DOE PAGES title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Life-cycle impact and exergy based resource use assessment of torrefied and non-torrefied briquette use for heat and electricity generation

Abstract

Forest residue biomass can be used as bioenergy feedstock, however, issues associated with its properties including low density and high moisture content constrains its valorization. Using mobile conversion technologies that can operate in remote areas and are capable of converting forest residues into high quality energy products can address the issues associated with its valorization for renewable energy production. This study evaluated environmental sustainability of using an integrated novel system of semi-mobile biomass conversion technologies (BCTs) to utilize low-value forest residue biomass as high value bioenergy products. A cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment (LCA) and resource use assessment on a unit-process level was conducted for two bio-products: nontorrefied briquettes (NTB) and torrefied briquettes (TOB). Their use for production of useful thermal energy in wood stoves for domestic heating and electricity at power plants were investigated along with their alternatives. The analyses were performed with SimaPro 8.5 using the DATASMART database. The impact assessment results showed a notable decrease in global warming (GW) impact when substituting fossil fuels with these two bio-products. Specifically, for domestic heating on an equivalent energy basis, a 50% substitution of propane with NTB and TOB showed GHG emission reductions of 46% and 41%, respectively. For electricity generation,more » 10% cofiring at coal power plant with NTB and TOB showed GHG emission reductions of 6% and 8%, respectively. For the TOB supply chain, a large portion of the GW impact of the came from the torrefaction process and followed by the drying process. This was due to the propane use in these processes. Comparative analysis showed that near-woods biomass conversion for TOB production instead of processing feedstock at an in-town facility with access to grid electricity found 48%–55% lower GW impact for both electricity and heat generation scenarios, respectively. Resourced footprint analysis showed that most exergy extraction from the natural environment came from the drying process for NTB supply chain. In the TOB product system, torrefaction was the major contributor.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [1]
  1. USDA Forest Service Forest Products Lab., Madison, WI (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Humboldt State Univ., Arcata, CA (United States); Oak Ridge Associated Univ., Oak Ridge, TN (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Transportation Office. Bioenergy Technologies Office; USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
1799204
Alternate Identifier(s):
OSTI ID: 1564318
Grant/Contract Number:  
EE0006297; AC05-06OR23100
Resource Type:
Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Journal of Cleaner Production
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 233; Journal ID: ISSN 0959-6526
Publisher:
Elsevier
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
09 BIOMASS FUELS; torrefaction; wood briquettes; life cycle assessment; resource use assessment; exergetic life cycle assessment; bioenergy

Citation Formats

Alanya-Rosenbaum, Sevda, and Bergman, Richard D. Life-cycle impact and exergy based resource use assessment of torrefied and non-torrefied briquette use for heat and electricity generation. United States: N. p., 2019. Web. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.298.
Alanya-Rosenbaum, Sevda, & Bergman, Richard D. Life-cycle impact and exergy based resource use assessment of torrefied and non-torrefied briquette use for heat and electricity generation. United States. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.298
Alanya-Rosenbaum, Sevda, and Bergman, Richard D. Sat . "Life-cycle impact and exergy based resource use assessment of torrefied and non-torrefied briquette use for heat and electricity generation". United States. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.298. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1799204.
@article{osti_1799204,
title = {Life-cycle impact and exergy based resource use assessment of torrefied and non-torrefied briquette use for heat and electricity generation},
author = {Alanya-Rosenbaum, Sevda and Bergman, Richard D.},
abstractNote = {Forest residue biomass can be used as bioenergy feedstock, however, issues associated with its properties including low density and high moisture content constrains its valorization. Using mobile conversion technologies that can operate in remote areas and are capable of converting forest residues into high quality energy products can address the issues associated with its valorization for renewable energy production. This study evaluated environmental sustainability of using an integrated novel system of semi-mobile biomass conversion technologies (BCTs) to utilize low-value forest residue biomass as high value bioenergy products. A cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment (LCA) and resource use assessment on a unit-process level was conducted for two bio-products: nontorrefied briquettes (NTB) and torrefied briquettes (TOB). Their use for production of useful thermal energy in wood stoves for domestic heating and electricity at power plants were investigated along with their alternatives. The analyses were performed with SimaPro 8.5 using the DATASMART database. The impact assessment results showed a notable decrease in global warming (GW) impact when substituting fossil fuels with these two bio-products. Specifically, for domestic heating on an equivalent energy basis, a 50% substitution of propane with NTB and TOB showed GHG emission reductions of 46% and 41%, respectively. For electricity generation, 10% cofiring at coal power plant with NTB and TOB showed GHG emission reductions of 6% and 8%, respectively. For the TOB supply chain, a large portion of the GW impact of the came from the torrefaction process and followed by the drying process. This was due to the propane use in these processes. Comparative analysis showed that near-woods biomass conversion for TOB production instead of processing feedstock at an in-town facility with access to grid electricity found 48%–55% lower GW impact for both electricity and heat generation scenarios, respectively. Resourced footprint analysis showed that most exergy extraction from the natural environment came from the drying process for NTB supply chain. In the TOB product system, torrefaction was the major contributor.},
doi = {10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.298},
journal = {Journal of Cleaner Production},
number = ,
volume = 233,
place = {United States},
year = {Sat Jun 01 00:00:00 EDT 2019},
month = {Sat Jun 01 00:00:00 EDT 2019}
}

Journal Article:

Citation Metrics:
Cited by: 10 works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science

Save / Share:

Works referenced in this record:

Combustion, cofiring and emissions characteristics of torrefied biomass in a drop tube reactor
journal, August 2015


Life‐cycle assessment of torrefied coppice willow co‐firing with lignite coal in an existing pulverized coal boiler
journal, June 2017

