Herbaceous Feedstock 2019 State of Technology Report

Abstract

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) promotes the production of advanced liquid transportation fuels from lignocellulosic biomass by funding fundamental and applied research that advances the State of Technology (SOT). As part of its involvement with this mission, Idaho National Laboratory (INL) completes an annual SOT report for biomass feedstock logistics. This report summarizes supply system impacts of Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO)-funded research and development efforts at INL and elsewhere (such as the High-Tonnage Feedstock Logistics projects (Webb et al. 2013a, Webb et al. 2013b, Webb et al. 2013c, Webb and Sokhansanj 2014, Sokhansanj et al. 2014)) that lead to improvements in feedstock supply systems. These include improvements to and observed performance of innovative harvest and collection methods, storage technologies, transportation and handling approaches, and advanced preprocessing technologies. Biomass quality and variability, and the interface between feedstock quality and conversion performance are key drivers in addition to delivered feedstock cost. In this report, we estimate the benefits of R&D improvements to individual supply system unit operations and present the status of feedstock logistics technology development for converting biomass into biofuels. These analyses are supported by experimental data where possible and help to align the SOT relative to the cost goals defined in the Multi-Year Program Plan. The 2019 Herbaceous SOT incorporates several technology changes in feedstock preprocessing and introduces opportunities from the integrated landscape management (ILM) strategy and increased grower participation to reduce biomass access costs, while maintaining or improving grower profitability. During FY18 uneven flow from the horizontal bale grinder was identified as a significant issue limiting preprocessing system throughput. Based on FSL-funded research at INL, the 2019 Herbaceous SOT replaces the horizontal bale grinder used in the first ton/acre. However, it is purported that MOG is lower in moisture and ash content

Nth‐plant supply: corn stover supplies and costs in a fleet of biorefineries

“…The US Department of Energy's delivered feedstock cost targets have ranged from $79-$93 Mg −1 ($71-$84 ton −1 ). 8,20,42,43 However, cost targets vary by feedstock mix and quality specifications. Actual feedstock cost targets will be influenced by market pull and policy for decarbonization with different products and conversion costs, which are unknown.…”

“…The US Department of Energy's delivered feedstock cost targets have ranged from $79–$93 Mg −1 ($71–$84 ton −1 ) 8,20,42,43 . However, cost targets vary by feedstock mix and quality specifications.…”

Integrated Landscape Management to Reduce Biomass Feedstock Access Costs

“…Although the switchgrass grower payment in the 2018 Herbaceous Feedstock State of Technology (SOT) report (Roni et al, 2018) is reported as $38.87, it was decided to use a more aggressive cost target of $26.66, the same cost associated with three-pass corn stover. In the 2019 SOT report, ILM strategies were incorporated to reduce biomass access costs by 20% and to increase biomass availabilities in Kansas, Nebraska and Colorado (Roni et al, 2019). The analysis results implied that even with the 20% reduced cost previously demonstrated in the 2018 TEA, switchgrass was not cost-competitive to be included into the feedstock blend, which suggested that 20% might not be a low-enough cost reduction target.…”

Screening of alkali‐assisted storage conditions to define the operational window of deacetylation within storage systems in the bioenergy supply chain

“…The transportation distance was assumed to be similar to what was used in a two-pass harvest baled logistics system. 28 On-site preprocessing at the biorefinery involved unloading the silage tube using the walking floor trailer, and plastic wrap removal that was facilitated by a high tonnage knuckle boom. The wrap used was assumed to be collected and disposed of in a local landfill.…”

“…The assumed grower payment for corn stover residues was based on a two-pass corn stover harvest and collection approach representing the state of technology within the context of bioenergy production. 28 Fixed costs or all unit operations included capital recovery, insurance, and taxes, and were estimated following the guidelines published by American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE). A list of all equipment used in this scenario is presented in Table 2, along with machine purchase price, machine life, and salvage value.…”