Techno-economic analysis of decentralized biomass processing depots

Lamers, Patrick; Roni, Mohammad S.; Tumuluru, Jaya S.; Jacobson, Jacob J.; Cafferty, Kara G.; Hansen, Jason K.; Kenney, Kevin; Teymouri, Farzaneh; Bals, Bryan

doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2015.07.009

Title: Techno-economic analysis of decentralized biomass processing depots

Full Record
Other Related Research

Abstract

Decentralized biomass processing facilities, known as biomass depots, may be necessary to achieve feedstock cost, quantity, and quality required to grow the future U.S. bioeconomy. In this paper, we assess three distinct depot configurations for technical difference and economic performance. The depot designs were chosen to compare and contrast a suite of capabilities that a depot could perform ranging from conventional pelleting to sophisticated pretreatment technologies. Our economic analyses indicate that depot processing costs are likely to range from ~US$30 to US$63 per dry metric tonne (Mg), depending upon the specific technology implemented and the energy consumption for processing equipment such as grinders and dryers. We conclude that the benefits of integrating depots into the overall biomass feedstock supply chain will outweigh depot processing costs and that incorporation of this technology should be aggressively pursued.

Authors:: Lamers, Patrick; Roni, Mohammad S.; Tumuluru, Jaya S.; Jacobson, Jacob J.; Cafferty, Kara G.; Hansen, Jason K.; Kenney, Kevin; Teymouri, Farzaneh; Bals, Bryan

Publication Date:: Thu Oct 01 00:00:00 EDT 2015

Research Org.:: Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Idaho Falls, ID (United States)

Sponsoring Org.:: USDOE

OSTI Identifier:: 1206803

Alternate Identifier(s):: OSTI ID: 1207284

Grant/Contract Number:: AC07–05ID14517

Resource Type:: Published Article

Journal Name:: Bioresource Technology

Additional Journal Information:: Journal Name: Bioresource Technology Journal Volume: 194 Journal Issue: C; Journal ID: ISSN 0960-8524

Publisher:: Elsevier

Country of Publication:: United Kingdom

Language:: English

Subject:: 09 BIOMASS FUELS; biomass depot; feedstock logistics; advanced biomass supply system; biorefinery; bioeconomy

Citation Formats


                    Lamers, Patrick, Roni, Mohammad S., Tumuluru, Jaya S., Jacobson, Jacob J., Cafferty, Kara G., Hansen, Jason K., Kenney, Kevin, Teymouri, Farzaneh, and Bals, Bryan. Techno-economic analysis of decentralized biomass processing depots.  United Kingdom: N. p., 2015. 
Web.  doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2015.07.009.

Copy to clipboard


                    Lamers, Patrick, Roni, Mohammad S., Tumuluru, Jaya S., Jacobson, Jacob J., Cafferty, Kara G., Hansen, Jason K., Kenney, Kevin, Teymouri, Farzaneh, & Bals, Bryan. Techno-economic analysis of decentralized biomass processing depots.  United Kingdom.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.07.009

Copy to clipboard


                    Lamers, Patrick, Roni, Mohammad S., Tumuluru, Jaya S., Jacobson, Jacob J., Cafferty, Kara G., Hansen, Jason K., Kenney, Kevin, Teymouri, Farzaneh, and Bals, Bryan. Thu .  
"Techno-economic analysis of decentralized biomass processing depots".  United Kingdom.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.07.009.

Copy to clipboard


                    
@article{osti_1206803,

  title        = {Techno-economic analysis of decentralized biomass processing depots},

  author       = {Lamers, Patrick and Roni, Mohammad S. and Tumuluru, Jaya S. and Jacobson, Jacob J. and Cafferty, Kara G. and Hansen, Jason K. and Kenney, Kevin and Teymouri, Farzaneh and Bals, Bryan},

  abstractNote = {Decentralized biomass processing facilities, known as biomass depots, may be necessary to achieve feedstock cost, quantity, and quality required to grow the future U.S. bioeconomy. In this paper, we assess three distinct depot configurations for technical difference and economic performance. The depot designs were chosen to compare and contrast a suite of capabilities that a depot could perform ranging from conventional pelleting to sophisticated pretreatment technologies. Our economic analyses indicate that depot processing costs are likely to range from ~US$30 to US$63 per dry metric tonne (Mg), depending upon the specific technology implemented and the energy consumption for processing equipment such as grinders and dryers. We conclude that the benefits of integrating depots into the overall biomass feedstock supply chain will outweigh depot processing costs and that incorporation of this technology should be aggressively pursued.},

  doi          = {10.1016/j.biortech.2015.07.009},

  journal      = {Bioresource Technology},

  number       = C,

  volume       = 194,

  place        = {United Kingdom},

  year         = {Thu Oct 01 00:00:00 EDT 2015},

  month        = {Thu Oct 01 00:00:00 EDT 2015}

}

Copy to clipboard

Journal Article:

