Economic and Ecological Impacts on the Integration of Biomass-Based SNG and FT Diesel in the Austrian Energy System

Abstract

The production of sustainable, biomass-based synthetic natural gas (SNG) and Fischer–Tropsch (FT) diesel can contribute significantly to climate neutrality. This work aims to determine the commercial-scale production costs and CO2 footprint of biomass-based SNG and FT diesel to find suitable integration scenarios for both products in the Austrian energy system. Based on the simulation results, either 65 MW SNG and 14.2 MW district heat, or 36.6 MW FT diesel, 17.6 MW FT naphtha, and 22.8 MW district heat can be produced from 100 MW biomass. The production costs with taxes for wood-based SNG are 70–91 EUR /MWh and for FT diesel they are 1.31–1.89 EUR /L, depending on whether pre-crisis or crisis times are considered, which are in the range of fossil market prices. The CO2 footprint of both products is 90% lower than that of their fossil counterparts. Finally, suitable integration scenarios for SNG and FT diesel in the Austrian energy system were determined. For SNG, use within the energy sector for covering electricity peak loads or use in the industry sector for providing high-temperature heat were identified as the most promising scenarios. In the case of FT diesel, its use in the heavy-duty traffic sector seems most suitable.

Hydrogen production from woody biomass gasification: a techno‐economic analysis

“…4 Fossil fuels could be replaced by centrally and sustainably produced hydrogen in these sectors. Hydrogen produced by DFB gasification would require about 5 and 32% (calculated with a CGE of 61%) of the additional potential of woody biomass in Austria (21 TWh a −1 ) 36 to substitute fossil fuels used in the maritime and steel industry sectors, respectively. If maritime is excluded, the requirements may be compression to grid level and a lower quality hydrogen (Grade A) 46,47 could suffice.…”

“…Decentralized hydrogen production from biomass could contribute to the defossilization of the heavy‐duty sector (long‐haul trucks and buses), which is of medium importance in the Hydrogen Strategy for Austria 4 . Alternatively, the agricultural and forestry sector demands 2.5 TWh a −1 to be substituted, 5 which would require about 25% of the additional potential of woody biomass in Austria 36 if a CGE of 48.0% is considered. In this case, the supply of Grade D 46,47 hydrogen at a pressure level of 700 bar may be needed.…”

“…As proposed by Hammerschmid et al ., 36 the techno‐economic analysis was carried out for two different reference years, 2019 and 2022, in order to consider the economic impacts of global disruptions. It was based on the net present value (NPV) method.…”

“…55 As in previous work, 56 the fixed capital costs of the FIXB gasifier unit and coarse gas cleaning system are calculated by multiplying the number of FIXB gasifiers required for 1 MW H2 by the package-unit costs of a single FIXB unit. The fixed capital costs of the DFB system are determined by using the order-of-magnitude method and cost-scaling method as described by Hammerschmid et al 36 Those of the gas cleaning and product gas conditioning units are estimated by applying the cost-scaling method and the Lang factor of 4.13 for solid-fluid processing plants according to Eqn (6). The fixed capital costs for the hydrogen purification unit, the PSA, are computed in a similar manner.…”