Life cycle assessment of the production of gasoline and diesel from forest residues using integrated hydropyrolysis and hydroconversion View Full Text


Ontology type: schema:ScholarlyArticle     


Article Info

DATE

2019-03-29

AUTHORS

Robert Zupko

ABSTRACT

PurposeRenewable gasoline and diesel can be produced through integrated hydropyrolysis and hydroconversion (IH2) using renewable feedstocks such as woody biomass from logging residues. This study assesses the potential environmental impacts of IH2 process fuels manufactured in Ontonagon, Michigan, to determine their environmental impacts and if these manufactured fuels will meet Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS) requirements. The energy return on investment (EROI) is also calculated for comparison to other renewable fuels.MethodsA cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment was conducted using regional forestry, timber harvest, and transportation data from the region. Regional geographic data was used to determine service areas that may provide woody biomass. The service areas were then developed into inventory data based upon the type and distribution of potential woody biomass feedstocks. Survey data from loggers in the region were used to ensure that harvest types were allocated in accordance with regional activity. Remaining inventory items were derived from existing data in the literature or existing life cycle inventory databases. This study uses a functional unit of one megajoule of gasoline or diesel produced using the IH2 process and assessed several environmental indicators as well as EROI.Results and discussionFuels produced generate approximately 88% less greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions compared to petroleum fuels given RFS assumptions. Manufacturing and transportation of feedstocks accounts for 92.19% of energy used in production giving a calculated EROI of 4.19 and 4.31 per kilogram of diesel and gasoline, respectively. Pessimistic estimates of soil organic carbon (SOC) loss result in GHG emissions that are approximately 83% lower. If a 1:0.5 displacement ratio of IH2 fuels is considered, the GHG emissions are about 76% lower without SOC loss and 66% lower with. This study demonstrates that while environmental impacts and EROI are sensitive to site selection and SOC estimates, there is a sufficient GHG emission reduction such that IH2 fuels are capable of meeting regulatory requirements.ConclusionsFuels produced at the facility result in a reduction in GHG emissions, but better site selection may result in less fuel being used in transportation. Reducing the quantity of electricity needed in n-th–generation facilities would also reduce environmental impacts while improving the EROI. The energy mix used to supply IH2 facilities should also be considered during the planning process. Finally, future research may be needed to ensure feedstocks recovered from logging operations match expectations. More... »

PAGES

1793-1804

References to SciGraph publications

  • 2009-11-19. Biofuels: Efficiency, Ethics, and Limits to Human Appropriation of Ecosystem Services in JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS
  • 2010-07-11. New perspectives on the energy return on (energy) investment (EROI) of corn ethanol in ENVIRONMENT, DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY
  • 2011-01-21. TRACI 2.0: the tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental impacts 2.0 in CLEAN TECHNOLOGIES AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
  • Identifiers

    URI

    http://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s11367-019-01616-8

    DOI

    http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01616-8

    DIMENSIONS

    https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1113086510


    Indexing Status Check whether this publication has been indexed by Scopus and Web Of Science using the SN Indexing Status Tool
    Incoming Citations Browse incoming citations for this publication using opencitations.net

    JSON-LD is the canonical representation for SciGraph data.

    TIP: You can open this SciGraph record using an external JSON-LD service: JSON-LD Playground Google SDTT

