2nd Michigan Forest Bioeconomy Conference

Sustainable Futures

Institute

Understanding Sustainability of the Circular EconomyThrough Systems Analysis

David R. Shonnard, Ph.D.

Feb. 13, 2019The H Hotel, Midland, MI

Professor and Robbins Chair in Sustainable Use of MaterialsDepartment of Chemical EngineeringDirector, Sustainable Futures Institute

Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, USA

Comparing Linear to Circular Economy

A Systems Analysis Framework

Case Studies:

Summary and Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Questions

2

Overview

3

Linear Economy (Material Flow Diagram)

VirginFeedstock

Production and Use

Collected for Recycle

Closed-LoopRecycling

Recycle ProcessLosses

Open-LoopRecycling

Incineration /Energy Recovery

Wastes Landfilled

Leakage(Litter)

Linear Dominant Economy

4

Circular Economy (Material Flow Diagram)

Production and Use

Collected and Processed for

Recycle/Reman.

Closed-LoopRecycling

Energy Recovery

Circular Dominant Economy

LandfilledVirginFeedstock

Wastes

5

Systems Analysis Framework and Tools

MaterialsRecoveryProcesses

LCA (SimaPro)

TEA model,Regional Economics

Process simulation-optimization (Aspen

Plus, INL Model)

Mechanical RecyclingProcesses

ChemicalRecyclingProcesses

Environmental

Social

Economic

Sustainability Indicators

NPV, IRR, MSP,GHG Emissions, Fossil Energy Demand,Direct JobsRegional EconomicsToxic Materials

M/E Balance Databases

Simulations (Software tools)

Impact Assessment NPV = net present value.

IRR = internal rate of return MSP = minimum selling price

Research questions,New policies,trigger new analyses

Framework

Simulation ToolsProcess simulation, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Social LCA (SLCA), TEA, Regional Economics

6

MI Forest Biomass Supply Chain

Feedstock Growth /

Cultivation

Feedstock Harvesting

Feedstock Transport

FeedstockConversion

ProductTransport

ProductUse

FuelChemicalsEquipment

FuelChemicalsEquipment

System BoundaryFunctional Unit: one green tonne of biomass

delivered to factory gate

Re-plantingLand-use change

Maintenance

Heat/PowerChemicalsEquipment

FuelChemicalsEquipment

Research Methods: Surveys of loggers and haulers

MI Economic Development CorporationUS Department of Energy

7

MI Forest Biomass Harvesting ResultsGreenhouse gas emissions Fossil Energy Demand

kg CO2 eqgreen tonnea

kg CO2 eqdry tonne

MJ green tonne

MJdry tonne

A: Full Processor / Forwarder30% Cut (Selective) 14.7 29.4 197.2 394.470% Cut (shelterwood) 12.3 24.6 165.9 331.7Clearcutting 9.9 19.8 135.2 270.4B: Feller-buncher / Skidder / Slasher30% Cut (Selective) 26.3 52.6 337.0 674.070% Cut (shelterwood) 19.1 38.3 248.1 496.3Clearcutting 13.6 27.2 179.0 358.0C: Chainsaws / Skidder30% Cut (Selective) 24.3 48.6 304.2 608.570% Cut (shelterwood) 23.3 46.6 291.9 583.7Clearcutting 22.0 44.0 275.5 551.1

All 30% selective cut harvesting 20.9 41.8 270.8 541.6All 70% shelterwood harvesting 16.3 32.5 213.3 426.6All Clearcut harvesting 10.3 20.6 139.6 279.2All harvesting activity 17.8 35.7 233.1 466.1

a – ‘tonne’ refers to metric tonne

More intensive = more efficientBestMid-input, high productivity

High input, high productivity

Low input, low productivity

Aggregated harvesting/forwarding

8

Process diagram of the IH2® process

26 wt. % biofuel

yieldSolid feed

hopper

Hydroconversion reactor

Fluid bed hydropyrolysis

reactor

SteamReformer

Sour water

stripper

H2S scrubber Oxidation

Char Ash Steam

Steam Water

Gasoline/Diesel blend

Biomass Liquid

hydrocarbons

CO2

H2O

C1-C3 hydrocarbons

H2

Ammonium sulfate

Water

Char boiler

SteamElectricity

(used internally)

Cyclone

Compressor

Separator

Wastewater

NH3-Water

Biomass Processing

Case 1

9

Process diagram of the IH2® Plus process

38 wt. % biofuel

yieldSolid feed hopper

Hydroconversion reactor

Fluid bed hydropyrolysis

reactor

SteamReformer

Separator

Sour water stripper

H2S scrubber Oxidation

Char Ash Steam

Steam Water

Gasoline/Diesel blend

Biomass Liquid hydrocarbons

CO2

H2OC1-C3

hydrocarbons

CH4

H2

Ammonium sulfate

Water

Char boiler

SteamElectricity

(used internally)

