bioenergy ir roberto vazquez.pdf · sustainable farming of bioenergy crops . ligno-cellulosics ....

Bioenergy Roberto Vazquez

5th International Conference on Energy –Sustainable Energy Policies and Technologies

•Bioenergy Summary Layout

- Primary energy/liquid fuels

- Biomass potential

- Bioenergy platforms

- Integrated biorefinery

- Summary

•Bioenergy


- Biomass potential



- Summary

•Primary energy and carbon emissions Short term energy outlook, 2014-2015

U.S. Energy Information Administration, International Energy Outlook 2013

+10 TW in 30 years ~ 2 GW every 3 days (2 nuclear plants) Business as usual: increase in energy demand in parallel with carbon emissions. Energy will not be produced cleaner.

17.5

27.4

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

50,000

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

2009 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Mill

ion

met

ric to

ns C

O2

TW

EIA: World total primary energy consumption/carbon emissions, 2009-2040

World total primary energy World carbon dioxide emissions

•Bioenergy Summary Layout


- Biomass potential



- Summary

•20 TW challenge 100%, world’s primary energy through biomass

Land surface:

150b km2

Sea surface

360b km2

Earth’s surface 510b km2

Daily Irra-diance:

250 W/m2

Total solar

energy 37PW

Land for biomass

5%

Incident solar

radiation: 1.9 PW

Efficiency biomass:

1.5%

Biomass energy: 28 TW

Biomass platform efficiency

70%

Biomass energy 20 TW

Total primary energy 20 TW

Incident Radiation •54,000 GJ

ha-1 yr-1

Incident PAR •14,000 GJ

ha-1 yr-1

Intercepted PAR •10,000 GJ

ha-1 yr-1

Dry biomass production •884 GJ ha-1

yr-1

E (MJ m-2): incident radiation PARt (MJ m-2): accumulated incident photosynthetically active radiation (St from emergence to harvest) PARi (MJ m-2): intercepted PAR Y: total maximum dry aboveground biomass production εi Interception efficiency εc Conversion efficiency of PAR k: Energy per unit biomass

•Radiation interception/conversion Efficiencies of radiation interception and conversion (Miscanthus)

Y= 𝑆𝑡𝑘∙𝜖𝑖∙𝜖𝑐�

In context, 6% land requirement Total cropland includes land planted for crops (82%), and cropland used for pasture and idled cropland. Forest-use increased 20 million acres (3%) from 2002 to 2007. Special use areas, increased threefold since 1959, including a fourfold increase in rural parks and fish and wildlife areas.

•Major Uses of Land in the United States Inventory of U.S. major land uses, 2007

29%

27%

18%

14%

9% 3%

ForestlandGrassland pasture and rangelandCroplandSpecial uses (parks, wildlife areas)Miscellaneous (tundra, swamps...)Urban land

(*) % US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Institute

•Deforestation Correlation biofuel production deforestation

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

Prod

uctio

n bi

ofue

ls '0

00 to

ns

1990 Methanol+Biodiesel Production (tons)

2014 Methanol+Biodiesel Production (tons)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1990 2000 2010

% F

ores

t Lan

d

Argentina

Brazil

Indonesia

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1990 2000 2010

% F

ores

t Lan

d

EuropeanUnionUnitedStates

(*) % Forest land, World Bank, Biofuel production Platts

US as an example of mature agricultural industry. Yield has doubled in 40 years, with solid upward trend. Energy cops have not been developed. Possibility of: - Higher yields - New crop land

•Land usage: the yield factor Harvested area and yield of all crops in US (FAO)

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

0.00E+00

5.00E+08

1.00E+09

1.50E+09

2.00E+09

2.50E+09

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Tonn

ers

per H

a

Har

vest

ed A

rea

(Ha)

, Pro

duct

ion

(tonn

es)

Year

Harvested Area (Ha) Production (tonnes)

Yield (tonnes/Ha)

FAO, compiled by RV

10% decrease in harvested area during the period of intense ethanol development. ILU for US produced ethanol and biodiesel?

