DOCSLIB.ORG

Biogas and Fuel Cells Workshop Summary Report Proceedings from the Biogas and Fuel Cells Workshop Golden, Colorado June 11–13, 2012

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biogas and Fuel Cells Workshop Summary Report Proceedings from the Biogas and Fuel Cells Workshop Golden, Colorado June 11–13, 2012 Biogas and Fuel Cells Workshop Summary Report Proceedings from the Biogas and Fuel Cells Workshop Golden, Colorado June 11–13, 2012 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. Workshop Proceedings NREL/BK-5600-56523 January 2013 Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 Biogas and Fuel Cells Workshop Summary Report Proceedings from the Biogas and Fuel Cells Workshop Golden, Colorado June 11–13, 2012 Prepared under Task No. H279.1710 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Workshop Proceedings 15013 Denver West Parkway NREL/BK-5600-56523 Golden, Colorado 80401 January 2013 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof. Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/bridge Available for a processing fee to U.S. Department of Energy and its contractors, in paper, from: U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062 phone: 865.576.8401 fax: 865.576.5728 email: mailto:[email protected] Available for sale to the public, in paper, from: U.S. Department of Commerce National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, VA 22161 phone: 800.553.6847 fax: 703.605.6900 email: [email protected] online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/help/ordermethods.aspx Cover Photos: (left to right) PIX 16416, PIX 17423, PIX 16560, PIX 17613, PIX 17436, PIX 17721 Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 10% post consumer waste. Executive Summary Introduction The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), in association with the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), held a Biogas and Fuel Cells Workshop on June 11–13, 2012, in Golden, Colorado, to discuss biogas and waste-to- energy technologies for fuel cell applications. The meeting was spearheaded by the Fuel Cell Technologies Program in coordination with the Biomass Program. The overall objective was to identify opportunities for coupling renewable biomethane with highly efficient fuel cells to produce electricity; heat; combined heat and power (CHP); or combined heat, hydrogen and power (referred to as CHHP or “trigeneration”) for stationary or motive applications. The workshop focused on biogas sourced from wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), landfills, and industrial facilities that generate or process large amounts of organic waste, including large biofuel production facilities (biorefineries). Following were the specific objectives of the workshop: 1. To discuss current state-of-the-art for biogas and waste-to-energy technologies for fuel cell applications 2. To identify key challenges (technical and non-technical) preventing or delaying the near-term, widespread deployment of biogas fuel cells projects Wastewater biogas cleanup system at the Joint Base Lewis McChord (JBLM), near Tacoma, WA. 3. To identify synergies and As part of a Defense Logistics Agency opportunities for biogas and fuel cell demonstration project at JBLM, the equipment was technologies used for on-site hydrogen production from wastewater biogas for use in fuel cell-powered 4. To develop strategies for accelerating forklifts and fuel cell electric vehicles. the use of biogas for stationary fuel Photo from the Gas Technology Institute cell power and/or hydrogen fueling infrastructure for motive power fuel cells The workshop was attended by 58 participants from industry; trade associations; national laboratories; universities; and federal, state, and local government agencies (see Workshop Participant List—Appendix A). The workshop featured a series of panel sessions, with presentations on biogas and fuel cell technology status, applications, legislative outlook, business perspectives, and success stories (see Agenda—Appendix B). The presentations are available online at the DOE’s Fuel Cell Technologies Program website.1 Feedback from participants was gathered in breakout discussion sessions that addressed three types of CHP or trigeneration fuel cell projects: (1) projects that use biogas from WWTP anaerobic digester gas (ADG), (2) projects that use landfill gas (LFG), or (3) projects in industrial facilities that generate or process large 1 “Fuel Cell Technologies Program: Biogas and Fuel Cells Workshop,” last modified June 27, 2012, http://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/wkshp_biogas_fuel_cells.html. Biogas and Fuel Cells Workshop iii amounts of organic waste (e.g., food production). The results of these discussions, as described in this report, represent the output of the workshop participants rather than the views of the DOE or of specific individuals or industries. Current Status While both technical and non-technical challenges exist to the widespread use of biogas fueled fuel cells, as detailed below, commercial