Subscriber access provided by READING UNIV
Article
Environmental, economic, and scalability considerations and trends of selected fuel economy-enhancing biomass-derived blendstocks Jennifer B. Dunn, Mary J. Biddy, Susanne B. Jones, Hao Cai, Thathiana Benavides, Jennifer Markham, Ling Tao, Eric C. D. Tan, Christopher Kinchin, Ryan Davis, Abhijit Dutta, Mark Bearden, Christopher Clayton, Steven Phillips, Kenneth G. Rappe, and Patrick Lamers ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/ acssuschemeng.7b02871 • Publication Date (Web): 30 Oct 2017 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on November 8, 2017
Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.
Page 1 of 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
1
Environmental, economic, and scalability
2
considerations and trends of selected fuel economy-
3
enhancing biomass-derived blendstocks
4
Jennifer B. Dunn,1,* Mary Biddy,2,† Susanne Jones,3, ‡ Hao Cai,1 Pahola Thathiana Benavides,1
5
Jennifer Markham,2 Ling Tao,2 Eric Tan,2 Christopher Kinchin,2 Ryan Davis,2 Abhijit Dutta,2
6
Mark Bearden,3 Christopher Clayton,3 Steven Phillips,3 Kenneth Rappé3, Patrick Lamers4
1. Systems Assessment Group, Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory,
7
9700 S. Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439
8
2. National Bioenergy Center, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 15013 Denver West
9
Parkway, Golden, Colorado 80401, United States
10
3. Energy Processes and Materials Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 902
11
Battelle Boulevard, Richland, WA 99352
12
4. Bioenergy Technologies Group, Idaho National Laboratory, 2525 N Fremont Ave, Idaho
13
Falls, ID 83415, United States
14
15
Corresponding authors
16
*Email:
[email protected]
17
†
Email:
[email protected] 1 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 2 of 32
18
‡
19
Keywords: techno-economic analysis, life-cycle analysis, biofuels
20
Abstract
21
24 biomass-derived compounds and mixtures, identified based on their physical properties,
22
which could be blended into fuels to improve spark ignition engine fuel economy were assessed
23
for their economic, technology readiness, and environmental viability. These bio-blendstocks
24
were modeled to be produced biochemically, thermochemically, or through hybrid processes. To
25
carry out the assessment, 17 metrics were developed for which each bio-blendstock was
26
determined to be favorable, neutral, or unfavorable. Cellulosic ethanol was included as a
27
reference case. Overall economic and, to some extent, environmental viability is driven by
28
projected yields for each of these processes. The metrics used in this analysis methodology
29
highlight the near-term potential to achieve these targeted yield estimates when considering data
30
quality and current technical readiness for these conversion strategies. Key knowledge gaps
31
included the degree of purity needed for use as a bio-blendstock. Less stringent purification
32
requirements for fuels could cut processing costs and environmental impacts. Additionally, more
33
information is needed on the blending behavior of many of these bio-blendstocks with gasoline
34
to support the technology readiness evaluation. Overall, the technology to produce many of these
35
blendstocks from biomass is emerging and as it matures, these assessments must be revisited.
36
Importantly, considering economic, environmental, and technology readiness factors, in addition
37
to physical properties of blendstocks that could be used to boost engine efficiency and fuel
Email:
[email protected]
2 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 3 of 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
38
economy, in the early stages of project research and development can help spotlight those most
39
likely to be viable in the near term.
