Energy intensity, life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions, and economic assessment of liquid biofuel pipelines

被引:12
作者
Strogen, Bret [1 ]
Horvath, Arpad [2 ]
Zilberman, David [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Energy Biosci Inst, Berkeley, CA 94704 USA
[2] Univ Calif Berkeley, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
[3] Univ Calif Berkeley, Dept Agr & Resource Econ, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
关键词
Freight transportation; Alternative fuel; Systems analysis; Climate policy; Life-cycle assessment; ETHANOL DISTRIBUTION; TRANSPORT; ELECTRICITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.biortech.2013.08.150
中图分类号
S2 [农业工程];
学科分类号
0828 ;
摘要
Petroleum fuels are predominantly transported domestically by pipelines, whereas biofuels are almost exclusively transported by rail, barge, and truck. As biofuel production increases, new pipelines may become economically attractive. Location-specific variables impacting pipeline viability include construction costs, availability and costs of alternative transportation modes, electricity prices and emissions (if priced), throughput, and subsurface temperature. When transporting alcohol or diesel-like fuels, pipelines have a lower direct energy intensity than rail, barge, and trucks if fluid velocity is under 1 m/s for 4-inch diameter pipelines and 2 m/s for 8-inch or larger pipelines. Across multiple hypothetical state-specific scenarios, profit-maximizing design velocities range from 1.2 to 1.9 m/s. In costs and GHG emissions, optimized pipelines outperform trucks in each state and rail and barge in most states, if projected throughput exceeds four billion liters/year. If emissions are priced, optimum design diameters typically increase to reduce pumping energy demands, increasing the cost-effectiveness of pipeline projects. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:476 / 485
页数:10
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]  
AAR, 2012, COST EFF AM FREIGHT
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2013, TRANS ALT VEH FUELS
[3]  
[Anonymous], REP C DED ETH PIP FE
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2012, EM GEN RES INT DAT E
[5]   Should we transport coal, gas, or electricity: Cost, efficiency, and environmental implications [J].
Bergerson, JA ;
Lave, LB .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2005, 39 (16) :5905-5910
[6]   Key issues and options in accounting for carbon sequestration and temporary storage in life cycle assessment and carbon footprinting [J].
Brandao, Miguel ;
Levasseur, Annie ;
Kirschbaum, Miko U. F. ;
Weidema, Bo P. ;
Cowie, Annette L. ;
Jorgensen, Susanne Vedel ;
Hauschild, Michael Z. ;
Pennington, David W. ;
Chomkhamsri, Kirana .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2013, 18 (01) :230-240
[7]   Review of explicit approximations to the Colebrook relation for flow friction [J].
Brkic, Dejan .
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, 2011, 77 (01) :34-48
[8]  
CMU GDI, 2010, EC INP OUTP LIF CYCL
[9]   Technology Limits for Reducing EU Transport Sector CO2 Emissions [J].
Dray, Lynnette M. ;
Schaefer, Andreas ;
Ben-Akiva, Moshe E. .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2012, 46 (09) :4734-4741
[10]   A comprehensive approach to the design of ethanol supply chains including carbon trading effects [J].
Giarola, Sara ;
Shah, Nilay ;
Bezzo, Fabrizio .
BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY, 2012, 107 :175-185