deployments of these technologies do exist and have been successful. Biogas from WWTPs, landfills, and commercial food processing has been utilized as well. Using fuel cells and other energy conversion devices, these renewable fuels have been employed to generate power and heat for onsite needs, power for export back to the grid, and hydrogen for fuel cell electric vehicles. Figure ES-1 provides details on some notable examples of operating projects. Challenges to Widespread Biogas Fuel Cell Project Deployment The examples provided in Figure ES-1 show that biogas fuel cell projects are being demonstrated in real world conditions and provide a foundation for growth. During the workshop, participants were asked to identify challenges and pathways for accelerating and expanding the commercialization of biogas and fuel cells in the United States. The challenges generally fell into six main categories: 1) cost and financing, 2) technology, 3) policy and regulations, 4) analysis, 5) education, and 6) utility issues. Figure ES-1. Biomass to electricity, heat, and hydrogen pathways Strategies and Actions to Accelerate Biogas Fuel Cell Project Deployment After discussing the challenges, participants identified possible strategies and actions that could overcome the challenges and help accelerate widespread deployment of biogas fuel cell projects. Following are the key strategies and actions suggested by workshop participants. Biogas and Fuel Cells Workshop iv Reduce the cost of biogas cleanup systems • Conduct research and development (R&D) projects on biogas cleanup o Lower cost cleanup equipment o Digester process modifications to minimize contaminants in biogas o Gas quality sensor and testing technology • Develop a public database that includes biogas composition and maximum allowable concentrations of contaminants to fuel cells Develop consistent, long-term national and state policies that are supportive of biogas fuel cell projects • Evaluate successful state or international policies and potential impacts if implemented nationwide • Create partnership of organizations representing biogas stakeholders to draft best practices and explain benefits to potential users • Work with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to modify Renewable Identification Number (RIN) and Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) programs and consider regulatory changes for increasing capture and use of biogas Develop and publish widely accepted value proposition for biogas versus alternatives • Develop biogas fuel cell analysis tool • Create detailed case studies of different types of successful projects to serve as reference plants • Create a partnership of organizations representing all biogas stakeholders to communicate the value proposition to municipalities, private companies, and other stakeholders Expand and identify key market opportunities • Create an open-source database and multi-layer map that shows organic waste type/location, electricity and natural gas prices, large process energy and electricity users (especially those that require very high energy reliability), and potential hydrogen users. • Conduct R&D to enhance production of biogas and co-products from anaerobic digesters Increase access to utility grid (gas and electric) • Develop a database of biomethane locations, quality and the impacts of gas and electric utility interconnection with biogas projects • Develop targeted information products and conference presentations for regulators, utilities, and associations • Work with regulators and utility associations to lower electric interconnection costs and make net metering favorable for biogas-to-electricity
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biorefining National Program
    Biorefining National Program 5-Year Action Plan 2014-2019 1 How This Action Plan Was Developed The goal of the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) Biorefining National Program (NP 213) is to conduct research that enables new, commercially-viable technologies for the conversion of agricultural materials into fuels, value-added co-products, and biobased products. To achieve this goal, this Action Plan was designed to meet the following criteria: 1. Maximize the long-term economic impact of ARS biorefining research 2. Emphasize ARS’ unique capabilities and avoid overlap with research at other institutions 3. Maximize returns to agricultural stakeholders from ARS investment of public funds By developing commercially viable technologies for the production of biobased industrial products, ARS biorefining research increases the demand for agricultural products and therefore benefits both agricultural producers and rural communities. According to the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Energy Information Administration (EIA), U.S. demand for gasoline is forecasted to drop over the next 10 years; this drop will reduce demand for blendstock ethanol, which is roughly 10 percent of the gasoline demand (Figure 1). The 10 percent “blend wall” is a result of government regulations and limitations imposed by the Nation’s gasoline distribution infrastructure, and although demand for E85 and E15 will rise, those volumes are relatively low. As a consequence, industry production capacity is expected to exceed demand for fuel ethanol sometime in the 2013 2014 time frame. 2013-2014: E10 Blend Wall Billion Gallons Gallons Per Billion Year Figure 1. Forecasted demand for ethanol blendstock vs. RFS2 targets 1 Chart courtesy of Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Combustion and Heat Release Characteristics of Biogas Under Hydrogen- and Oxygen-Enriched Condition
