1 / 25

BIOREFINERY IMPLEMENTATION IN MARGINAL LAND. Bioenergy and Biochemicals.

University of Naples “ Parthenope ” Department of Sciences for the Environment. BIOREFINERY IMPLEMENTATION IN MARGINAL LAND. Bioenergy and Biochemicals. Sandra Fahd, Gabriella Fiorentino , Salvatore Mellino , Maddalena Ripa and Sergio Ulgiati.

brandtj
Download Presentation

BIOREFINERY IMPLEMENTATION IN MARGINAL LAND. Bioenergy and Biochemicals.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. UniversityofNaples “Parthenope” DepartmentofSciencesfor the Environment BIOREFINERY IMPLEMENTATION IN MARGINAL LAND. Bioenergy and Biochemicals. Sandra Fahd, Gabriella Fiorentino, Salvatore Mellino, Maddalena Ripa and Sergio Ulgiati Trends and future ofsustainabledevelopment Tampere, 9 June 2011

  2. Outline • Energy crops: pros & cons • Evaluation tools • Bioenergy pattern • Biorefinery pattern • Conclusions

  3. unsustainabilityof non-renewablebased production systems • finite feedstocksthat are beingquicklydepleted • pollution • and climatechange • production ofhugeamountofwaste Biomassas alternative feedstock for industrial production Energy crops: pros & cons

  4. Land demand Promotion of bioenergy generates new environmental and social problems Abiotic matter degradation Biotic matter degradation Energydemand Labor Soil erosion Waterdemand ENERGY CROPPING Emissions and wastes Energy crops: pros & cons

  5. non-foodcrops on marginallands as alternative solutionnot in competitionwithfood production Highly polluted, not suitable for food production & low productivity lands Energy crops: pros & cons

  6. SETTING THE GOAL. 1 • Identification of suitable land and crops • capable of providing a suitable biomass substrate, without competing with food production • characterized by high yield, low cultural requirements and low environmental impact Evaluationtools

  7. SETTING THE GOAL. 2 • development of an integrated evaluation method • capable of identifying bottlenecks and improvement options • suitable for decision making Evaluationtools

  8. Extended LCA Approach: SUMMA (SUstainabilityMultidimensional and MultiscaleAssessment) Life Cycle Assessment “cradle to grave analysis” SUMMA Geographic Information System for spatial analysis the energy that is embodied in any form of energy, good or service Evaluationtools

  9. MARGINAL LANDS IN CAMPANIA REGION non-irrigated arable lands from CORINE LAND COVER overlaid on the areas declared polluted by ARPAC amount to 44,998 ha Evaluationtools

  10. EthiopianMustard or Brassica carinata • High adaptability to different types of soil (clay and sandy soils) as well as to semi-arid climate (southern Italy) • Low chemical input requirement • Strong resistance to diseases and water shortages • High amounts of crop residues Evaluationtools

  11. Brassica carinata agriculturalresidues (lignocellulosic material) seeds oil extraction (pressing) steamexplosion cakemeal oil lubricants cellulose pelletsforbiofumigation transesterification/saponification hemicellulose lignin amendments and fertilizers glycerine biodiesel proteinisolates building blocks (erucic acid) plastic and polymers Evaluationtools

  12. Brassica carinata agriculturalresidues (lignocellulosic material) seeds oil extraction (pressing) oil extraction (pressing) cakemeal oil transesterification/saponification transesterification/saponification glycerine biodiesel Bioenergy pattern

  13. SUMMA PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Bioenergy pattern

  14. ENERGETIC EVALUATION ECONOMIC EVALUATION Bioenergy pattern

  15. BIOREFINERY SCENARIO A SCENARIO B BIOENERGY Marginal, polluted, not irrigated lands in Campania Marginal, NOT polluted, not irrigated lands in Campania Biorefinery pattern Bioenergy pattern

  16. BIOREFINERY IS “the sustainable processing of biomass into a spectrum of value-added products (chemicals, materials, food and feed) and energy (biofuels, power and heat).” Kamm, B.; Kamm, M. (2004). Principles of Biorefineries. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 64: 137-145 Biorefinery pattern

  17. BIOFINE LINE Furfural Purification Furfural Reactor #2 LA Derivatives LA Extraction LA Conversion Reactor #1 Steam Formic Acid Hexose Feedstock Char Substance Pretreatment Make-up acid Energy Electricity • A high temperature, fast acid hydrolysis of biomass polysaccharides • The feedstock is hydrolysed with 1-5% mineral acid in two reactors • The first reactor hydrolyses the sugars and produces 5-hydroxymethyl furfural (HMF) from the C6 sugars and furfural from the C5 sugars • The HMF goes to the second reactor where levulinic acid is formed Biorefinery pattern

  18. FURFURAL P.R. Gruber & M Kamm (Editors), “Biorefineries – Industrial Processes and Products, Status Quo and Future Directions, Vols 1 & 2, 2006, Wiley-VCH Biorefinery pattern

  19. LEVULINIC ACID DERIVATIVES P.R. Gruber & M Kamm (Editors), “Biorefineries – Industrial Processes and Products, Status Quo and Future Directions, Vols 1 & 2, 2006, Wiley-VCH Biorefinery pattern

  20. Brassica carinata agriculturalresidues (lignocellulosic material) seeds oil extraction (pressing) oil extraction (pressing) steamexplosion cakemeal oil cellulose transesterification/saponification transesterification/saponification hemicellulose lignin glycerine biodiesel BIOFINE LINE ethyllevulinate formic acid Biorefinery pattern

  21. ENERGY ADVANTAGE • highersavingsof oil in the production ofchemicals and biomaterials (petro-chemicalsrequire more fossilenergy in the process) • ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE • higher market valueofbiochemicals (comparedto the market valueofthermalenergy) + highersavingsfromlargeramountof oil replaced the economicreturnresultstobehigher (the ratioofgrossincometocostsisabout 2:1) Biorefinery pattern

  22. SUMMA PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Biorefinery pattern

  23. Conclusions. 1 • The energy and environmental performance of the B. carinatabioenergy approach is not feasible at the level of Campania regional agriculture. • If agricultural residues are exploited for the extraction of chemical building blocks, both the energy and the economic balances are improved, due to the high added value of biochemicals. • By converting waste and residues (also from food manufacturing industry and urban systems) into value added chemicals, combustion and landfilling are avoided and additional energy, economic and environmental benefits are gained Conclusions

  24. Conclusions. 2 • The evaluation tools applied are able to capture several different aspects (methodological, spatial and time-scale) and integrate them into a whole picture. • By means of SUMMA approach, the most sustainable option (or set of options) can be identified and choices among alternatives are undoubtedly facilitated. • Additional insights on constraints and scenarios can be gained if SUMMA database and indicators are further processed via MuSIASEM (Multi-ScaleIntegratedAnalysisofSocietal and EcosystemMetobolism) and ASA (Advanced Sustainability Analysis) Conclusions

  25. Acknowledgements Synergies in Multi-scaleInter-LinkagesofEco-socialsystems http://www.smile-fp7.eu/ Thanks for your attention! gabriella.fiorentino@uniparthenope.it

More Related