| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Berndes, Göran, 1966, et al.
(författare)
-
Strategies For 2nd Generation Biofuels In Eu - Co-firing to stimulate feedstock supply development and process integration to improve energy efficiency and economic competitiveness
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Biomass and Bioenergy. - : Elsevier BV. - 1873-2909 .- 0961-9534. ; 34:2, s. 227-236
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The present biofuel policies in the European Union primarily stimulate 1st generation biofuels that are produced based on conventional food crops. They may be a distraction fromlignocellulose based 2nd generation biofuels – and also from biomass use for heat and electricity – by keeping farmers’ attention and significant investments focusing on firstgeneration biofuels and the cultivation of conventional food crops as feedstocks. This article presents two strategies that can contribute to the development of 2nd generation biofuels based on lignocellulosic feedstocks. The integration of gasification-based biofuel plants in district heating systems is one option for increasing the energy efficiency and improving the economic competitiveness of such biofuels. Another option, biomass co-firing with coal,generates high-efficiency biomass electricity and reduces CO2 emissions by replacing coal. It also offers a near-term market for lignocellulosic biomass, which can stimulate development of supply systems for biomass also suitable as feedstock for 2nd generation biofuels. Regardless of the long-term priorities of biomass use for energy, the stimulation of lignocellulosic biomass production by development of near term and cost-effective markets isjudged to be a no-regrets strategy for Europe. Strategies that induce a relevant development and exploit existing energy infrastructures in order to reduce risk and reach lower costs, are proposed an attractive complement the present and prospective biofuel policies.
|
|
| 4. |
- Cañete Vela, Isabel, 1992, et al.
(författare)
-
Co-recycling of natural and synthetic carbon materials for a sustainable circular economy
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of Cleaner Production. - : Elsevier BV. - 0959-6526. ; 365
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Circular economy approaches are commonly depicted by two cycles, where the biological cycle is associated with regeneration in the biosphere and the technical cycle with reuse, refurbishment, and recycling to maintain value and maximize material recovery. This work, instead, presents an alternative vision to the management of carbonbased materials that integrates the two cycles and enables the phasing-out of fossil carbon from the material system. The aim is to investigate the benefits and global potential of a co-recycling system, as an alternative to conventional recycling systems that separate biomass-based materials (e.g., wood, paper) from fossil-based materials (e.g., plastics). Thermochemical recycling technologies enable the conversion of carbon-based waste materials into high-quality synthetic products, promoting circularity and avoiding carbon losses such as carbon emissions and waste accumulation in landfills and nature. Here, the construction and analysis of co-recycling scenarios show how the deployment of thermochemical recycling technologies can decouple the material system from fossil resource extraction. Furthermore, energy use is reduced if pyrolysis and/or gasification are included in the portfolio of recycling technologies. In a decarbonized energy system, deployment of co-recycling can lead to near-zero carbon emissions, while in more carbon-intensive energy systems the choice of thermochemical recycling route is key to limiting carbon emissions.
|
|
| 5. |
- Cintas Sanchez, Olivia, 1982, et al.
(författare)
-
Geospatial supply-demand modeling of biomass residues for co-firing in European coal power plants
- 2018
-
Ingår i: GCB Bioenergy. - : Wiley. - 1757-1707 .- 1757-1693. ; 10:11, s. 786-803
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Biomass co‐firing with coal is a near‐term option to displace fossil fuels and can facilitate development of biomass conversion and the build‐out of biomass supply infrastructure. A GIS‐based modeling framework (EU‐28, Norway, and Switzerland) is used to quantify and localize biomass demand for co‐firing in coal power plants and agricultural and forest residue supply potentials; supply and demand are then matched based on minimizing the total biomass transport costs (field‐to‐gate). Key datasets (e.g., land cover, land use, wood production) are available at 1,000 m or higher resolution, while some data (e.g., simulated yields) and assumptions (e.g., crop harvest index) have lower resolution and were re‐sampled to allow modeling at 1,000 m resolution. Biomass demand for co‐firing is estimated at 184 PJ in 2020, corresponding to an emissions reduction of 18 Mt CO2. In all countries except Italy and Spain, the sum of the forest and agricultural residues available at less than 300 km from a co‐firing plant exceeds the assessed biomass demand. The total cost of transporting residues to these plants is reduced if agricultural residues can be used, since transport distances are shorter. The total volume of forest residues less than 300 km from a co‐firing plant corresponds to about half of the assessed biomass demand. Almost 70% of the total biomass demand for co‐firing is found in Germany and Poland. The volumes of domestic forest residues in Germany (Poland) available within the cost range 2‐5 (1.5‐3.5) €/GJ biomass correspond to about 30% (70%) of the biomass demand. The volumes of domestic forest and agricultural residues in Germany (Poland) within the cost range 2‐4 (below 2) €/GJ biomass exceed the biomass demand for co‐firing. Half of the biomass demand is located within 50 km from ports, indicating that long‐distance biomass transport by sea is in many instances an option.
