skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Economic and life cycle assessments of biomass utilization for bioenergy products

Abstract

A modeling process was developed to examine the economic and environmental benefits of utilizing energy crops for biofuels and bioproducts. Three energy crops (hybrid willow, switchgrass and miscanthus) that can potentially grow on marginal agricultural land or abandoned mine land in the northeastern United States were considered in the analytical process for the production of biofuels, biopower and pellet fuel. The supply chain components for both the economic analysis and life cycle modeling processes included feedstock establishment, harvest, transportation, storage, preprocessing, conversion, distribution and final usage. Sensitivity analysis was also conducted to assess the effects of energy crop yield, transportation distance, conversion rate, facility capacity and internal rate of return (IRR) on the production of bioenergy products. The required selling price (RSP) ranged from $ 7.7/GJ to $ 47.9/GJ for different bioproducts. The production of biopower had the highest RSP and pellet fuel had the lowest. The results also indicated that bioenergy production using hybrid willow demonstrated lower RSP than the two perennial grass feedstocks. Pellet production presented the lowest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (less than 10 kg CO 2 eq per 1,000 MJ) and fossil energy consumption (less than 150 MJ per 1,000 MJ). The production of biofuel resultedmore » in the highest GHG emissions. Sensitivity analysis indicated that IRR was the most sensitive factor to RSP and followed by conversion rate for biofuel and biopower production. As a result, conversion rate and transportation distance of feedstock presented a significant effect on environmental impacts during the production of the bioproducts.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [1];  [2];  [3];  [4];  [5]
  1. West Virginia Univ., Morgantown, WV (United States)
  2. Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, PA (United States)
  3. Idaho National Lab. (INL), Idaho Falls, ID (United States)
  4. Drexel Univ., Philadelphia, PA (United States)
  5. State Univ. of New York (SUNY), Syracuse, NY (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Idaho National Lab. (INL), Idaho Falls, ID (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Nuclear Energy (NE)
OSTI Identifier:
1357763
Report Number(s):
INL/JOU-16-39807
Journal ID: ISSN 1932-104X
Grant/Contract Number:
AC07-05ID14517
Resource Type:
Journal Article: Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Biofuels, Bioproducts & Biorefining
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 11; Journal Issue: 4; Journal ID: ISSN 1932-104X
Publisher:
Wiley
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
09 BIOMASS FUELS; biofuels; biomass; bioproducts; energy crops; marginal land; bioenergy product; life cycle assessment; economic modeling

Citation Formats

Liu, Weiguo, Wang, Jingxin, Richard, Tom L., Hartley, Damon S., Spatari, Sabrina, and Volk, Timothy A. Economic and life cycle assessments of biomass utilization for bioenergy products. United States: N. p., 2017. Web. doi:10.1002/bbb.1770.
Liu, Weiguo, Wang, Jingxin, Richard, Tom L., Hartley, Damon S., Spatari, Sabrina, & Volk, Timothy A. Economic and life cycle assessments of biomass utilization for bioenergy products. United States. doi:10.1002/bbb.1770.
Liu, Weiguo, Wang, Jingxin, Richard, Tom L., Hartley, Damon S., Spatari, Sabrina, and Volk, Timothy A. Thu . "Economic and life cycle assessments of biomass utilization for bioenergy products". United States. doi:10.1002/bbb.1770. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1357763.
@article{osti_1357763,
title = {Economic and life cycle assessments of biomass utilization for bioenergy products},
author = {Liu, Weiguo and Wang, Jingxin and Richard, Tom L. and Hartley, Damon S. and Spatari, Sabrina and Volk, Timothy A.},
abstractNote = {A modeling process was developed to examine the economic and environmental benefits of utilizing energy crops for biofuels and bioproducts. Three energy crops (hybrid willow, switchgrass and miscanthus) that can potentially grow on marginal agricultural land or abandoned mine land in the northeastern United States were considered in the analytical process for the production of biofuels, biopower and pellet fuel. The supply chain components for both the economic analysis and life cycle modeling processes included feedstock establishment, harvest, transportation, storage, preprocessing, conversion, distribution and final usage. Sensitivity analysis was also conducted to assess the effects of energy crop yield, transportation distance, conversion rate, facility capacity and internal rate of return (IRR) on the production of bioenergy products. The required selling price (RSP) ranged from $ 7.7/GJ to $ 47.9/GJ for different bioproducts. The production of biopower had the highest RSP and pellet fuel had the lowest. The results also indicated that bioenergy production using hybrid willow demonstrated lower RSP than the two perennial grass feedstocks. Pellet production presented the lowest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (less than 10 kg CO2 eq per 1,000 MJ) and fossil energy consumption (less than 150 MJ per 1,000 MJ). The production of biofuel resulted in the highest GHG emissions. Sensitivity analysis indicated that IRR was the most sensitive factor to RSP and followed by conversion rate for biofuel and biopower production. As a result, conversion rate and transportation distance of feedstock presented a significant effect on environmental impacts during the production of the bioproducts.},
doi = {10.1002/bbb.1770},
journal = {Biofuels, Bioproducts & Biorefining},
number = 4,
volume = 11,
place = {United States},
year = {Thu May 04 00:00:00 EDT 2017},
month = {Thu May 04 00:00:00 EDT 2017}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record

