Bradley A. Saville, Heather MacLean, Mohammad Pour Bafrani, Tim Shen, Jon McKechnie

University of Toronto FFAB AGM May 22, 2013

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) LCA quantifies the environmental effects of the

production of a product(s), considering the full life cycle from resource extraction through production, use of a product and disposal.

In this work, LCA is used to quantify

greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for production of Lignocellulosic Ethanol, with different co-products and production pathways

Life Cycle Assessment Key factors:

Crop production Includes seed, fertilizer, chemicals, fuel

Harvest and extraction Includes oil/sugar extraction, transport to processing facilities

Biofuels production process Consumption/use in truck/car Co-products

4

Feedstock

Plant

Distribution

Vehicle

1

Energy IN

Co-Product(s)

Energy OUT

Emissions OUT

Ethanol Fuel

Amount of Biomass Used

Model Vehicle

• 2000 metric tonnes per day

• E85 (85% denatured ethanol, 15% gasoline by volume)

Fuel Produced

• Flexible fuel vehicle

• Fuel consumption • 9.48 L/100km (gasoline) • 12.65 L/100km (E85)

Life Cycle Metrics

Gaseous Emissions Energy Inputs

Waste Streams Water Consumption

• Life Cycle Metric / MJ E85 Produced

Functional Unit

Energy Common Life Cycle Metrics • Total (includes renewables)

• Fossil (includes petroleum)

• Petroleum

Emissions

• CO2, N2O, CH4 (greenhouse gases)

• All combined into CO2 equivalents using Global Warming Potentials over a 100 year timeframe

Gaseous Emissions Energy Inputs

Waste Streams Water Consumption

Characteristics • 2nd generation biofuel • Made from non-food crops • Uses a renewable feedstock • Feed can be domestically produced • Adaptable to existing

infrastructure

Sources • Agricultural residues • Wood/residues • Herbaceous crops • Portions of municipal solid waste

7

Lignocellulosic Biomass

Corn (Starch based)

Petroleum Bioethanol

Many different products! Many Possibilities Few established pathways

Crude Oil

Oil Refinery

LPG

Gasoline

Naphtha Diesel Coke

Fuel Oil Paraffin

Biomass

Biorefinery

Ethanol

Biopolymers Protein

Sweeteners (Xylitol)

Lignin Pellets

Electricity

Bioethanol

Many Possibilities Few established pathways

Biomass

Biorefinery

Ethanol

Biopolymers Protein

Sweeteners (Xylitol)

Lignin Pellets

Electricity

Numerous Feedstocks

Numerous Conversion Methods

Numerous Potential Products

10

Bioethanol

10

Biomass

Biorefinery

Ethanol

Electricity

Single Feedstock

Single Conversion Method

Limited Set of Co-Products

Majority of Existing Studies

“Black Box Model”

Previously Studied

Detailed Modelling (Aspen Plus) of different conversion methods

Sugar

11

Xylitol

Ethanol

Feedstock

Plant

Coal

Soy Protein

Grid Electricity

Lignin Pellets

Co-Product

Protein

Xylitol

Electricity

Sugar

Scenarios

Dilute Acid

Hydrolysis

Ethanol Electricity Fuel Pellets

Xylitol

Ammonia Fibre

Expansion

Auto- Hydrolysis

Fermentation

Corn Stover Switchgrass Hybrid

Poplar

Distillation Processing

Protein

Gas

olin

e

DA

EL

DA

PE

AX

EL

AX

PE

AX

PR

AH

EL

AH

PE

AH

XE

AH

XP

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

MJ o

f Ene

rgy

/ M

J of F

uel P

rodu

ced

Total Fossil Petroleum Co-Product Credit Net

At least 42% higher total energy use

Generally higher total energy use relative to gasoline pathway

Gas

olin

e

DA

EL

DA

PE

AX

EL

AX

PE

AX

PR

AH

EL

AH

PE

AH

XE

AH

XP

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

MJ o

f Ene

rgy

/ M

J of F

uel P

rodu

ced

Total Fossil Petroleum Co-Product Credit Net

At least 47% lower fossil energy use

Generally lower fossil energy use relative to gasoline pathway

Gas

olin

e

DA

EL

DA

PE

AX

EL

AX

PE

AX

PR

AH

EL

AH

PE

AH

XE

AH

XP

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

MJ o

f Ene

rgy

/ M

J of F

uel P

rodu

ced

Total Fossil Petroleum Co-Product Credit Net

Co-Product credits substantially reduce fossil energy

Co-product credit is substantial for fossil energy use

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5 G

asol

ine

Elec

Elec

/Pel

lets

Elec

Elec

/Pel

lets

Elec

Elec

/Pel

lets

Elec

/Xyl

itol

Elec

/Pel

lets

/Xyl

itol

kg C

O2e

q /

MJ E

than

ol F

uel P

rodu

ced

Fossil Energy Co-Product Credit Net

AFEX Conversion Autohydrolysis

Conversion Dilute Acid Conversion

*All non-gasoline pathways produce E85

18

-0.15

-0.1

-0.05

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

Gasoline DAEL DAPE AXEL AXPE AXPR AHEL AHPE AHXE AHXP

kg C

O2e

q /

MJ E

than

ol F

uel P

rodu

ced

Co-Product Credit Downstream Upstream Net

At least 60% reduction relative to gasoline

-0.15

-0.1

-0.05

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

Gasoline DAEL DAPE AXEL AXPE AXPR AHEL AHPE AHXE AHXP

kg C

O2e

q /

MJ E

than

ol F

uel P

rodu

ced

Co-Product Credit Downstream Upstream Net

Pathway with largest net GHG emissions reduction is the autohydrolysis conversion pathway co-producing xylitol and lignin pellets

140% net GHG reduction relative to gasoline

Summary: Impact of Co-products

Co-products can have a significant effect on LCA metrics Large credit if the co-product displaces a GHG-intensive

existing product e.g., renewable electricity displaces coal-derived electricity

Small credit if existing product has low GHG intensity Key Metrics for co-products:

High margin Low energy to produce Displaces energy and GHG-intensive product

20

Contact Information: Bradley.saville@utoronto.ca

416 978 7745