Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “BIOFUELS”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 127 records · Page 7

Energy valuation methods for biofuels in South Florida: Introduction to life cycle assessment and emergy approaches

Here, recent changes in the United States requiring the use of ethanol in gasoline for most vehicular transportation have created discussion about important issues, such as shifting the use of certain plants from food production to energy supply, related federal subsidies, effects on soil, water and atmosphere resources, tradeoffs between food production and energy production, speculation about biofuels as a possible means for energy security, potential reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions or development and expansion of biofuels industry. A sustainable approach to biofuel production requires understanding inputs (i.e., energy required to carry out a process, both natural and anthropogenic) and outputs (i.e., energy produced by that process) and cover the entire process, as well as environmental considerations that can be overlooked in a more traditional approach. This publication gives an overview of two methods for evaluating energy transformations in biofuels production: (1) Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and (2) Emergy Assessment (EA). The LCA approach involves measurements affecting greenhouse gases (GHG), which can be linked to the energy considerations used in the EA. Although these two methods have their basis in energy or GHG evaluations, their approaches can lead to a reliable judgment regarding a biofuel process. Using these two methods can ensure that the energy components are well understood and can help to evaluate the economic environmental component of a biofuel process. In turn, using these two evaluative tools will allow for decisions about biofuel processes that favor sustainability

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

An economic evaluation of alternative biofuel deployment scenarios in the USA

Energy market conditions have shifted dramatically since the USA renewable fuel standards (RFS1 in 2005; RFS2 in 2007) were enacted. The USA has transitioned from an increasing dependence on oil imports to abundant domestic oil production. In addition, increases in the use of ethanol, the main biofuel currently produced in the USA, is now limited by the blend wall constraint. Given this, the current study evaluates alternative biofuel deployment scenarios in the USA, accounting for changes in market conditions. The analysis is performed with a general equilibrium model that reflects the structure of the USA biofuel market as the transition to advanced biofuel begins. Results suggest that ethanol consumption would increase, albeit slowly, if current biofuel deployment rates of about 10% are maintained as persistently lower oil prices lead to a gradual increase in the consumption of liquid transportation fuels. Without the blend wall constraint, this study finds that the overall economic impact of a full implementation of the USA RFS2 policy is largely neutral before 2022. However, the economic impacts become slightly negative under the blend wall constraint since more expensive bio-hydrocarbons are needed to meet the RFS2 mandates. Results for a scenario with reduced advanced biofuel deployment based on current policy plans show near neutral economic impacts up to 2027. This scenario is also consistent with another scenario where the volume of bio-hydrocarbons deployed is reduced to adjust for its higher cost and energy content relative to deploying the mandated RFS2 advanced biofuel volumes as ethanol. The important role of technological change is demonstrated under pioneer and accelerated technology scenarios, with the latter leading to neutral or positive economic effects up to 2023 under most blend wall scenarios. Here, all scenarios evaluated in this study are found to have positive long-term economic benefits for the USA economy.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Trade-offs between Biofuels Energy Production, Land Use and Water Use in Florida

Objective of the presentation is to document land use and water use implications of biomass production to demonstrate the overall resources implications associated with bioethanol production for Florida’s transportation sector needs. Rationale for using biofuels (BF) is explained, so are advantages & challenges of BF production and use. Land use changes (LUC) in Florida are presented and consequences outlined. It is documented that Florida’s agricultural land is a very limited resource, with only 0.43 ac/person comparing to the global average of 1.71 ac/person. The direct relation of increased biofuels production causing increased water use is explained. Favorable climate, water resources, advanced research, traditional leading agricultural role, minor oil reserves, no refineries and increasing energy demands are the main reasons why Florida considers pursuing BF production in large scale. Eight various bioethanol crops produced in Florida were considered in this study (Miscanthus, Switchgrass, Sweet Sorghum, Corn, Elephantgrass, Sugarcane, Energycane, Eucalyptus). Biomass yield and bioethanol yield of these crops are documented. Bioethanol needs of Florida are estimated and related land requirements for the needed bioethanol production calculated. Projections for various bioethanol blends (E15 to E85) are then presented. Finally, water demand for biofuels production is quantified. It is concluded that land use requirement for production of all ethanol in E85 fuel blend in Florida is roughly the same as the total available ag land in Florida for the best yielding biofuels crops (energycane, eucalyptus). Water demand for production of all ethanol needed for E100 would increase current overall water consumption in Florida between 65% and 100% for the most common biofuels crops. Vehicular energy is only 33% of Floridians energy consumption, so even all Florida’s agricultural land was given up for biofuels, it would still produce only 33% of Florida’s total energy needs. Still, bioethanol (primarily cellulosic) produced in Florida has a potential to meet a significant portion of the State’s transportation needs. Assuming no change in food production and consumption habits in Florida, the likely result of biofuels sector expansion would be the conversion of natural lands or low-intensity agricultural lands into high-intensity biomass production and the associated increased water consumption and water quality implications.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

