NJF seminar 405: Production and Utilization of Crops for Energy. 25-26 September 2007, Vilnius, Lithuania Why diversify biomass production for biofuels Henrik Hauggaard-Nielsen Mette Hedegaard Thomsen Erik Steen Jensen Risø National Laboratory Technical University of Denmark DTU
A new EU citizen was born in DK 28. Aug 07 Hello my name is Karen
Agenda for the next 25 minutes Biofuels and EU GHG balances and the Danish IBUS concept Diversifying biomass production exemplified by results produced from 3 yr field experimentations in 5 different EU countries using pea-barley intercropping Conclusion
The situation about biofuels Accoding to EU agreement the amount of biofuels will be increased to at least 5.75% of the total consumption of fuel for transportation by 2010 and at least 10% by 2020 Objectives are CO 2 -reduction and sustainability
Biofuels in Europe 1 % of road transport fuel consumption Source: EEA, 2006, Fact sheet 31
Biomass is a renewable energy resource Plant production: CO 2 + H 2 O + sunlight (chlorophyll) (CH 2 O) n + O 2 Combustion of plants (or plant derived products): (CH 2 O) n + O 2 Energy + H 2 O + CO 2 Plants contain stored solar energy Plants capture and reduce CO 2 Plants contain nutrient element for fermentation, including production of organic fertilizer
Sustainability and fossil consuming elements Diesel N fertilizer P,K,S fertilizer Herbicides Fungicides Insecticides Growth regulators Irrigation
The Danish Integrated Biomass Utilization System (IBUS) Partners: Copenhagen University Life Sicco K/S (DK engineering company) TMO biotec (UK termophilic microorganisms) Risø National Laboratory, Technical University Denmark
Up-scaling pilot studies to commercial factory Risø 10 kg straw h -1 (1990) Fynsværket 100 kg straw h -1 (2004) Skærbækværket 1000 kg straw h -1 (2006)
2G bioethanol production using straw as raw material Lignocellulose raw material Xylanase Microorganism? C5 Pretreatment Cellulases Yeast 250 kg EtOH per tons straw Hemicellulose Cellulose C6 Lignin Hydrolyses Fermentation Distillation
GHG balances using the IBUS concept Conclusions based upon LCA perspectives incl. entire production chain Grain (wheat) based ethanol results in modest or even negative GHG emissions compared to neat petrol reference case Straw (wheat) based ethanol show a great potential for GHG savings Biomass production and management is a very prominent source of GHG emissions in these calculations Looking at the entire ethanol production cycle it can be concluded 1. generation ethanol - 60-70% of total emissions 2. generation ethanol - 30-45% of total emissions Source: van Maarschalkerweerd, 2006
GHG emission sources from Danish wheat grain production K-fertiliser prod. Lubricant oil Electricity Traction P-fertiliser prod. N-fertiliser prod. Soil N 2 O emissions Source: LCA Food, 2006
Choice of crop species and energy consumption Energy consumption (MJ/ha) 20.000 15.000 10.000 5.000 Atm. N 2 -fixation N fertilizer Seed Herbicides P fertilizer Mechanisation 0 Pea Wheat Source: ITCF- UNIP (1999)
Diversifying biomass production? Time Year 1 2 3 4 Space Field 1 Field 2 Wheat Whaet Wheat Wheat Monoculture Increased diversity Barley Pea Sole cropping Pea Wheat BarleyPotatoes Rotation Barley-pea mixture Intercropping
Basic pea( )-barley( ) intercrop design 3 yrs Sole cropping P100 B100 Row-by-row intercropping P100B50 P50B50 90 pl. m -2 300 pl. m -2 90+150 pl. m -2 45+150 pl. m -2
Pea-barley intercrop agronomic performance 400 DK UK FR Pea Barley 300 200 100 0 400 300 GE IT Mean P100 B100 P100B50 P50B50 P100 B100 P100B50 P50B50 P100 B100 P100B50 P50B50 Grain yield (g DM m -2 ) 200 100 0 Cropping Source: Hauggaard-Nielsen et al., in prep.
Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) LER AB = Y AB Y AA + Y BA Y BB LER > 1: Advantage from intercropping LER < 1: Advantage from sole cropping
Pea-barley intercrop agronomic performance - LER 400 300 200 100 0 400 300 P100 B100 P100B50 P50B50 Grain yield (g DM m -2 ) 200 100 0 DK GE UK IT P100 B100 P100B50 P50B50 P100 B100 P100B50 P50B50 Cropping FR Mean Pea Barley 1.14 1.06 1.21 1.17 1.15 1.15 1.42 1.36 1.16 1.18 1.14 1.08 Source: Hauggaard-Nielsen et al., in prep.
Complementary use of resources Complementarity is implemented in the crop stand when species utilize resources differently Resource availability (%) 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 Time or space Resource Species A Species B Species C
Species complementarity and resource use When improving the knowledge level about interspecific competition a higher degree of local resource use efficiency can be obtained Resource availability (%) 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 Time or space Resource ABC IC
Fossil consuming elements and intercropping Diesel (+) N fertilizer + P,K,S fertilizer (+) Herbicides + Fungicides (+) Insecticides (+) Growth regulators + Irrigation.
Centralized and/or decentralized biorefinery concept High value protein rich feed product Fertiliser rich in micro and macro nutrients
Biomass and bioenergy production in organic agriculture consequences for soil fertility, environment, spread of animal parasites and socio-economy (Acr.: BioConcens). BioConcens aims at analyzing and suggesting solutions to the apparent opposing aims of bioenergy production and safeguarding soil fertility in OA. BioConcens concept framework (FØJOIII 2007-2011) Food Organic Farm Fodder Strip intercrop Organic matter Nutrients Community Region Milk production Manure Biomass Bioenergy plant Protein feed Milk/meat Agroindustry
Biorefinery for sustainable Reliable Economical Fuel production from energy crops. Acronym: Bio.REF AIM: Sustainable production of biofuels using residues for integrated multi-product production such as biodiesel, -ethanol, - hydrogen, -gas as well as -pesticides. (Bio.REF 2007-2010) Optimised harvest Straw pretreatment SSF C6- fermentation in membrane bioreactor Oilseeds Straw Bioethanol Enzymatic transesterification - continuous process By-products: Glycerol, fatty acids, animal feed Biodiesel (RME) C5 fermentation to Biohydrogen Biogas production Biohydrogen Biogas Fischer Topsch Methanol Fertiliser Heat & Electricity Life cycle analysis
Conclusions Biomass is a key diversification strategy to improve energy supply security and mitigate GHG emissions Biomass production should be cultivated using the lowest possible input of fossil energy All sugars in the chosen biomass raw materials can be utilized by using the right biorefinery concept Ecosystem services should be validated together with their biofuel production potential Bioenergy systems are relatively complex, intersectoral and sitespecific. Solving problems requires synergic contribution from agriculture, forestry, energy industry and environmental sectors Are we able to create such interdisciplinary collaborations?
Thanks for your attention Remember to see and comment on the poster titled: Sustainable biofuel production and validation of crop species A qualitative approach by Steffen Bertelsen Blume and Henrik Hauggaard-Nielsen