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
3 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 4 of 32
47
Introduction
48
Fuel properties influence engine efficiency.1,2 The primary focus of the Co-Optima initiative, a
49
collaborative effort among nine U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratories, is to identify
50
the fuel properties that will enable enhanced fuel economy, blended fuels with these properties,
51
and engines that will work with these fuels towards increased efficiency and fuel economy. To
52
date, the project has investigated potential biomass-derived blendstocks that could be blended
53
with gasoline and used in spark ignition engines to reduce the energy consumption and emissions
54
associated with the transportation sector. While many of the blendstocks considered could be
55
produced from petroleum or natural gas feedstocks, this analysis has focused on biomass-derived
56
blendstocks which may offer numerous technical, societal, and environmental benefits. Within
57
Co-Optima, fuel properties, including boiling and freezing points, heat of vaporization, research
58
octane number, solubility, ignition quality, corrosivity, toxicity, and heteroatom concentration,
59
among other properties, of 400 biomass-derived potential blendstocks were evaluated. After this
60
assessment, about 40 biomass-derived blendstocks exhibited favorable fuel properties.3
61
Not all of these 40, however, could be produced in the near term (~15 years) economically and at
62
scale. Further analysis was therefore needed to evaluate the economic and market viability and
63
environmental impact of these bio-blendstocks. In the analysis herein, 24 of the bio-blendstocks
64
– selected from the 40 to achieve diversity in chemical class, representativeness in conversion
65
route (fermentation, thermochemical, and hybrid (with both biochemical and thermochemical
66
attributes)), and sufficiently well-characterized conversion routes to enable a high-level techno-
67
economic analysis (TEA) – were evaluated for these factors. We included cellulosic ethanol
4 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 5 of 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
68
performance as a benchmark. Table S1 catalogues key physical property information of the 24
69
bio-blendstocks and ethanol.
70
The 24 selected bio-blendstocks listed in Table S1 include alcohols (8), esters (4),
71
ketones (4), hydrocarbon mixtures (6), an alkane, and a furan blend. All Co-Optima bio-
72
blendstocks have research octane numbers (RON) exceeding 98, a key enabler of
73
enhanced fuel economy for spark ignition engines.2 Ethanol, a biomass-derived octane
74
enhancer, blended at a 10% volume in most gasoline in the United States, has been
75
included as a reference case. While most of the ethanol in the market today is made from
76
corn starch, this analysis considers cellulosic ethanol from municipal or agricultural
77
waste, among other feedstocks, which offers additional benefits and is in the early stages
78
of commercial production. It is important to note that other compounds derived from
79
biomass or other feedstocks that could offer desirable fuel properties. The 24 compounds
80
and mixtures selected as case studies for the Co-Optima initiative are referred to herein as
81
“Co-Optima bio-blendstocks.”
82
In this paper, we evaluate these 24 Co-Optima bio-blendstocks for economic viability,
83
scalability, and energy and environmental impact. While the influence of high-level ethanol
84
blends on engine efficiency and the costs and environmental impacts of producing high-level
85
ethanol blends have been investigated previously,1,2 this is the first systematic study of other
86
potential biomass-derived blendstocks that may improve fuel economy. This study does not
87
recommend a specific blendstock be pursued or be included in gasoline at a specific blending
88
level with or without ethanol. Rather, the aim is to identify whether these Co-Optima bio-
5 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 6 of 32
89
blendstocks are viable to enter the market in a near-term timeframe and to identify potential
90
roadblocks to their commercialization and whether these can be overcome.
91
Methodology
92
While some of the Co-Optima bio-blendstocks (Table S1) are on the path to commercialization,
93
many are just emerging or are still undergoing R&D at a range of scales. For these latter
94
biomass-derived blendstocks, insights into how they may be produced are available only through
95
the literature (academic and patent). For biomass-derived blendstocks in the commercialization
96
pipeline (e.g., methanol-to-gasoline), more information may be available through company
97
literature and presentations in addition to the literature. This nascent state of the industry
98
translates into some uncertainty in establishing, for example, production costs based on process
99
modeling. Therefore the evaluation of these potential biomass-derived blendstocks is qualitative
100
and based on thresholds. We developed 17 metrics (Tables 1–3) in the categories of economic
101
viability, technology readiness (i.e., scalability), and environmental impact based on prior
102
experience with cost, scalability, and environmental drivers of biomass conversion processes.4-9
103
For each metric, we established three categories, or bins, into which each blendstock fell. When
104
possible, these targets were based on regulatory thresholds (e.g., Renewable Fuel Standard
105
requirements for GHG reductions) or previous analyses of mature (e.g., corn ethanol, gasoline)
106
or emerging fuels. For example, the categories for the carbon efficiency metric were based on
107
analyses of pyrolysis and gasification.8,9 The metrics and bins developed were vetted with Co-
108
Optima stakeholders including the project’s External Advisory Board.
