The NREL Biochemical and Thermochemical Ethanol Conversion Processes: Financial and Environmental Analysis Comparison

The financial and environmental performance of the National Renewable Energy Lab’s (NREL) thermochemical and biochemical biofuel conversion processes are examined herein with pine, eucalyptus, unmanaged hardwood, switchgrass, and sweet sorghum. The environmental impacts of the process scenarios were determined by quantifying greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and TRACI impacts. Integrated financial and environmental performance metrics were introduced and used to examine the biofuel production scenarios. The thermochemical and biochemical conversion processes produced the highest financial performance and lowest environmental impacts when paired with pine and sweet sorghum, respectively. The high ash content of switchgrass and high lignin content of loblolly pine lowered conversion yields, resulting in the highest environmental impacts and lowest financial performance for the thermochemical and biochemical conversion processes, respectively. Biofuel produced using the thermochemical conversion process resulted in lower TRACI single score impacts and somewhat lower GHG emissions per megajoule (MJ) of fuel than using the biochemical conversion pathway. The cost of carbon mitigation resulting from biofuel production and corresponding government subsidies was determined to be higher than the expected market carbon price. In some scenarios, the cost of carbon mitigation was several times higher than the market carbon price, indicating that there may be other more cost-effective methods of reducing carbon emissions.

[1]  Jacob J. Jacobson,et al.  Feedstock handling and processing effects on biochemical conversion to biofuels , 2010 .

[2]  J. Görgens,et al.  Comparing biological and thermochemical processing of sugarcane bagasse: an energy balance perspective. , 2011 .

[3]  J. Palutikof,et al.  Climate change 2007 : impacts, adaptation and vulnerability , 2001 .

[4]  Hans-Jörg Althaus,et al.  The ecoinvent Database: Overview and Methodological Framework (7 pp) , 2005 .

[5]  Jennifer Cooper,et al.  Life cycle impact assessment weights to support environmentally preferable purchasing in the United States. , 2007, Environmental science & technology.

[6]  Michael Q. Wang,et al.  The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: An Update , 2002 .

[7]  A. Aden,et al.  Thermochemical Ethanol via Indirect Gasification and Mixed Alcohol Synthesis of Lignocellulosic Biomass , 2007 .

[8]  T. Seager,et al.  Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Lignocellulosic Ethanol Production: Biochemical Versus Thermochemical Conversion , 2010, Environmental management.

[9]  Huajiang Huang,et al.  Effect of biomass species and plant size on cellulosic ethanol: A comparative process and economic analysis , 2009 .

[10]  H. Jameel,et al.  Integrated conversion, financial, and risk modeling of cellulosic ethanol from woody and non‐woody biomass via dilute acid pre‐treatment , 2014 .

[11]  Sara González-García,et al.  Life cycle assessment of two alternative bioenergy systems involving Salix spp. biomass: Bioethanol production and power generation , 2012 .

[12]  T. Foust,et al.  An economic and environmental comparison of a biochemical and a thermochemical lignocellulosic ethanol conversion processes , 2009 .

[13]  Juha Nurmi,et al.  Modelling moisture content and dry matter loss during storage of logging residues for energy , 2011 .

[14]  Gerald Rebitzer,et al.  The LCIA midpoint-damage framework of the UNEP/SETAC life cycle initiative , 2004 .

[15]  J. Jechura,et al.  Biomass to Hydrogen Production Detailed Design and Economics Utilizing the Battelle Columbus Laboratory Indirectly-Heated Gasifier , 2005 .

[16]  César A.C. Sequeira,et al.  Fermentation, gasification and pyrolysis of carbonaceous residues towards usage in fuel cells , 2007 .

[17]  Paul Jett A Comparison of Two Modeled Syngas Cleanup Systems and Their Integration with Selected Fuel Synthesis Processes. , 2011 .

[18]  R. Frings,et al.  Environmental requirements in thermochemical and biochemical conversion of biomass , 1992 .

[19]  David D. Hsu,et al.  Life cycle environmental impacts of selected U.S. ethanol production and use pathways in 2022. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[20]  Ryan Michael Swanson,et al.  Techno-Economic Analysis of Biofuels Production Based on Gasification , 2010 .

[21]  R. Plevin Modeling Corn Ethanol and Climate , 2009 .

[22]  G. Heath,et al.  Environmental and sustainability factors associated with next-generation biofuels in the U.S.: what do we really know? , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[23]  H. Jameel,et al.  Economics of cellulosic ethanol production in a thermochemical pathway for softwood, hardwood, corn stover and switchgrass , 2012 .

[24]  Hasan Jameel,et al.  Converting Eucalyptus biomass into ethanol: Financial and sensitivity analysis in a co-current dilute acid process. Part II , 2011 .

[25]  D. Patterson,et al.  Size, Moisture Content, and British Thermal Unit Value of Processed In-Woods Residues: Five Case Studies , 2011 .

[26]  D. Schell,et al.  Ethanol from lignocellulosic biomass , 1992 .