sustainable transportation: can the u. s. become ...cssd.ucr.edu/seminars/pdfs/norbeck slides...
Post on 04-Mar-2018
222 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Sustainable Transportation:Can the U. S. Become Independent of
Foreign Oil?
ByJoseph M. Norbeck
Yeager Families Professor of EngineeringDirector,
Environmental Research InstituteUniversity of California, Riverside
Randall Lewis Seminar SeriesFebruary 15, 2007
Outline
• Energy Utilization in US • Economic Impact of Imported Oil • Issues Related to Transportation• Alternative Fuels and Vehicle Technology• Pathways To Energy Independence• UCR Research in Energy• Conclusions and Recommendations
US Petroleum Oil Imports
* Information provided by DOE/EIA
Top World Oil Consumers, 2005*
* Information provided by DOE/EIA
World Oil Consumption (with Projections)
* Information provided by DOE/EIA
Top World Oil Net Exporters
Non OPEC members
* Information provided by DOE/EIA
US Crude Oil Prices
US Spot Price FOB Weighted by Estimated Import Volume
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1978 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Cru
de O
il Pr
ices
($/G
allo
n)
* Information provided by DOE/EIA
Transportation Energy Facts• Unstable global petroleum economy
– Over $60 per barrel crude in 2006• Cost of past 30 years of Middle East upheavals to U.S.
economy-$7 trillion • US spends over $120 billion a year on oil imports• Middle East has 70% of world’s oil reserves• US reserves is approximately 2% of total• US consumes more than 25 million barrels of petroleum
each day• Petroleum is not sustainable and will be depleted in future• Growth in China & India adds to global demand
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Global Auto Industry - Production(Thousand Unit)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000
GDP/Cap. PPP (USD)
Vehi
cles
Per
100
0 Pe
rson
China(12)
Poland(345)
Brazil(119)
S. Korea(286)
UK(526)
Italy(667)
France(588)Germany(588)Japan(588)
US(816)
[California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit, 2000][California Department of Transportation]
California Population and VMT By Year
California Population and VMT
Approaches to Alternative Transportation Fuels
• Need to Understand the Magnitude of Problem– Need to Replace 25 Million Barrels/Day (1 Billion Gallons/Day)
• Solar and Wind Technologies Can Produce Electricity and Hydrogen from Water but Expensive
• Biomass is an efficient energy storage system—need to provide sufficient feedstock
• Coal, Municipal Solid Wastes and Agricultural Wastes are also attractive • Numerous conversion processes to make transportation fuels and energy
from biomass• Ethanol from sugar/starch• Cellulosic Ethanol• Biodiesel from vegetable oil or animal fats• Methanol• Fischer-Tropsch diesel• DME
What type of Synthetic Transportation Fuel?