The Renewable Fuel Standard May Limit Overall Greenhouse Gas Savings by Corn Stover-Based Cellulosic Biofuels in the U.S. Midwest: Effects of the Regulatory Approach on Projected Emissions

The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program specifies a greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction threshold for cellulosic biofuels, while the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) program in California does not. Here, we investigate the effects of the GHG threshold under the RFS on projected GHG savings from two corn stover-based biofuel supply chain systems in the United States Midwest. The analysis is based on a techno-economic framework that minimizes ethanol selling price. The GHG threshold lowers the lifecycle GHG of ethanol: 34.39 +/- 4.92 gCO(2) MJ(-1) in the RFS-compliant system and 46.30 +/- 10.05 gCO(2) MJ1 in the non RFS-compliant system. However, hypothetical biorefinery systems complying with the RFS will not process the more GHG-intensive corn stover, and thus much less biofuel will be produced compared to the non RFS-compliant system. Thus, taken as a whole, the non RFS-compliant system would achieve more GHG savings than an RFS-compliant system: 10.7 TgCO(2) year(-1) in the non RFS-compliant system compared with 4.4 TgCO(2) year1 in the RFS-compliant system. These results suggest that the current RFS GHG reduction threshold may not be the most efficient way to carry out the purposes of the Energy Security and Independence Act in the corn stover-based biofuel system: relaxing the threshold could actually increase the overall GHG savings from corn stover-based biofuels. Therefore, the LCFS-type regulatory approach is recommended for the corn stover-based cellulosic biofuel system under the RFS program. In addition, our calculation of the GHG balance for stover-based biofuel accounts for SOC losses, while the current RFS estimates do not include effects on SOC.

CARBON, BIOMASS, VOLUME↗

Biofuels combustion*

This review describes major features of current research in renewable fuels derived from plants and from fatty acids. Recent and ongoing fundamental studies of biofuel molecular structure, oxidation reactions, and biofuel chemical properties are reviewed, in addition to combustion applications of biofuels in the major types of engines in which biofuels are used. Biofuels and their combustion are compared with combustion features of conventional petroleum-based fuels. Two main classes of biofuels are described, those consisting of small, primarily alcohol, fuels (particularly ethanol, n-butanol, and iso-pentanol) that are used primarily to replace or supplement gasoline and those derived from fatty acids and used primarily to replace or supplement conventional diesel fuels. As a result, research efforts on so-called second- and third-generation biofuels are discussed briefly.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Current Challenges in Commercially Producing Biofuels from Lignocellulosic Biomass

Biofuels that are produced from biobased materials are a good alternative to petroleum based fuels. They offer several benefits to society and the environment. Producing second generation biofuels is even more challenging than producing first generation biofuels due the complexity of the biomass and issues related to producing, harvesting, and transporting less dense biomass to centralized biorefineries. In addition to this logistic challenge, other challenges with respect to processing steps in converting biomass to liquid transportation fuel like pretreatment, hydrolysis, microbial fermentation, and fuel separation still exist and are discussed in this review. The possible coproducts that could be produced in the biorefinery and their importance to reduce the processing cost of biofuel are discussed. About $1 billion was spent in the year 2012 by the government agencies in US to meet the mandate to replace 30% existing liquid transportation fuels by 2022 which is 36 billion gallons/year. Other countries in the world have set their own targets to replace petroleum fuel by biofuels. Because of the challenges listed in this review and lack of government policies to create the demand for biofuels, it may take more time for the lignocellulosic biofuels to hit the market place than previously projected.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Global Warming Potential and Eutrophication Potential of Biofuel Feedstock Crops Produced in Florida, Measured Under Different Scenarios

