Life-Cycle Assessment for the Production of Bioethanol from Willow Biomass Crops via Biochemical Conversion

We conducted a life-cycle assessment (LCA) of ethanol production via bioconversion of willow biomass crop feedstock. Willow crop data were used to assess feedstock production impacts. The bioconversion process was modeled with an Aspen simulation that predicts an overall conversion yield of 310 lite...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Forest products journal 2012-04, Vol.62 (4), p.305-313
Hauptverfasser: Budsberg, Erik, Rastogi, Mohit, Puettmann, Maureen E, Caputo, Jesse, Balogh, Stephen, Volk, Timothy A, Gustafson, Richard, Johnson, Leonard
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:We conducted a life-cycle assessment (LCA) of ethanol production via bioconversion of willow biomass crop feedstock. Willow crop data were used to assess feedstock production impacts. The bioconversion process was modeled with an Aspen simulation that predicts an overall conversion yield of 310 liters of ethanol per tonne of feedstock (74 gal per US short ton). Vehicle combustion impacts were assessed using Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) models. We compared the impacts of bioconversion-produced ethanol with those of gasoline on an equivalent energy basis. We found that the life-cycle global warming potential of ethanol was slightly negative. Carbon emissions from ethanol production and use were balanced by carbon absorption in the growing willow feedstock and the displacement of fossil fuel–produced electricity with renewable electricity produced in the bioconversion process. The fossil fuel input required for producing 1 MJ of energy from ethanol was 141 percent less than that from gasoline. More water was needed to produce 1 MJ of ethanol fuel than 1 MJ of gasoline. The life-cycle water use for ethanol was 169 percent greater than for gasoline. The largest contributors to water use were the conversion process itself and the production of chemicals and materials used in the process, such as enzymes and sulfuric acid.
ISSN:0015-7473
2376-9637
DOI:10.13073/FPJ-D-12-00022.1