• Liquid fuel is preferred– High energy density (Range)– Safety and storage– More convenient distribution– Fueling infrastructure in place– Engine technology is mature– Criteria Pollution Problem Solved with exception
of Heavy Duty Diesel Engines• Issue of Implementation• Combination of Advanced Technology and Clean Fuels
Alternative Fueled Vehicles• Alternative Fuels are not necessarily Sustainable • Base Feedstocks are usually petroleum based• Efforts toward AFVs began in 1980s
– Initial Motivation was Air Quality– Mostly Government Fleets
• Vehicle Technology Mature with exception of Hydrogen Powered Vehicles
• Major Effort in US to Aggressively Implement Ethanol Vehicles
• Gasoline Hybrids can run on Ethanol/Diesel
Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles
• Current Cost of Fuel Cell Technology is $3000/kW ($200K/vehicle)– Need to reduce cost to $30/kW in ten years
• Long term durability of fuel cell at required capacity needs significant technological breakthrough
• Intellectual Property Closely Guarded• Fueling Infrastructure for Public Acceptance may
be biggest barrier• Large Penetration of Vehicles Needed for Cost
Reduction
Conversion options• Present technologies
– Anaerobic Digestion– Fermentation for
ethanol production– Gasification using
additional oxygen• Dry feed stock
– Bio-diesel
• Future technologies– Enhanced fermentation
of cellulose & lignin– Advanced Gasification
• Steam Pyrolysis• Hydro-gasification• Co-feed all carbonaceous
urban & farm wastes• Synthetic diesel fuel
Need to Convert Entire Amount of Biomass
US Production Biodiesel and Ethanol
• Corn Ethanol Production Approximately 2.9 Billion Gallons/yearEquivalent to Approximately 2 Billion
Gallons/Gasoline (2 days supply)
• Biodiesel Production is Approximately 1 Billion Gallons/year
* Information provided by DOE/EIA
Biorefinery for Renewable Feedstocks to Fuels, Chemicals, Power, Food, and Feed
Hydrolysis
Lignocellulosics
Lignin
Sugars
ProteinFuel
ChemicalconversionFermentationChemical
conversionProcessing
Electricity
FoodFeed
FurfuralFuransGlycolsMethyl ethyl ketoneAdipic acidEthylenePropylene
Ethanol Citric acidGlycerol Fumaric acidLipids Lactic acidAcetone Propionic acidn-Butanol Succinic acidButanediol Itaconic acidIsopropanol Acetic acidButyric acid Acetaldehyde
PhenolsAromaticsDibasic acidsOlefinsDiesel fuel
From C Wyman 1990
Progress in Enzyme Based Technology for Cellulosic Ethanol
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Time
Bio
etha
nol c
ost,
$/ga
llon
CornEtOH Price
Based on historic estimates by NREL
1980 Now
Projected Cellulosic Ethanol Costs
1.18
0.500.34
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
Base Case AdvancedTechnology
Best Parameter
Cos
t, $/
gal
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Efficiency multiplier
Acr
es, m
illio
ns
0
50
100
150
200
250
Squa
re m
iles,
thou
sand
s
Not including residue use
Including residues
Land to Displace All U.S. Gasoline with Cellulosic Ethanol
Land idled by Federal Programs
CRP land
Based on Lynd
Total agricultural land area: >400 million acresTotal dry land area in US = 2.3 billion acresRhode Island dry land area = 0.669 million acresTexas dry land area = 167.6 million acresTotal land area in 50 mile radius = 5 million acres
Based on 1,000 gals/acre
World Recoverable Coal
* Information provided by IEA 2004
CE-CERT Process
• Carbon and water is converted to a synthetic fuel (cetane) and carbon dioxide at high pressure and Temperature
molkJCOlHCOHsC
/4335.8)(17)(5.24
23416
2
++→+
Reaction rate measurements
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
600 670 770
Temperature (oC)
rate
con
stan
t of C
H4
(x 1
000)
(min
-1)
k1(CH4) k2(CH4) k3(CH4) k4(CH4)
k1 : He onlyk2 : H2 onlyk3 : He-water mixturek4 : H2-water mixture
CE-CERT Process for Producing F-T fuel
min0 20 40 60 80 100 120
counts
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
FID1 A, (060130\AIS10001.D)
min0 20 40 60 80 100 120
counts
0
250000
500000
750000
1000000
1250000
1500000
1750000
2000000
FID1 A, (060130\AIS10004.D)
1.0
11 1
.164
1.3
01
Commercial Diesel
F-T product Organic Portion
Feedstocks Evaluated
• Organic: Biomass– Vegetable (Wood, Agricultural Waste, Crops)– Animal (Enteric waste, Poultry, Food)
• Organic: Petroleum– Plastic– Polymers-rubber, tires– Paint Residues
• Organic- Fossil derived (Coal)
What makes CE-CERT Process Unique?
