@article{morizet-davis_qiu_khongpatimakorn_daystar_lan_park_sagues_venditti_2025, title={Environmental Life Cycle Assessment and Techno-Economic Analysis of Textile Waste Valorization via Modular Bioenergy with Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage}, DOI={10.1007/s12155-025-10909-w}, abstractNote={Abstract Annually, over 92 million metric tonnes (Mt) of textile waste are produced globally, with 17 Mt discarded in the US alone. Textile waste is typically comprised of approximately 50% biomass-derived cellulosic fiber and 50% fossil carbon-derived synthetic fiber, with the biogenic portion representing a global CO 2 removal capacity estimated at 75 Mt CO 2 (14 Mt CO 2 in the US alone). Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) offers a promising solution for permanently removing atmospheric CO 2 by converting biomass into energy while capturing and storing the resulting carbon emissions. Despite its potential, textile waste remains an underutilized feedstock in BECCS research and deployment. This study evaluates the techno-economic feasibility and environmental performance of small-scale modular BECCS systems that process textile waste to produce electricity and achieve net-negative emissions. Four waste-to-energy scenarios were modeled using 100% cotton or a 50/50 cotton–polyethylene terephthalate (PET) blend, with and without carbon capture. In 2018, the US EPA reported that 66% of discarded textiles were landfilled. As a result, a fifth landfilling end-of-life scenario was introduced to compare valorization scenarios to a baseline scenario. Life cycle assessment (LCA) and techno-economic analysis (TEA) are applied to quantify levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) and CO 2 removal. For 100% cotton waste, the removal cost was 329 USD per metric ton (t) CO 2 e, significantly lower than 777 USD per t-CO 2 e for 50/50 cotton-PET. The carbon removal efficiencies of 100% cotton and 50/50 cotton-PET textile waste materials were 91% and 59%, respectively. The lowest LCOE was observed for a 50/50 cotton-PET mixture with CCS at 0.17 USD/kWh, due to the relatively high energy density of the feedstock. In contrast, 100% cotton with CCS had the highest LCOE at 0.29 USD/kWh due to the lower feedstock energy density, higher capital expenditure (CAPEX), and reduced CO 2 sales, due to the lower carbon content in cotton compared to PET. In addition, the LCOE for the 50/50 cotton-PET without CCS was 0.18 USD/kWh and the LCOE for the 100% cotton without CCS was 0.24 USD/kWh. The LCA with CCS showed that direct and indirect emissions lead to high acidification potential due to ammonia release via monoethanolamine (MEA) degradation, compared to electricity production without CCS. Additionally, the production of MEA itself exhibited high ecotoxicity potential compared to other process inputs such as NaOH and activated carbon. Overall, this study demonstrated textile waste’s potential as a viable alternative for producing bioenergy and waste-derived energy. In terms of overall environmental impact, all four valorization scenarios significantly outperformed landfilling.}, journal={BioEnergy Research}, author={Morizet-Davis, Jonathan and Qiu, Yaojing and Khongpatimakorn, June and Daystar, Jesse and Lan, Kai and Park, Sunkyu and Sagues, William Joe and Venditti, Richard A.}, year={2025}, month={Dec} }
 @article{morizet-davis_wang_kim_ham_lan_venditti_park_2025, title={Sustainable production of xylo-oligosaccharides: A comparative environmental life cycle and techno-economic analysis}, volume={31}, ISSN={2589-014X}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2025.102233}, DOI={10.1016/j.biteb.2025.102233}, journal={Bioresource Technology Reports}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Morizet-Davis, Jonathan and Wang, Song and Kim, Hoyong and Ham, Choonghyun and Lan, Kai and Venditti, Richard and Park, Sunkyu}, year={2025}, month={Sep}, pages={102233} }