    [
      {
        "@context": "https://springernature.github.io/scigraph/jsonld/sgcontext.json", 
        "about": [
          {
            "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/09", 
            "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
            "name": "Engineering", 
            "type": "DefinedTerm"
          }, 
          {
            "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/0907", 
            "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
            "name": "Environmental Engineering", 
            "type": "DefinedTerm"
          }
        ], 
        "author": [
          {
            "affiliation": {
              "alternateName": "Department of Social Sciences, Michigan Technological University, 1400 Townsend Dr, 49931, Houghton, MI, USA", 
              "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.259979.9", 
              "name": [
                "Department of Social Sciences, Michigan Technological University, 1400 Townsend Dr, 49931, Houghton, MI, USA"
              ], 
              "type": "Organization"
            }, 
            "familyName": "Zupko", 
            "givenName": "Robert", 
            "id": "sg:person.07423050614.36", 
            "sameAs": [
              "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.07423050614.36"
            ], 
            "type": "Person"
          }
        ], 
        "citation": [
          {
            "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s10806-009-9218-x", 
            "sameAs": [
              "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1051420744", 
              "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-009-9218-x"
            ], 
            "type": "CreativeWork"
          }, 
          {
            "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s10098-010-0338-9", 
            "sameAs": [
              "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1050591623", 
              "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-010-0338-9"
            ], 
            "type": "CreativeWork"
          }, 
          {
            "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s10668-010-9255-7", 
            "sameAs": [
              "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1033010386", 
              "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-010-9255-7"
            ], 
            "type": "CreativeWork"
          }
        ], 
        "datePublished": "2019-03-29", 
        "datePublishedReg": "2019-03-29", 
        "description": "PurposeRenewable gasoline and diesel can be produced through integrated hydropyrolysis and hydroconversion (IH2) using renewable feedstocks such as woody biomass from logging residues. This study assesses the potential environmental impacts of IH2 process fuels manufactured in Ontonagon, Michigan, to determine their environmental impacts and if these manufactured fuels will meet Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS) requirements. The energy return on investment (EROI) is also calculated for comparison to other renewable fuels.MethodsA cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment was conducted using regional forestry, timber harvest, and transportation data from the region. Regional geographic data was used to determine service areas that may provide woody biomass. The service areas were then developed into inventory data based upon the type and distribution of potential woody biomass feedstocks. Survey data from loggers in the region were used to ensure that harvest types were allocated in accordance with regional activity. Remaining inventory items were derived from existing data in the literature or existing life cycle inventory databases. This study uses a functional unit of one megajoule of gasoline or diesel produced using the IH2 process and assessed several environmental indicators as well as EROI.Results and discussionFuels produced generate approximately 88% less greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions compared to petroleum fuels given RFS assumptions. Manufacturing and transportation of feedstocks accounts for 92.19% of energy used in production giving a calculated EROI of 4.19 and 4.31 per kilogram of diesel and gasoline, respectively. Pessimistic estimates of soil organic carbon (SOC) loss result in GHG emissions that are approximately 83% lower. If a 1:0.5 displacement ratio of IH2 fuels is considered, the GHG emissions are about 76% lower without SOC loss and 66% lower with. This study demonstrates that while environmental impacts and EROI are sensitive to site selection and SOC estimates, there is a sufficient GHG emission reduction such that IH2 fuels are capable of meeting regulatory requirements.ConclusionsFuels produced at the facility result in a reduction in GHG emissions, but better site selection may result in less fuel being used in transportation. Reducing the quantity of electricity needed in n-th\u2013generation facilities would also reduce environmental impacts while improving the EROI. The energy mix used to supply IH2 facilities should also be considered during the planning process. Finally, future research may be needed to ensure feedstocks recovered from logging operations match expectations.", 
        "genre": "article", 
        "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s11367-019-01616-8", 
        "inLanguage": "en", 
        "isAccessibleForFree": false, 
        "isPartOf": [
          {
