CRADLE-TO-GRAVE LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF SYNGAS ELECTRICITY FROM WOODY BIOMASS RESIDUES
Keywords:
Bioenergy, woody biomass, syngas electricity, life-cycle analysis, environmental assessment.Abstract
Forest restoration and fire suppression activities in the western United States have resulted in large volumes of low-to-no-value residues. An environmental assessment would enable greater use while maintaining environmental sustainability of these residues for energy products. One internationally accepted sustainable metric tool that can assess environmental impacts of new bioenergy conversion systems is the life cycle assessment (LCA). Using the LCA method, this study evaluated the synthesis gas (syngas) electricity produced via a distributed-scale biomass thermochemical conversion system called the Tucker renewable natural gas (RNG) system. This system converts woody biomass in a high-temperature and extremely low-oxygen environment to a medium-energy syngas that is burned to generate electricity. The system also produced biochar as a by-product and tar as a waste. Results from the life cycle impact assessment included an estimate of the global warming (GW) impact from the cradle-to-grave production of syngas for electricity. When the carbon sequestration effect from the biochar by-product was included, GW impact value (0.330 kg CO2-eq/kWh) was notably lower compared with electricity generated from bituminous coal (1.079 kg CO2-eq/kWh) and conventional natural gas (0.720 kg CO2-eq/kWh). Other environmental impacts showed that syngas electricity ranged between the direct-biomass-burned electricity and fossil-fuel-combusted electricity for different impact categories. This occurred because, although the woody biomass feedstock was from a renewable resource with less environmental impact, propane was consumed during the thermochemical conversion. Specifically, the evaluation showed that the highest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions contribution came from burning propane that was used to maintain the endothermic reaction in the Tucker RNG unit. If the tar waste from the system were converted into a low-energy syngas and used to supplement propane consumption, a further decrease of 41% in GHG emissions (ie fossil CO2) could be achieved in this cradle-to-grave assessment.
References
Bare J (2011) TRACI 2.0: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts 2.0. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 13(5):687-696.
Bergman R, Zhang H, Englund K, Windell K, Gu H (2016) Estimating GHG Emissions from the manufacturing of field-applied biochar pellets In: Proceedings, Society of Wood Science and Technology 59th International Convention. March 6-11, 2016. Curitiba, Brazil: 139-149.
Channiwala SA, Parikh PP (2002) A unified correlation for estimating HHV of solid, liquid and gaseous fuels. Fuel 81(8):1051–1063.
Cherubini F, Stromman AH (2011) Life cycle assessment of bioenergy systems: State of the art and future challenges. Biores Technol 102(2):437-451.
Ciais P, Sabine C, Bala G, Bopp L, Brovkin V, Canadell J, Chhabra A, DeFries R, Galloway J, Heimann M, Jones C, Le Quéré C, Myneni RB, Piao S, Thornton P (2013) Chapter 6: Carbon and other biogeochemical cycles. In: Climate change 2013: The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter06_FINAL.pdf (15 June 2016).
Cowie AL, Cowie AJ (2014) Case Study - Rural Climate Solutions (University of New England/ NSW Department of Primary Industries) Life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas mitigation benefits of biochar. http://www.ieabioenergy-task38.org/publications/T38_Biochar_case_study.pdf. (28 April 2015).
Field JL, Keske CMH, Birch GL, Defoort MW, Cotrufo MF (2013) Distributed biochar and bioenergy coproduction: A regionally specific case study of environmental benefits and economic impacts. Glob Change Biol Bioenergy 5:177-191.
Gaunt J, Lehmann J (2008) Energy balance and emissions associated with biochar sequestration and pyrolysis bioenergy production. College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Cornell University. Environmental Science & Technology 42: 4152–4158.
Gu H, Bergman R (2016) Life-cycle assessment of a distributed-scale thermochemical bioenergy conversion system. Wood Fiber Sci 48(2):129-141.
Hertwich EG, Gibon T, Bouman EA, Arvesen A, Suh S, Heath GA, Bergesen JD, Ramirez A, Vega MI Shi L (2013) Integrated life-cycle assessment of electricity-supply scenarios confirms global environmental benefit of low-carbon technologies. PNAS special feature. http://www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1312753111. pp. 6. (14 June 2016)
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2014)
Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fifth
assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change. Page 151 in Pachauri RK, Meyer LA,
eds. Core Writing Team. Climate change 2014: Synthesis
report. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (2006a)
Environmental management—life-cycle assessment—
principles and framework. ISO 14040. ISO, Geneva,
Switzerland. 20 pp.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (2006b)
Environmental management—life-cycle assessment—
requirements and guidelines. ISO 14044. ISO, Geneva,
Switzerland. 46 pp.
Johnson E (2016) Managing Director, Atlantic Consulting, Gattikon, Switzerland. Personal communication with R Bergman on 23 July 2016.
Miller S, Essen M, Anderson N, Chung W, Elliot W, Page-Dumroese D, Han, Han-Sup, Hogland J, Keyes CR (2014). Burgeoning biomass: Creating efficient and sustainable forest biomass supply chains in the Rockies. Science You Can Use Bulletin, Issue 13. USDA For Serv Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO. 10 pp.
Miller S, Essen M, Anderson N, Page-Dumroese D, McCollum D, Bergman R, Elder T (2015) Burgeoning biomass: Creating efficient and sustainable forest biomass supply chains in the Rockies, Part II. Science You Can Use Bulletin, Issue 17. USDA For Serv Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO. 10 pp.
Morris V (2016) CEO, US Microgrid, Charleston, SC. Personal communication with H Gu on 11 July 2016.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) (2012)
Life-cycle inventory database project. https://www.lcacom
mons.gov/nrel/search (3 March 2015).
