Circular Biomass Valorisation

» What are the benefits of a more circular biomass valorisation?
» How can these benefits be assessed at an early stage?

Increasing demand for food, feed, biomaterials, biochemicals, biofuels, bioenergy, and soil fertility is placing growing pressure on available biomass resources. To meet these demands, the resource use efficiency of the available biomass should be optimized without compromising the environment. 

Given the different composition and properties of biomass resources, the potential benefits of the different valorisation pathways  vary considerably. In order to set priorities, each valorisation pathway must be assessed, taking into account the "weighted" value of each component, the expected product yields, the appreciation of the products, and the potential for cascading use.

While it is widely acknowledged that substituting primary resources, such as crops and fossil resources, with residual biomass streams can deliver environmental benefits, there is no clear consensus on which valorisation pathway provides the greatest benefits for each residual stream. Priorities are often presented as rigid hierarchies: 

• Frameworks for residues and waste streams in agri-food supply chains, like the EU Food Waste Hierarchy, generally apply fixed rankings that do not consider the unique characteristics and functional value of a material in a particular application. Moreover, comparisons of environmental performance of alternative biobased applications within the same domain, e.g. cattle feed versus pig feed, and bioenergy versus bioplastic production, are relatively scarce. Studies that do make such comparisons typically focus on a single or few feedstocks, limiting the broader applicability of their conclusions.
• From an agricultural production perspective it is often advocated to keep crop residues available for the soil, with an eye on relevancy for soil health. However, essential functionality for the soil, e.g., persistent organic matter and nutrients, can also be achieved through solutions that deliver greater circular benefits, while maintaining the essential soil inputs. For instance, through biorefinery components of the material can be used for higher-value applications while persistent organic matter and/or nutrients may be returned to the soil. Another example is cascading use, where materials are returned to the soil after one or more use cycles. Essential soil inputs can also be supplied through alternative circular sources, such as compost, digestate, or residual streams with limited value in other valorisation pathways. Note that fuel consumption associated with biomass collection, as well as for application of alternative materials, may significantly influence which option is considered the most circular.

This website provides an analysis tool, built on insights of various valorisation pathways and supporting data, to support more informed evaluation and decision-making regarding the valorisation of biomass resources, helping stakeholders to identify the most appropriate and sustainable options. The tool addresses both resource use efficiency and climate impact. It is demonstrated that the ranking of valorisation pathways depends strongly on the composition of the specific biomass resource being assessed.

Quantify impacts of circular biomass valorisation with the CAT-BREVIA tool