            "id": "sg:journal.1051923", 
            "issn": [
              "0948-3349", 
              "1614-7502"
            ], 
            "name": "The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment", 
            "publisher": "Springer Nature", 
            "type": "Periodical"
          }, 
          {
            "issueNumber": "10", 
            "type": "PublicationIssue"
          }, 
          {
            "type": "PublicationVolume", 
            "volumeNumber": "24"
          }
        ], 
        "keywords": [
          "life cycle assessment", 
          "GHG emissions", 
          "cycle assessment", 
          "environmental impacts", 
          "less greenhouse gas emissions", 
          "grave life cycle assessment", 
          "production of gasoline", 
          "life cycle inventory databases", 
          "GHG emission reduction", 
          "quantity of electricity", 
          "woody biomass", 
          "process fuel", 
          "transportation of feedstock", 
          "generation facilities", 
          "petroleum fuels", 
          "less fuel", 
          "diesel", 
          "greenhouse gas emissions", 
          "renewable fuels", 
          "displacement ratio", 
          "fuel", 
          "potential environmental impacts", 
          "energy mix", 
          "better site selection", 
          "biomass feedstock", 
          "emission reduction", 
          "gasoline", 
          "standard requirements", 
          "gas emissions", 
          "forest residues", 
          "feedstock", 
          "woody biomass feedstock", 
          "energy return", 
          "MethodsA cradle", 
          "renewable feedstock", 
          "hydropyrolysis", 
          "EROI", 
          "SOC estimates", 
          "inventory database", 
          "emission", 
          "site selection", 
          "electricity", 
          "transportation", 
          "facilities results", 
          "manufacturing", 
          "SOC loss", 
          "regional forestry", 
          "pessimistic estimates", 
          "timber harvest", 
          "harvest type", 
          "Ontonagon", 
          "environmental indicators", 
          "inventory data", 
          "megajoules", 
          "hydroconversion", 
          "service area", 
          "functional units", 
          "transportation data", 
          "requirements", 
          "process", 
          "facilities", 
          "operation", 
          "biomass", 
          "loss results", 
          "regulatory requirements", 
          "energy", 
          "geographic data", 
          "results", 
          "cradle", 
          "reduction", 
          "planning process", 
          "loggers", 
          "mix", 
          "ratio", 
          "impact", 
          "forestry", 
          "area", 
          "production", 
          "quantity", 
          "distribution", 
          "types", 
          "region", 
          "harvest", 
          "estimates", 
          "comparison", 
          "survey data", 
          "assessment", 
          "data", 
          "generate", 
          "Michigan", 
          "units", 
          "accordance", 
          "selection", 
          "loss", 
          "study", 
          "assumption", 
          "indicators", 
          "regional activity", 
          "residues", 
          "future research", 
          "research", 
          "investment", 
          "literature", 
          "inventory items", 
          "activity", 
          "expectations", 
          "return", 
          "database", 
          "items", 
          "PurposeRenewable gasoline", 
          "IH2 process fuels", 
          "Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS) requirements", 
          "Fuel Standards (RFS) requirements", 
          "Regional geographic data", 
          "potential woody biomass feedstocks", 
          "cycle inventory databases", 
          "megajoule of gasoline", 
          "IH2 process", 
          "discussionFuels", 
          "RFS assumptions", 
          "soil organic carbon (SOC) loss result", 
          "organic carbon (SOC) loss result", 
          "carbon (SOC) loss result", 
          "IH2 fuels", 
          "sufficient GHG emission reduction", 
          "ConclusionsFuels", 
          "IH2 facilities"
        ], 
        "name": "Life cycle assessment of the production of gasoline and diesel from forest residues using integrated hydropyrolysis and hydroconversion", 
        "pagination": "1793-1804", 
        "productId": [
          {
            "name": "dimensions_id", 
            "type": "PropertyValue", 
            "value": [
              "pub.1113086510"
            ]
          }, 
          {
            "name": "doi", 
            "type": "PropertyValue", 
            "value": [
              "10.1007/s11367-019-01616-8"
            ]
          }
        ], 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01616-8", 
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1113086510"
        ], 
        "sdDataset": "articles", 
        "sdDatePublished": "2021-12-01T19:43", 
        "sdLicense": "https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/", 
        "sdPublisher": {
          "name": "Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project", 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "sdSource": "s3://com-springernature-scigraph/baseset/20211201/entities/gbq_results/article/article_797.jsonl", 
        "type": "ScholarlyArticle", 
        "url": "https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01616-8"
      }
    ]
     