Citation Metrics:
Cited by: 2works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science

Save / Share:
  • An array of feedstock is being evaluated as potential raw material for cellulosic biofuel production. Thorough assessments are required in regional landscape settings before these feedstocks can be cultivated and sustainable management practices can be implemented. On the processing side, a potential solution to the logistical challenges of large biorefi neries is provided by a network of distributed processing facilities called local biomass processing depots. A large-scale cellulosic ethanol industry is likely to emerge soon in the United States. We have the opportunity to influence the sustainability of this emerging industry. The watershed-scale optimized and rearranged landscape design (WORLD) modelmore » estimates land allocations for different cellulosic feedstocks at biorefinery scale without displacing current animal nutrition requirements. This model also incorporates a network of the aforementioned depots. An integrated life cycle assessment is then conducted over the unified system of optimized feedstock production, processing, and associated transport operations to evaluate net energy yields (NEYs) and environmental impacts.« less
  • Cited by 17
  • Life-cycle assessment (LCA) is a theoretically attractive approach for evaluating resource consumption and environmental emissions associated with the production, use, and disposal of products. Current LCA guidelines suggest adherence to conventions that can significantly affect results. Conventions of special importance in LCAs of forest products are those pertaining to sustainability of natural resources, recyclability and biodegradability of products, and use of renewable energy in manufacturing processes. More general methodological issues (e.g., relating emissions to impacts, site-to-site variability in loads, data quality) are also important in forest-product LCAs.
  • Life cycle assessment (LCA) can be an invaluable tool for the structured environmental impact assessment of bioenergy product systems. However, the methodology's static temporal and spatial scope combined with its restriction to emission-based metrics in life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) inhibits its effectiveness at assessing climate change impacts that stem from dynamic land surface-atmosphere interactions inherent to all biomass-based product systems. In this paper, we focus on two dynamic issues related to anthropogenic land use that can significantly influence the climate impacts of bioenergy systems: i) temporary changes to the terrestrial carbon cycle; and ii) temporary changes in land surfacemore » albedo-and illustrate how they can be integrated within the LCA framework. In the context of active land use management for bioenergy, we discuss these dynamics and their relevancy and outline the methodological steps that would be required to derive case-specific biogenic CO{sub 2} and albedo change characterization factors for inclusion in LCIA. We demonstrate our concepts and metrics with application to a case study of transportation biofuel sourced from managed boreal forest biomass in northern Europe. We derive GWP indices for three land management cases of varying site productivities to illustrate the importance and need to consider case- or region-specific characterization factors for bioenergy product systems. Uncertainties and limitations of the proposed metrics are discussed. - Highlights: Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer A method for including temporary surface albedo and carbon cycle changes in Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) is elaborated. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer Concepts are applied to a single bioenergy case whereby a range of feedstock productivities are shown to influence results. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer Results imply that case- and site-specific characterization factors can be essential for a more informed impact assessment. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer Uncertainties and limitations of the proposed methodologies are elaborated.« less