Environmental Impacts of Biofuels: Lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions Mississippi State University January 28 2014 Valerie Thomas School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, and School of Public Policy Biofuel motivation 1 Reduce risk of oil embargos, price spikes, geopolitical dependence Middle East Conflict Six day war - June 5 1967 Arab oil embargo - June 6 Yom Kippur War - 1973 Arab Oil Embargo - 1973 Iranian Revolution - 1979 Crude oil prices since 1861 BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2010 Biofuel motivation 2 Support US farmers Similar motivation for ethanol production from sugar cane in Brazil Biofuel motivation 3 Reduce greenhouse gas emissions Coal: C135H96O9NS … (or CH for short) Petroleum (octane): C8H18 … Natural Gas (methane): CH4 C +O2 ® CO2 1 kg C corresponds to 44/12 kg CO2 1 kg uncombusted CH4 corresponds to 25 kg CO2e in 100 year time horizon. Earth’s Spectrum Shows GHG effects Archer, Chp. 4, Greenhouse Gases Water is a Greenhouse Gas Water Excitation Levels Archer, Chp. 4, Greenhouse Gases CO2 excitation levels Archer, Chp. 4, Greenhouse Gases Effectiveness of Greenhouse Gases Depends on Their Radiative Efficiency and Time Dependent Decay Radiative Efficiency: W/m2/kg Time dependent decay: x(t) Selected Greenhouse Gases The CO2 response function used in this report is based on the revised version of the Bern Carbon cycle model used in Chapter 10 of this report (Bern2.5CC; Joos et al. 2001) using a background CO2 concentration value of 378 ppm. The decay of a pulse of CO2 with time t is given by 3 a0 + å ai e-t/t i i=1 where a0 = 0.217, a1 = 0.259, a2 = 0.338, a3 = 0.186, τ1 = 172.9 years, τ2 = 18.51 years, IPCC 2007 and τ = 1.186 years. Global Warming Potential TH is time horizon, a is radiative efficiency of increase of one unit of substance (W/m2/kg); x and r are time dependent decay of substance x and reference gas r. Selected Greenhouse Gases IPCC 2007 Atmospheric CO2 for 400,000 years Carbon dioxide concentrations in Antarctica over 400,000 years. “The graph combines ice core data with recent samples of Antarctic air. The 100,000-year ice age cycle is clearly recognizable.” (Data sources: Petit et al. 1999; Keeling and Whorf 2004; GLOBALVIEW-CO2 2007.) Anthropogenic Carbon Emissions Boden et al. 2011 Mauna Loa Data Set Biofuel motivation 3 Reduce greenhouse gas emissions Biomass is often credited with zero greenhouse gas emissions www.wfpa.org Life Cycle Assessment Assessment of the environmental impacts of a product or service including • raw material extraction, • manufacturing, • distribution, • use, and • end of life. US Renewable Fuel Standard US EISA US Renewable Fuel Stadnard (RFS2) Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Requirements Compared to Petroleum Fuels • advanced renewable fuels < 50 % • cellulosic renewable fuels < 40 % • funding for development < 20 % Lifecycle Energy and GHG Emissions from Ethanol Produced by Algae Ron Chance, Matthew Realff, Valerie Thomas Zushou Hu, Dexin Luo, Dong Gu Choi School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, and School of Industrial and Systems Engineering System Boundary for LCA LCA Results Depend on Initial Ethanol Concentration Analysis Framework: Consider Baseline and Two Extensions Baseline Extension 1 Extension 2 Initial Concentration 1 wt% Initial Concentration 0.5~5.0 wt% Initial Concentration 0.5~5.0 wt% External Energy Supply CHP + Natural gas Grid Electricity+ Natural gas CHP + Solar thermal + Natural gas External Energy Supply CHP + Natural gas Grid Electricity+ Natural gas CHP + Solar thermal + Natural gas External Energy Supply CHP+ Natural gas Heat Exchange Efficiency 80% Heat Exchange Efficiency 80% Heat Exchange Efficiency 90% 1 Production Rate Fertilizer Energy and GHG emissions Ethanol: 56,000 l/hectare Waste Biomass: 0.97 ton/hectare Algae Composition (1) Nitrogen: Phosphorous: 8 wt% 0.3 wt% Energy and GHG emissions Nitrogen: Phosphorous: Fertilizer Parameters (2-3) Nitrous Dioxide: 0.0017 MJ/MJEtOH 0.11 g CO2e/MJEtOH 0.000017 MJ/ MJEtOH 0.0026 g CO2e/MJEtOH 0.1 g CO2e/MJEtOH Nitrogen: 23.7 MJ/kg Nitrogen: 1.675 kg CO2e/kg Phosphorous: 5.78 MJ/kg Phosphorous: 0.97 kg CO2e/kg Nitrous Dioxide: 0.005 g N2O /g N (1) ECN, Phyllis: The Composition of Biomass and Waste. 