•Land usage: the yield factor II Harvested area all crops in US (FAO), detail

2.90E+08

3.10E+08

3.30E+08

3.50E+08

3.70E+08

3.90E+08

4.10E+08

1980 1990 2000 2010

Har

vest

ed A

rea

(Ha)

,

Year

Harvested Area (Ha)

-10%

FAO, compiled by RV

KEY ASPECTS

The question is not “if” but “how much” we can produce in a sustainable way

From 1960 to 2010, agricultural production has increased threefold and per capita provision

of calories increased by 1/3 (FAOSTAT, 2013), in parallel with biofuel production

Current agriculture is well able to feed the world and will be able to feed 9B people in 2050

Challenge is not average supply of calories but distribution. This is a political issue.

Meat and milk production is in competition for land. Calorie production from crops is much more efficient. Dietary change?

Reduction of waste (more than 30% currently)

•Sustainability Sustainable Farming of Bioenergy Crops

Ligno-cellulosics

Forest biomass

Wood (hardwood

and softwood)

Residue: bark,

thinning, sawdust, pruning

Agricultural residues

Food crops: Corn stover, cob, kernel,

fibers; wheat

straw; rice straw, hull;

oat hull

Non-food crops: cotton stalk;

cotton gin;

Energy Crops

Grass: switch-grass, alfalfa,

miscanthus

Municipal waste

Residential waste: paper

waste, food waste

Non-residential:

waste paper, food processing

waste

•Biomass potential, sources Carbohydrate sources

Biomass at $60 per dry ton (*) or less identified under 3% energy crop growth rate, U.S. billion-ton Update study. “Billion-ton”: resources to potentially displace 30% more of the country’s 2005 petroleum consumption. 30 million acres of cropland and 49 million acres of pastureland shift into energy crops (*) cultivation (or acquisition), harvest, and delivery of biomass to the field edge or roadside. For grasses and residues, price includes baling. For forest residues and woody crops, includes minimal chipping

•Biomass potential resources, 2030 Used/potential resources at $60/dt under 3% annual growth rate

0 500 1000 1500

2012

2017

2022

2030

Million dry tons

Forest resources currently usedForest biomass & waste resource potentialAgricultural resources currently usedAgricultural biomass & waste resource potentialEnergy crops

U.S. Billion ton update, US Department of Energy

Scalability and sensitivity of energy crops. Up to 400M dt by 2030 in baseline assumptions. Extreme sensitivity to price for energy crops. Tenfold increase from $40 ton to $60 ton.

•Biomass potential resources, 2030 (II) Available Forest, Agricultural and Energy crops (Baseline assumptions)

050

100150200250300350400450

2012 2017 2022 2027

Mill

ion

dry

tons

Forestresidues &wood residues(< $40 dt)Forestresidues &wood residues(< $50 dt)Forestresidues &wood residues(< $60 dt)

050

100150200250300350400450

2012 2017 2022 2027

Mill

ion

dry

tons

Agriculturalresidues andwastes (< $40dt)Agriculturalresidues andwastes (< $50dt)Agriculturalresidues andwastes (< $60dt)

050

100150200250300350400450

2012 2017 2022 2027

Mill

ion

dry

tons

Energy crops(< $40)Energy crops(< $50)Energy crops(< $60)

U.S. Billion ton update, US Department of Energy

•Biomass: feedstock selection

Chemical composition Price of

biomass (farm gate)

Energy content/ density

Yield, land require-ments

Logistic costs

Water

Fertilizer Pesticides herbicides

GHG emissions

Soil Erosion

Energy balance

Biodiversity, landscape

impact

Social impact (labour)

Feedstock Selection

•Miscanthus x Gigantheus

Miscanthus x Gigantheus, picture from Sieverdingbeck in NRW

Key Aspects:

- C4 with high yield - Low fertilizer input (mineral inputs

recycled before senescence). Current studies only consider fertilizer in the first on or two years.

