BIOCORE vs Sample Clauses

BIOCORE vs other biomass-based systems In most cases, a BIOCORE biorefinery will compete with other uses of the limited resources biomass and agricultural land. In this case, another life cycle comparison is necessary to assess the impacts (Fig. 4-3). To this end, products originating from alternative biomass or land uses like bioenergy are themselves compared to alternative fossil-based products like energy from natural gas. This leads to the situation that e.g. either the demand for chemicals is satisfied by biomass and the demand for energy is satisfied by fossil resources or vice ver- sa. The underlying question is whether the BIOCORE biorefinery concept or alternative use options of the same biogenic resources are more sustainable. The alternative biomass use options for all kinds of biomass assessed in this study are (see chapter 9.3.2 in Annex 1 for more details):  Direct combustion BIOCORE scenarios No action alternative Alternative land use Natural gas extraction Transport Natural gas extraction Transport Transport Feedstock provision Transport Feedstock provision Transport Biomass provision Transport  Synfuels Use Use Conventional energy Bioenergy Conversion Biomass conversion Transport Transport Biomass Natural gas extraction Alternative land use Alternative scenarios Use + End of life Use + End of life Biobased products Reference products BIOCORE biorefinery Conversion Transport Transport Biomass Biomass provision BIOCORE scenarios Feedstock provision Conversion Use Conversion Use Biomass conversion Use Conversion Use + End of life Conversion Use + End of life BIOCORE biorefinery Use + End of life Product Reference system Process Legend:
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
BIOCORE vs conventional systems The use of residual biomass like straw from agricultural land always has to be compared to a reference system because something will happen to the biomass or the land even if no BIOCORE biorefinery is implemented. In the initial part of the assessment focussing on the BIOCORE biorefinery concept is based on the precondition that sufficient biomass or agri- cultural land is available. Independent of how much unused biomass or agricultural land may be available in reality in 2025, this precondition allows to independently assess the BIOCORE biorefinery and its optimisation options before comparing it to alternative use op- tions of the biomass or agricultural land in a second step. Thus, the implementation of the BIOCORE biorefinery concept is compared to not extracting the agricultural residues and forestry biomass or not using the agricultural land. Nevertheless, this reference system can still cause environmental benefits (e.g. remaining straw serves as fertiliser reducing the xx- xxxx for mineral fertiliser) or environmental burdens (e.g. straw is burned in the field causing significant emissions). These environmental impacts of the reference system are credited to the BIOCORE biorefinery, which leads to the reduction of its environmental impacts (if bur- dens are avoided) or to additional impacts (if benefits are prevented). These reference sys- tems are part of the life cycle of the BIOCORE biorefinery (see Table 4-4 for an overview). Table 4-4 Feedstocks for the BIOCORE biorefinery concept and their reference systems (main scenario underlined) Feedstock type Feedstock Reference system Agricultural residues Wheat straw Rice straw Forestry biomass Hardwood stems from thinnings (xx- xxxxxx > 5 cm) Agricultural biomass Miscanthus, poplar short rotation cop- pice (SRC) Ploughing in, serves as fertiliser Burning in field Remain in forest No production, land is not used (non-rotational fal- low land)
BIOCORE vs conventional systems Selection of indicators Various aspects of environmental, economic and social sustainability have been studied in individual assessments, which form the basis of this integrated sustainability assessment. The impact of the BIOCORE life cycles and the conventional reference systems on all these aspects is quantified or qualitatively rated using various indicators. The suitability and scien- tific validity of the indicators has been verified in the individual assessments. In the integrated sustainability assessment, those indicators were chosen from the set of available indicators, which give additional information that is relevant for decisions between the assessed options (Table 5-13). This selection does not contain several qualitative indicators from the more comprehensive set, which show the same values for all assessed scenarios or were rated less important for decisions between the assessed options by the respective experts. For completeness, they are shown in the annex in Table 10-1. Furthermore, related specific (qualitative) indicators were merged into a more general indicator if values showed similar patterns for the assessed scenarios. For an overview and a short description of the indicators see Table 5-12. Results for these indicators and selected scenarios under standard condi- tions are shown in Table 5-13 and bandwidths under favourable and less favourable condi- tions are shown in Table 5-14. Table 5-12 Overview of sustainability indicators Impact category Short description Technology Maturity Technical maturity of involved processes. Availability of infrastructure for logistics and storage This indicator refers to logistics as well as short-term and seasonal storage of biomass. Use of GMOs Use of genetically modified organisms (here: microbes) in closed fer- mentation facilities within the biorefinery. Release of GMOs like gene- tically modified plants to the environment is not intended. Risk of explosions and fires Risk of explosions and fires within industrial facilities like biorefineries. Development of legislative framework and bureaucra- tic hurdles Feedstock flexibility of con- version technologies Potential legislative and bureaucratic hurdles for the implementation of the scenario. The capability of the core process to use several different feedstocks interchangeably or in a mixture. Environment Resource depletion: ener- gy Depletion of non-renewable energy resources, i.e. fossil fuels such as mineral oil, nat...

