IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v13y2011i8p591-602.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental impacts and costs of woody Biomass-to-Liquid (BTL) production and use -- A review

Author

Listed:
  • Sunde, K.
  • Brekke, A.
  • Solberg, B.

Abstract

This article investigates the environmental profile and costs of woody BTL production and use by reviewing existing LCA studies. The findings reveal that BTL from sustainably managed forest biomass and woody waste may have a lower overall environmental impact than fossil diesel. The benefits of using BTL instead of fossil diesel are largely due to savings in fossil energy use, which offer savings in GHG emissions since a large part of the lifecycle CO2 emissions are biogenic. Improvements in the impact category photosmog or summer smog have also been reported. On the other hand, wood based BTL may increase eutrophication and acidification, and increased ozone depletion and toxicity may also be expected. While global indicators like climate change, non-renewable resources and ozone depletion are fairly easy to interpret, the local indicators such as eutrophication, acidification, photosmog and toxicity are site specific, and an LCA will not take into account where, when and at which rate the emissions occur, which are important parameters when estimating local pollution effects. In addition, increased logging or the establishment of short rotation plantations may impact biodiversity, land-use changes and the value of nature. The reported results differed when assessing the same fuel due to differences in methodology and data assumptions. For the methodological part, differences in system boundaries, system completeness and chosen allocation methods contributed to the ranges in results. Differences regarding data inputs, such as plant efficiency and fuel consumption were also important for the differences in results. The most influential or sensitive factors within the reviewed studies were the assumed type of feedstock, plant efficiency and drivetrain. The reported production costs of BTL are in the range of 0.70-1.12 euros per liter. The costs are largely influenced by plant scale, biomass costs and plant efficiency. Biofuels are generally not considered a cost effective climate mitigation means, but there are no other feasible solutions than biofuels for the heavy transport sector in the short to medium term.