- Low herbicide input (outcompetes weeds)

- Few natural pests or diseases (no pesticides)

- Low soil erosion (MT/ha/y: soybean 40, corn, 20, perennial ~0)

- High carbon fixed underground - Lower land competition: Rolling

terrain, soil quality requirements - Lower water competition (deep root

system) - Better habitat: 2 to 5 times as many

bird species than row crops

•Bioenergy


- Biomass potential



- Summary

KEY ASPECTS

Product value (value of the product needed for a

NPV of zero with a market internal rate of return) Sensitivity of product value to:

Biomass cost Yields Byproduct price Capital cost Other raw materials/catalists/enzymes

required Plant size

Compatibility with current engines and fuel distribution network

Integration at agricultural level. N, P, K balance. Integration at livestock farming: protein and

carbohydrate balance

•Bioenergy platforms Evaluation of the performance of different platforms

Capital cost per ton Land use: Solar energy capture efficiency: energy

of final products/solar irradiance of land used Carbon efficiency: carbon in final products/

carbon in biomass Energy output per unit of biomass energy input Primary energy balance: Primary energy

out/primary energy in Optimum size of plant taking into account access

to land within the maximum transport distance at target biomass price.

Secondary products Primary products Primary process Process type

Biomass

Thermochemi-cal conversion

Gasification Product gas Syngas, SNG-

FT, fuels, MeOH, olefiins

Pyrolysis Pyrolysis oil Fuel, biochemicals

Torrefaction Torrefied biomass Biofuel

Combustion Steam/heat Heat and electricity

Biological conversion

Chemical conversion

Mechanical conversion

•Structure of biomass conversion processes

(*) Dr. Roman Hackl, Prof. Simon Harvey, 2010 ,Chalmers University of Technology.

Thermochemical conversion

•Pyrolysis Combined biomass fast pyrolysis and H2 upgrading process diagram

(*)NREL, Techno-Economic Analysis of Biomass Fast Pyrolysis, M. Wright, J.A. Satrio, R. Brown, D. Daugaard, D. Hu

•Pyrolysis Key aspects - biomass pyrolysis

• Catalyst

•H-ZSM-5 & Ni-ZSM-5 •Sulfuric/

polyphosphoric acid •NaOH •Fe2(SO4)3 •ZnCl2

• Reactor type

•Entrained-flow •Conical spouted-bed •Bubbling Fluid bed

• Temp./Heating rate

•673 K + •10-200 °C/s

• Residence time

•Gas flow •Design

High complexity:

Multiscale nature of biomass feedstocks (1E1 to 1E-10 m) Multiphase nature of pyrolysis

Challenges (*):

Development of experimental techniques Anhydrosugars, pyrans and furans formation pathways from cellulose Product breakdown within intermediate liquid Solvation effect on intermediate liquid chemistry Catalysts (natural, primary and secondary) Char formation mechanism Heat transfer models Aerosols and their effect on bio oil production Particle shrinkage

(*) Energy & Environmental Science , Mettler, Matthew S.; Vlachos, Dionisios G.; Dauenhauer, Paul J.





Biomass



Anaerobic digestion Biogas Methane,

methanol, olefins

Fermentation Ethanol Fuel, ethylene,

ETBE, ethylamines

Enzymatic hydrolysis

Fermentable sugars

Ethanol, Fuel, ethylene,

ethylamines Chemical

conversion


•Cellulosic Ethanol Integrated cellulosic ethanol plant (C6 and C5 sugars)

(*)NREL

•Lignocellulosic ethanol Commercial Facilities (2014)-Selection US

Company Location Products Status Raw Material

Pretreat-ment Tech. Lignin use

Abengoa Bioenergia

Hogoton, KS, USA (demo in Spain)

75,000 TPA EtOH, 22MW

(October 17, 2014?)

Corn stover, wheat straw, switchgrass, milo stubble (sorghum stalks)

Acid-catalyzed steam explosion, enzymatic hydrolysis

Co-product, recovered after distillation

POET-DSM Advanced Biofuels

Emmersburg, IA, USA

75,000 TPA EtOH

(September 2014?) Corn stover

Pretreat-ment, enzymatic hydrolysis

Biogas production

DuPont

Nevada, IA (demo in Vonore, Tennessee)

90,000 TPA EtOH End of 2014 Corn stover

Steam explosion/ enzymatic hydrolysis (cellulase, hemicellu-lase and beta-glucosidase)

