Environmental impacts and limitations of third‐generation biobutanol: Life cycle assessment of n ‐butanol produced by genetically engineered cyanobacteria
Abstract
Photosynthetic cyanobacteria have attracted interest as production organisms for third‐generation biofuels, where sunlight and CO 2 are used by microbes directly to synthesize fuel molecules. A particularly suitable biofuel is n ‐butanol, and there have been several laboratory reports of genetically engineered photosynthetic cyanobacteria capable of synthesizing and secreting n ‐butanol. This work evaluates the environmental impacts and cumulative energy demand (CED) of cyanobacteria‐produced n ‐butanol through a cradle‐to‐grave consequential life cycle assessment (LCA). A hypothetical production plant in northern Sweden (area 1 ha, producing 5–85 m 3 n ‐butanol per year) was considered, and a range of cultivation formats and cellular productivity scenarios assessed. Depending on the scenario, greenhouse gas emissions (GHGe) ranged from 16.9 to 58.6 gCO 2 eq/MJ BuOH and the CED from 3.8 to 13 MJ/MJ BuOH . Only with the assumption of a nearby paper mill to supply waste sources for heat and CO 2 was the sustainability requirement of at least 60% GHGe savings compared to fossil fuels reached, though placement in northern Sweden reduced energy needed for reactor cooling. A high CED in all scenarios shows that significant metabolic engineering is necessary, such as a carbon partitioning of >90% to n ‐butanol, as well as improved light utilization, to begin to displace fossil fuels or even first‐ and second‐generation bioethanol.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
To be able to adequately use LCA approaches, a certain maturity of the technology is needed to limit significant variability due to assumptions/extrapolations due to limited data at the industrial scale.
“To be able to adequately use LCA approaches, a certain maturity of the technology is needed to limit significant variability due to assumptions/extrapolations due to limited data at the industrial scale [125].”
From Overview and Challenges of Large-Scale Cultivation of Photosynthetic Microalgae and Cyanobacteria (2023) · cites this paper as [125]
Cites
Environmental Life Cycle Comparison of Algae to Other Bioenergy Feedstocks
Clarens, A. F., Resurreccion, E. P., White, M. A., & Colosi, L. M. (2010) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es902838n · Cited by 1,118 · see citing works
Life cycle assessment of bioenergy systems: State of the art and future challenges
Cherubini, F., & Strømman, A. H. (2011) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2010.08.010 · Cited by 832 · see citing works
Mechanism and challenges in commercialisation of algal biofuels
Singh, A., Nigam, P. S., & Murphy, J. D. (2011) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2010.06.057 · Cited by 476 · see citing works
Characterization of a flat plate photobioreactor for the production of microalgae
Sierra, E., Acién, F. G., Fernández, J. M., García, J. L., González, C., & Molina, E. (2008) · Chemical Engineering Journal · doi:10.1016/j.cej.2007.06.004 · Cited by 439 · cited 2× · see citing works
“, 2014) Disposable low-density polyethylene plastic bag (Sierra et al., 2008)”
BackgroundMethodBrentner, L. B., Eckelman, M. J., & Zimmerman, J. B. (2011) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es2006995 · Cited by 377 · see citing works
Net energy and greenhouse gas emission evaluation of biodiesel derived from microalgae
Batan, L., Quinn, J., Willson, B., & Bradley, T. (2010) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es102052y · Cited by 360 · see citing works
Comparison of Four Outdoor Pilot-Scale Photobioreactors
de Vree, J. H., Bosma, R., Janssen, M., Barbosa, M. J., & Wijffels, R. H. (2015) · Biotechnology for Biofuels · doi:10.1186/s13068-015-0400-2 · Cited by 249 · see citing works
Liu, X., Saydah, B., Eranki, P., Colosi, L. M., Greg Mitchell, B., Rhodes, J., & Clarens, A. F. (2013) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2013.08.112 · Cited by 246 · see citing works
Quantitative uncertainty analysis of life cycle assessment for algal biofuel production
Sills, D. L., Paramita, V., Franke, M. J., Johnson, M. C., Akabas, T. M., Greene, C. H., & Tester, J. W. (2013) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es3029236 · Cited by 241 · see citing works
Carneiro, M. L. N. M., Pradelle, F., Braga, S. L., Gomes, M. S. P., Martins, A. R. F. A., Turkovics, F., & Pradelle, R. N. C. (2017) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.152 · Cited by 239 · see citing works
Luo, D., Hu, Z., Choi, D. G., Thomas, V. M., Realff, M. J., & Chance, R. R. (2010) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es1007577 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
Clark, R. L., McGinley, L. L., Purdy, H. M., Korosh, T. C., Reed, J. L., Root, T. W., & Pfleger, B. F. (2018) · Metabolic Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.ymben.2018.03.017 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Overview and Challenges of Large-Scale Cultivation of Photosynthetic Microalgae and Cyanobacteria
Novoveská, L., Nielsen, S. L., Eroldoğan, O. T., Haznedaroglu, B. Z., Rinkevich, B., Fazi, S., Robbens, J., Vasquez, M., & Einarsson, H. (2023) · Marine Drugs · doi:10.3390/md21080445 · Cited by 368 · see citing works
A review on the promising fuel of the future – Biobutanol; the hindrances and future perspectives
Liu, Y., Yuan, Y., Ramya, G., Mohan Singh, S., Thuy Lan Chi, N., Pugazhendhi, A., Xia, C., & Mathimani, T. (2022) · Fuel · doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2022.125166 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Arias, A., Nika, C.-E., Vasilaki, V., Feijoo, G., Moreira, M. T., & Katsou, E. (2024) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2024.114427 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Cyanobacteria as whole-cell factories: Current status and future prospectives
Toepel, J., Karande, R., Klähn, S., & Bühler, B. (2023) · Current Opinion in Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2023.102892 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
Villacreses-Freire, D., Ketzer, F., & Rösch, C. (2022) · BioEnergy Research · doi:10.1007/s12155-021-10323-y · Cited by 26 · see citing works
- Authors
- Nilsson, A., Shabestary, K., Brandão, M., & Hudson, E. P.
- Affiliations
- School of Engineering Sciences in Chemistry, Biotechnology and Health Science for Life Laboratory KTH ‐ Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm Sweden
- Science for Life Laboratory (SE)
- KTH Royal Institute of Technology (SE)
- Corresponding author
- Hudson, Elton P.
- Venue
- Journal of Industrial Ecology
- Published
- 2019-04
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 205-216
- ISSN
- 1088-1980 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-9290
- OpenAlex
- W2930523514
- Cited by
- 50
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 4
- FWCI
- 2.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Industrial Ecology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
- Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Algal biology and biofuel production
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Microbial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
- Keywords
- n-butanol, photosynthetic cyanobacteria, third-generation biofuels, genetically engineered cyanobacteria, cumulative energy demand, greenhouse gas emissions, life cycle assessment, carbon allocation, light utilization, metabolic engineering
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
