Environmental Implications of Bio-Jet: LCA approach

Northwest Advanced Renewables Alliance

Environmental Implications of Bio-Jet:LCA approach

Indroneil Ganguly Asst. Professor (Research)

University of Washington, Seattle

Presentation Overview• Background

– Being Green– What is LCA– Importance of LCA in the project

• Results of Bio-Jet LCA– Some scenarios on the feedstock aspect– Overall LCA of Bio-jet Fuel

• Comparing Bio-jet of Fossil based Jet-fuel

What does it mean to be Green??How do we measure it?? What is Sustainability??

SustainabilityUnited Nations World Commission on Environment and Development (1987)

Sustainable Development definition:

“… development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

• Biodegradable• Recyclable• Ozone friendly• Eco-design• Greenwashing

We all know that being Green is Trendy . . . . . .What is the science of being green?

• Industry is looking for ways to green their products and manufacturing processes.• Individuals and Families are looking to green their homes and lifestyles.

• How can you tell if something really is green??• What is currently happening to achieve this goal?

Definition:

Life Cycle Assessment

“Compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs and the potential environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life cycle”This establishes an environmental

profile of the system!

ISO = International Organization for Standardization

Ensures that an LCA is completed in a certain way.

WHAT CAN BE DONE WITH LCA?

1.Product or project development and improvement2.Strategic planning3.Public policy making4.Marketing and eco-declarations

7

CO2

SUN

O2 CO2 Air EmissionsSUN

O2

Water & Land Removals and Emissions

Management & Harvest ProductionSoil Carbon

Extraction

Urban and suburban wastes** municipal solid wastes (MSW), lawn wastes, wastewater treatment sludge, urban wood wastes, disaster debris, trap grease, yellow grease, waste cooking oil, etc.

Life Cycle Assessment of Bio- Jet Fuel


CO2

SUN


O2



Extraction


System Boundary

CO2

SUN


O2



Extraction

10


System Boundary

CO2

SUN


O2



Extraction

11


System Boundary

CO2

SUN


O2



Extraction

• Bio-Fuels necessary to move the United States toward greater energy independence and security

• LCA is required for public procurement

Suggested Greenhouse Gas Reduction CriterionSubtitle A—Renewable Fuel Standard• ‘‘(E) CELLULOSIC BIOFUEL –to be considered acceptable has

to be “at least 60 percent less than the baseline lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions”.

12

US Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007

H.R.6: (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate), PROCUREMENT AND ACQUISITION OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS. (Source: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-110hr6enr/pdf/BILLS-110hr6enr.pdf)

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-110hr6enr/pdf/BILLS-110hr6enr.pdf

Relevant Characteristics of Forest Biomass

Difficulty handling and economic viability issues

Low bulk density

Varying sizes and shapes of woody biomass

Inconsistent mix of multiple species

Various handling complications in cases of

Salvage of mountain pine beetle killed trees

Stage of beetle attack at the time of harvest is critical

Post fire salvage operations (can we use it for Bio-fuel?)

Biomass Handling Methods: in woods

Grinding:

Chipping:

Bundling:

Source: Han-Sup Han et al. 2012

Biomass recovery and production systems

Slash recovery operation Dump truck slash shuttle & centralized grinding Roll-off/Hook-lift truck slash shuttle & centralized grinding Bundling slash & Centralized grinding Grinding on site & Hog fuel shuttle Pile-to-pile on site grinding

Whole tree chipping Medium Chipper – Small/large trees Large Chipper – Small/large trees

Integrated harvesting Chipping (whole tree) & Grinding (slash) Grinding only (slash & whole tree)

Source: Han-Sup Han et al. 2012

Example: System

Boundary for

LCA of Forest Thinning

Equivalency factors used (equivalent mass/mass emitted)

17

Impacts Considered CH4 CO CO2 N2O NMVOC NOx PM SOx

Contribution to Climate Change (CO2

equivalents) 21 0 1 310 0 0 0 0

Contribution to Acidification (H+

equivalents) 0 0 0 0 0 40 0 50.8

Contribution to photochemical smog

(NOx equivalents) 0.0030 0.013 0 0 0.78 1 0 0

Impact category Impact category Media

Ozone depletion Air

Global climate Air

Acidification Air Air

Eutrophication Air, water

Smog formation Air Air

Human health criteria Air Air

Human health cancer Urban air, nonurban air, freshwater, seawater,

natural soil, agricultural soilHuman health noncancer

Ecotoxicity Urban

18Source: TRACI 2.0

Northwest Advanced Renewables Alliance

Overview of Bio-Jet fuel LCA

Overall Scope for LCA of woody biomass to bio-jet fuel

Scenarios developed for recovery of landing residue

Benchmark scenario:1. Harvest standing forest using a Feller-buncher 2. Take harvest to primary landing using a track-skidder3. Shuttle Loose Residue from Primary Landing to secondary using a dump truck (30 CY

capacity)4. Chip at the secondary landing and haul to biomass processing facility using a chip

van (140 CY capacity)5. Transportation Scenario:

Spur Road 1 ½ lane Gravel Highway Interstate Total

Avg. miles/hr 6 20 29 55 62

One way haul miles 2.5 5 10 20 37.5 75Developed by: CORRIM

1st Alternate Scenario:1. A larger Roll-off container (50 CY capacity) can access the primary landing for

shuttling the loose residue to secondary landing for chipping.2. Everything else remains constant