6 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 7 of 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
109
Notably, we considered two production cases for each potential blendstock. The first, called the
110
state of technology (SOT) case, reflects the current performance of the conversion process. SOT
111
key parameters, such as yield and selectivity, are lower than they would be when the technology
112
is more mature. The second production case considered is called the target case, which is
113
forward-looking and considers the potential of the technology at full scale. A process model for
114
each case informed bio-blendstock cost estimates. (Detailed TEA and life-cycle analysis [LCA]
115
assumptions are in the SI.) These process models generally were modifications of existing
116
models.4–9 The integration of these process models and economic evaluations, also described in
117
previous studies,4–9 produces an estimate of the cost per gasoline gallon equivalent (GGE) to
118
produce the biomass-derived blendstocks. The overall designs are based on fully integrated,
119
standalone facilities and include all supporting utilities and equipment required to operate the
120
biorefinery. The financial assumptions align with recent process designs developed by both the
121
National Renewable Energy Laboratory and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.4–9
122
Technology readiness metrics (Table 1) were evaluated based on the SOT case. Given the
123
emerging nature of the production of many of these compounds, production cost estimates
124
should be viewed as the best understanding we can gain given the information that is available.
125
For this reason, we did not rate the Co-Optima bio-blendstocks based on their absolute cost of
126
production estimate, but rather on how their cost of production compared to other biomass-
127
derived blendstocks in this analysis. A separate metric was included to reflect the state of
128
knowledge regarding the production route considered and the source/quality of the baseline data.
129
An unfavorable rating was assigned when process information was largely notional due to
130
limited data availability.
7 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 8 of 32
131
We considered producing biomass-derived blendstocks from either a herbaceous biomass blend
132
for the biochemical production routes or from a woody biomass blend for the thermochemical
133
production routes (see SI). Within the technology readiness metrics, biomass feedstock
134
influences were considered, including the state of knowledge regarding the effect of feedstock
135
type and specifications on product yield and quality. The final technology readiness metric that
136
was evaluated was the degree of biomass-derived product blending behavior with conventional
137
gasoline given the information currently available. Importantly, the Co-Optima R&D projects are
138
currently assessing the influence of blending levels on fuel properties3 and working towards
139
understanding the optimal blending levels for each Co-Optima biomass-derived blendstock.
140
8 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 9 of 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
Table 1. Technology Readiness Metrics Metric
Favorable (+)
Neutral (0)
Unfavorable (-)
Approach
Co-Optima bioblendstock production SOT cost
Falls in cluster of lowest cost pathways
Falls in cluster of moderate cost pathways
Falls in cluster of high cost pathways
Cost will be adopted from established target cases, published TEA data, and newly developed analysis. Costs compared on a $/GGE basis to take into account differing energy densities.
State of knowledge regarding conversion process and its technology readiness level (TRL)
Demonstration-scale (or larger) data available
Bench-scale data available
Notional, partly literature based
Conduct review of existing research and analyses, literature, and discussions with national laboratory researchers.
Number of viable routes to produce fuel or blendstock
>3
2–3
1
Evaluate literature and discuss with national laboratory researchers. New viable routes are through a different conversion pathway (such as biochemical versus thermochemical designs) and are not changes to one particular design (such as a new catalyst).
Data quality regarding feedstock assumptions in process modeling
Experimental data only from real feedstocks
Experimental data are a combination of real feedstocks and mock feedstocks
Experimental data from mock feedstocks
Evaluate feedstock source in experiments used to inform process modeling.
Production process sensitivity to feedstock type
Feedstock changes result in minor variations in fuel yield/quality
Feedstock changes result in some variations in fuel yield/quality
Feedstock changes can cause significant variations in fuel yield/quality
When experimental data unavailable, use highlevel mass balance to estimate.
Robustness of process to feedstocks of different specs
Changes in feedstock specifications minimally influences yield/quality
Changes in feedstock specifications moderately influences yield/quality
Changes in feedstock specifications greatly influences yield/quality
Examine experimental data for information on influence of specification changes (e.g., ash, hydrocarbon content) on yield and quality.
Blending behavior of blendstock with current fuels for use in vehicles
Current quality good enough for replacement
Current quality good enough for blend
Current quality in blend not good or unknown
Consider level of information regarding fuel quality of biomass-derived blendstock, such as whether it is known that it can be directly blended versus there is some limited knowledge about blending properties such as wide boiling range bulk properties.