    Download the RDF metadata as:  json-ld nt turtle xml License info

    HOW TO GET THIS DATA PROGRAMMATICALLY:

    JSON-LD is a popular format for linked data which is fully compatible with JSON.

    curl -H 'Accept: application/ld+json' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s11367-019-01616-8'

    N-Triples is a line-based linked data format ideal for batch operations.

    curl -H 'Accept: application/n-triples' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s11367-019-01616-8'

    Turtle is a human-readable linked data format.

    curl -H 'Accept: text/turtle' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s11367-019-01616-8'

    RDF/XML is a standard XML format for linked data.

    curl -H 'Accept: application/rdf+xml' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s11367-019-01616-8'


     

    This table displays all metadata directly associated to this object as RDF triples.

    197 TRIPLES      22 PREDICATES      155 URIs      144 LITERALS      6 BLANK NODES

    Subject Predicate Object
    1 sg:pub.10.1007/s11367-019-01616-8 schema:about anzsrc-for:09
    2 anzsrc-for:0907
    3 schema:author N82c3166cbf67429cb309aa9f5fb5d80d
    4 schema:citation sg:pub.10.1007/s10098-010-0338-9
    5 sg:pub.10.1007/s10668-010-9255-7
    6 sg:pub.10.1007/s10806-009-9218-x
    7 schema:datePublished 2019-03-29
    8 schema:datePublishedReg 2019-03-29
    9 schema:description PurposeRenewable gasoline and diesel can be produced through integrated hydropyrolysis and hydroconversion (IH2) using renewable feedstocks such as woody biomass from logging residues. This study assesses the potential environmental impacts of IH2 process fuels manufactured in Ontonagon, Michigan, to determine their environmental impacts and if these manufactured fuels will meet Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS) requirements. The energy return on investment (EROI) is also calculated for comparison to other renewable fuels.MethodsA cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment was conducted using regional forestry, timber harvest, and transportation data from the region. Regional geographic data was used to determine service areas that may provide woody biomass. The service areas were then developed into inventory data based upon the type and distribution of potential woody biomass feedstocks. Survey data from loggers in the region were used to ensure that harvest types were allocated in accordance with regional activity. Remaining inventory items were derived from existing data in the literature or existing life cycle inventory databases. This study uses a functional unit of one megajoule of gasoline or diesel produced using the IH2 process and assessed several environmental indicators as well as EROI.Results and discussionFuels produced generate approximately 88% less greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions compared to petroleum fuels given RFS assumptions. Manufacturing and transportation of feedstocks accounts for 92.19% of energy used in production giving a calculated EROI of 4.19 and 4.31 per kilogram of diesel and gasoline, respectively. Pessimistic estimates of soil organic carbon (SOC) loss result in GHG emissions that are approximately 83% lower. If a 1:0.5 displacement ratio of IH2 fuels is considered, the GHG emissions are about 76% lower without SOC loss and 66% lower with. This study demonstrates that while environmental impacts and EROI are sensitive to site selection and SOC estimates, there is a sufficient GHG emission reduction such that IH2 fuels are capable of meeting regulatory requirements.ConclusionsFuels produced at the facility result in a reduction in GHG emissions, but better site selection may result in less fuel being used in transportation. Reducing the quantity of electricity needed in n-th–generation facilities would also reduce environmental impacts while improving the EROI. The energy mix used to supply IH2 facilities should also be considered during the planning process. Finally, future research may be needed to ensure feedstocks recovered from logging operations match expectations.
    10 schema:genre article
    11 schema:inLanguage en
    12 schema:isAccessibleForFree false
    13 schema:isPartOf N07ee3059a1fd40ce87d9c371fdadfbf1
    14 N66917ea83f0f44acbfbf2d9dac20f957
    15 sg:journal.1051923
    16 schema:keywords ConclusionsFuels
    17 EROI
    18 Fuel Standards (RFS) requirements
    19 GHG emission reduction
    20 GHG emissions
    21 IH2 facilities
    22 IH2 fuels
    23 IH2 process
    24 IH2 process fuels
    25 MethodsA cradle
    26 Michigan
    27 Ontonagon
    28 PurposeRenewable gasoline
    29 RFS assumptions
    30 Regional geographic data
    31 Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS) requirements
    32 SOC estimates
    33 SOC loss
    34 accordance
    35 activity
    36 area
    37 assessment
    38 assumption
    39 better site selection
    40 biomass
    41 biomass feedstock
    42 carbon (SOC) loss result
    43 comparison
    44 cradle
    45 cycle assessment
    46 cycle inventory databases
    47 data
    48 database
    49 diesel
    50 discussionFuels
    51 displacement ratio
    52 distribution
    53 electricity
    54 emission
    55 emission reduction
    56 energy
    57 energy mix
    58 energy return
    59 environmental impacts
    60 environmental indicators
    61 estimates
    62 expectations