2010. http://www.ecn.nl/phyllis/ (2) Kongshaug, G., Energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in fertilizer production. IFA Technical Conference, Marrakech, Morocco, 1998. (3) US DOE, Agricultural Chemicals: Fertilizers, Energy and Environmental Profile of the U.S. Chemical Industry. Energy and Environmental Profile of the U.S. Chemical Industry, Chapter 5. Technologies, O. o. I. 2000 Bioreactor Production and Disposal 2 Assumptions 1 Photo-bioreactor systems to be replaced every 5 years; 2 No GHG emissions from drained bioreactors; Production of Polyethylene (1) Energy use: GHG emissions: Dimension of the PBR 76 MJ/kg 1.9 kg CO2e /kg Length: Circumference: Wall thickness: Results Energy use: 0.05 MJ/MJEtOH GHG emissions: 1.3 g CO2e/MJEtOH (1) GREET, ANL 50 feet 12.6 feet 5~10 mil Ethanol Distribution and Combustion Assumptions from GREET Model 3 1 40% barge: 520 miles 0.54 MJ/ton-mile 2 40% railroad tanks: 800 miles 0.36 MJ/ton-mile 3 20% trucks: 80 miles 0.9 MJ/ton-mile 4 0.0031 g CH4 and 0.0024 g N2O per MJ of ethanol combusted Results Distribution: Combustion: 0.017 MJ/MJEtOH 1.6 g CO2e/MJEtOH 0.84 g CO2e/MJEtOH Freight Truck Energy Intensity 8000 7000 Btu/ton-mile 6000 5000 Single Unit Truck 4000 Combination Truck 3000 2000 1 mile = 1.6 km 1 ton = 0.907 tonnes 1 Btu = 1055 J 1000 0 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Air freight energy intensity 80,000 70,000 Btu/ton-mile 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Freight energy intensity 4,500 4,000 Btu/ton-mile 3,500 3,000 Truck 2,500 Rail 2,000 Water Pipeline 1,500 1,000 500 0 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 CO2 Delivery and Water Consumption Assumptions 4 1 Source water pumped from a depth of 100 meters; 2 Water is circulated to the power plant 6 km away; 3 Reverse osmosis seawater desalination; (1) 4 No water loss through evaporation. Results Water pumping: Carbonation: Water consumption Reverse osmosis: 0.002 kWh/MJEtOH 0.00090 kWh/MJEtOH 0.926 l/lEtOH 9.5×10-5 kWh/MJEtOH (1) National Research Council Review of the Desalination and Water Purification Technology Roadmap; Washington, DC, 2004 5 6 7 Ethanol Separation Process Ethanol Separation Process Compression Energy 5 Processes: Vapor Compression Steam Stripping and Distillation Inputs 1 HYSYS simulation P 2 T 0.051 MJ/MJEtOH Efficiencies 1 nRT Pout 1 Wadiabatic 1 Pin 0.055 MJ/MJEtOH Ethanol Separation Process Evaporation Energy & Molecular Sieve 6 7 Evaporation Processes: Vapor Compression Steam Stripping Inputs 1 wt% 2 T HYSYS simulation E evap mi v H(T) i Efficiencies 0.16 MJ/MJEtOH 1 heat exchange 2 column eff. 0.17 MJ/MJEtOH i Final Purification Processes: Molecular Sieve - The total heat requirement : 1 ~ 2 MJ/kgEtOH. (1) - In this study : 1.5 MJ/kgEtOH, or 0.056 MJ/MJEtOH (1) Cho, J.; Park, J.; Jeon, J.-k., Comparison of three- and two-column configurations in ethanol dehydration using azeotropic distillation. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. (Seoul, Repub. Korea) 2006, 12 (2), 206-215. Baseline Energy Use per MJ of Ethanol Produced for Process Steps at 1wt% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Baseline GHG Emissions for 1wt% at 80% heat exchange efficiency 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Baseline GHG Emissions for 1wt% at 80% and 90% heat exchange efficiency 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 External Energy Supply Scenarios S1 Electrical energy U.S. grid electricity Process heat Natural gas S2 Electrical energy and heat Natural gas fueled CHP Extra Process heat Natural gas Electrical energy and heat Natural gas fueled CHP S3 Process heat 14 hr Natural gas 10 hr Solar thermal 700 g CO2e/kWhe 50.38 g CO2e/MJEtOH 478 g CO2e/kWhe 50.38 g CO2e/MJEtOH 478 g CO2e/kWhe 50.38 g CO2e/MJEtOH 0 g CO2e/MJEtOH Lifecycle GHG Emissions for 80% and 90% heat exchange efficiencies 0.5wt%~5wt% g CO2e/MJ Ethanol DOE target of 40% of the gasoline emission DOE target of 