9 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 10 of 32
140
Economic viability metrics (Table 2) take into account the target case and consider various
141
aspects of process economics. First, we ranked the target cost for each blendstock through the
142
ratio of the SOT cost to the target cost. This is a critical metric that assesses the amount of
143
research and development required to cut processing costs. Furthermore, we considered the
144
extent to which economic viability of the Co-Optima bio-blendstock depended upon the co-
145
production of electricity (e.g., through lignin combustion), chemicals, or a co-produced
146
blendstock (e.g., diesel). This was a minor effect given that only the n-butanol case has a
147
chemical co-product. Nonetheless, this metric was included because a process heavily dependent
148
upon co-products for viability may not be desirable. Swings in the market value of the chemical
149
could prompt a producer to stop producing it along with the co-produced bio-blendstock.
150
Additionally, if the bio-blendstock were produced from, or is itself, a valuable chemical
151
intermediate, market factors could pull it to other uses. Most commodity chemicals have higher
152
profit margins than fuel blendstocks and production of biomass-derived fuel blendstocks could
153
be challenged if competing with commodity chemicals. Finally, feedstock cost, an important
154
process economics driver, was included as a metric.
155 156
10 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 11 of 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
157
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
Table 2. Economic Viability Metrics Metric
Favorable (+)
Neutral (0)
Unfavorable (-)
Approach
Fuel production target cost
Falls in cluster of lowest cost pathways
Falls in cluster of moderate cost pathways
Falls in cluster of high cost pathways
Cost adopted from established target cases, published TEA data, and newly-developed analysis. Costs compared on a $/GGE basis to take into account differing energy densities.
Ratio of SOT-totarget cost
4
See above approaches for developing SOT and target costs.
Percentage of product price dependent on coproducts (i.e., chemicals, electricity, other blendstocks/fuels produced as coproduct to CoOptima fuel)
50%
Evaluate with process models and technoeconomic analysis.
Competition for the biomassderived blendstock or its predecessor
Blendstock is not produced from, nor is itself, a valuable chemical intermediate
Blendstock is produced from, or is itself, a raw chemical intermediate
Blendstock is produced from, or is itself, a valuable chemical intermediate
Evaluate market size for biomass-derived blendstocks and their predecessors in the production process (i.e., intermediates between feedstock and final blendstock product).a
Cost of feedstock (in US$2014)
Cost at or below target of $84/dry ton delivered at reactor throat10,11
Some uncertainty as to whether feedstock cost will be at or below $84/dry ton (e.g., < $100 ton10,11)
Feedstock cost at delivery to reactor throat likely to exceed $120/dry ton
Feedstock prices are based upon Idaho National Laboratory’s feedstock cost analyses.10,11
158 159 160 161 162
a.
It may be possible that competition for the bio-blendstock for multiple end uses could lead to more stable financing for biorefineries that would produce the bio-blendstock, but our primary focus in this analysis is availability as a bio-blendstock fuel, which could be compromised if there were competition with the chemicals market.
163
(Table 3). This part of the analysis aims to understand the impact that targeted bio-blendstocks
164
could have on the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, water consumption and air
165
pollution when compared to traditional fossil fuels production. To evaluate life-cycle energy and
166
environmental impacts of the biomass-derived blendstocks, we incorporated material and energy
The final group of metrics considered reflects the environmental impacts of the bio-blendstocks
11 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 12 of 32
167
flows from process models into Argonne National Laboratory’s Greenhouse gases, Regulated
168
Emissions, and Energy use in Transportation (GREET®) model (2015 release) and carried out an
169
LCA of each biomass-derived blendstock. Additional data sources included feedstock processing
170
and logistics from Idaho National Laboratory’s analyses10,11 and feedstock production data from
171
GREET.12
172
12 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 13 of 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
173
174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
Table 3. Environmental Impact Metrics Metric
Favorable (+)
Neutral (0)
Unfavorable (-)
Approach
Efficiency of input carbon (fossil and biomass-derived) to Co-Optima bioblendstock for the target casea
>40%
30–40%
98
311
RON) portion of an overall fuel stream produced in a gasification process and this portion of the
312
total energy product output of the process is heavily dependent on the majority of fuel product
313
that has a RON below 98. 1-butanol is co-produced with other alcohols. Feedstock costs again
314
are uniformly favorable across bio-blendstocks because we assumed a single feedstock cost.