Suggested Citation

  • Sunde, K. & Brekke, A. & Solberg, B., 2011. "Environmental impacts and costs of woody Biomass-to-Liquid (BTL) production and use -- A review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(8), pages 591-602, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:13:y:2011:i:8:p:591-602
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934111000761
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel M. Kammen & Alexander E. Farrell & Richard J. Plevin & Andrew D. Jones & Mark A. Delucchi & Gregory F. Nemet, 2007. "Energy and Greenhouse Impacts of Biofuels: A Framework for Analysis," OECD/ITF Joint Transport Research Centre Discussion Papers 2007/2, OECD Publishing.
    2. Veronika Dornburg & Gregg Marland, 2008. "Temporary storage of carbon in the biosphere does have value for climate change mitigation: a response to the paper by Miko Kirschbaum," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 211-217, March.
    3. Damartzis, T. & Zabaniotou, A., 2011. "Thermochemical conversion of biomass to second generation biofuels through integrated process design--A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 366-378, January.
    4. Hamelinck, Carlo N & Faaij, Andre P.C., 2006. "Outlook for advanced biofuels," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 3268-3283, November.
    5. Gustavsson, Leif & Madlener, Reinhard, 2003. "CO2 mitigation costs of large-scale bioenergy technologies in competitive electricity markets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(14), pages 1405-1425.
    6. Kammen, Daniel M & Farrell, Alexander E & Plevin, Richard J & Jones, Andrew D & Nemet, Gregory F & Delucchi, Mark A, 2008. "Energy and Greenhouse Gas Impacts of Biofuels: A Framework for Analysis," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt3fs897q3, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    7. Bright, Ryan M. & H. Strømman, Anders, 2010. "Incentivizing wood-based Fischer-Tropsch diesel through financial policy instruments: An economic assessment for Norway," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 6849-6859, November.
    8. Urge-Vorsatz, Diana & Novikova, Aleksandra, 2008. "Potentials and costs of carbon dioxide mitigation in the world's buildings," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 642-661, February.
    9. Cherubini, Francesco, 2010. "GHG balances of bioenergy systems – Overview of key steps in the production chain and methodological concerns," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 1565-1573.
    10. Annette Cowie & Pete Smith & Dale Johnson, 2006. "Does Soil Carbon Loss in Biomass Production Systems Negate the Greenhouse Benefits of Bioenergy?," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 11(5), pages 979-1002, September.
    11. Rubin, Edward S. & Chen, Chao & Rao, Anand B., 2007. "Cost and performance of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 capture and storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 4444-4454, September.
    12. Seiler, Jean-Marie & Hohwiller, Carole & Imbach, Juliette & Luciani, Jean-François, 2010. "Technical and economical evaluation of enhanced biomass to liquid fuel processes," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 3587-3592.
    13. Davison, John, 2007. "Performance and costs of power plants with capture and storage of CO2," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1163-1176.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lester, Mason Scott & Bramstoft, Rasmus & Münster, Marie, 2020. "Analysis on Electrofuels in Future Energy Systems: A 2050 Case Study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    2. Otavio Cavalett & Sigurd Norem Slettmo & Francesco Cherubini, 2018. "Energy and Environmental Aspects of Using Eucalyptus from Brazil for Energy and Transportation Services in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, November.
    3. Jesús Andrés Tavizón-Pozos & Gerardo Chavez-Esquivel & Víctor Alejandro Suárez-Toriello & Carlos Eduardo Santolalla-Vargas & Oscar Abel Luévano-Rivas & Omar Uriel Valdés-Martínez & Alfonso Talavera-Ló, 2021. "State of Art of Alkaline Earth Metal Oxides Catalysts Used in the Transesterification of Oils for Biodiesel Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-24, February.
    4. Neves, Renato Cruz & Klein, Bruno Colling & da Silva, Ricardo Justino & Rezende, Mylene Cristina Alves Ferreira & Funke, Axel & Olivarez-Gómez, Edgardo & Bonomi, Antonio & Maciel-Filho, Rubens, 2020. "A vision on biomass-to-liquids (BTL) thermochemical routes in integrated sugarcane biorefineries for biojet fuel production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    5. De Simio, L. & Gambino, M. & Iannaccone, S., 2013. "Possible transport energy sources for the future," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 1-10.
    6. Fang Yan & Kaili Xu & Deshun Li & Zhikai Cui, 2017. "A novel hazard assessment method for biomass gasification stations based on extended set pair analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-21, September.
    7. Choudhury, Hari K. & Goswami, Kishor, 2013. "Determinants of expansion of area under jatropha plantation in North East India: A Tobit analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 46-52.
    8. Millinger, M. & Ponitka, J. & Arendt, O. & Thrän, D., 2017. "Competitiveness of advanced and conventional biofuels: Results from least-cost modelling of biofuel competition in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 394-402.