Perlack PD, Wright LL, Turhollow AF, Graham RL, Stokes RJ, Erbach DC (2005) Biomass as feedstock for a bioenergy and bioproducts industry: The technical feasibility of a billion-ton: Annual supply. April 2005. A joint study sponsored by U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/bioenergy/pdfs/final_billionton_vision_report2.pdf (28 April 2015)
Pierobon F, Ganguly G, Anfodillo T, Eastin IL (2014) Evaluation of environmental impacts of harvest residue-based bioenergy using radiative forcing analysis. For Chron 90(5):577-585.
PRé Consultants (2016) Life-Cycle assessment software package SimaPro 8. Stationsplein 121, 3818 LE Amersfoort, The Netherlands. http://www.pre-sustainability.com/ (14 June 2016).
Schreiber A, Zapp P, and Marx J (2012) Meta-analysis of life cycle assessment studies on electricity generation with carbon capture and storage. 2012 by Yale University. DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00435 .x Vol. 16, Number S1.
Sebastian F, Royo J Gomez, M (2011) Cofiring versus biomass-fired power plants: GHG (Greenhouse Gases) emissions savings comparison by means of LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) methodology. Energy 36: 2029-2037.
Sohi SP, Krull E, Lopez-Capel E, Bol R (2010) Chapter 2 – A review of biochar and its use and function in soil. Advances in Agronomy 105:47–82.
Stephenson A, MacKay DJC (2014) Life cycle impacts of biomass electricity in 2020. Department of Energy and Climate Change, London, UK. http://www.gov.uk/decc.
Steubing B (2011) Analysis of the availability of bioenergy and assessment of its optimal use from an environmental perspective. PhD dissertation, École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. 181 pp.
Steubing B, Zah R, Ludwig C (2011) Life cycle assessment of SNG from wood for heating, electricity, and transportation. Biomass Bioenerg 35(7):2950–2960.
Tilman D, Socolow R, Foley JA, Hill J, Larson E, Lynd L, Pacala S, Reilly J, Searchinger T, Somerville C, Williams R (2009) Beneficial Biofuels—The Food, Energy, and Environment Trilemma. Science 325(5938): 270-271.
Tucker R (2016) Owner, Tucker Engineering Associates, Inc. Charlotte, NC, Personal communication with H Gu on 11 July 2016.
Turconi R, Boldrin A, Astrup T (2013) Life cycle assessment of electricity generation technologies: Overview, comparability and limitations. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 28: 555–565.
United States Energy Information Administration (USEIA)
(2016) Short-term energy outlook. United States Energy
Information Administration. https://www.eia.gov/forecasts/
steo/report/electricity.cfm (2 August 2016).
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
(2015) eGRID 2012 summary tables. USEPA, Washington,
DC. 13 pp. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/
-10/documents/egrid2012_summarytables_0.pdf (18
July 2016).
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
(2016a) Inventory of US greenhouse gas emissions and
sinks: 1990-2014. Chapter 6: Land use, land-use change,
and forestry. EPA 430-R-16-002. USEPA, Washington,
DC. 1-91 pp. https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/
Downloads/ghgemissions/US-GHG-Inventory-2016-Main-
Text.pdf (4 August 2016)
United States Environmental Protection Agency USEPA
(2016) Carbon dioxide emissions associated with biomass
use at stationary sources. USEPA. Washington,
DC. https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/
biogenic-emissions.html (28 April 2015).
USFS (2011) National report on sustainable forests—2010. FS-979. USDA For Serv, Washington, DC. 214 pp. http://www.fs.fed.us/research/sustain/docs/national-reports/2010/2010-sustainability-report.pdf. (4 August 2016).
United States Department of Energy (USDOE) (2016)
Billion-ton report: Advancing domestic resources
for a thriving bioeconomy. Volume 1: Economic availability
of feedstocks. Langholtz MH, Stokes BJ, Eaton
LM (Leads). USDOE. ORNL/TM-2016/160. Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN. 448 pp. http://energy
.gov/eere/bioenergy/2016-billion-ton-report (7 December
.
Wang Z, Dunn JB, Han J, Wang MQ (2014) Effects of co-produced biochar on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of pyrolysis-derived renewable fuels. Biofuels and Bioprod Bioref. 8:189–204.
Whitaker M, Heath GA, O’Donoughue P, and Vorum M (2012) Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Coal-Fired electricity Generation. 2012 by Yale University. DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00465 .x Vol. 16, Number S1.
Woodall CW Coulston JW, Domke GM, Walters BF, Wear DN, Smith JE, Andersen H, Clough BJ, Cohen WB, Griffith DM, Hagen SC, Hanou IS, Nichols MC, Perry CH, Russell MB, Westfall JA, Wilson BT (2015) The U.S. forest carbon accounting framework: Stocks and stock change, 1990-2016. Gen Tech Rep NRS-154. USDA For Serv Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA. 49 pp.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
The copyright of an article published in Wood and Fiber Science is transferred to the Society of Wood Science and Technology (for U. S. Government employees: to the extent transferable), effective if and when the article is accepted for publication. This transfer grants the Society of Wood Science and Technology permission to republish all or any part of the article in any form, e.g., reprints for sale, microfiche, proceedings, etc. However, the authors reserve the following as set forth in the Copyright Law:
1. All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.
2. The right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. In the case of whole articles, such third parties must obtain Society of Wood Science and Technology written permission as well. However, the Society may grant rights with respect to Journal issues as a whole.
3. The right to use all or part of this article in future works of their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, text books, or reprint books.