The agriculture sector is in a growing need to develop greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation techniques to reduce the enhanced greenhouse effect. The challenge to the sector is not only to reduce net emissions but also increase production to meet growing demands for food, fiber, and biofuel. This study focuses on the changes in the GHG balance of three biofuel feedstock (biofuel sugarcane, energy-cane and sweet sorghum) considering changes caused by the adoption of conservationist practices such as reduced tillage, use of controlled-release fertilizers or when cultivation areas are converted from burned harvest to green harvest. Based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2006) balance and the Tools for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts (TRACI) characterization factors published by the EPA, the annual emission balance includes use energy (diesel and electricity), equipment, and ancillary materials, according to the mean annual consumption of supplies per hectare. The total amounts of GWP were 2740, 1791, and 1910 kg CO2e ha-1 y-1 for biofuel sugarcane, energy-cane and sweet sorghum, respectively, when produced with conventional tillage and sugarcane was burned prior to harvesting. Applying reduced tillage practices, the GHG emissions reduced to 13% for biofuel sugarcane, 23% for energy-cane and 8% for sweet sorghum. A similar decrease occurs when a controlled-release fertilizer practice is adopted, which helps reduce the total emission balance in 5%, 12% and 19% for biofuel sugarcane, energy-cane and sweet sorghum, respectively and a 31% average reduction in eutrophication potential. Moreover, the GHG emissions for biofuel sugarcane, with the adoption of green harvest, would result in a smaller GHG balance of 1924 kg CO2e ha-1 y-1, providing an effect strategy for GHG mitigation while still providing a profitable yield in Florida.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Drop-in biofuel production via conventional (lipid/fatty acid) and advanced (biomass) routes. Part I

Drop-in biofuels that are 'functionally identical to petroleum fuels and fully compatible with existing infrastructure' are needed for sectors such as aviation where biofuels such as bioethanol/biodiesel cannot be used. The technologies used to produce drop-in biofuels can be grouped into the four categories: oleochemical, thermochemical, biochemical, and hybrid technologies. Commercial volumes of conventional drop-in biofuels are currently produced through the oleochemical pathway, to make products such as renewable diesel and biojet fuel. However, the cost, sustainability, and availability of the lipid/fatty acid feedstocks are significant challenges that need to be addressed. In the longer-term, it is likely that commercial growth in drop-in biofuels will be based on lignocellulosic feedstocks. However, these technologies have been slow to develop and have been hampered by several technoeconomic challenges. For example, the gasification/Fischer-Tropsch (FT) synthesis route suffers from high capital costs and economies of scale difficulties, while the economical production of high quality syngas remains a significant challenge. Although pyrolysis/hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) based technologies are promising, the upgrading of pyrolysis oils to higher specification fuels has encountered several technical challenges, such as high catalyst cost and short catalyst lifespan. Biochemical routes to drop-in fuels have the advantage of producing single molecules with simple chemistry. Moreover, the high value of these molecules in other markets such as renewable chemical precursors and fragrances will limit their use for fuel. In the near-term, (1-5 years) it is likely that, 'conventional' drop-in biofuels will be produced predominantly via the oleochemical route, due to the relative simplicity and maturity of this pathway.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Harness the power of atomistic modeling and deep learning in biofuel separation

Biofuels offer a remarkable, sustainable energy source for a future of clean energy. The development of efficient biofuel separation plays a crucial role in achieving cost-effective utilization of biofuel. In this chapter, we provide an overview of the recent advancements in atomistic-level modeling and deep learning in the rational design of novel, efficient biofuel separation. The fundamental principles of quantum and statistical mechanics are covered in appropriate detail to highlight their underlying differences in theory. The methodologies of several molecular representations and deep learning algorithms applicable to biofuel separation are briefly demonstrated as well. The applications, successes, and risks of employing density functional theory, ab initio molecular dynamics, classical molecular dynamics, and deep learning are provided to showcase their recent accomplishments in biofuel separation as well as potential improvements in both methodology and application. Lastly, a vision for the future growth of these methods is illustrated.

deep learning, artificial intelligence, biofuels, ↗

Assessment of algal biofuel resource potential in the United States with consideration of regional water stress