315
Examining the environmental metrics, although the target case carbon efficiency for many of the
316
Co-Optima bio-blendstocks was low, life-cycle GHG emissions tended to be favorable or
317
neutral.
318
Overall, methanol and methanol-to-gasoline—subject to commercialization efforts—received the
319
most favorable ratings of the various thermochemically derived bio-blendstocks. Most
320
unfavorable ratings for these pathways fall in the technology readiness metric group and overall
321
target case carbon efficiency tends to be unfavorable. Thermochemical ethanol serves as a point
322
of comparison in Figure 2, but this route is not fully commercialized and has an unfavorably
323
rated carbon efficiency and many neutral ratings. It should be noted that the baseline gasification
324
designs are energy self-sufficient and burn biomass rather than relying on imports of natural gas
20 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 21 of 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
325
or electricity for these designs. Carbon efficiency could be boosted if such imports were
326
assumed; however, further analysis would be required to understand the impact on sustainability
327
metrics.
328
The aromatic/olefinic gasoline blendstock via pyrolysis-derived sugars/upgrading had the
329
greatest number of unfavorable ratings in Figure 2. Limited information was available regarding
330
the SOT for sugars recovery and upgrading. Very preliminary experimental work suggested that
331
hydrotreating the mostly lignin fraction may be difficult.21 Furthermore, feedstock quality (such
332
as high ash or low lignin fraction) has a significant effect on yield. Ash also poses challenges to
333
catalyst maintenance.
334 335
Figure 2. Thermochemically produced bio-blendstocks screening results. Blue, green, and brown
336
circles represent favorable, neutral, and unfavorable categorization as defined in Tables 1–3.
337
Gray circles reflect a lack of information to categorize a given bio-blendstock for a certain
338
metric. Cellulosic ethanol is included as a benchmark. Italicized bio-blendstocks are produced 21 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 22 of 32
339
via pyrolysis. Other bio-blendstocks are produced via indirect liquefaction. *Carbon efficiency
340
and target yields are for the Co-Optima blendstock for the target case.
341
Five bio-blendstock candidates were evaluated based on process models that incorporated
342
biochemical and thermochemical elements (Figure 3). For example, routes to the furan mixture,
343
ester mixture, and gasoline produced via the catalytic conversion of sugars considered in this
344
analysis first employ an enzymatic hydrolysis step followed by a thermochemical step. The route
345
to isooctene begins with fermentation that produces isobutanol, which is subsequently
346
catalytically converted to isooctene. Production of butyl acetate proceeds through biological
347
conversion in two separate fermentation trains. One train produces ethanol; the other produces
348
isobutanol. Subsequent conversion and catalysis steps produce butyl acetate. Thermochemical
349
gasification produces syngas, which is first biologically upgraded to produce a 2,3-butandiol
350
intermediate, then dehydrated to yield methyl ethyl ketone.
351
For each of these hybrid routes, the SOT cost of production received a neutral rating. Production
352
information for these compounds tended to be from the literature for relevant feedstock types.
353
The multiple conversion routes to each of these bio-blendstocks tended to be robust regarding
354
feedstock types and specifications. Whereas gasoline produced from sugar catalytic conversion
355
would be blendable with gasoline, and isooctene should be similarly blendable as long as
356
impurities are low, the blending behavior of other bio-blendstocks is not clear at this point.
357
Target costs for these bio-blendstocks could be high, but these were paired with somewhat high
358
SOT costs yielding relatively favorable ratios of SOT-to-target costs. For these particular
22 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 23 of 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
359
blendstocks, this latter metric may not yield the most important insight compared to the
360
individual target costs. Overall, co-product dependency for these bio-blendstocks was low.
361
Notably, the pathway to methyl ethyl ketone that we considered goes through 2,3-butanediol,
362
which is a potentially valuable intermediate. For this reason, we assigned a neutral rating to the
363
market competition metric for methyl ethyl ketone. The butyl acetate pathway proceeds through
364
valuable intermediates ethanol and isobutanol.