    energies Article Combustion and Heat Release Characteristics of Biogas under Hydrogen- and Oxygen-Enriched Condition Jun Li 1, Hongyu Huang 2,*, Huhetaoli 2, Yugo Osaka 3, Yu Bai 2, Noriyuki Kobayashi 1,* and Yong Chen 2 1 Department of Chemical Engineering, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Aichi 464-8603, Japan; [email protected] 2 Guangzhou Institute of Energy Conversion, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou 510640, China; [email protected] (H.); [email protected] (Y.B.); [email protected] (Y.C.) 3 Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Kanazawa University, Kakuma, Kanazawa, Ishikawa 920-1192, Japan; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] (H.H.); [email protected] (N.K.); Tel.: +86-20-870-48394 (H.H.); +81-52-789-5428 (N.K.) Received: 10 May 2017; Accepted: 20 July 2017; Published: 13 August 2017 Abstract: Combustion and heat release characteristics of biogas non-premixed flames under various hydrogen-enriched and oxygen-enriched conditions were investigated through chemical kinetics simulation using detailed chemical mechanisms. The heat release rates, chemical reaction rates, and molar fraction of all species of biogas at various methane contents (35.3–58.7%, mass fraction), hydrogen addition ratios (10–50%), and oxygen enrichment levels (21–35%) were calculated considering the GRI 3.0 mechanism and P1 radiation model. Results showed that the net reaction rate of biogas increases with increasing hydrogen addition ratio and oxygen levels, leading to a higher net heat release rate of biogas flame. Meanwhile, flame length was shortened with the increase in hydrogen addition ratio and oxygen levels.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 ETHANOL INDUSTRY OUTLOOK 1 Focusing Forward, from Challenge to Opportunity
    RENEWABLE FUELS ASSOCIATION RFA Board of Directors Neil Koehler RFA Chairman Pacific Ethanol Inc. www.pacificethanol.com Jeanne McCaherty Charles Wilson Geoff Cooper Rick Schwarck RFA Vice Chair RFA Treasurer RFA President RFA Secretary Guardian Energy LLC Trenton Agri Products LLC Renewable Fuels Association Absolute Energy LLC www.guardiannrg.com www.trentonagriproducts.com www.EthanolRFA.org www.absenergy.org Neal Kemmet Mick Henderson Brian Kletscher Bob Pasma Ace Ethanol LLC Commonwealth Agri-Energy LLC Highwater Ethanol LLC Parallel Products www.aceethanol.com www.commonwealthagrienergy.com www.highwaterethanol.com www.parallelproducts.com Ray Baker Scott Mundt Pat Boyle Delayne Johnson Adkins Energy LLC Dakota Ethanol LLC Homeland Energy Solutions LLC Quad County Corn Processors Coop. www.adkinsenergy.com www.dakotaethanol.com www.homelandenergysolutions.com www.quad-county.com Eric McAfee John Didion Seth Harder Dana Lewis Aemetis Inc. Didion Ethanol LLC Husker Ag LLC Redfield Energy LLC www.aemetis.com www.didionmilling.com www.huskerag.com www.redfieldenergy.com Randall Doyal Carl Sitzmann Kevin Keiser Walter Wendland Al-Corn Clean Fuel LLC E Energy Adams LLC Ingredion Inc. Ringneck Energy LLC www.al-corn.com www.eenergyadams.com www.ingredion.com www.ringneckenergy.com Erik Huschitt Bill Pracht Chuck Woodside Brian Pasbrig Badger State Ethanol LLC East Kansas Agri-Energy LLC KAAPA Ethanol Holdings LLC Show Me Ethanol LLC www.badgerstateethanol.com www.ekaellc.com www.kaapaethanol.com www.smefuel.com Jim Leiting Jason Friedberg
    [Show full text]
  • Fuel Properties Comparison
    Alternative Fuels Data Center Fuel Properties Comparison Compressed Liquefied Low Sulfur Gasoline/E10 Biodiesel Propane (LPG) Natural Gas Natural Gas Ethanol/E100 Methanol Hydrogen Electricity Diesel (CNG) (LNG) Chemical C4 to C12 and C8 to C25 Methyl esters of C3H8 (majority) CH4 (majority), CH4 same as CNG CH3CH2OH CH3OH H2 N/A Structure [1] Ethanol ≤ to C12 to C22 fatty acids and C4H10 C2H6 and inert with inert gasses 10% (minority) gases <0.5% (a) Fuel Material Crude Oil Crude Oil Fats and oils from A by-product of Underground Underground Corn, grains, or Natural gas, coal, Natural gas, Natural gas, coal, (feedstocks) sources such as petroleum reserves and reserves and agricultural waste or woody biomass methanol, and nuclear, wind, soybeans, waste refining or renewable renewable (cellulose) electrolysis of hydro, solar, and cooking oil, animal natural gas biogas biogas water small percentages fats, and rapeseed processing of geothermal and biomass Gasoline or 1 gal = 1.00 1 gal = 1.12 B100 1 gal = 0.74 GGE 1 lb. = 0.18 GGE 1 lb. = 0.19 GGE 1 gal = 0.67 GGE 1 gal = 0.50 GGE 1 lb. = 0.45 1 kWh = 0.030 Diesel Gallon GGE GGE 1 gal = 1.05 GGE 1 gal = 0.66 DGE 1 lb. = 0.16 DGE 1 lb. = 0.17 DGE 1 gal = 0.59 DGE 1 gal = 0.45 DGE GGE GGE Equivalent 1 gal = 0.88 1 gal = 1.00 1 gal = 0.93 DGE 1 lb. = 0.40 1 kWh = 0.027 (GGE or DGE) DGE DGE B20 DGE DGE 1 gal = 1.11 GGE 1 kg = 1 GGE 1 gal = 0.99 DGE 1 kg = 0.9 DGE Energy 1 gallon of 1 gallon of 1 gallon of B100 1 gallon of 5.66 lb., or 5.37 lb.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Renewable Fuel Standard Program: Measuring the Impact on Crude Oil and Gasoline Prices Philip K. Verleger, Jr.1 This Paper