Algae have been considered as a promising feedstock for biofuels. Because scaling-up algae biofuels production consumes significant amount of water, the impact of water use should be considered. This study evaluates algae-derived biofuel production potential in the United States (US) with consideration of regional water stress. We identified 7,075 potential sites in the US meeting land, biomass productivity and CO2 co-locating criteria using the Biomass Assessment Tool (BAT). The impact of water use for algal biofuel production in terms of water scarcity footprint is quantified using modeled 33-year site-scale water consumption from BAT and the county-level water stress indicator from the Available Water Remaining for the US (AWARE-US) metric. Long-term (20 billion gallon per year [BGY]) and near-term (5 BGY) renewable diesel (RD) production targets are considered. To select suitable algae cultivation facilities, biomass yield and water use are considered with and without a water stress constraint. We found that ranking sites based on biomass yield results in a high water use impact (24.5 thousand US equivalent billion gallons (BGYe) for the long-term RD target). If sites are instead ranked on water use efficiency, water consumption is reduced on average by 62%, with an average reduction in biomass yield by 25%. To reconcile trade-offs between biomass yield and water use impact, AWARE-US can be applied along with considering biomass yield. This strategy removes sites located in water stressed areas while keeping high productivity sites. For the 20 BGY RD target, this reduces water use impact by 55% without lowering biomass productivity or 97% with moderate reductions (4% on average) in biomass productivity, compared to the sites ranked by biomass yield alone. The results demonstrate that incorporating water stress into energy-scale algae biofuel production planning is key to achieving synergies between biofuel yield and fresh water use impact.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

A Techno-Economic Analysis of Emission Controls on Hydrocarbon Biofuel Production

Biofuels have the potential to reduce our dependency on petroleum-derived transportation fuels and decrease greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Although the overall GHG emissions from biofuels are expected to be lower when compared to those of petroleum fuels, the process of converting biomass feedstocks into biofuels emits various air pollutants, which may be subject to federal air quality regulation or emission limits. While prior research has evaluated the technical and economic feasibility of biofuel technologies, gaps still exist in understanding the regulatory issues associated with the biorefineries and their economic implications on biofuel production costs (referred to as minimum fuel selling price (MFSP) in this study). The aim of our research is to evaluate the economic impact of implementing emission reduction technologies at biorefineries and estimate the cost effectiveness of two primary control technologies that may be required for air permitting purposes. We analyze a lignocellulosic sugars-to-hydrocarbon biofuel production pathway developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and implement air emission controls in Aspen Plus to evaluate how they affect the MFSP. Results from this analysis can help inform decisions about biorefinery siting and sizing, as well as mitigate the risks associated with air permitting.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Biofuels Information Center

The purpose of the Biofuels Information Center (BIC) task is to provide relevant data, information, reports, and web-based tools to all bioenergy stakeholders. The BIC task began in FY08 to meet the requirement under Title II, Sec. 229 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) requires DOE to develop a "Biofuels and Biorefinery Information Center". The BIC task supports biofuels pages content on the EERE's most visited website - the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC http://www.afdc.energy.gov) and the Bioenergy Atlas tools (currently archived) (previous address https://maps.nrel.gov). This task results in more than 1.7 million web pageviews (an instance of an internet user visiting a webpage) per year. In FY22, the task completed the final year of the 5 year USDA Biofuels Infrastructure Partnership (BIP). The USDA BIP expanded infrastructure for E15 and/or E85 to approximately 850 stations and NREL received and reviewed data for quality analyzed all infrastructure and sales data collected by USDA. Stations are privately held and previously it was difficult to ascertain infrastructure and sales data. This unique dataset allows insight into infrastructure data (number of pumps and tanks, costs to install new equipment) and sales data (price and volume for E10, E15, E85, and diesel by month). The 2021 USDA BIP National Summary Report is with DOE for review prior to publication. Future work will include the biannual Bioenergy Industry Status Report (4 previous versions have been published) . The task also supports the principal investigator's time to engage stakeholders on infrastructure and deployment of biofuels. This includes leading, membership, and participation in the following roles: member Board of Advisors at the Fuels Institute, voting member for multiple UL standards committees, Co-Chair of the Infrastructure team at Agriculture/Auto/Ethanol, Member of Coordination Research Council's ULSD Corrosion Committee. The Principal investigator routinely responds to industry inquires to assist in deployment of biofuels regularly.

biofuels↗

Production facilities for second generation biofuels in the USA and the EU – current status and future perspectives

