| 1. |
- 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.
|
|
| 2. |
- Hansson, Julia, 1978, et al.
(författare)
-
Alternative marine fuels: Prospects based on multi-criteria decision analysis involving Swedish stakeholders
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Biomass and Bioenergy. - : Elsevier BV. - 1873-2909 .- 0961-9534. ; 126, s. 159-173
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- There is a need for alternative marine fuels in order to reduce the environmental and climate impacts of shipping, in the short and long term. This study assesses the prospects for seven alternative fuels for the shipping sector in 2030, including biofuels, by applying a multi-criteria decision analysis approach that is based on the estimated fuel performance and on input from a panel of maritime stakeholders and by considering, explicitly, the influence of stakeholder preferences. Seven alternative marine fuels—liquefied natural gas (LNG), liquefied biogas (LBG), methanol from natural gas, renewable methanol, hydrogen for fuel cells produced from (i) natural gas or (ii) electrolysis based on renewable electricity, and hydrotreated vegetable oil (HVO)—and heavy fuel oil (HFO) as benchmark are included and ranked by ten performance criteria and their relative importance. The criteria cover economic, environmental, technical, and social aspects. Stakeholder group preferences (i.e., the relative importance groups assign to the criteria) influence the ranking of these options. For ship-owners, fuel producers, and engine manufacturers, economic criteria, in particular the fuel price, are the most important. These groups rank LNG and HFO the highest, followed by fossil methanol, and then various biofuels (LBG, renewable methanol, and HVO). Meanwhile, representatives from Swedish government authorities prioritize environmental criteria, specifically GHG emissions, and social criteria, specifically the potential to meet regulations, ranking renewable hydrogen the highest, followed by renewable methanol, and then HVO. Policy initiatives are needed to promote the introduction of renewable marine fuels.
|
|
| 3. |
- Londo, Marc, et al.
(författare)
-
The REFUEL EU road map for biofuels in transport: Application of the project’s tools to some short-term policy issues
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Biomass and Bioenergy. - : Elsevier BV. - 1873-2909 .- 0961-9534. ; 34:2, s. 244-250
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The current hot debate on biofuels calls for a balanced and realistic long-term strategy forbiofuels. The REFUEL project provides several ingredients for such a strategy. Analyses inthis project indicate that domestically produced biofuels can cover a significant share of EUfuel demand in the coming decades, with the EU-12 new member states and Ukraine asmost promising regions. This potential can be realised with residual streams and onexisting agricultural land, without conversion of e.g. nature reserves. Second generationbiofuels are essential for the long-term success of biofuels due to their superior performancein many ways. But generally, the key challenge for the near future would be how toenhance the development of biofuels in a responsible way, i.e. stimulating the productionchains with the best performance, and preventing negative impacts e.g., by paying carefulattention to possible system impacts of biofuel production such as indirect land usechanges and rising food prices. Finally, 2nd generation biofuels require specific policy: theprecursor role of 1st generation is overrated, both in technical terms as well as in their roleas market precursors. When it comes to synergies, 2nd generation biofuels might benefitmore from other developments in the energy sector, such as initiatives in co-firing ofbiomass for (heat and) power, than from 1st generation biofuels, also because of the publicresistance that the latter induce.
|
|