365
Environmental metrics aside from life-cycle fossil energy consumption were mostly neutral. The
366
carbon efficiencies of isooctene and butyl acetate pathways, however, were relatively low and
367
the life-cycle GHG emissions of gasoline from catalytic sugar conversion and butyl acetate were
368
high.
369
Overall, all bio-blendstocks produced via hybrid biochemical and thermochemical technologies
370
had one or more unfavorable ratings. Many were in the environmental metric category. One
371
reason for high GHG emissions in the gasoline from the catalytic conversion of sugar pathway is
372
the use of significant quantities of hydrogen that was assumed in process modeling to be sourced
373
from natural gas steam-methane reforming. Alternative design options could allow for internally
374
sourced hydrogen, although Co-Optima bio-blendstock yield would decline and the production
375
cost would likely rise as hydrogen was purchased from a vendor.5 On the other hand, the high
376
GHG emissions associated with butyl acetate are driven by the relatively low yield of this
377
compound in the process modeling. If these compounds (or any included in this analysis that can
378
be produced by multiple technologies) were produced through an alternative route, the analysis
23 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
379
results might be different. For example, the furan mixture could be produced through pyrolytic
380
pathways.
Page 24 of 32
381
382
Figure 3. Screening results for bio-blendstocks produced via hybrid biochemical-thermochemical
383
routes. Blue, green, and brown circles represent favorable, neutral, and unfavorable
384
categorization as defined in Tables 1–3. Gray circles reflect a lack of information to categorize a
385
given bio-blendstock for a certain metric. *Carbon efficiency is for the Co-Optima blendstock
386
for the target case. **CC denotes catalytic conversion.
387
This analysis highlighted several key overarching themes. First, based on our current
388
understanding of these pathways, feedstock considerations are not insignificant but are also not
389
roadblocks provided feedstocks are available at sufficient levels and reasonable cost. Secondly,
390
yields of bio-blendstocks in biochemical, sugar-based routes may be relatively lower than bio-
391
blendstock yields in thermochemical processes because, in biochemical routes, the lignin fraction
392
of the feed is not available for bio-blendstock production. On the other hand, thermochemical
393
routes tend to mimic those that would be used if the candidate were a chemical, which consist of
24 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 25 of 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
394
many steps. If the impurity level were known for various thermochemically produced bio-
395
blendstocks, then the carbon usage could be optimized and economic and environmental metrics
396
may improve. Additionally, the quality of these fuel mixtures is uncertain regardless of the
397
conversion pathway. The impact that the composition of these streams has on the fuel properties
398
(including octane) for these further-looking target cases is also uncertain. Also, the results
399
suggest that new synthesis routes that focus on fuel rather than chemical grade production are
400
needed. Routes that proceed through an ethanol intermediate could produce a high-octane
401
component. Such bolt-on technologies for converting ethanol to a different high-octane bio-
402
blendstock is motivated in part by the infrastructure challenges ethanol faces and current
403
blending limits, which may be altered in the future.
404
Another key issue identified in this analysis is the uncertainty about the blending level of many
405
of these bio-blendstocks. Any oxygenate that had not been certified (isobutanol) or tested (e.g.,
406
methanol underwent limited testing) was noted as having unknown blending behavior. Higher
407
alcohols were expected to behave at least as well as ethanol, but if no testing had been
408
performed, a bio-blendstock received an unknown rating. Ongoing work within the Co-Optima
409
initiative will address these data gaps.
410
This analysis presented several challenges. First, the emerging nature, or the limited public
411
information, of the technology precluded a robust quantitative evaluation of the Co-Optima bio-
412
blendstocks. With time, technology maturation, and increased information disclosure, it will
413
become viable to increase the robustness and quantitative nature of this type of analysis. For
414
example, corn ethanol plants routinely participate in surveys that publish information regarding
25 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 26 of 32
415
yield and energy consumption18 and this may become the norm for other biorefineries over time.
416
Second, balancing the importance of technology readiness, economic, and environmental metrics
417
is a challenge, although some have developed methodologies to handle this balancing
418
quantitatively.19 The qualitative approach we adopted makes possible the identification of
419
options that are not likely viable, at least in the near term. For example, 2-methyl butanol
420
exhibited unfavorable SOT cost, ratio of target-to-SOT cost, target case Co-Optima bio-
421
blendstock carbon efficiency, and GHG emissions. This bio-blendstock is an inadvisable choice
422
for targeted efforts towards development in the near term. This method can also flag Co-Optima
423
bio-blendstocks with few barriers towards deployment, such as the methanol-to-gasoline route.
