Gasification versus fast pyrolysis bio-oil production: A life cycle assessment

被引:38
作者
Alcazar-Ruiz, A. [1 ]
Ortiz, M. L. [1 ]
Dorado, F. [1 ]
Sanchez-Silva, L. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Castilla La Mancha, Dept Chem Engn, Avda Camilo Jose Cela 12, E-13071 Ciudad Real, Spain
关键词
Life cycle assessment; Gasification-FT; Fast pyrolysis; Agricultural waste biomass; GWP; Aspen Plus (R); FISCHER-TROPSCH SYNTHESIS; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; ELECTRICITY-GENERATION; MEXICAN BIOMASSES; COMBUSTION; FUEL; VALORIZATION; ENERGY; EMISSION; INDUSTRY;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130373
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
A life cycle assessment was performed to compare the sustainability of gasification and fast pyrolysis processes for producing bio-oil using agricultural wastes from biomass. The objective was to carry out the environmental analysis associated with the production of 1 MJ bio-oil using different agricultural wastes biomasses for both thermochemical processes to determine which process is more respectful with the environment. The life cycle assessment revealed that gasification was more detrimental to the environment for all agricultural biomasses under study. In addition, greenhouse gas emissions over a 100-year time horizon were calculated, thereby demonstrating that CO2 yield emissions were higher than those for CH4 and N2O in both thermochemical processes. Furthermore, to gain a comprehensive overview, both thermochemical processes were divided into different equipment blocks to evaluate their individual impacts. Almond shell, pistachio shell and olive stone were identified as the biomasses for which minor amount of feed was needed to produce 1 MJ bio-oil. This assessment determined that the gasification stage of the gasification process and the separation stage for fast pyrolysis, were the main contributors to all mid-point impact categories. Finally, fast pyrolysis was the most environmentally friendly option for producing 1 MJ bio-oil.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 58 条
[1]   Life-cycle assessment of forest harvesting and transportation operations in Tennessee [J].
Abbas, Dalia ;
Handler, Robert M. .
JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2018, 176 :512-520
[2]   Valorization of olive oil industry subproducts: ash and olive pomace fast pyrolysis [J].
Alcazar-Ruiz, A. ;
Garcia-Carpintero, R. ;
Dorado, F. ;
Sanchez-Silva, L. .
FOOD AND BIOPRODUCTS PROCESSING, 2021, 125 :37-45
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2001, ENGINEERING
[4]   Rational design of process parameters for carbon-neutral and sulfur-free motor fuel production from second-generation biomass generated syngas [J].
Bahri, Shashank ;
Basak, Uttaran ;
Upadhyayula, Sreedevi .
JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2021, 279
[5]  
Bhatt A.H., 2018, AIR PERMITTING IMPLI
[6]  
Boerrigter H., 2003, PYROLYSIS GASIF BIOM, V1
[7]   Life cycle assessment of bioenergy production from orchards woody residues in Northern Italy [J].
Boschiero, Martina ;
Cherubini, Francesco ;
Nati, Carla ;
Zerbe, Stefan .
JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2016, 112 :2569-2580
[8]   Framework for consequential life cycle assessment of pyrolysis biorefineries: A case study for the conversion of primary forestry residues [J].
Brassard, P. ;
Godbout, S. ;
Hamelin, L. .
RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2021, 138
[9]   Environmental and energy performance of residual forest biomass for electricity generation: Gasification vs. combustion [J].
Briones-Hidrovo, Andrei ;
Copa, Jose ;
Tarelho, Luis A. C. ;
Goncalves, Catia ;
da Costa, Tamiris Pacheco ;
Dias, Ana Claudia .
JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2021, 289
[10]   Energy balance and life cycle assessment of a microalgae-based wastewater treatment plant: A focus on alternative biogas uses [J].
Colzi Lopes, Alexandre ;
Valente, Antonio ;
Iribarren, Diego ;
Gonzalez-Fernandez, Cristina .
BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY, 2018, 270 :138-146