|
|
| 6. |
- Cintas Sanchez, Olivia, 1982, et al.
(författare)
-
Geospatial supply-demand modeling of lignocellulosic biomass for electricity and biofuels in the European Union
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Biomass and Bioenergy. - : Elsevier BV. - 1873-2909 .- 0961-9534. ; 144
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Bioenergy can contribute to achieving European Union (EU) climate targets while mitigating impacts from current agricultural land use. A GIS-based modeling framework (1000 m resolution) is employed to match biomass supply (forest and agricultural residues, complemented by lignocellulosic energy crops where needed) with biomass demand for either electricity or bio-oil production on sites currently used for coal power in the EU-28, Norway, and Switzerland. The framework matches supply and demand based on minimizing the field-to-gate costs and is used to provide geographically explicit information on (i) plant-gate supply cost; (ii) CO2 savings; and (iii) potential mitigation opportunities for soil erosion, flooding, and eutrophication resulting from the introduction of energy crops on cropland. Converting all suitable coal power plants to biomass and assuming that biomass is sourced within a transport distance of 300 km, would produce an estimated 150 TW h biomass-derived electricity, using 1365 PJ biomass, including biomass from energy crops grown on 6 Mha. Using all existing coal power sites for bio-oil production in 100-MW pyrolysis units could produce 820 PJ of bio-oil, using 1260 PJ biomass, including biomass from energy crops grown on 1.8 Mha. Using biomass to generate electricity would correspond to an emissions reduction of 135 MtCO2, while using biomass to produce bio-oil to substitute for crude oil would correspond to a reduction of 59 MtCO2. In addition, energy crops can have a positive effect on soil organic carbon in most of the analyzed countries. The mitigation opportunities investigated range from marginal to high depending on location.
|
|
| 7. |
- Cowie, A. L., et al.
(författare)
-
Applying a science-based systems perspective to dispel misconceptions about climate effects of forest bioenergy
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Global Change Biology Bioenergy. - : John Wiley and Sons Inc. - 1757-1693 .- 1757-1707. ; 13:8, s. 1210-1231
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The scientific literature contains contrasting findings about the climate effects of forest bioenergy, partly due to the wide diversity of bioenergy systems and associated contexts, but also due to differences in assessment methods. The climate effects of bioenergy must be accurately assessed to inform policy-making, but the complexity of bioenergy systems and associated land, industry and energy systems raises challenges for assessment. We examine misconceptions about climate effects of forest bioenergy and discuss important considerations in assessing these effects and devising measures to incentivize sustainable bioenergy as a component of climate policy. The temporal and spatial system boundary and the reference (counterfactual) scenarios are key methodology choices that strongly influence results. Focussing on carbon balances of individual forest stands and comparing emissions at the point of combustion neglect system-level interactions that influence the climate effects of forest bioenergy. We highlight the need for a systems approach, in assessing options and developing policy for forest bioenergy that: (1) considers the whole life cycle of bioenergy systems, including effects of the associated forest management and harvesting on landscape carbon balances; (2) identifies how forest bioenergy can best be deployed to support energy system transformation required to achieve climate goals; and (3) incentivizes those forest bioenergy systems that augment the mitigation value of the forest sector as a whole. Emphasis on short-term emissions reduction targets can lead to decisions that make medium- to long-term climate goals more difficult to achieve. The most important climate change mitigation measure is the transformation of energy, industry and transport systems so that fossil carbon remains underground. Narrow perspectives obscure the significant role that bioenergy can play by displacing fossil fuels now, and supporting energy system transition. Greater transparency and consistency is needed in greenhouse gas reporting and accounting related to bioenergy.
|
|
| 8. |
- Cutz, Luis, 1986, et al.
