TY - JOUR
T1 - Techno-Economic Analysis and Life-Cycle Analysis of Two Light-Duty Bioblendstocks
T2 - Isobutanol and Aromatic-Rich Hydrocarbons
AU - Cai, Hao
AU - Markham, Jennifer
AU - Jones, Susanne
AU - Benavides, Pahola Thathiana
AU - Dunn, Jennifer B.
AU - Biddy, Mary
AU - Tao, Ling
AU - Lamers, Patrick
AU - Phillips, Steven
N1 - Funding Information:
The research reported in this paper was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) and Vehicle Technologies Office (VTO) under the DOE Co-Optimization of Fuels and Engines Initiative. The authors gratefully acknowledge the support and direction of Alicia Lindauer at BETO, Kevin Stork at VTO, and the Co-Optima leadership team. This work was supported by U.S. Department of Energy contracts DE-AC02-06CH11357 at Argonne National Laboratory, DEAC36-08GO28308 at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, DE-AC05-76RL01830 at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and DE-AC07- 05ID14517 at Idaho National Laboratory. The authors acknowledge helpful inputs on feedstock blending strategies for biochemical and thermochemical conversion from David Thompson, Damon Hartley, and Roni Mohammad of Idaho National Laboratory. This work was authored in part by Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, the manager and operator of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Funding provided by U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Bioenergy Technologies Office. The views expressed in the article do not necessarily represent the views of the DOE or the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the U.S. Government retains a nonexclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this work, or allow others to do so, for U.S. Government purposes.
Funding Information:
This work was authored in part by Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, the manager and operator of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Funding provided by U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Bioenergy Technologies Office.
Publisher Copyright:
© Copyright 2018 American Chemical Society.
PY - 2018/7/2
Y1 - 2018/7/2
N2 - Isobutanol and aromatic-rich hydrocarbons (ARHC) are two biomass-derived high-octane blendstocks that could be blended with petroleum gasoline for use in optimized spark-ignition engines in light-duty vehicles, potentially increasing engine efficiency. To evaluate technology readiness, economic viability, and environmental impacts of these technologies, we use detailed techno-economic analysis (TEA) and life-cycle analysis (LCA). We assumed isobutanol is produced via biochemical conversion of an herbaceous feedstock blend while ARHC is produced via thermochemical conversion of a woody feedstock blend. The minimum estimated fuel selling price (MFSP) of isobutanol ranged from $5.57/gasoline gallon equivalent (GGE) ($0.045/MJ) based on today's technology to $4.22/GGE ($0.034/MJ) with technology advancements. The MFSP of ARHC could decline from $5.20/GGE ($0.042/MJ) based on today's technology to $4.20/GGE ($0.034/MJ) as technology improves. Both isobutanol and ARHC offer about 73% greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction relative to petroleum gasoline per LCA of these two bioblendstocks. On the other hand, water consumption in the production of both bioblendstocks exceeds that of conventional gasoline although process engineering offers routes to cutting water consumption. Over their life-cycles, both isobutanol and ARHC emit more NOx and PM2.5 than petroleum gasoline. Improving the energy efficiency and lowering air emissions from agricultural equipment will reduce the life-cycle air pollutant emissions of these bioblendstocks.
AB - Isobutanol and aromatic-rich hydrocarbons (ARHC) are two biomass-derived high-octane blendstocks that could be blended with petroleum gasoline for use in optimized spark-ignition engines in light-duty vehicles, potentially increasing engine efficiency. To evaluate technology readiness, economic viability, and environmental impacts of these technologies, we use detailed techno-economic analysis (TEA) and life-cycle analysis (LCA). We assumed isobutanol is produced via biochemical conversion of an herbaceous feedstock blend while ARHC is produced via thermochemical conversion of a woody feedstock blend. The minimum estimated fuel selling price (MFSP) of isobutanol ranged from $5.57/gasoline gallon equivalent (GGE) ($0.045/MJ) based on today's technology to $4.22/GGE ($0.034/MJ) with technology advancements. The MFSP of ARHC could decline from $5.20/GGE ($0.042/MJ) based on today's technology to $4.20/GGE ($0.034/MJ) as technology improves. Both isobutanol and ARHC offer about 73% greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction relative to petroleum gasoline per LCA of these two bioblendstocks. On the other hand, water consumption in the production of both bioblendstocks exceeds that of conventional gasoline although process engineering offers routes to cutting water consumption. Over their life-cycles, both isobutanol and ARHC emit more NOx and PM2.5 than petroleum gasoline. Improving the energy efficiency and lowering air emissions from agricultural equipment will reduce the life-cycle air pollutant emissions of these bioblendstocks.
KW - Aromatic-rich hydrocarbons
KW - Bioblendstock
KW - Isobutanol
KW - Life-cycle analysis
KW - Techno-economic analysis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85047429367&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85047429367&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1021/acssuschemeng.8b01152
DO - 10.1021/acssuschemeng.8b01152
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85047429367
SN - 2168-0485
VL - 6
SP - 8790
EP - 8800
JO - ACS Sustainable Chemistry and Engineering
JF - ACS Sustainable Chemistry and Engineering
IS - 7
ER -