Related to BIOCORE vs

  • Supplier Diversity Seller shall comply with Xxxxx’s Supplier Diversity Program in accordance with Appendix V.

  • USOC SOMEC XXXXX Note: In addition to the OSS charges, applicable discounted service order and related discounted charges apply per the tariff.

  • Licensee Licensee represents and warrants that:

  • Gross Beta Flags A = Result acceptable, Bias <= +/- 50% with a statistically positive result at two standard deviations (Result/Uncertainty > 2, i.e., the range encompassing the result, plus or minus the total uncertainty at two standard deviations, does not include zero). N = Result not acceptable, Bias > +/- 50% or the reported result is not statistically positive at two standard deviations (Result/Uncertainty <= 2, i.e., the range encompassing the result, plus or minus the total uncertainty at two standard deviations, includes zero). Uncertainty Flags:

  • SAFECOM Recipients receiving federal financial assistance awards made under programs that provide emergency communication equipment and its related activities must comply with the SAFECOM Guidance for Emergency Communication Grants, including provisions on technical standards that ensure and enhance interoperable communications.

  • Nepotism No employee shall be awarded a position where he/she is to be directly supervised by a member of his/her immediate family. “

  • API If the Software offers integration capabilities via an API, your use of the API may be subject to additional costs or Sage specific policies and terms and conditions (which shall prevail in relation to your use of the API). You may not access or use the API in any way that could cause damage to us or the Software, or in contravention of any applicable laws. We reserve the right in our sole discretion, to: (i) update any API from time to time; (ii) place limitations around your use of any API; and (iii) deny you access to any API in the event of misuse by you or to otherwise protect our legitimate interests.

  • LICENSOR any Person from whom a Grantor obtains the right to use any Intellectual Property. Lien: any Person’s interest in Property securing an obligation owed to, or a claim by, such Person, whether such interest is based on common law, statute or contract, including liens, security interests, pledges, hypothecations, statutory trusts, reservations, exceptions, encroachments, easements, rights-of-way, covenants, conditions, restrictions, leases, and other title exceptions and encumbrances affecting Property. Lien Waiver: an agreement, in form and substance satisfactory to Collateral Agent, by which (a) for any material Collateral located on leased premises, the lessor waives or subordinates any Lien it may have on the Collateral, and agrees to permit Collateral Agent to enter upon the premises and remove the Collateral or to use the premises to store or dispose of the Collateral; (b) for any Collateral held by a warehouseman, processor, shipper, customs broker or freight forwarder, such Person waives or subordinates any Lien it may have on the Collateral, agrees to hold any Documents in its possession relating to the Collateral as agent for Collateral Agent, and agrees to deliver the Collateral to Collateral Agent upon request; (c) for any Collateral held by a repairman, mechanic or bailee, such Person acknowledges Collateral Agent’s Lien, waives or subordinates any Lien it may have on the Collateral, and agrees to deliver the Collateral to Collateral Agent upon request; and (d) for any Collateral subject to a Licensor’s Intellectual Property rights, the Licensor grants to Collateral Agent the right, vis-à-vis such Licensor, to enforce Collateral Agent’s Liens with respect to the Collateral, including the right to dispose of it with the benefit of the Intellectual Property, whether or not a default exists under any applicable License.

  • Research, Science and Technology Cooperation 1. The aims of cooperation in research, science and technology, carried out in the mutual interest of the Parties and in compliance with their policies, will be: (a) to build on existing agreements already in place for cooperation on research, science and technology; (b) to encourage, where appropriate, government agencies, research institutions, universities, private companies and other research organizations in the Parties to conclude direct arrangements in support of cooperative activities, programs or projects within the framework of this Agreement, specially related to trade and commerce; and (c) to focus cooperative activities towards sectors where mutual and complementary interests exist, with special emphasis on information and communication technologies and software development to facilitate trade between the Parties. 2. The Parties will encourage and facilitate, as appropriate, the following activities including, but not limited to:

  • WSIB & LTD An Employee who is receiving benefits under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, or under a LTD plan, is not entitled to benefits under a school board’s sick leave and short term disability plan for the same condition unless the employee is on a graduated return to work program then WSIB/LTD remains the first payor. For clarity, where an employee is receiving partial benefits under WSIB/LTD, they may be entitled to receive benefits under the sick leave plan, subject to the circumstances of the specific situation. During the interim period from the date of the injury/incident or illness to the date of the approval by the WSIB/LTD of the claim, the employee may access sick leave and short term leave and disability coverage. A reconciliation of sick leave deductions made and payments provided, will be undertaken by the school board once the WSIB/LTD has adjudicated and approved the claim. In the event that the WSIB/LTD does not approve the claim, the school board shall deal with the absence consistent with the terms of the sick leave and short term leave and disability plans.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.