• Uses Water Slurry– Carrier for feedstock– Feedstock does not need to be dried– Reaction rate enhanced up to 300 times
• Self Sustaining Process – Internal Hydrogen Feedback– Net Exothermic Reaction
• Enables conversion of Renewable Resources as well as Coal
California’s Top 5 Producers of Carbonaceous Material (2003)
• Ideal for Distributed Generation– Power– Liquid Fuels– Chemicals– Co-production
Potential Fischer-Tropsch (FT) Production from Agriculture &
Forestry Residues
SMR to FTRAvailable Mass
(Mg a-1)Mass CH4
(M moles a-1)Mass CO
(M moles a-1)Mass CO2
(M moles a-1)COSMR
(M moles a-1)C9-C20 (Mg a-1)
Wax (Mg a-1)
Total Distillates (M bbl a-1)
9.9E+06 1.6E+05 8.1E+04 5.4E+04 1.5E+05 1.0E+06 4.0E+05 106.9
CA Agriculture Residues (2003)FTR ProductAvailability Steam Hydrogasification Data
SMR to FTRAvailable Mass
(Mg a-1)Mass CH4
(M moles a-1)Mass CO
(M moles a-1)Mass CO2
(M moles a-1)COSMR
(M moles a-1)C9-C20 (Mg a-1)
Wax (Mg a-1)
Total Distillates (M bbl a-1)
2.0E+07 3.4E+05 1.7E+05 1.1E+05 3.2E+05 2.1E+06 8.5E+05 226.4
CA Forestry Residues (2003)Availability Steam Hydrogasification Data FTR Product
Experimental SHR Yields
(CH4, CO, CO2)
SMR95% Conversion
CH4 CO
FTR 90% Conversion
CO FT Products (Distribution based
on ASPEN®
modeling)
CA Biomass
UCR Initiatives
• Development of Technical Foundation to Accelerate Emergence of Large Scale Biological Processing of Cellulosic Biomass to Commodity Products and Fuels
• Conversion of Biomass, Problematic Solid Wastes and Coal into and Diesel Fuel
• Commercial Facility within 5 years
Importance of Integrated Production of Ethanol and Diesel
• Production of diesel fuel from residual solids could compensate for lower yields of ethanol from softwoods
• Co-production of ethanol and diesel will service both spark and compression ignition engines while nearly eliminating net emissions of carbon dioxide
• Virtually nothing has been done on conversion of lignin and other solids left after ethanol production to diesel
• This project will have implications for other solid wastes such as municipal solid waste (MSW) and/or biosolids
Conclusions• Vehicle technology for alternative fuels is mature • Problems of Emissions from Spark Ignition Engines
Essentially Solved-Issue of Clean Fuel and Implementation
• Advanced thermo-chemical and biological conversion processes appear promising
• Combination of the two may be preferred • Availability of carbonaceous waste is sufficient to make
considerable impact in reducing imported fossil fuels • High potential “fuel crops” have been identified • Land mass required is modest for path to
independence
Conclusions• More research needs to be done to understand
different processes advantages and efficiencies • Sustainable energy supplies may be within reach by
next decade• Synthetic Gasoline, Ethanol, and Clean Synthetic
Diesel Fuel good bets for fuels of the future• Hydrogen Economy May Also be Coming• Changes in Lifestyle are An Absolute Necessity
What are Barriers?• Until recently, inadequate focus on all
renewable energy options by Federal Government
• Lack of a strategic vision by USDA and USDOE on defining agricultural sector’s role in energy arena– Corn Ethanol and Biodiesel not sufficient for
energy independence but get all attention– Cellulostic ethanol attractive but need funds
• Need Action Plan for developing and implementing new energy solutions
What Should Be Done?• Magnitude of Plan Requires Comprehensive Initiative
from Federal and State Governments• Decision Makers and General Public need to be
educated• Commercial Scale Processing Plants Need to be
Constructed with Combination of Equity Funding and Federal Assistance
• Plan needs to be NATIONAL PRIORITY• Current Administration Plans Appear Promising• Fund Joey and Charley’s Research at UCR
top related