University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development The greenhouse gas mitigation potential of green biorefineries in Austria Stefan Höltinger, Mathias Kirchner, Johannes Schmidt & Erwin Schmid University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna 24 August 2016, (LTU) Luleå, Sweden
University of Natural Resources Outline and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development • Introduction Biorefinery • Motivation for biorefinery research • Drivers for green biorefinery development in Austria • • Data and methodology Integrated modelling approach • Spatially explicit data • LCA approach • • Results and outlook Profitability of different green biorefinery concepts • GHG mitigation potential • 2
University of Natural Resources Definition and classification and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development „ Biorefining is the sustainable processing of biomass into a spectrum of marketable bio-based products and bioenergy.” IEA - Task 42 Biorefineries IEA Task 42 Classification of Biorefineries 1 • Raw materials (agricultural-, forest- and aquatic biomass, biogenic residuals and waste materials) • Intermediates (Platform) (starch, proteins, fibres, press juice, biogas, syngas) • Processes (mechanical, thermochemical, chemical and biotechnological) • Products (food, feed, chemicals, materials, fuels, electricity, heat) 1 Cherubini et al. (2009). Toward a common classification approach for biorefinery systems. Biofpr . 3
University of Natural Resources Motivation for GBR research and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development • Biorefineries are promoted for • Mitigating climate change 1 • Replacing fossil resources by renewable raw materials or waste 2 • Increasing economic efficiency and sustainability of energy technologies 3 • Drivers for the green biorefinery concept in Austria • Oversupply of grassland biomass due to changes in agricultural policies and structures • Alternative utilization for grassland biomass to preserve cultural landscape • Employment opportunities for rural areas 1 EC (2008). 20 20 by 2020 - Europe's climate change opportunity 2 EC (2011). A resource-efficient Europe - Flagship initiative under the Europe 2020 Strategy” 3 EC (2009). “ Investing in the Development of Low Carbon Technologies (SET- Plan)” 4
University of Natural Resources Objectives and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development • Spatially explicit, techno-economic optimization model (BioResume) to assess • economic feasibility of various green biorefinery (GBR) concepts • determine key parameters that affect the profitability • GHG mitigation potential • Impact of different policy support schemes 5
University of Natural Resources Green Biorefinery (GBR) concepts and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development • Assessment of GBR concepts and biogas (CHP) Feedstocks and products GBR - Concept Feedstock Press juice Press cake GBR_fibres grass silage feed proteins, fibres for biogas CHP technical applications GBR_amino_acids grass silage amino acids, Biogas CHP lactic acid Biogas grass silage Biogas CHP 6
University of Natural Resources Integrated modelling framework and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development EPIC Simulates biophysical processes such as crop yields Biophysical process and nutrient cycles at 1x1 km simulation model PASMA [grid] Derives economically optimal Austrian agricultural production and forestry sector model BioResume Maximizes profits along the biorefinery supply chain by Biorefinery supply selecting optimal. plant chain optimization locations and capacities model
University of Natural Resources PASMA[grid] and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development Biomass supply • Spatially explicit biomass supply • curves at 1x1 km resolution competition with livestock, • bioenergy and food production aggregated to 20x20 km supply • regions for MIP model Direct and indirect soil • emissions • GHG emissions for different management intensities (fertilizer inputs) Annual grass silage supply per 20x20 km supply region at a feedstock price of 100 Euro per t dm 8
University of Natural Resources BioResume – Input data and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development Spatially explicit data Techno-economic and LCA data • Biomass supply and soil GHG • Annualized capital costs emissions of different • Operating costs management intensities • Energy inputs and costs (1x1 km) • Transportation costs and GHG • 174 supply regions (20x20 km) emissions • 79 potential sites • Product yields and prices • Road network dataset • GHG emissions of reference products 9
University of Natural Resources Life cycle GHG emissions of GBRs and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development • Scope • Ghg mitigation potential of utilizing one t dm grass silage in different green biorefinery systems compared to energetic utilization in biogas plants • Functional unit – input orientated • 1 t dm biomass input • System boundaries • GHG emissions from cradle to factory gate • Cultivation and harvest (soil emissions and machinery), biomass transport and processing in GBR • Reference system 10
System boundaries and reference systems
University of Natural Resources Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development • Sensitivity analysis • Monte-Carlo simulation with 500 model runs with feasible ranges for • product yields and prices • Life cycle GHG emissions of biorefineries • Ghg emissions of substituted products • Uncertainty analysis • Impact of single model parameters on model results uncertainty 12
University of Natural Resources Results – Supply chain design and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development Optimal capacities for • biorefineries are on average about 6 times larger than for biogas plants 8-14 GBRs instead of 30-35 • biogas plants to optimally utilize the biomass potential Average biomass • transportation distances increase from 30 km up to 45-50 km 13
University of Natural Resources Results - Profitability and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development All concepts are economically • feasible under current policy support schemes GBR_amino acids and • GBR_fibres are not economically feasible in 6% and 1% of the simulation runs for, respectively Biogas lower profitability, but • also lower uncertainty due to guaranteed feed-in tariff 15
University of Natural Resources Results – GHG emissions and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development 16
University of Natural Resources Results – GHG mitigation and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development 17
University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna Effect of abolishing feed-tariffs for bioenergy Institute for Sustainable Economic Development 18
University of Natural Resources Conclusions and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development • Green biorefineries can offer a profitable utilization pathway for grass silage in Austria • biogas plants rely on the current policy support schemes (feed-in tariffs) • Profitability of green biorefineries is very sensitive to • market prices of key products (organic acids and technical fibres) • the development of separation and downstream costs • upscaling costs from pilot- to industrial scale • The GHG mitigation potential per t dm biomass input is in a similar range than the pure energetic utilization in biogas plants 19
University of Natural Resources Outlook and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development • Limited LCA approach • only GHG emissions covered • Non renewable energy inputs • Land use implications • Demand restrictions biorefinery products • Limitation for overall mitigation potential 20
University of Natural Resources Thank you! and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development Thank you for your interest University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna Department of Economics and Social Sciences Institute for Sustainable Economic Development Stefan Höltinger, Mathias Kirchner, Johannes Schmidt, Erwin Schmid Feistmantelstraße 4, A-1180 Vienna Tel.: +43 1 47654-73119 stefan.hoeltinger@boku.ac.at , http://www.wiso.boku.ac.at/inwe/ 08. 10. 2013 Stefan Höltinger 21
University of Natural Resources Ghg credits for substituted products and Life Sciences, Vienna Institute for Sustainable Economic Development product unit min max insulation boards kg CO2 eq kg -1 1.03 1.72 feed protein concentrate kg CO2 eq kg -1 0.73 0.90 lactic acid kg CO2 eq kg -1 0.40 1.20 amino acid mixture kg CO2 eq kg -1 8.40 11.38 electricity kg CO2 eq kWh -1 0.28 surplus heat kg CO2 eq kWh -1 0.24 • Key factors • Choice of reference products • Multiple feedstocks and production routes • Product yields 22
Recommend
More recommend