Free Publicly Available Full Text

Publisher's Version of Record
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.07.009

Other availability

Search WorldCat to find libraries that may hold this journal

Citation Metrics:

Cited by: 103 works

Citation information provided by
Web of Science

Save / Share:

Export Metadata

Save to My Library

Similar Records in DOE PAGES and OSTI.GOV collections:

Techno-Economic Analysis of decentralized preprocessing systems for fast pyrolysis biorefineries with blended feedstocks in the southeastern United States

Journal Article Lan, Kai ; Ou, Longwen ; Park, Sunkyu ; ... - Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

This study evaluated the economic feasibility of fast pyrolysis biorefineries fed with blended pine residues and switchgrass in the Southeastern U.S. with different supply chain design. Previous techno-economic analyses (TEA) have focused on either blended biomass or decentralized preprocessing without investigating the impacts of varied process parameters, technology options, and real-world biomass distribution. This study fills the literature gap by modeling scenarios for different biomass blending ratios, biorefinery and preprocessing site (socalled depot) capacities, and alternative preprocessing technologies. High-resolution, real-world geospatial data were analyzed using Geographic Information Systems to facilitate supply chain design and TEA. For a decentralized system, themore »« less
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.110881

Full Text Available
EISA (Energy Independence and Security Act) compliant ethanol fuel from corn stover in a depot-based decentralized system: EISA-Compliant Ethanol Fuel from Corn Stover in a Depot-Based Decentralized System

Journal Article Kim, Seungdo ; Zhang, Xuesong ; Dale, Bruce E. ; ... - Biofuels, Bioproducts & Biorefining

Abstract Cellulosic biofuels face significant problems of feedstock aggregation and logistics leading to poor economies of scale. The current model is for relatively small biorefineries using feedstock gathered locally. Here a depot‐based decentralized biorefinery system is explored to estimate the US Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) compliant corn stover ethanol production potential in the US Midwest. Depots serve to aggregate, pretreat, and densify biomass (via pellets) and thereby enable very large biorefineries using a decentralized system to collect these pellets. Such a corn‐stover based decentralized system using depots would establish one or two very large‐scale decentralized biorefineries capable ofmore »« less
Cited by 7
https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.1899

Full Text Available
EISA (Energy Independence and Security Act) compliant ethanol fuel from corn stover in a depot-based decentralized system

Journal Article Kim, Seungdo ; Zhang, Xuesong ; Dale, Bruce E. ; ... - Biofuels, Bioproducts & Biorefining

Cellulosic biofuels face significant problems of feedstock aggregation and logistics leading to poor economies of scale. The current model is based on relatively small biorefineries using locally-gathered feedstocks. Here, we examine the potential capacity of a hypothetically distributed, depot-based, biorefinery system to produce cellulosic ethanol from corn stover in the United States Midwest. The local depots serve to aggregate, pretreat and densify biomass (via pellets), which are collected, transported, and fed to a few very large, cellulosic ethanol biorefineries. We found that a corn stover-based depot system would help establish one or two very large-scale biorefineries capable of processing aboutmore »« less
https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.1899
Herbaceous Feedstock 2019 State of Technology Report

Technical Report Roni, Mohammad Sadekuzzaman ; Lin, Yingqian ; Griffel, Mike ; ...

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) promotes the production of advanced liquid transportation fuels from lignocellulosic biomass by funding fundamental and applied research that advances the State of Technology (SOT). As part of its involvement with this mission, Idaho National Laboratory (INL) completes an annual SOT report for biomass feedstock logistics. This report summarizes supply system impacts of Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO)-funded research and development efforts at INL and elsewhere (such as the High-Tonnage Feedstock Logistics projects (Webb et al. 2013a, Webb et al. 2013b, Webb et al. 2013c, Webb and Sokhansanj 2014, Sokhansanj et al. 2014)) that lead tomore »« less
https://doi.org/10.2172/1607754

Full Text Available
Impacts of uncertain feedstock quality on the economic feasibility of fast pyrolysis biorefineries with blended feedstocks and decentralized preprocessing sites in the Southeastern United States

Journal Article Lan, Kai ; Park, Sunkyu ; Kelley, Stephen S. ; ... - Global Change Biology. Bioenergy

Abstract This study performs techno‐economic analysis and Monte Carlo simulations (MCS) to explore the effects that variations in biomass feedstock quality have on the economic feasibility of fast pyrolysis biorefineries using decentralized preprocessing sites (i.e., depots that produce pellets). Two biomass resources in the Southeastern United States, that is, pine residues and switchgrass, were examined as feedstocks. A scenario analysis was conducted for an array of different combinations, including different pellet ash control levels, feedstock blending ratios, different biorefinery capacities, and different biorefinery on‐stream capacities, followed by a comparison with the traditional centralized system. MCS results show that, with depotmore »« less
https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12752

Similar Records