    63 facilities
    64 facilities results
    65 feedstock
    66 forest residues
    67 forestry
    68 fuel
    69 functional units
    70 future research
    71 gas emissions
    72 gasoline
    73 generate
    74 generation facilities
    75 geographic data
    76 grave life cycle assessment
    77 greenhouse gas emissions
    78 harvest
    79 harvest type
    80 hydroconversion
    81 hydropyrolysis
    82 impact
    83 indicators
    84 inventory data
    85 inventory database
    86 inventory items
    87 investment
    88 items
    89 less fuel
    90 less greenhouse gas emissions
    91 life cycle assessment
    92 life cycle inventory databases
    93 literature
    94 loggers
    95 loss
    96 loss results
    97 manufacturing
    98 megajoule of gasoline
    99 megajoules
    100 mix
    101 operation
    102 organic carbon (SOC) loss result
    103 pessimistic estimates
    104 petroleum fuels
    105 planning process
    106 potential environmental impacts
    107 potential woody biomass feedstocks
    108 process
    109 process fuel
    110 production
    111 production of gasoline
    112 quantity
    113 quantity of electricity
    114 ratio
    115 reduction
    116 region
    117 regional activity
    118 regional forestry
    119 regulatory requirements
    120 renewable feedstock
    121 renewable fuels
    122 requirements
    123 research
    124 residues
    125 results
    126 return
    127 selection
    128 service area
    129 site selection
    130 soil organic carbon (SOC) loss result
    131 standard requirements
    132 study
    133 sufficient GHG emission reduction
    134 survey data
    135 timber harvest
    136 transportation
    137 transportation data
    138 transportation of feedstock
    139 types
    140 units
    141 woody biomass
    142 woody biomass feedstock
    143 schema:name Life cycle assessment of the production of gasoline and diesel from forest residues using integrated hydropyrolysis and hydroconversion
    144 schema:pagination 1793-1804
    145 schema:productId N329152c6d06746a995804b959b20d5b3
    146 Nd3ce13d409054ca4884d5533d9f3427f
    147 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1113086510
    148 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01616-8
    149 schema:sdDatePublished 2021-12-01T19:43
    150 schema:sdLicense https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/
    151 schema:sdPublisher Nc124c5c7df48446b979e76cf00724920
    152 schema:url https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-019-01616-8
    153 sgo:license sg:explorer/license/
    154 sgo:sdDataset articles
    155 rdf:type schema:ScholarlyArticle
    156 N07ee3059a1fd40ce87d9c371fdadfbf1 schema:volumeNumber 24
    157 rdf:type schema:PublicationVolume
    158 N329152c6d06746a995804b959b20d5b3 schema:name doi
    159 schema:value 10.1007/s11367-019-01616-8
    160 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
    161 N66917ea83f0f44acbfbf2d9dac20f957 schema:issueNumber 10
    162 rdf:type schema:PublicationIssue
    163 N82c3166cbf67429cb309aa9f5fb5d80d rdf:first sg:person.07423050614.36
    164 rdf:rest rdf:nil
    165 Nc124c5c7df48446b979e76cf00724920 schema:name Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project
    166 rdf:type schema:Organization
    167 Nd3ce13d409054ca4884d5533d9f3427f schema:name dimensions_id
    168 schema:value pub.1113086510
    169 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
    170 anzsrc-for:09 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
    171 schema:name Engineering
    172 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
    173 anzsrc-for:0907 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
    174 schema:name Environmental Engineering
    175 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
    176 sg:journal.1051923 schema:issn 0948-3349
    177 1614-7502
    178 schema:name The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
    179 schema:publisher Springer Nature
    180 rdf:type schema:Periodical
    181 sg:person.07423050614.36 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.259979.9
    182 schema:familyName Zupko
    183 schema:givenName Robert
    184 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.07423050614.36
    185 rdf:type schema:Person
    186 sg:pub.10.1007/s10098-010-0338-9 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1050591623
    187 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-010-0338-9
    188 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
    189 sg:pub.10.1007/s10668-010-9255-7 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1033010386
    190 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-010-9255-7
    191 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
    192 sg:pub.10.1007/s10806-009-9218-x schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1051420744
    193 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-009-9218-x
    194 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
    195 grid-institutes:grid.259979.9 schema:alternateName Department of Social Sciences, Michigan Technological University, 1400 Townsend Dr, 49931, Houghton, MI, USA
    196 schema:name Department of Social Sciences, Michigan Technological University, 1400 Townsend Dr, 49931, Houghton, MI, USA
    197 rdf:type schema:Organization
     




    Preview window. Press ESC to close (or click here)


    ...