    The Renewable Fuel Standard Program: Measuring the Impact on Crude Oil and Gasoline Prices Philip K. Verleger, Jr.1 This paper examines the impact of the Renewable Fuel Standard program (RFS) on crude oil and gasoline prices. The RFS program was enacted fourteen years ago in 2005, but the particular focus of this paper is on the period from 2015 to 2018. The conclusions offered from this research are that the RFS program has provided economic benefits to consumers in the United States and worldwide. Retail gasoline prices are lower thanks to the program. The findings from an econometric model show that the savings to consumers resulting from the RFS averaged $0.22 per gallon from 2015 through 2018. Quantifying the Benefits of Renewable Fuels The first and most obvious benefit from renewables lies in the price of crude oil. The blending of approximately one million barrels per day of ethanol into U.S. motor fuels over the 2015 through 2018 period has lowered the average price of crude by $6 per barrel. This reduction has cut the retail gasoline price by $0.22 per gallon from the level that would have obtained absent the presence of ethanol in the motor gasoline supply. The lowering of gasoline prices confers a second benefit on consumers. Because gasoline demand is price inelastic, consumers have been able to allocate a smaller percentage of their total consumption budget to fuel purchases. This has allowed them to expend more on other goods. Over four years, US consumers have been able to spend almost $90 billion per year more on other goods because of gasoline prices being pulled down by renewable fuel use.
    [Show full text]
  • Aertos Bio-Based Economy Forward-Looking Analysis
    AERTOs Bio-Based Economy Forward-Looking Analysis Jesse Fahnestock, SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden Henna Sundqvist-Andberg, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland AERTOs Bio-Based Economy: Forward-Looking Analysis 1 Innehållsförteckning Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 3 Forward-Looking Analysis: Purpose and Approach ............................................................................. 4 The Scenario Framework ..................................................................................................................... 4 The Scenario Pathways ........................................................................................................................ 6 The World and Sustainability .......................................................................................................... 8 Europe and the Bioeconomy ......................................................................................................... 10 RTOs and the Industry ................................................................................................................... 13 Actors and Factors ............................................................................................................................. 15 Assessing the Boundaries: Quantitative Parameters of a Bio-Based Economy ................................ 17 Industrially available biomass ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Energy and the Hydrogen Economy
    Energy and the Hydrogen Economy Ulf Bossel Fuel Cell Consultant Morgenacherstrasse 2F CH-5452 Oberrohrdorf / Switzerland +41-56-496-7292 and Baldur Eliasson ABB Switzerland Ltd. Corporate Research CH-5405 Baden-Dättwil / Switzerland Abstract Between production and use any commercial product is subject to the following processes: packaging, transportation, storage and transfer. The same is true for hydrogen in a “Hydrogen Economy”. Hydrogen has to be packaged by compression or liquefaction, it has to be transported by surface vehicles or pipelines, it has to be stored and transferred. Generated by electrolysis or chemistry, the fuel gas has to go through theses market procedures before it can be used by the customer, even if it is produced locally at filling stations. As there are no environmental or energetic advantages in producing hydrogen from natural gas or other hydrocarbons, we do not consider this option, although hydrogen can be chemically synthesized at relative low cost. In the past, hydrogen production and hydrogen use have been addressed by many, assuming that hydrogen gas is just another gaseous energy carrier and that it can be handled much like natural gas in today’s energy economy. With this study we present an analysis of the energy required to operate a pure hydrogen economy. High-grade electricity from renewable or nuclear sources is needed not only to generate hydrogen, but also for all other essential steps of a hydrogen economy. But because of the molecular structure of hydrogen, a hydrogen infrastructure is much more energy-intensive than a natural gas economy. In this study, the energy consumed by each stage is related to the energy content (higher heating value HHV) of the delivered hydrogen itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Biogas As a Transport Fuel—A System Analysis of Value Chain Development in a Swedish Context