424
Future work will refine several of the process modeling, TEAs, and LCAs involved in this
425
screening process and consider alternative screening techniques. The current screening analysis,
426
however, was instrumental as a supplement to a physical-property-based screening of Co-Optima
427
bio-blendstocks, allowing the initiative to check for roadblocks that could arise in even the most
428
promising of blendstocks if only properties were considered. The current harmonized assessment
429
between fuel and engine developers and analysts yields a robust approach to identify/develop a
430
renewable transportation fuel that can potentially decrease the overall fossil energy consumption
431
and improve the environmental impact and economic viability of the transportation sector.
432
Acknowledgements
433
The research reported in this paper was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
434
Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) and Vehicle Technologies Office (VTO) under the DOE
435
Co-Optimization of Fuels and Engines Initiative. The authors gratefully acknowledge the support
26 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 27 of 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
436
and direction of Alicia Lindauer at BETO, Kevin Stork at VTO, and the Co-Optima leadership
437
team. Furthermore, the authors acknowledge helpful discussions with Kristi Moriarty, Teresa
438
Alleman, and Bob McCormick of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
439
Abbreviations
440
BETO, Bioenergy Technologies Office; CC, catalytic conversion; DOE, U.S. Department of
441
Energy; EPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; GGE, gasoline gallon equivalent; GHG,
442
greenhouse gas; GREET, Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in
443
Transportation; LC, life cycle; LCA, life-cycle analysis; MTG, methanol-to-gatsoline; RON,
444
research octane number; SOT, state of technology; TEA, techno-economic analysis; TRL,
445
technology readiness level; VTO, Vehicle Technologies Office
446
447
Supplementary Materials
448
Fuel properties of bio-blendstocks considered in this study, biomass feedstock assumptions,
449
high-level process information for production of bio-blendstocks
450
References
451
1. Han, J. et al. Well-to-Wheels Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis of High-Octane Fuels with
452
Various Market Shares and Ethanol Blending Levels. ANL/ESD-15/10. Argonne National
453
Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, 2015.
27 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
454
2. Leone, T. G. et al. The Effect of Compression Ratio, Fuel Octane Rating, and Ethanol Content
455
on Spark-Ignition Engine Efficiency. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 10778–10789. doi:
456
10.1021/acs.est.5b01420
457
3. McCormick, R. L. et al. Selection Criteria and Screening of Potential Biomass-Derived
458
Streams as Fuel Blendstocks for Advanced Spark-Ignition Engines. SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr.
459
2017, 10, DOI 10.4271/2017-01-0868. doi: 10.4271/2017-01-0868
460
Page 28 of 32
4. Davis, R., et al. Process Design and Economics for the Conversion of Lignocellulosic
461
Biomass to Hydrocarbons: Dilute-Acid Prehydrolysis and Enzymatic Hydrolysis
462
Deconstruction of Biomass to Sugars and Biological Conversion of Sugars to Hydrocarbons.
463
NREL/TP-5100-60223. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado, 2013;
464
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy14osti/60223.pdf.
465
5. Davis, R., et al. Process Design and Economics for the Conversion of Lignocellulosic
466
Biomass to Hydrocarbons: Dilute-Acid and Enzymatic Deconstruction of Biomass to Sugars
467
and Catalytic Conversion of Sugars to Hydrocarbons. NREL/TP-5100-62498. National
468
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado,, 2015;
469
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy15osti/62498.pdf.
470
6. Dutta, A., et al. Process Design and Economics for Conversion of Lignocellulosic Biomass to
471
Ethanol Thermochemical Pathway by Indirect Gasification and Mixed Alcohol Synthesis.
472
NREL/TP-5100-51400. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado, 2011;
473
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy11osti/51400.pdf.
28 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 29 of 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
474
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
7. Dutta, A., et al. Process Design and Economics for the Conversion of Lignocellulosic
475
Biomass to Hydrocarbon Fuels Thermochemical Research Pathways with In Situ and Ex Situ
476
Upgrading of Fast Pyrolysis Vapors. NREL/TP-5100-62455;PNNL-23823. National
477
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado, 2015;
478
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy15osti/62455.pdf.