Second generation biofuel production facilities have been slower to reach large-scale production than was anticipated a few years ago even though in Europe, the Renewable Energy Directive has incentives for, and in the United States there are also financial incentives and, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 has targets for second generation biofuels. There have been a number of facilities that have been cancelled, but starting in 2013 it appears that significant quantities of second generation biofuels will be produced. A variety of conversion processes, thermal and biological, as well as hybrids of the two is being utilized. There will be a variety of fuels ethanol, drop-in fuels (e.g. gasoline, diesel), biodiesel, steam, electricity, bio-oil, sugars, and chemicals; and a variety of feedstocks crop residues, wood, wood wastes, energy crops, waste oils and municipal solid waste (MSW). One approach to reducing the risk of moving from first to second generation biofuel production has been to take incremental steps such as converting the cellulosic part of grains into ethanol in addition to the starch portion. Many of the second generation biofuel facilities are co-located with first generation biofuel production facilities to share infrastructure as well as trade by-products (e.g. excess steam). One of the challenges has been financing, but both private and government sources are being utilized. Private sources include internal corporate funds and debt offerings, and venture capital. Furthermore, government sources include the U.S. federal government, the European Union, European national governments, and state and local governments.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Estimates of the Global Indirect Energy-Use Emission Impacts of USA Biofuel Policy

This paper evaluates the indirect energy-use emission implications of increases in the use of biofuels in the USA between 2001 and 2010 as mandates within a dynamic global computable general equilibrium model. The study incorporates explicit markets for biofuels, petroleum and other fossil fuels, and accounts for interactions among all sectors of an 18-region global economy. It considers bilateral trade, as well as the dynamics of capital allocation and investment. Simulation results show that the biofuel mandates in the USA generate an overall reduction in global energy use and emissions over the simulation period from 2001 to 2030. Consequently, the indirect energy-use emission change or emission leakage under the mandate is negative. That is, global emission reductions are larger than the direct emission savings from replacing petroleum with biofuels under the USA RFS2 over the last decade. Under our principal scenario this enhanced the direct emission reduction from biofuels by about 66%. The global change in lifecycle energy-use emissions for this scenario was estimated to be about 93 million tons of CO2e in 2010, 45 million tons of CO2e in 2020, and an increase of 5 million tons of CO2e in 2030, relative to the baseline scenario. Sensitivity results of six alternative scenarios provided additional insights into the pattern of the regional and global effects of biofuel mandates on energy-use emissions.

02 PETROLEUM↗

Shock tube investigation of high-temperature, extremely-rich oxidation of several co-optima biofuels for spark-ignition engines

To reduce the reliance on fossil fuels in the transportation sector and increase combustion efficiency, the Co-Optima initiative from US Department of Energy identified the top 10 biofuels for downsized, boosted, spark-ignition engines. Most of these biofuels have detailed reaction mechanisms available in literature developed based on studies at temperatures lower than 1700 K and an equivalence ratio of less than five. As such, the performance of these detailed mechanisms at high temperature and extremely rich conditions are unknown. It is important to validate kinetic mechanisms at these conditions because they are conducive to soot formation. Prediction of soot by chemical kinetic models relies on the prediction of underlying benchmark species like carbon monoxide and ethylene. In this work, we conduct high temperature (1700–2050 K) and high equivalence ratio(Φ=8.6) oxidation of these biofuels, namely 2,4,4-trimethyl-1-pentene (α-diisobutylene), ethanol, cyclopentanone, methyl acetate, and 2-methylfuran, blended in ethylene behind reflected shock waves at 4–4.7 atm pressure. Carbon monoxide and ethylene time histories are measured simultaneously using a continuous feedback quantum cascade laser near 4.9 µm and a tunable CO 2 gas laser at 10.532 nm, respectively. Results show that ethanol blend forms more carbon monoxide than other biofuels and consumes ethylene faster than the biofuel blends in the temperature range considered. Overall, the performance of different mechanisms in literature are evaluated against the experimental results. The novel reaction mechanism ‘the Co-Optima model’, which includes the sub mechanisms for all the biofuels in this study, was found to be the best mechanism for the experimental conditions studied.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Ignition Delay Measurements of Four Component Model Gasolines Exploring the Impacts of Biofuels and Aromatics