    sustainability Article Biogas as a Transport Fuel—A System Analysis of Value Chain Development in a Swedish Context Muhammad Arfan *, Zhao Wang, Shveta Soam and Ola Eriksson Department of Building Engineering, Energy Systems and Sustainability Science, University of Gävle, SE-801 76 Gävle, Sweden; [email protected] (Z.W.); [email protected] (S.S.); [email protected] (O.E.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +46-704-400-593 Abstract: Biofuels policy instruments are important in the development and diffusion of biogas as a transport fuel in Sweden. Their effectiveness with links to geodemographic conditions has not been analysed systematically in studying biogas development in a less urbanised regions, with high po- tential and primitive gas infrastructure. One such region identified is Gävleborg in Sweden. By using value chain statistics, interviews with related actors, and studying biofuels policy instruments and implications for biogas development, it is found that the policy measures have not been as effective in the region as in the rest of Sweden due to different geodemographic characteristics of the region, which has resulted in impeded biogas development. In addition to factors found in previous studies, the less-developed biogas value chain in this region can be attributed particularly to undefined rules of the game, which is lack of consensus on trade-off of resources and services, unnecessary competition among several fuel alternatives, as well as the ambiguity of municipalities’ prioritization, and regional cultural differences. To strengthen the regional biogas sector, system actors need a strategy to eliminate blocking effects of identified local factors, and national policy instruments should provide mechanisms to process geographical conditions in regulatory, economic support, Citation: Arfan, M.; Wang, Z.; Soam, and market formation.
    [Show full text]
  • Bio-Based Chemicals That Sound, Socially Accepted, and Cost-Competitive Bioenergy on P.O
    Further Information IEA Bioenergy Task42 Website www.iea-bioenergy.task42-biorefineries.com IEA Bioenergy is an international collaboration set-up in 1978 by the International Energy Agency (IEA) to IEA Bioenergy Website improve international co-operation and information www.ieabioenergy.com exchange between national bioenergy RD&D programmes. This report, that was prepared IEA Bioenergy’s vision is to achieve a substantial Contact – IEA Bioenergy Task42 Secretariat on behalf of IEA Bioenergy – bioenergy contribution to future global energy demands Wageningen UR – Food and Bio-based Research Task42 Biorefinery, addresses the Bio-based by accelerating the production and use of environmentally Hilde Holleman – Secretary main bio-based chemicals that sound, socially accepted, and cost-competitive bioenergy on P.O. Box 17 potentially could be co-produced a sustainable basis, thus providing the increased security 6700 AA Wageningen of supply whilst reducing greenhouse gas emissions from The Netherlands with secondary energy carriers in energy use. Currently, IEA Bioenergy has 24 Members and Phone: +31 317 481165 integrated biorefinery facilities. Chemicals is operating on the basis of 12 Tasks covering all aspects of Email: [email protected] Biorefining, i.e. the sustainable the bioenergy chain, from resource to the supply of energy services to the consumer. processing of biomass into a Leader of Task42 spectrum of marketable Bio-based René van Ree Products (chemicals, materials) Wageningen UR – Food and Bio-based Research | Task 42 Biorefinery Phone: +31 317 611894 and Bioenergy (fuels, power, heat) Email: [email protected] generally is seen as the optimal IEA Bioenergy Task42 Biorefinery deals with knowledge strategy to sustainably convert building and exchange within the area of biorefining, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Strategies to Enable Lower-Cost Biofuels
