A comparative techno-economic assessment of biochar production from different residue streams using conventional and microwave pyrolysis

被引:128
作者
Haeldermans, T. [1 ,2 ]
Campion, L. [3 ]
Kuppens, T. [3 ]
Vanreppelen, K. [1 ]
Cuypers, A. [4 ]
Schreurs, S. [2 ]
机构
[1] BVBA, Act&Sorb, Houthalen Helchteren, Belgium
[2] Hasselt Univ, CMK, Res Grp Nucl Technol, Diepenbeek, Belgium
[3] Hasselt Univ, CMK, Res Grp Environm Econ, Diepenbeek, Belgium
[4] Hasselt Univ, CMK, Res Grp Environm Biol, Diepenbeek, Belgium
关键词
Conventional pyrolysis; Microwave pyrolysis; Economics; Biochar; Techno-economic assessment; SLOW PYROLYSIS; BIOMASS; CARBON;
D O I
10.1016/j.biortech.2020.124083
中图分类号
S2 [农业工程];
学科分类号
0828 ;
摘要
A comparative techno-economic assessment and Monte Carlo risk analysis is performed on large scale (3 tonne/ h) biochar production plants for conventional (CPS) and microwave (MWP) pyrolysis using six different residue streams. Both plants are viable with minimum selling prices between Euro 436/tonne and Euro 863/tonne for CPS, and between Euro 564/tonne and Euro 979/tonne for MWP. The CPS is therefore more viable than MWP as it is a simpler and more established technology. However, a 20% biochar price increase due to higher biochar quality makes the MWP technology more viable. Nevertheless, the discounted payback period remains higher than this of CPS due to the increased CAPEX. Biochar price is the most important determinant of a biochar production plant's feasibility, motivating the need for economic and market research on biochar prices in function of biochar characteristics to reduce fluctuations in widely varying biochar prices.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 48 条
[1]   Life cycle environmental and economic performance of biochar compared with activated carbon: A meta-analysis [J].
Alhashimi, Hashim A. ;
Aktas, Can B. .
RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND RECYCLING, 2017, 118 :13-26
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2015, UN review
[3]  
Belgische Petroleum Federatie, EV MAX BRANDST 1 WWW
[4]   A techno-economic comparison of power production by biomass fast pyrolysis with gasification and combustion [J].
Bridgwater, AV ;
Toft, AJ ;
Brammer, JG .
RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2002, 6 (03) :181-248
[5]   Financial viability of biofuel and biochar production from forest biomass in the face of market price volatility and uncertainty [J].
Campbell, Robert M. ;
Anderson, Nathaniel M. ;
Daugaard, Daren E. ;
Naughton, Helen T. .
APPLIED ENERGY, 2018, 230 :330-343
[6]  
Doll C., 2016, EC IMPACT INTRO ROAD
[7]   Biochar composition-dependent impacts on soil nutrient release, carbon mineralization, and potential environmental risk: A review [J].
El-Naggar, Ali ;
El-Naggar, Ahmed Hamdy ;
Shaheen, Sabry M. ;
Sarkar, Binoy ;
Chang, Scott X. ;
Tsang, Daniel C. W. ;
Rinklebe, Joerg ;
Ok, Yong Sik .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2019, 241 (458-467) :458-467
[8]  
European Central Bank, 2020, DEF PRIC STAB WWW DO
[9]  
European Commission, 2018, European Commission [WWW Document], DOI [10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004, DOI 10.2833/9937, 10.2833/9937]
[10]  
Eurostat, 2020, NAT GAS PRIC STAT WW