20% of the gasoline emission Ethanol wt % from phtobioreactors Life Cycle Inventory Assessment How does the ethanol concentration and mix of fuels to generate heat and power influence the ability of the system to meet RFS? Natural Gas + US Grid Natural Gas CHP Natural Gas CHP + Solar Thermal Conclusion and Discussion DOE 40% goal (36.5 g CO2e/MJEtOH) achievable by all three energy supply scenarios and initial concentration as low as 0.5% DOE 20% goal (18.3 g CO2e/MJEtOH) more challenging Advantage 1: the potential to locate production facilities on low-value, arid, nonagricultural land, and the resulting avoidance of competition with agriculture Advantage 2: no-harvest strategy has the potential for more energy efficient separations, lower fertilizer requirements, and lower water usage in comparison to other algae biofuel processes. Technical challenge: the algae- produced ethanol system does not produce extra biomass waste that can be used as energy to power the process Does making ethanol use more fossil energy and release more greenhouse gases than the gasoline it is designed to replace? Farrell et al. 2006. Ethanol Can Contribute to Energy and Environmental Goals. Science 311:506. Sources of biomass carbon emissions • Production, transport use fossil fuel • Soil carbon loss (direct or indirect) • Regeneration time Sample Bioenergy Lifecycle CO2e Emissions Thomas and Liu 2013 Assessment of Alternative Fibers Valerie Thomas, Wenman Liu, Norman Marsolan Institute for Paper Science and Technology School of Industrial and Systems Engineering School of Public Policy Georgia Institute of Technology Arundo donax Perennial Grown for bioenergy High yield Low input Invasiveness Kenaf Annual Grown for fiber Medium yield Low input Bamboo Perennial Widely grown in China High yield Low input Invasiveness Wheat Straw Agricultural residue No additional: - land use - fertilizers - pesticides - irrigation Northern softwood Biodiversity Carbon storage Low input Bamboo as alternative Recycled Fiber Moderate - energy use - carbon footprint - environmental impact Kenaf, arundo, wheat straw as alternatives What drives the results • • • • • • • • Yield Irrigation Fertilizers Pesticides Agricultural Energy Use Invasiveness Biodiversity Pulping process change Preliminary Comparison: Yield Preliminary Comparison: Water Deinked Pulp irrigation Northern softwood process water Bamboo Arundo donax Kenaf Wheat straw 0 100 200 300 400 m3/ton 500 600 700 Preliminary Comparison: Nitrogen Fertilizer Other Deinked Pulp Kengro Northern softwood GTP Bamboo KC China Arundo donax Kenaf Wheat straw (10%) 0 20 40 60 80 kg N/ton 100 120 Eutrophication, energy input, greenhouse gas emissions Standard Methods Provide • • • • • • Land use Fossil fuel energy use Freshwater use – Irrigation and Processing Greenhouse gases from energy and chemicals Eutrophication Ecotoxicity Preliminary Results – Illustrative Only Multiple Impact Categories Net greenhouse gas emissions from each fiber option under a 100-year time horizon 3000 2500 Landfill emissions Biogenic to mill 2000 1500 Transport Agriculture 1000 Sum total 500 0 Northern softwood Bamboo Recycled fiber Wheat straw (10%) Kenaf (35%) -500 Arundo donax kg CO2e/t pulp Pulping Net greenhouse gas emissions from each fiber option under a 500-year time horizon 1000 600 Landfill emissions 400 Biogenic to mill 200 Pulping 0 Transport -200 Agriculture -400 Sum total -600 -800 Northern softwood Bamboo Recycled fiber Wheat straw (10%) Kenaf (35%) -1000 Arundo donax kg CO2e/t pulp 800 Biodiversity Driver for northern forest protection – Effect from reducing northern softwood harvesting – Effect from growing bamboo on southern timberland – Effects of kenaf and arundo Species richness, Ecosystem scarcity, Ecosystem vulnerability Carbon storage Driver for northern forest protection • Effect from reducing northern softwood harvesting • Effect from growing bamboo on southern timberland • Effects of kenaf and arundo Carbon storage in soils is known to be very highly variable. Biogenic Global Warming Potentials Data from Guest et al. J. Indust. Ecol. 2012. LCA of paper from alternative fibers