This study explores the impacts of combinations of biofuel (ethanol, isobutanol and 2-methyl furan) and aromatic (toluene) compounds in a four component fuel blend, at fixed research octane number (RON) on ignition delay measured in an advanced fuel ignition delay analyzer (AFIDA 2805). Ignition delay measurements were performed over a range of temperatures from 400 to 725 °C (673 to 998 K) and two chamber pressures of 10 and 20 bar. The four component mixtures are compared to primary reference fuels at RON values of 90 and 100. The ignition delay measurements show that as the aromatic and biofuel concentrations increased, two stage ignition behavior was suppressed, at both initial chamber pressures. But both RON 100 (isooctane) and RON 90 reference fuels showed two stage ignition behavior, as did fuel mixtures with low biofuel and aromatic content. RON 90 fuels showed stronger two stage ignition behavior than RON 100 fuels, as expected. Depending on the type of biofuel in the mixture, the ignition delay at low chamber temperatures could be far greater than for the reference fuels. In particular, for the RON 100 mixtures at either 10 or 20 bar initial chamber pressure, the ignition delay at 400 °C (673 K) for the high level blend of 2-methyl furan and toluene (30 vol% of each) exhibited an ignition delay that was 10 times longer than for neat isooctane. The results show the strong non-linear octane blending response of these three biofuel compounds, especially in concert with the kinetic antagonism that toluene is known to display in mixtures with isooctane. These results have implications for the formulation of biofuel mixtures for spark ignition and advanced compression ignition engines, where this non-linear octane blending response could be exploited to improve knock resistance, or modulate the autoignition process.

2-methyl furan↗

The synergy between stakeholders for cellulosic biofuel development: Perspectives, opportunities, and barriers

While understanding individual stakeholders' perspectives on the adoption and conversion to a biofuel-based landscape has been a subject of many previous studies on biofuels, there has been relatively little attention given to understanding how the interaction between multiple stakeholders involved in biofuel development could influence the widespread adoption of biofuel production. Here, this paper analyzes the key stakeholder interactions utilizing various data sources including survey results, social media posts, and empirical and theoretical analyses. An intensive review is conducted for a number of surveys and research papers on different aspects of biofuel development such as land use choices, biorefinery and transportation, infrastructure development, consumer priorities, environmental impacts, etc. Following that, a stakeholder synergy approach is applied to synthesizing typical responses of stakeholders, such as producers, consumers, biorefineries, rural communities, and the government, and discussing how their responses influence each other's decisions and the overall system performance. Based on the findings of inadequate stakeholder synergy, it is recommended that new surveys and further research should be conducted to understand why synergy between stakeholders in biofuel development is absent. Additionally, this paper provides research perspectives, including (1) applying cutting-edge text-mining techniques to conduct sentiment analysis, and research and public attention analysis; (2) using an agent-based model to simulate stakeholder interactions and understand the factors that influence stakeholder synergy and the emergence of a bioeconomy.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

The influence of catalysts on biofuel life cycle analysis (LCA)

Catalysts play an important role in biofuel production but are rarely included in biofuel life cycle analysis (LCA). In this work, we estimate the cradle-to-gate energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of Pt/γ-Al 2 O 3 , CoMo/γ-Al 2 O 3 , and ZSM-5, catalysts that could be used in processes to convert biomass to biofuels. We also consider the potential impacts of catalyst recovery and recycling. Integrating the energy and environmental impacts of CoMo/γ-Al 2 O 3 and ZSM-5 into an LCA of renewable gasoline produced via in-situ and ex-situ fast pyrolysis of a blended woody feedstock revealed that the ZSM-5, with cradle-to-gate GHG emissions of 7.7 kg CO 2 e/kg, could influence net life-cycle GHG emissions of the renewable gasoline (1.7 gCO 2 e/MJ for the in-situ process, 1.2 gCO 2 e/MJ for the ex-situ process) by up to 14% depending on the loading rate. CoMo/γ-Al 2 O 3 had a greater GHG intensity (9.6 kg CO 2 e/kg) than ZSM-5, however, it contributed approximately only 1% to the life-cycle GHG emissions of the renewable gasoline because of the small amount of this catalyst needed per kg of biofuel produced. As a result, given that catalysts can contribute significantly to biofuel life-cycle GHG emissions depending on the GHG intensity of their production and their consumption rates, biofuel LCAs should consider the potential influence of catalysts on LCA results.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