Prospects for the Development of Drop-in Liquid Biofuels (especially Gasoline) from Sustainable Feedstocks

Transcription

1 Prospects for the Development of Drop-in Liquid Biofuels (especially Gasoline) from Sustainable Feedstocks Reinhard Seiser Andrew Burke Session 1: Biofuel and Biomethane Transportation Fuels - Setting the Stage Workshop: Assessment of Critical Barriers and Opportunities to Accelerate Biofuels and Biomethane as Transportation Fuels in California

2 Biomass Resource Source: The difference between technical and gross resources arises from inaccessible or sensitive areas, losses from harvesting, and maintaining soil quality. Williams, R. B., B. M. Jenkins and S. R. Kaffka (2015). An Assessment of Biomass Resources in California, 2013 Data - DRAFT. CEC PIER Contract , California Biomass Collaborative. Laird et al., Long-term impacts of residue harvesting on soil quality: Harvesting 90% of above ground residue [corn stover] for 19 years resulted in substantial degradation of soil quality. Organic C and total N were reduced.

3 Transportation Fuels in California Ethanol 2014 Biofuel production 2020 Projections (ARB Target) Diesel Potential from 30 MDT/yr (40% eff.) 2014 Total Consumption Gasoline Total 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Million gal/yr Strong need for renewable-gasoline production Additional biomass resources and efficiency gains needed (energy crops, imports from other states, methanation of CO 2 )

4 Biomass Composition 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Ash Carbon Hydrogen Oxygen w% (dry) w% (daf) w% (daf) w% (daf) Converted to moles: (CH 1.43 O 0.65 ) n (daf) Redwood Mill Residue or ~ (CH 2 O) n (waf) Almond Prunings Almond Shells Walnut Shells Corn Stover Cotton Stalks daf dry and ash free waf wet and ash free Ash: Si, K, Na, Ca, Mg, Al, Fe, and other metals. Inorganics: N, S. Cellulose (C 6 H 10 O 5 ) n, 40-50% Hemicellulose (~C 5 H 8 O 4 ) n, 20-35% Lignin (~C 31 H 34 O 11 ) n, 15-35%

5 Biomass, ~(CH 2 O) n (+C+H 2 O) Biomass Conversion Vehicle Fuels Natural Gas CO 2 CH 4 Methane, CH 4 C+CO 2 CH 3 OH Methanol, AKI: 99, CH 3 OH CO 2 C 2 H 5 OH Ethanol, AKI: 99, C 2 H 5 OH CO 2 +H 2 O ~CH 2 Diesel components Hexadecane, C 16 H 34 CO 2 +H 2 O ~CH 2 Gasoline components Isooctane, AKI: 100, C 8 H 18 Toluene, AKI: 114, C 7 H 8 AKI Anti-knock index, (RON+MON)/2 Ethanol, AKI: 99, C 2 H 5 OH (No n-heptane, AKI: 0, C 7 H 16 )

6 Many Players in the Area of Biomass Conversion Source: US DOE

7 Lignocellulosic Biomass Coolplanet Pyrolysis Conversion Technologies H 2 Kior Hydrotreating Diesel Naphtha Refinery Direct Liquefaction Gasoline H 2 Hydropyrolysis CRI (IH 2 ) G4 Insights Diesel Gasoline (blendstock) RNG TCG, REII, KIT CO 2 Syngas (H 2, CO, Gobigas Gasification HC, tars, CO 2 ) Gas Cleanup Methanation CO 2 RNG Indirect Liquefaction Fisher Tropsch Mixed-alcohol Synthesis Methanol/DME Frontline Fulcrum (TRI, tubular FT) Red Rock (Velocys) Jet Fuel Diesel Middle distillate Hydroprocessing Naphtha Refinery Ethanol TUV, West Biofuels Gasoline Methanol or DME Enerkem Haldor Topsoe (Tigas) Methanol-to- Gasoline (blend stock) Gasoline Vegetable Oils H 2 Neste Hydrotreating Lanzatech Fermentation of CO Diesel Other Feedstocks or Methods

8 Price Components of Gasoline To be price competitive, cost of conversion needs to be near difference between imported crude oil plus refining and biomass costs. Other large benefits such as jobs, energy security, forest management, fire hazard mitigation, pollution, and greenhouse gas reduction would accrue. Source: US DOE

9 Financial Barrier: Scale-up Risk Capital Cost Annual Fuel Production Pre-commercial Pilot Scale Demonstration Scale $1M $10M $100M $1B Laboratory Scale Commercial Scale 1 gal 100s of gal 1 million gal >100 million gal Cumulative Profits/Lo oss Too large scale-up Better to scale up in smaller steps Plant Size Miscalculation cu a of Valley- of-death can turn a nearprofitable projection into the worst-case scenario. Range Fuels: 5 tons/day 125 tons/day (Phase1) failed Kior: 50 times from demonstration to commercial on hold

10 Technical Barrier: Catalyst Deactivation Contaminant Methanol Synthesis FT Synthesis Mixed Alcohol Synthesis Fixed / Fluidized bed Methanation Particulate < 0.02 mg/nm3 n.d. (soot, dust char, ash) Tars (condensible) < 0.1 mg/nm3 < 10ppb Inhibitory compounds < 1 ppm < 1/1000ppm (class 2 heteroatoms, BTX) Sulfur < 1 mg/nm3 < 10ppb < 300ppm < 10/10ppb (H2S, COS) Nitrogen < 0.1 mg/nm3 < 20ppb (NH3, HCN) Alkali < 10 ppb Halides (primarily HCl) < 0.1 mg/nm3 < 10 ppb ppm partsparts per million, ppb parts parts per billion Many thermo-chemical processes employ catalysts and are subject to catalyst deactivation. High demands on gas cleanup. Kior: Reports indicated 75% reduction of planned output.

11 Feedstock Barrier: Scale and Logistics Biomass is distributed and biomass facilities are small. Refineries are concentrated and large. Fuel specifications for gasoline are tight. Possibly combine process streams after they are being concentrated in energy: Woody Biomass Small scale Medium scale Large scale Pretreatment Pretreatment Thermo-chemical conversion Refinery Gasoline, Diesel, Jet fuel Pretreatment Thermo-chemical conversion Thermo-chemical conversion Pretreatment could be drying, torrefaction, or Thermo-chemical conversion could be pyrolysis, or Refining could be hydrocracking, hydrotreating, pyrolysis gasification+synthesis isomerization, distillation, sulfur removal

12 Conclusions Without drop-in biofuels from lignocellulosic biomass, it will be difficult to meet renewable fuel targets for Facilities/processes to produce hydrocarbon drop-in fuels are in an early stage of development. A number of pathways are being developed with plans for demonstration projects. Financial, technical, and logistical barriers exist for near-term commercialization of drop-in fuel production.