Technical and Economic Modeling for the Production of Torrefied Lignocellulosic Biomass for the U.S. Densified Fuel Industry

Pirraglia, Adrian; Gonzalez, Ronalds; Denig, Joseph; Saloni, Daniel

doi:10.1007/s12155-012-9255-6

Cited by 26 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, the lack of both technical and economical clarity to run a large-scale plant still remains as an obstacle for the investors, policy makers, and the implementing organizations. To fill this gap, Pirraglia et al (2013) integrates mass balance, energy consumption, and rates of return, net present value, minimum revenue, and production costs. They found that the torrefaction reactor unit accounts for 60% of the total capital investment and it is highly sensitive parameter in the financial analysis.…”

Section: The Commercial Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comprehensive Review on Biomass Torrefaction

Nhuchhen¹,

Basu²,

Acharya³

2014

IJREB

170

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biomass is a versatile energy resource that could be used as a sustainable energy resource in solid, liquid and gaseous form of energy sources. Torrefaction is an emerging thermal biomass pretreatment method that has an ability to reduce the major limitations of biomass such as heterogeneity, lower bulk density, lower energy density, hygroscopic behavior, and fibrous nature. Torrefaction, aiming to produce high quality solid biomass products, is carried out at 200-300 °C in an inert environment at an atmospheric pressure. The removal of volatiles through different decomposition reactions is the basic principle behind the torrefaction process. Torrefaction upgrades biomass quality and alters the combustion behavior, which can be efficiently used in the co-firing power plant. This paper presents a comprehensive review on torrefaction of biomass and their characteristics. Despite of the number of advantages, torrefaction is motivated mainly for thermochemical conversion process because of its ability to increase hydrophobicity, grindability and energy density of biomass. In addition to this, torrefied biomass could be used to replace coal in the metallurgical process, and promoted as an alternative of charcoal.

show abstract

Section: The Commercial Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comprehensive Review on Biomass Torrefaction

Nhuchhen¹,

Basu²,

Acharya³

2014

IJREB

170

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In summary, the feedstock costs are from $28/BDMT to $83/BDMT depending on the location and supply and demand. (Bergman 2005) 33 (Pirraglia et al 2012) 50 (McDow 2013 28 to 83 (RISI 2015) 40 to 77…”

Section: Feedstock Costmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Review of Torrefied Wood Economics

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This literature review aims to provide a systematic analysis of studies on the financial aspects of producing torrefied biomass and torrefied pellets. There are substantial differences in the specific technologies, operating conditions, scale of the demonstration, and properties of biomass feedstock. There is a lack of reports that consider the entire supply chain, which is required for an understanding of the high-cost steps. To obtain a robust view of the torrefaction processes' financial prospects the authors have used both peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed papers that allowed the researchers to include thirty-one papers in this analysis. All these studies establish that the prices of the biomass and the final torrefied product are critical. The product yield and caloric content, which are related to pricing, were also key financial drivers. The lower freight costs due to high-energy density of the torrefied pellets was recognized and calculated, but some other benefits were not quantified. There is a need for a detailed and flexible torrefaction financial model that includes variations in financial assumptions and biomass properties. Given the uncertainty around many specific steps, there is value in including stochastic tools in these financial analyses.

show abstract

“…Benefi t from employment (29) Multiplier of benefi ts (to credit additional benefi ts in the region): employment =2.025, feedstock production =1.5.…”

Section: Social Benefi Tsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of linear programming to ‐optimize the social, −environmental, and economic impacts of using woody feedstocks for pellet and ‐torrefied pellet production

Radics

Dasmohapatra

Kelley

2016

Biofuels Bioprod Bioref

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Linear programming was used to optimize the economic, environmental, and social impacts of forest biomass used for bioenergy production. Sixteen scenarios (combinations of feedstocks, products, markets, and end use) were studied. Two feedstocks (roundwood and wood residues), two densifi ed bioenergy products (white pellet, torrefi ed pellet), two markets (domestic, international), and two end uses (power generation, district heating) were evaluated. The social, environmental, and economic sustainability attributes were quantifi ed and monetized using peer-reviewed literature to analyze the trade-offs. Using the economic criteria alone, the model showed that the best solution was use of 70% roundwood and 30% forest residue feedstock to produce torrefi ed pellets (TP) sold for district heating in the EU. The model predicts $5.4 million annual profi t which is driven by the use of lower cost forest residue feedstocks, and relatively higher prices for the heating market in the EU. Inclusion of all three sustainability attributes led to a different optimized solution. TP produced from roundwood and sold to the EU market for heating was the optimum, due to the social benefi ts derived from increased local income to landowners and reduced shipping costs. It also had added benefi ts of reductions in emissions across the transportation system on an energy basis. TP consistently had higher social benefi ts than WP due to the need for more biomass per unit of fi nal product, and providing more local jobs and income from feedstock production. The increasing costs of carbon emissions increased the environmental benefi ts of TP compared to WP or coal.

show abstract

Technical and Economic Modeling for the Production of Torrefied Lignocellulosic Biomass for the U.S. Densified Fuel Industry

Cited by 26 publications

References 17 publications

A Comprehensive Review on Biomass Torrefaction

A Comprehensive Review on Biomass Torrefaction

Systematic Review of Torrefied Wood Economics

Use of linear programming to ‐optimize the social, −environmental, and economic impacts of using woody feedstocks for pellet and ‐torrefied pellet production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About