Harvest site to landing in roll off container Harvest site to landing in dump truck0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

29.6

49.2

Global Warming Potential

Front Loader

Chipper/Loader

Residuals from forest harvest

Shuttle from harvest to landing using dump truck

Transport Chips to Facility

Kilo

gram

of C

O2

equi

vale

bnt

Alternate distance scenariosSecond series of scenarios (Total distance stays constant; spur road distance increases):

• All other factors same as baseline case

Third series of scenarios: (Interstate road distance increases)

• All other factors same as baseline case

Spur Road (miles)

1 ½ lane (miles)

Gravel (miles)

Highway (miles)

Interstate (miles)

Total (miles)

Alternate Scenario 2 3.5 5 10 20 36.5 75

Alternate Scenario 3 5 5 10 20 35 75

Spur Road (miles)

1 ½ lane (miles)

Gravel (miles)

Highway (miles)

Interstate (miles)

Total (miles)



Alternate distance scenarios (baseline, 2 and 3)

2.5 miles spur road 3.5 miles spur road 5 miles spur road20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

107.8

119.7

Global warming kg CO2 eq, 137.6

47.452.6

Smog kg O3 eq, 60.4

84.3

93.6

Acidification mol H+ eq, 107.5

75 miles from Harvest site to Biomass Processing Facility Different Spur Road Distances from Harvest Site to Landing

Alternate distance scenarios (baseline, 4 and 5)

75 miles 100 miles 120 miles20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

107.8

114.0

Global warming kg CO2 eq; 118.8

47.4 50.1Smog kg O3 eq,

52.2

84.389.1

Acidification mol H+ eq; 92.9

2.5 miles Spur Road Distance frim Harvest Site to LandingDifferent Highway Distances from Landing to Biomass Processing Facility

Consequential LCA

System Impact Avoided Impact Total Impact

Global Warming kg CO2 eq 65.71 -65.7 0.006

Smog kg O3 eq 28.8 -89.5 -60.7

Acidification Air mol H+ eq 52 -176 -124

Ozone Depletion kg CFC-11 eq 2.71E-09 -3.26E-10 2.38E-09

Respiratory Effects kg PM10 eq 0 -11.1 -11.1

Environmental Impacts of Residual Extraction and Avoided Impacts of Slash Pile Burning

Complete Forest to IPK Process: Environmental Performance of 1 kg of IPK

Impact Category Unit Total Contribution from Feedstock process

Contribution from Pretreatment and

GEVO processGlobal warming potential (GWP) kg CO2 eq. 1.304708 4.38848E-05 1.304664

Acidification Potential H+ moles eq. -0.83518 -0.85198225 0.016798

Eutrophication Potential kg N eq. 0.004714 -0.000699414 0.005413

Ozone depletion Potential kg CFC-11 eq. 6E-08 1.63197E-11 6.00E-08

Smog Potential kg O3 eq. -0.27772 -0.4162199 0.138496

Respiratory Effects kg PM10 eq. -0.07464 -0.075427 0.00079

Global warming potential (GWP) Acidification Potential Eutrophication Potential Ozone depletion Potential Smog Potential Respiratory Effects

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5Total Contribution from Feedstock process Contribution from Pretreatment and GEVO process

Preliminary findings – do not publish or cite

Crude Oil Extraction

Crude Oil Transportation

Refinery: Jet Fuel Production

Jet Fuel Transportation

Jet Fuel Combustion

Aviation Productivity

Co-Products

Emissions to Air, Water and Land Emissions: CO2, PM, Nox, Sox, H20Fossil Jet Fuel

Co-ProductsSoil Carbon

Bio-Jet Fuel Transportation

Bio-Jet Fuel Combustion

Co-Products

Greenhouse & Land Prep.

Forest Stand Harvest Operations

Prep. & Transport Biomass

Pre-treatment and Bio-jet conversion

Emissions to Air, Water and Land

CO2, PM, Nox, Sox, H20CO2

CO2

Bio Jet Fuel

Aircraft transportation: One person for 1 km on an intercontinental flight

Impact Category UnitTransport, aircraft, passenger, intercontinental

Bio-Jet Fuel (IPK) Fossil Fuel (Kerosene)

Ozone depletion kg CFC-11 eq 1.69E-06 1.42E-05

Global warming kg CO2 eq 32.32 84.22

Fossil fuel depletion MJ surplus 65.17 165.79

Preliminary findings – do not publish or cite

Ozone depletion Global warming Fossil fuel depletion0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Bio-Jet Fuel (IPK) Fossil Fuel (Kerosene)

62% Reduction

Conclusion• We were able to get such favorable results primarily for the

following reasons:

– A minimal amount of fossil fuel is used during the conversion process, because waste biomass (in the form of lignin), can be substituted for coal and/or natural gas to provide the heat and power needed for the IPK process.

– The avoided environmental burdens associated with not having to burn the slash piles in the forest reduced the overall environmental footprint of the process.

• We can improve the overall carbon footprint associated with bio-jet fuel through innovations in efficient feedstock handling.

THANK YOU

Documents

Environmental Implications of Bio-Jet: LCA approach