479
8. Jones, S. et al. Process Design and Economics for the Conversion of Lignocellulosic Biomass
480
for Hydrocarbon Fuels.PNNL-23053;NREL/TP-5100-61178. Pacific Northwest National
481
Laboratory, Richland, Washington, 2013; http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy14osti/61178.pdf.
482
9. Tan, E. C. D., et al. Process Design and Economics for the Conversion of Lignocellulosic
483
Biomass to Hydrocarbons via Indirect Liquefaction Thermochemical Research Pathway to
484
High-Octane Gasoline Blendstock Through Methanol/Dimethyl Ether Intermediates.
485
NREL/TP-5100-62402; PNNL-23822. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden,
486
Colorado, 2015; http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy15osti/62402.pdf.
487
10.
Bioenergy Technologies Office Multi-Year Program Plan. Bioenergy Technologies
488
Office, Washington, D.C., 2016;
489
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/07/f33/mypp_march2016.pdf.
490
11.
Feedstock Supply System Design and Analysis: The Feedstock Logistics Design Case for
491
Multiple Conversion Pathways. Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, Idaho, 2014;
492
https://bioenergy.inl.gov/Reports/Feedstock%20Supply%20System%20Design%20and%20A
493
nalysis.pdf.
29 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
494
12.
Page 30 of 32
Canter, C., et al. Update to Herbaceous and Short Rotation Woody Crops in GREET®
495
Based on the 2016 Billion Ton Study. Argonne National Laboratory Technical Memorandum,
496
Argonne, Illinois, 2016; https://greet.es.anl.gov/files/bts-2016.
497 498
499 500
501
13.
Kolodziej, R.; Scheib, J. Bio-isobutanol: The next generation biofuel. Hydrocarb.
Process. 2012, 79–85. 14.
PEP Yearbook International. IHS Chemical Process Economics Program;
https://www.ihs.com/products/chemical-technology-pep-index.html. 15.
Title 40: Protection of the Environment. Part 80- Regulation of Fuels and Fuels
502
Additives. Subpart L – Gasoline Benzene. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
503
Washington, D.C.,2007; https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/40/part-80/subpart-L.
504
16.
Title 13: the California Reformulated Gasoline Regulations, California Code of
505
Regulations, Sections 2250-2273.5 Reflecting Amendments Effective October 9, 2012.
506
California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, California, ,2012;
507
https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/gasoline/100912CaRFG_regs.pdf.
508
17.
U.S. Reformulated Spark-Ignition Engine Fuel and the U.S. Renewable Fuels Standard.
509
ASTM Committee D02 on Petroleum Products and Lubricants, West Conshohocken,
510
Pennsylvania, 2014; https://www.astm.org/COMMIT/MONO12-EB.24605.pdf.
511
18.
Mueller, S.; Kwik, J. 2012 Corn Ethanol: Emerging Plant Energy and Environmental
512
Technologies. UIC Energy Resources Center, Chicago, Illinois, 2013;
513
http://www.ethanolrfa.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/2012-Corn-Ethanol-Emerging-Plant-
514
Energy-and-Environmental-Technologies.pdf. 30 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 31 of 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
515
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
19.
Pan, S.-Y., et al. Engineering, environmental and economic performance evaluation of
516
high-gravity carbonation process for carbon capture and utilization. Appl. Energy. 2016, 170,
517
269–277. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.02.103
518 519
20. Enerkem, 2017 http://enerkem.com/biofuels-and-green-chemicals/biofuels/ accessed 8/16/2017
520 521
21.
Elliott, D. et al. Hydrocarbon liquid production via catalytic hydroprocessing of phenolic
522
oils fractioned from fast pyrolysis of red oak and corn stover. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2015,
523
3, 892-901. doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.5b00015
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
31 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 32 of 32
534
535
536
537
538
539
TOC/Abstract Graphic and Synopsis. Bio-blendstocks with physical properties indicative of an
540
ability to increase the fuel economy of spark ignition engines were evaluated for their technology
541
readiness and economic and environmental viability.
542
543
32 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