Solid biofuel

•Lignocellulosic ethanol Commercial Facilities (2014)- EU/Brazil

Company Location Products Status Raw Material

Pretreat-ment Tech. Lignin use

Beta Renewables

Crescentino, Italy

40,000 TPA EtOH, 13 MW

Operational, October 2013

Arundo donax, straw

Steam explosion/ enzymatic hydrolysis

Solid biofuel

IOGEN- RAIZEN

Costa Pinto, Brazil (demo in Canada)

30,000 TPA EtOH Q4, 2014 Sugarcane

straw

Modified steam explosion, enzymatic hydrolysis

Steam and electricity generation

Grand Bio (Beta Renewables)

Alagoas, Brazil

65,000 TPA EtOH

Final commissioning June 2014

Sugar Cane Straw

Steam explosion/ enzymatic hydrolysis

Solid biofuel

Land required in a 20km radius for a 200,000 MT per year ethanol production Corn, 400 gal/acre; stover 8 dt/acre, 50% removal, 100 gal/dt; Energy crop, 35 dt/ha, 100 gal/dt

•Enzymatic hydrolysis - Efficiencies

54%

Corn

27%

Corn+stover

15%

Energy crop

3.0 MT/ha

3.0 MT/ha

10.5 MT/ha

0.0 MT/ha 4.0 MT/ha 8.0 MT/ha 12.0 MT/ha

Corn

Corn+stover

Energy crop

Ethanol production per ha

Starch Cellulosic waste Cellulosic

Production per ha:

Corn: current use Adding corn stover cellulosic

conversion, 50% removal Corn farm land converted to

energy crop

E35 possible with no additional land

Dose-efficiency – cost Biomass saccharification rates (glucanase, xylanases, beta-gulosidase) Reduced product inhibition Performance at high biomass solid loadings Operating conditions: sequential hydrolysis and fermentation (SHF), hybrid (HSF) and

simultaneous (SSF) pH and temperature range Pretreatment flexibility Substrate flexibility Nutrients

•Enzymatic hydrolysis - Challenges

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

PHP APB whPCS SEB AFEX CS WS

ACCELLERASE® TRIO™ (DuPont)

% glucan conversion% xylan conversion





Biomass



Chemical conversion

Acid hydrolysis Cellulose,

hemicellulose, lignin

Fermentable sugars, methanol

Supercritical conversion

Cellulose, hemicellulose,

lignin Fermentable

sugars, ethanol

Solvent extraction Cellulose,

hemicellulose, lignin

Ethanol, extractives


Wet whole cell conversion pathway Biocrude: composition and energy density closer petroleum crude than bio-oil from pyrolysis Biocrude: 44.5% afdw, 78.7% carbon, 10.1% hydrogen, 4.4% nitrogen, and 5.5% oxygen, 39 MJ/kg Biochar: >20% dw, 8 and 10 MJ kg–1

Aqueous coproducts: 18.4% afdw aqueous co-products (ACPs), C, N, P

•Hydrothermal liquefaction Pathways, yields

Liquefaction

Gas

Aqueous Insoluble Biochar

Aqueous Soluble Aqueous co-product

Decane insoluble

Dry Biochar

Evaporate solvent Biocrude

Decane soluble Evaporate solvent Biocrude

(*) Griffin, W. Roberts, Marie-Odile P. Fortier, Belinda S.M. Sturm, Susan M. Stagg-Williams (2013), Energy & Fuels.

•Hydrothermal liquefaction Potential block diagram: Example Algae processing

(*) Griffin, W. Roberts, Marie-Odile P. Fortier, Belinda S.M. Sturm, Susan M. Stagg-Williams (2013), Energy & Fuels.