    Integrated Strategies to Enable Lower-Cost Biofuels (This page intentionally left blank) ii Integrated Strategies to Enable Lower-Cost Biofuels Acknowledgments This report was prepared by Mary J. Biddy, Ryan Davis, Abhijit Dutta, Avantika Singh, Ling Tao, Eric C.D. Tan (National Renewable Energy Laboratory); Susanne B. Jones, James R. Collett, Lesley J. Snowden-Swan (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory); Erin Webb, Michael Kass, Matthew Langholtz (Oak Ridge National Laboratory); Jennifer Dunn, Cristina Negri, Shruti K. Mishra, John J. Quinn (Argonne National Laboratory); and David N. Thompson, Amber Hoover, Damon S. Hartley, Jaya Tumuluru, Jeffrey A. Lacey, Kevin L. Kenney, Leslie Ovard, Lloyd M. Griffel, Mohammad S. Roni, Neal A. Yancey, Rachel M. Emerson, Shyam K. Nair, William A. Smith, Allison Ray, Jason K. Hansen, Luke Williams, Magdalena Ramirez-Corredores, Patrick N. Bonebright, Quang A. Nguyen, Tyler Westover, Vicki S. Thompson, Lynn Wendt, and Patrick Lamers (Idaho National Laboratory). The authors would like to acknowledge Alicia Lindauer, Valerie Reed, Jonathan Male, Jim Spaeth, Kevin Craig, Michael Berube, and Zia Haq of the U.S. Department of Energy Bioenergy Technologies Office for their support, as well as Besiki Kazaishvili, Michael Deneen, and Kathy Cisar from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory Communications Office for their help in developing this report. iii Integrated Strategies to Enable Lower-Cost Biofuels List of Acronyms AD anaerobic digestion BETO Bioenergy Technologies Office BioSepCon Bioprocessing Separations
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard on Food and Feed Prices
    BRIEFING © 2021 INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON CLEAN TRANSPORTATION JANUARY 2021 The impact of the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard on food and feed prices Jane O’Malley, Stephanie Searle Stakeholders have engaged in significant debate around the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) and its impact on food and feed prices since its implementation in 2005. Various stakeholders have expressed concerns that the RFS has adverse economic impacts on consumers, livestock farmers, food manufacturers, and restaurants. This briefing paper reviews evidence of the impacts of the RFS on food prices, with a focus on corn and soy, and presents new analysis on the impact of the RFS on U.S. livestock farmers. We summarize the history of debate surrounding the RFS from the perspective of farmers, industry, and policymakers, and analyze its economic impacts relative to a counterfactual, no-RFS scenario. BACKGROUND ON THE RENEWABLE FUEL STANDARD AND NATIONAL DEBATE Farmers in the United States consider the RFS to be a boon for their industry, particularly for the crops that are biofuel feedstocks, most notably corn and soybean. Today, nearly 40% of the U.S. national corn crop, or 6.2 billion bushels, is used for ethanol production while approximately 30% of soy oil produced in the United States is used in biodiesel.1 The RFS is generally believed by stakeholders to increase corn prices. www.theicct.org 1 David W. Olson and Thomas Capehart, “Dried Distillers Grains (DDGs) Have Emerged as a Key Ethanol Coproduct,” United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service, October 1, 2019, https:// [email protected] www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2019/october/dried-distillers-grains-ddgs-have-emerged-as-a-key-ethanol- coproduct/; U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Evaluation of Large-Scale Biorefinery Deployment
    sustainability Article Economic Evaluation of Large-Scale Biorefinery Deployment: A Framework Integrating Dynamic Biomass Market and Techno-Economic Models Jonas Zetterholm 1,* , Elina Bryngemark 2 , Johan Ahlström 3 , Patrik Söderholm 2 , Simon Harvey 3 and Elisabeth Wetterlund 1,4 1 Department of Energy Engineering, Division of Energy Science, Luleå University of Technology, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden; [email protected] 2 Economics, Department of Business Administration, Technology and Social Sciences, Luleå University of Technology, SE-971 87 Luleå, Sweden; [email protected] (E.B.); [email protected] (P.S.) 3 Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Division of Energy Technology, Chalmers University of Technology, SE-412 96 Gothenburg, Sweden; [email protected] (J.A.); [email protected] (S.H.) 4 International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Schlossplatz 1, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 13 July 2020; Accepted: 28 August 2020; Published: 1 September 2020 Abstract: Biofuels and biochemicals play significant roles in the transition towards a fossil-free society. However, large-scale biorefineries are not yet cost-competitive with their fossil-fuel counterparts, and it is important to identify biorefinery concepts with high economic performance. For evaluating early-stage biorefinery concepts, one needs to consider not only the technical performance and process costs but also the economic performance of the full supply chain and the impacts on feedstock and product markets. This article presents and demonstrates a conceptual interdisciplinary framework that can constitute the basis for evaluations of the full supply-chain performance of biorefinery concepts. This framework considers the competition for biomass across sectors, assumes exogenous end-use product demand, and incorporates various geographical and technical constraints.
    [Show full text]