Dry Reformer

Fischer-Tropsch

Liquid hydrocarbons

Cyclone

Compressor

Syngas

NH3-Water

Wastewater

Biomass Processing

Case 2

10

Methodology – LCA System boundary IH2® Plus

Hydropyrolysis Hydroconversion Separator

Fischer-Tropsch

Sour water stripper

Ammonium sulfate

Biofuel

Wastewater

Biomass Processing

Dry Reformer

H2SScrubber

Steam Reformer

WaterInputs

Natural Gas

Energy

Electricity

Outputs

CO2

H2C1-C3

hydrocarbons

Syngas

System Boundary

11

Results – GHG emissions for IH2® vs IH2® Plus

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

Case 1 Case 1(FC) Case 2 Case 2(FC)

gCO

2eq/

MJ f

uel b

lend

94.94 94.69

41.52

12.42

60% reduction in GHG emissions relative to fossil gasoline

)

Fuel use

Fuel Transport

Waste treatment

Ammonia credit

H2 Production

Fuel Production

Feedstock

Case 1: IH2®, wood residueCase 2: IH2® Plus, woody residue

12

Pyrolysis-Based Hydrocarbon Biofuel Pathway

13

Process Flowsheet with Three Co-Product Options

• Modeled in Aspen Plus

• Design basis of 1,000 metric tons/day of dry feed to the pyrolysis unit

Burn to Displace Coal

Soil Amendment

Activated Carbon

$49.60 per ton (US EIA)

$352 per ton (Pacific Biochar)$111 per ton (del Campo 2015)

14

Techno-Economic Inputs to aDiscounted Cash Flow Analysis

15

LCA System Boundary

System Boundary

16

Economic and Environmental Results

Trade-off plot showing the effect of different co-products for all heat integration scenarios with displacement allocation

(120)

(80)

(40)

0

40

80

120

$2.00 $2.50 $3.00 $3.50 $4.00 $4.50 $5.00 $5.50 $6.00 $6.50

GHG

emis

sion

s, g

CO

2 eq

uiv p

er M

J of f

uel

MSP, $/gal

1 step 2 step sc 1Burn CharSoil AmendmentActivated Carbon

17

Summary and Conclusions

• A systems analysis framework is useful for evaluating sustainability of a circular forest bioeconomy

• A systems analysis framework • Based on a set of predictive models• Driven by research questions and policy/process alternatives• Inclusive of several sustainability indicators

• Forest-based biofuels achieve large GHG savings compared to fossil fuels, but

• Minimum selling prices are higher than fossil fuels for current market conditions.

18

Acknowledgements• Funding Sponsors

• Richard and Bonnie Robbins Endowment at Michigan Tech• Michigan (MEDC-DOE) Center of Energy Excellence• National Science Foundation grant MSP/CHE-ENG/ECCS-1230803

• Students-Postdocs-Faculty• Robert Handler• Olumide Winjobi• Daniel Kulas• Bethany Klemetsrud• Wen Zhou

19

References• Shonnard, D.R., Tipaldo, E., Thompson, V., Pearce, J., Caneba, G., Handler, R.M., 2019,

Systems analysis for PET and olefin polymers in a circular economy, Procedia CIRP, 26th CIRP Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) Conference.

• Handler, R.M., Shonnard, D.R., Lautala, P., Abbas, D., Srivastava, A., (2014), Environmental impacts of roundwood supply chain options in Michigan: Life-cycle assessment of harvest and transport stages, Journal of Cleaner Production, 76, 1 August, Pages 64–73.

• Winjobi, O., Tavakoli, H., Klemetsrud, B., Handler, R.M., Marker, T., Roberts, M., Shonnard, D.R., 2018, Carbon Footprint Analysis of Gasoline and Diesel from Forest Residues and Algae using Integrated Hydroyrolysis and Hydroconversion Plus Fisher Tropsch (IH2® Plus Cool GTL™), ACS Sustainable Chemistry and Engineering, DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.8b02091.

• Kulas, D. Winjobi, O., Zhou, W., Shonnard, D.R., 2018, Effects of Co-product Uses on Environmental and Economic Sustainability of Hydrocarbon Biofuel from One- and Two-Step Pyrolysis of Poplar, ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 6 (5), pp 5969–5980, DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b04390

• del Campo, B. G. Production of activated carbon from fast pyrolysis biochar and the detoxification of pyrolytic sugars for ethanol fermentation. PhD Dissertation, Iowa State University, 2015

2nd Michigan Forest Bioeconomy Conference

Sustainable Futures

Institute

Sustainable Forest BioeconomyRe

new

able

Biod

iver

sity

Carb

on N

eutr

al

Zero

Was

te

Eart

h Sy

stem

s

Syst

ems A

naly

sis

Entr

epre

neur

ial

Circ

ular

Eco

nom

y• Contact Information:

• David R. Shonnard: • drshonna@mtu.edu

Thank you for your attention!