Carbon efficiency = 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝑏𝑖𝑏 𝑏𝑖𝑜𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝑏𝑖𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏�

•Algal – Derived biofuels Microalgal biomass to biofuel processing pathways

(*) Adapted from Second-Generation Biofuel from High-Efficiency Algal-Derived Biocrude, Rhykka Connelly, Univ. Texas





Biomass



Chemical conversion


Separation Lignin Fuel, Heat, Electricity, Fiber

Drying and pelletising Biofuel Heat and

Electricity

Extraction Veg. oil, extracts Fuel, oleochemicals

•Bioenergy


- Biomass potential



- Summary

• Process, agricultural and livestock farming integration •Integrated biorefinery

•Bioenergy


- Biomass potential



- Summary

Develop energy crops and associated agronomic practices Develop models to integrate agricultural and livestock farming within the biomass-

biorefinery operation Biochemical pathway:

Design new pretreatments to depolymerize efficiently cellulose and hemicellulose

Improve enzymatic hydrolysis yields/costs Develop new enzymatic pathways to yield produce hydrophobic compounds

with better compatibility (other than ethanol) Thermochemical pathway:

Develop catalyst and reactor design to improve bio crude quantity and quality Integration of the bio crude upgrade into naphtha/diesel process to optimize

costs

•Summary of challenges

Bioenergy Roberto Vazquez

5th International Conference on Energy –Sustainable Energy Policies and Technologies

Thank you

•20 MM bbl per day challenge 100% US liquid fuel demand through biomass

Land surface: 9.2E6 km2

Daily Irra-diance:

250 W/m2

Total solar

energy 2.3E3 TW

Land for biomass

6%

Incident solar

radiation: 1.4E2 TW

Efficiency biomass:

1.5%

Biomass energy: 2.1 TW

Biomass platform efficiency

70%

Biomass energy 1.4 TW

Total liquid fuel

US 1.4 TW

•Liquid fuel demand: dependency Short term energy outlook, US 2014-2015

-0.30

-0.15

0.00

0.15

0.30

0.45

0.60

0.75

2012 2013 2014 201516.5

17.0

17.5

18.0

18.5

19.0

19.5

20.0

U.S. Liquid Fuels Consumption million barrels per day (MMbbl/d)

Motor gasoline (right axis)Jet fuel (right axis)Distillate fuel (right axis)Other fuels (right axis)

annual change (MMbbl/d)

Source: Short-Term Energy Outlook, August 2014.

Liquid fuel demand has been relatively stable and will remain stable in the near future in OECD countries. Decreases in Japan and Europe. Non-OECD consumption is projected to grow by 1.3 million bbl/d in 2014 and 1.2 million bbl/d in 2015, accounting for nearly all forecast global consumption. China is the leading contributor to projected global consumption.

•Forecasted increase in liquid fuel production Short term energy outlook, 2014-2015

Source: Short-Term Energy Outlook, August 2014.

Forecasted increases of production in biomass based fuel are minimal, even in leading countries. Biodiesel is not competitive (yet) and difficult to scale Ethanol has reached blend wall (E10) and E85 development is slow. Cellulosic ethanol has not met short term expectations. -0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

2012 2013 2014 20156

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

U.S. Crude Oil and Liquid Fuels Production million barrels per day (MMbbl/d)

Crude oil (right axis)Natural gas plant liquids (right axis)Fuel ethanol (right axis)Biodiesel (right axis)

annual change (MMbbl/d)

• Synthesis, Stomata, Enzymes • Water Use Efficiency (WUE): ratio of carbon dioxide intake to water lost through transpiration • Photorespiration: Under high light and high heat, the enzyme (RUBISCO) that grabs carbon dioxide for photosynthesis may grab oxygen instead, causing respiration

•Photosynthetic pathways: C4 and CAM Types of photosynthesis: arid adaptation

C3 Plants C4 Plants CAM Plants

Synthesis CO2 incorporated in to 3-carbon compound

CO2 incorporated in to 4-carbon compound

CO2 is stored in the form of an acid before photosynthesis

Stomata Open during the day

Open during the day (less) Open at night

Enzymes

RUBISCO photosynthesis and uptake of CO2

Carboxylase for CO2 uptake (quicker)

Acid releases CO2 for RUBISCO

Adaptation

More efficient than C4 and CAM plants under cool and moist conditions

Faster photosynthesis at high temperature, avoiding photorespiration. Better water efficiency

Very good water efficiency. May CAM-idle

bioenergy ir roberto vazquez.pdf · sustainable farming of bioenergy crops . ligno-cellulosics ....

Documents