without L&S. Without L&SUnitCASE 1-ACASE 1-BCASE 2-ACASE 2-B U=R+N+ F R + F N sej1.04E+15 4.38E+17 EYR=U/(F R + F N )sej1.00E+00 ELR= (N+F R +F N )/(R+F R )sej4.48E+05 1.88E+08 ESI=EYR/ELRsej2.23E-06 5.32E-09 %REN= (R+F R )/U 0.00% With L&SUnitCASE 1-ACASE 1-BCASE 2-ACASE 2-B U=R+N+ F R + F N sej1.08E+15 4.54E+176.29E+17 EYR=U/(F R + F N )sej1.00E+00 ELR= (N+F R +F N )/(R+F R )sej1.09E+03 2.75E+013.81E+01 ESI=EYR/ELRsej9.20E-04 3.63E-022.62E-02 %REN= (R+F R )/U 0.09% 3.63%2.62% Emergy accounting indicators of the electricity generation process, with and without L&S. Without L&SUnitCASE 1-ACASE 1-BCASE 2-ACASE 2-B U=R+N+ F R + F N sej3.50E+147.41E+147.16E+162.35E+17 EYR=U/(F R + F N )sej1.95E+004.11E+003.97E+021.31E+03 ELR= (N+F R +F N )/(R+F R )sej9.23E+055.92E+051.88E+08 ESI=EYR/ELRsej2.11E-066.94E-062.11E-066.94E-06 %REN= (R+F R )/U 0.00% With L&SUnitCASE 1-ACASE 1-BCASE 2-ACASE 2-B U=R+N+ F R + F N sej1.18E+161.22E+161.14E+173.49E+17 EYR=U/(F R + F N )sej1.02E+001.05E+009.82E+003.00E+01 ELR= (N+F R +F N )/(R+F R )sej3.44E+013.55E+012.71E+013.70E+01 ESI=EYR/ELRsej2.95E-022.96E-023.62E-018.12E-01 %REN= (R+F R )/U 2.91%2.82%3.56%2.63% RESULTS

15. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS UEVs of electric energy, without L&S, from CASE 1-A, CASE 1-B, CASE 2-A, CASE 2-B, oil fired power plant and photovoltaic system (sej/J). CASE 1-ACASE 1-BCASE 2-ACASE 2-BItalian MixOil plantPhotovoltaic 1.13E+052.39E+052.31E+077.60E+072.52E+055.11E+057.93E+04 Emergy demand of CASE 1-A, landfilling and incineration for the disposal of the needed quantity of animal by-products to produce 1 MWh of electric energy (sej). CASE 1-ALandfillingIncineration without L&Swith L&Swithout L&Swith L&Swithout L&Swith L&S 3.50E+141.18E+162.82E+142.85E+143.27E+143.30E+14 RESULTS

16. INTRODUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS CONCLUSIONS The linear model of resource consumption that follows a ‘take- make-dispose’ pattern is no more affordable. A new system thinking looking at waste as resources present both unique problems and opportunities to fill the sustainability gap and plan future resource recovery strategies. The ‘zero-burden’ approach to waste disposal is the most reasonable framework for dealing with waste treatment and conversion to useful output flows of energy and matter. The electricity obtained is more environmentally sound than, among others, the average grid electricity mix. From this point of view, converting animal waste into energy can be a triple-hitter, dealing simultaneously with human security, pollution, and, last but not least, energy recovery. RESULTS

17. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION! r.santagata@gmail.com