  • Woytiuk, Kurt; Sanscartier, David; Amichev, Beyhan Y.
  • Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining, Vol. 11, Issue 5
  • DOI: 10.1002/bbb.1788

Comparative cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of wood pellet production with torrefaction
journal, January 2015


Biomass for industrial applications: The role of torrefaction
journal, October 2017


Techno-economic and environmental assessments of storing woodchips and pellets for bioenergy applications
journal, December 2018

  • Sahoo, Kamalakanta; Bilek, E. M. (Ted); Mani, Sudhagar
  • Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 98
  • DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2018.08.055

Data quality management for life cycle inventories—an example of using data quality indicators
journal, January 1996


Biomass co-firing options on the emission reduction and electricity generation costs in coal-fired power plants
journal, January 2011


Critical Review of Health Impacts of Wildfire Smoke Exposure
journal, September 2016

  • Reid, Colleen E.; Brauer, Michael; Johnston, Fay H.
  • Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 124, Issue 9
  • DOI: 10.1289/ehp.1409277

Demonstration of a Pilot-Scale Plant for Biomass Torrefaction and Briquetting
journal, January 2018

  • Severy, Mark A.; Chamberlin, Charles E.; Eggink, Anthony J.
  • Applied Engineering in Agriculture, Vol. 34, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.13031/aea.12376

A Comparative Life-Cycle Assessment of Briquetting Logging Residues and Lumber Manufacturing Coproducts in Western United States
journal, January 2018

  • Alanya-Rosenbaum, Sevda; Bergman, Richard D.; Ganguly, Indroneil
  • Applied Engineering in Agriculture, Vol. 34, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.13031/aea.12378

Waste To Wisdom: Utilizing Forest Residues for the Production of Bioenergy and Biobased Products
journal, January 2018

  • Han, Han-Sup; Jacobson, Arne; Bilek, E. M. (Ted)
  • Applied Engineering in Agriculture, Vol. 34, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.13031/aea.12774

Not Just Lumber—Using Wood in the Sustainable Future of Materials, Chemicals, and Fuels
journal, July 2016


Emission of Inorganic PM 10 from the Combustion of Torrefied Biomass under Pulverized-Fuel Conditions
journal, January 2015

  • Yani, Syamsuddin; Gao, Xiangpeng; Wu, Hongwei
  • Energy & Fuels, Vol. 29, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1021/ef5023237

Performance Analysis of a Biomass Gasifier Genset at Varying Operating Conditions
journal, January 2018

  • Palmer, Kyle D.; Severy, Mark A.; Chamberlin, Charles E.
  • Applied Engineering in Agriculture, Vol. 34, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.13031/aea.12414

A review of biomass densification systems to develop uniform feedstock commodities for bioenergy application
journal, October 2011

  • Tumuluru, Jaya Shankar; Wright, Christopher T.; Hess, J. Richard
  • Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining, Vol. 5, Issue 6
  • DOI: 10.1002/bbb.324

Processing and sorting forest residues: Cost, productivity and managerial impacts
journal, October 2016


A review on torrefied biomass pellets as a sustainable alternative to coal in power generation
journal, December 2014

  • Nunes, L. J. R.; Matias, J. C. O.; Catalão, J. P. S.
  • Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 40
  • DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.181

Global emission hotspots of coal power generation
journal, February 2019


Evaluation of environmental impacts of harvest residue-based bioenergy using radiative forcing analysis
journal, October 2014

  • Pierobon, Francesca; Ganguly, Indroneil; Anfodillo, Tommaso
  • The Forestry Chronicle, Vol. 90, Issue 05
  • DOI: 10.5558/tfc2014-120

How to Conduct a Proper Sensitivity Analysis in Life Cycle Assessment: Taking into Account Correlations within LCI Data and Interactions within the LCA Calculation Model
journal, December 2014

  • Wei, Wei; Larrey-Lassalle, Pyrene; Faure, Thierry
  • Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 49, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.1021/es502128k

Domestic heating from forest logging residues: environmental risks and benefits
journal, July 2015


Environmental performance of wood pellets' production through life cycle analysis
journal, May 2016


Cumulative Exergy Extraction from the Natural Environment (CEENE): a comprehensive Life Cycle Impact Assessment method for resource accounting
journal, December 2007

  • Dewulf, J.; Bösch, M. E.; Meester, B. De
  • Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 41, Issue 24
  • DOI: 10.1021/es0711415

Techno-economic analysis of producing solid biofuels and biochar from forest residues using portable systems
journal, February 2019


Environmental evaluation of biomass pelleting using life cycle assessment
journal, January 2016


Life cycle assessment of direct co-firing of torrefied and/or pelletised woody biomass with coal in The Netherlands
journal, October 2014


An assessment of the torrefaction of North American pine and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions
journal, April 2016


Life-Cycle Assessment of coal–biomass based electricity in Chile: Focus on using raw vs torrefied wood
journal, December 2015

  • Arteaga-Pérez, Luis E.; Vega, Mabel; Rodríguez, Lina C.
  • Energy for Sustainable Development, Vol. 29
  • DOI: 10.1016/j.esd.2015.10.004

A review of biomass co-firing in North America
journal, December 2014


Carbon footprints of heating oil and LPG heating systems
journal, July 2012


The health impacts and economic value of wildland fire episodes in the U.S.: 2008–2012
journal, January 2018


Performance of a Residential Pellet Combustor Operating on Raw and Torrefied Spruce and Spruce-Derived Residues
journal, July 2013

  • Khalil, Roger A.; Bach, Quang-Vu; Skreiberg, Øyvind
  • Energy & Fuels, Vol. 27, Issue 8
  • DOI: 10.1021/ef400595f

Comparison of the energy and environmental performances of nine biomass/coal co-firing pathways
journal, November 2012