    9. Gasparatos, Alexandros & Doll, Christopher N.H. & Esteban, Miguel & Ahmed, Abubakari & Olang, Tabitha A., 2017. "Renewable energy and biodiversity: Implications for transitioning to a Green Economy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 161-184.
    10. Ail, Snehesh Shivananda & Dasappa, S., 2016. "Biomass to liquid transportation fuel via Fischer Tropsch synthesis – Technology review and current scenario," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 267-286.
    11. Yongzhong Jiang & Valerii Havrysh & Oleksandr Klymchuk & Vitalii Nitsenko & Tomas Balezentis & Dalia Streimikiene, 2019. "Utilization of Crop Residue for Power Generation: The Case of Ukraine," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-21, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lai, N.Y.G. & Yap, E.H. & Lee, C.W., 2011. "Viability of CCS: A broad-based assessment for Malaysia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(8), pages 3608-3616.
    2. Wu Haibo & Liu Zhaohui, 2018. "Economic research relating to a 200 MWe oxy‐fuel combustion power plant," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 8(5), pages 911-919, October.
    3. Pettinau, Alberto & Ferrara, Francesca & Tola, Vittorio & Cau, Giorgio, 2017. "Techno-economic comparison between different technologies for CO2-free power generation from coal," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 426-439.
    4. Almansoori, Ali & Betancourt-Torcat, Alberto, 2015. "Design optimization model for the integration of renewable and nuclear energy in the United Arab Emirates’ power system," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 234-251.
    5. Meleesa Naughton & Richard C. Darton & Fai Fung, 2012. "Could Climate Change Limit Water Availability for Coal-Fired Electricity Generation with Carbon Capture and Storage? A UK Case Study," Energy & Environment, , vol. 23(2-3), pages 265-282, May.
    6. Patel, Madhumita & Zhang, Xiaolei & Kumar, Amit, 2016. "Techno-economic and life cycle assessment on lignocellulosic biomass thermochemical conversion technologies: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 1486-1499.
    7. Piroli, Giuseppe & Rajcaniova, Miroslava & Ciaian, Pavel & Kancs, d׳Artis, 2015. "From a rise in B to a fall in C? SVAR analysis of environmental impact of biofuels," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 921-930.
    8. Luis Míguez, José & Porteiro, Jacobo & Pérez-Orozco, Raquel & Patiño, David & Rodríguez, Sandra, 2018. "Evolution of CO2 capture technology between 2007 and 2017 through the study of patent activity," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 1282-1296.
    9. Franz Nauschnigg, 2009. "Preiseffekte der Agrartreibstoffproduktion," Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft - WuG, Kammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte für Wien, Abteilung Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Statistik, vol. 35(2), pages 265-282.
    10. Alfredo Viskovic & Vladimir Valentic & Vladimir Franki, 2013. "The impac t of carbon prices on CCS investment in South East Europe," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(3), pages 91-120.
    11. Rohlfs, Wilko & Madlener, Reinhard, 2013. "Assessment of clean-coal strategies: The questionable merits of carbon capture-readiness," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 27-36.
    12. Bistline, John E. & Rai, Varun, 2010. "The role of carbon capture technologies in greenhouse gas emissions-reduction models: A parametric study for the U.S. power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 1177-1191, February.
    13. Donatini, Franco & Gigliucci, Gianluca & Riccardi, Juri & Schiavetti, Massimo & Gabbrielli, Roberto & Briola, Stefano, 2009. "Supercritical water oxidation of coal in power plants with low CO2 emissions," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(12), pages 2144-2150.
    14. Harvey, Mark & Pilgrim, Sarah, 2011. "The new competition for land: Food, energy, and climate change," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(S1), pages 40-51.
    15. Lai, Xianjin & Ye, Zhonghua & Xu, Zhengzhong & Husar Holmes, Maja & Henry Lambright, W., 2012. "Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technological innovation system in China: Structure, function evaluation and policy implication," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 635-646.
    16. repec:lic:licosd:37115 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Cristóbal, Jorge & Guillén-Gosálbez, Gonzalo & Jiménez, Laureano & Irabien, Angel, 2012. "Multi-objective optimization of coal-fired electricity production with CO2 capture," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 266-272.
    18. Siefert, Nicholas S. & Chang, Brian Y. & Litster, Shawn, 2014. "Exergy and economic analysis of a CaO-looping gasifier for IGFC–CCS and IGCC–CCS," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 230-245.
    19. Kalt, Gerald & Kranzl, Lukas, 2011. "Assessing the economic efficiency of bioenergy technologies in climate mitigation and fossil fuel replacement in Austria using a techno-economic approach," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(11), pages 3665-3684.
    20. Gustavsson, Leif & Truong, Nguyen Le, 2011. "Coproduction of district heat and electricity or biomotor fuels," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 6263-6277.
    21. Wang, Lu & Wei, Yi-Ming & Brown, Marilyn A., 2017. "Global transition to low-carbon electricity: A bibliometric analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 57-68.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:13:y:2011:i:8:p:591-602. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.