Comparison of integration options for gasification-based biofuel production systems – Economic and greenhouse gas emission implications

Holmgren, Kristina; Berntsson, Thore; Andersson, Eva; Rydberg, Tomas

doi:10.1016/j.energy.2016.05.059

Cited by 31 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is in line with the assumptions for maximum gasifier capacity made in Holmgren et al 8 A sensitivity analysis is included, in which two and six units are used. It was assumed that one gasification unit would be used for the 100 MW SNG plant, whereas for the 300 MW SNG plant, three units were assumed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 80%

“…It was assumed that one gasification unit would be used for the 100 MW SNG plant, whereas for the 300 MW SNG plant, three units were assumed. This is in line with the assumptions for maximum gasifier capacity made in Holmgren et al 8 A sensitivity analysis is included, in which two and six units are used.…”

mentioning

confidence: 80%

“…A more detailed description of the methodology and calculations behind the energy balances can be found in Holmgren et al 21 It was assumed that it is possible to deliver district heat all year (the same amount of hours as the SNG plant is in operation). The data are primarily based on Holmgren et al 8 and Heyne and Harvey 43 (for specific references, see Table A5). 42 Therefore, a sensitivity analysis is included in which the operation was reduced to 5000 h/y.…”

Section: Sng Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table A5 presents the investment cost functions used. The data are primarily based on Holmgren et al 8 and Heyne and Harvey 43 (for specific references, see Table A5). For the biomass handling system (receive, unload, and store) at pulp mills, it was assumed that additional investments would be made to an already existing, large system.…”

Section: Sng Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several comparisons of lignocellulosic-based value chains with different biofuels indicate high energy and cost efficiency as well as large potential to reduce fossil greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for bio-based synthetic natural gas (SNG). [3][4][5][6][7][8] This is due to the high yield (biomass-to-SNG) and total energy system efficiency that can be achieved in integrated gasification-based bio-SNG * production.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Systems analysis of different value chains based on domestic forest biomass for the production of bio-SNG

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary This study compares value chains based on domestic forest biomass for the production of bio–synthetic natural gas (SNG) with respect to economic performance, GHG emissions, and energy efficiency. Value chains in which raw material is upgraded to intermediate products before transportation to an SNG plant integrated with a district heating system for further upgrading are compared with a chain in which the raw material is transported directly to the SNG plant. The intermediates considered are either dried biomass from forest residues, or bark, upgraded at pulp mills, or pellets from sawdust upgraded at sawmills. The findings show that the difference in performance between the studied value chains is generally small. The highest cost and significantly lowest energy efficiency are associated with the value chain with pellets, which leads to the conclusion that more pretreatment than what is required by the SNG process, to lower transport costs, is not profitable. Drying forest residues at pulp mills before further transportation to and upgrading at an SNG plant leads to somewhat higher transportation costs because of the relatively high fixed costs associated with transportation. However, the benefit of drying the biomass using excess heat at pulp mills is that heat is “moved” from a location, where it can be hard to find profitable ways to use it, to the SNG plant, where the excess heat can be used for district heating. With these two factors working in opposition, the total cost is similar if forest residues are transported directly to the SNG plant or via a pulp mill. The lowest cost is achieved when falling bark from pulp mills is used because the first transportation step is avoided and no additional investment for biomass handling at the mill is required. However, there is a technical uncertainty regarding how much bark can be used in the SNG process.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 80%

mentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: Sng Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sng Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Systems analysis of different value chains based on domestic forest biomass for the production of bio-SNG

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Market and feasibility analysis of waste-integrated biorefineries

Yan¹,

Salman²

2023

Waste Biorefineries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Value chains for integrated production of liquefied bio-SNG at sawmill sites – Techno-economic and carbon footprint evaluation

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Industry's increasing demand for liquefied natural gas could be met in the future by liquefied methane produced from biomass feedstock (LBG-liquefied biogas). This study presents results from an investigation of value chains for integrated production of LBG at a generic sawmill site, based on gasification of sawmill waste streams and forest residues. The objective was to investigate the cost for, as well as the carbon footprint reduction associated with, production and use of LBG as a fuel. Five different LBG plant sizes were investigated in combination with three different sawmill sizes. The resulting cases differ regarding biomass feedstock composition, biomass transportation distances, LBG plant sizes, how efficiently the excess heat from the LBG plant is used, and LBG distribution distances. Pinch technology was used to quantify the heat integration opportunities and to design the process steam network. The results show that efficient use of energy within the integrated process has the largest impact on the performance of the value chain in terms of carbon footprint. The fuel production cost are mainly determined by the investment cost of the plant, as well as feedstock transportation costs, which mainly affects larger plants. Production costs are shown to range from 68 to 156 EUR/MWhfuel and the carbon footprint ranges from 175-250 kg GHG-eq/MWhnet biomass assuming that the product is used to substitute fossil LNG fuel. The results indicate that process integration of an indirect biomass gasifier for LBG production is an effective way for a sawmill to utilize its by-products. Integration of this type of biorefinery can be done in such a way that the plant can still cover its heating needs whilst expanding its product portfolio in a competitive way, both from a carbon footprint and cost perspective. The results also indicate that the gains associated with efficient heat integration are important to achieve an efficient value chain.

show abstract

Comparison of integration options for gasification-based biofuel production systems – Economic and greenhouse gas emission implications

Cited by 31 publications

References 51 publications

Systems analysis of different value chains based on domestic forest biomass for the production of bio-SNG

Systems analysis of different value chains based on domestic forest biomass for the production of bio-SNG

Market and feasibility analysis of waste-integrated biorefineries

Value chains for integrated production of liquefied bio-SNG at sawmill sites – Techno-economic and carbon footprint evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About