Sustainability assessment case slow pyrolysis Helena Wessman-Jääskeläinen, Kristian Melin, Matias Alarotu, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland

Transcription

1 Sustainability assessment case slow pyrolysis Helena Wessman-Jääskeläinen, Kristian Melin, Matias Alarotu, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Johan Torén, RISE Research Institutes of Sweden

2 MOBILE FLIP Sustainability Assessment Aim: To analyse sustainability impacts in the context of new environmental and technological innovations Case slow pyrolysis technology in mobile unit(s) Raw material waste biomass from the forest (wood residuals) and from the field (straw) Location Finland and France 1. Environmental sustainability: Global warming potential 2. Economic sustainability: Production costs, profitability 3. Social sustainability: Health and safety, job creation, rural development, cultural impacts 4. Integrated sustainability analysis (SWOT, PESTE) 2

3 System boundaries in case slow pyrolysis Energy (diesel /electricity from the grid) Raw material (forest residues/straw) Pretreatment (chipping/baling) Products (biochar) By-products (distillate, heat) Transportation Slow pyrolysis in mobile unit(s) or in stationary plant (assumption) 3

4 Wheat straw Forest residue Grid electricity Diesel generator Grid electricity Diesel generator Environmental sustainability: Global warming potential Mobile unit Mobile unit Stationary plant Mobile unit Mobile unit Biomass collection Biomass transportation Biomass treatment - electricity Slow pyrolysis - electricity Mobile unit relocation Product transportation Stationary plant Photo: bbc.co.uk kg CO 2 eq / t biochar 4

5 Economic sustainability: The effect of size with same parameters 600,0 500,0 CAPEX Labor cost Raw material Insurance Electricity By Product distillate 400,0 300,0 200,0 100,0 0,0-100,0 Mobile Plant Production cost of Biochar eur/t by slow pyrolysis Non Mobile 20 x larger 5

6 The effect of different variables on the profitability 6

7 Social sustainability Incidence rate per workers Local jobs per mobile plant and shift: 1.85 operators 0.33 foremen supervisors Additional social impacts include: Rural development Finding skilled labour Local acceptance Finland France EU Finland EU France Slow pyrolysis Fatal Accidents at work Logging and Forestry Crop and animal production 7

8 Integrated Sustainability analysis DIMENSIONS FOR SLOW PYROLYSIS STRENGHTS ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE Environmental benefits: biochar replaces fossil based products ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE Low CAPEX compared to industrial size units High quality product Biochar hype SOCIAL IMPACTS Rural development through increased valorization of underused residue streams TECHNOLOGY PERFORMANCE Close to a working unit High quality product Feasibility of mobile units for forest residues LEGISLATION ISSUES OPPORTUNITIES Carbon sequestration (carbon credits) Different raw material sources can be used as a mix Carbon sequestration (carbon credits) Many potential applications also for small scale use Low investment costs for mobile units Job creation Need for technologies to overcome environmental threats New applications to replace synthetic media Biochar under REACH WEAKNESSES Diesel based system Low capacity in mobile production Operation in small scale high labor cost Price Biochar hype Operators working alone Community acceptance of: increased transports Increased air and noise pollution Low capacity in mobile production No quality accreditation Legislation different in each country THREATS PAH in biochar Competition of wood waste with energy industry PAH in biochar Work organization due to 2 or 3 shifts Raw material quality (in mobile units) Legislation, barriers, REACH PAH in biochar Finding skilled labour 8

9 Thank you! This project has received funding from the European Union s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No MOBILE FLIP. Contacts: Click to add Helena.Wessman@vtt.fi title Kristian.Melin@vtt.fi Matias.Alarotu@vtt.fi Johan.Toren@ri.se