(författare)
-
A techno-economic assessment of biomass co-firing in Czech Republic, France, Germany and Poland
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining. - : Wiley. - 1932-1031 .- 1932-104X. ; 13:5, s. 1289-1305
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Biomass co-firing with coal can help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and can act as a low-cost stepping-stone for developing biomass supply infrastructures. This paper presents a techno-economic assessment of the biomass co-firing potential in coal-fired boilers in Czech Republic, France, Germany and Poland. The current coal power plant infrastructure is characterized by means of geographic location of the coal power plants, installed boiler capacity, type of boiler technology and year of commissioning, as extracted from the Chalmers Power Plant Database. The assessment considers type of boiler technology, type of biomass, co-firing fraction, implementation costs, breakeven prices for co-firing and an alkali index to determine the risk of high-temperature corrosion. The main factors affecting the co-firing potential are the biomass price, carbon price and alkali index. Results indicate that the total co-firing potential in the four countries is around 16 TWh year−1, with the largest potential from a conversion perspective in Germany, followed by Poland. Biomass co-firing with coal is estimated to be competitive at biomass prices below 13 € MWhinput−1 when the carbon price is 20 € t−1 CO2. On average, 1 TWh of electricity from biomass co-firing substitutes 0.9 Mt of fossil CO2 emissions. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
|
|
| 9. |
- Hansson, Julia, 1978, et al.
(författare)
-
Co-firing biomass with coal for electricity generation—An assessment of the potential in EU27
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Energy Policy. - : Elsevier BV. - 0301-4215. ; 37:4, s. 1444-1455
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The European Union aims to increase bioenergy use. Co-firing biomass with coal represents an attractive near-term option for electricity generation from renewable energy sources (RES-E). This study assesses the near-term technical potential for biomass co-firing with coal in the existing coal-fired power plant infrastructure in the EU27 Member States. The total technical potential for RES-E frombiomass co-firing amounts to approximately 50–90 TWh/yr, which requires a biomass supply of approximately 500–900 PJ/yr. The estimated co-firing potential in EU27 amounts to 20–35% of the estimated gap between current RES-E production and the RES-E target for 2010. However, for some member states the national co-firing potential is large enough to fill the national gap. The national biomass supply potential is considerably larger than the estimated biomass demand for co-firing for all member states. About 45% of the estimated biomass demand for co-firing comes from plants located close to the sea or near main navigable rivers and indicates the possibility for biomass import by sea transport. Thus, biomass co-firing has the potential to contribute substantially to the RES-E development in EU27.
|
|
| 10. |
- Hansson, Julia, 1978, et al.
(författare)
-
On the possibilities for co-firing biomass with coal for power generation in the EU
- 2008
-
Ingår i: World Bioenergy 2008 Conference & Exhibition on Biomass for Energy.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The European Union aims at an enhanced use of bioenergy. Co-firing biomass with coal represents an attractive near-term option for electricity generation from renewable energy sources (RES-E). The purpose with this study is to assess the near-term technical potential for biomass co-firing with coal in the existing coal-fired power plantinfrastructure in the EU27 Member States (MS). The technical potential for RES-E from biomass co-firing amounts toapproximately 50-90 TWh/year, which requires a biomass supply of approximately 500-900 PJ/year. The national biomass supply potential is considerably larger than the estimated biomass demand for each MS. However, actuallymeeting the possible co-firing biomass demand will require a substantial increase compared to the present primaryproduction of biomass in many MS. The implementation of biomass co-firing will be influenced by e.g., the availability and cost of different biomass resources as well as related transport and handling issues, the development of policies and competing options. Longer term, the biomass co-firing potential will be influenced by the development of carbon capture and storage. In the future work the RES-E generation from co-firing will be compared to the RES-E targets for 2010. The possibility for biomass import by sea will also be indicated.
|
|
