sustainable biofuels: prospects & challenges - world...
TRANSCRIPT
Sustainable Biofuels: Prospects and Challenges
Dr Jeremy WoodsA member of the UK Royal Society Working Group on Biofuels& Porter Institute, Imperial College London
The Guardian – 12th Feb 2008 - Monbiot
‘Apart from used chip fat, there is no such thing as a sustainable biofuel.’
…The European commission, by contrast, does have a plan, and it's a disaster. It recognises that "the oil dependence of the transport sector ... is one of the most serious problems of insecurity in energy supply that the EU faces". Partly in order to diversify fuel supplies, partly to cut greenhouse gas emissions, it has ordered the member states to ensure that by 2020 10% of the petroleum our cars burn must be replaced with biofuels. This won't solve peak oil, but it might at least put it into perspective by causing an even bigger problem.’
Wednesday, 05 March 2008 3
Biofuels study and report
The study was launched on the 16th October 2006Open call for evidence issued
Participatory industry workshop held at Royal Society in London on 12th January 2007
Facilitated interaction with feedback fed directly into report developmentOver 20 industries represented including agriculture, chemical, oil and vehicle sector representatives (UK and inter / multi-national)
Report launched on the 14th January 2008
ChairProfessor John Pickett CBE FRS Rothamsted Research
Working groupProfessor Dennis Anderson Centre for Environmental Policy,
Imperial College LondonProfessor Dianna Bowles OBE Centre for Novel Agricultural Products,
University of YorkProfessor Tony Bridgwater Bioenergy Research Group, Aston UniversityProfessor Paul Jarvis FRS Atmospheric and Environmental Science,
University of EdinburghDr Nigel Mortimer North Energy AssociatesProfessor Martyn Poliakoff, FRS School of Chemistry, University of NottinghamDr Jeremy Woods Porter Alliance, Centre for Environmental Policy,
Imperial College London
SecretariatMr Tanzeed Alam Science Policy OfficerMr Richard Heap Manager
For more information, please contact the Secretariat: + 44 (0) 207 451 2588/2590, [email protected] or [email protected]
Wednesday, 05 March 2008 4
Working group membership
Climate Change
Global / RegionalEnergy Security
Rural Development
Local / ConsumerUsability / reliability
CostEnvironment /
health[inc air quality]
Sustai
nabil
ity
Drivers and obstacles for bioenergy:conflicts and synergies are inevitable
What is driving biofuels?
UK Petrol Price (2007)Wholesale petrol = $15/GJPump purchase = $55/GJ
Zambia Petrol Price (March 2006)Wholesale petrol = $18/GJPump purchase = $44/GJ
Zambia projected ethanol production costs$16 to $38/GJ (no taxes)
C-molasses to straight juice used Assumes no value for co-products e.g. electricity
barr
el
$0
$2
$4
$6
$8
$10
$12
1972
1975
1978
1981
1984
1987
1990
1993
1996
1999
2002
2005
Oil (Dubai): $/GJGas (EU): $/GJCoal (EU): $/GJ
Source: adapted from www.bp.com (2007)
Global trends in fossil energy prices (1972 to 2006)
Global petroleum prices ($/barrel) and ethanol production (Mgal/yr. 1960 to 2006; Kammen et al, 2007)
$ pe
r bar
rel
7
0.0E+00
1.0E+10
2.0E+10
3.0E+10
4.0E+10
5.0E+10
6.0E+10
7.0E+10
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
Gro
ss 'C
ost'
(US$
per
yea
r)
-1.0E+08
4.0E+08
9.0E+08
1.4E+09
1.9E+09
2.4E+09
Con
sum
ptio
n (b
arre
ls p
er y
ear)
Gross cost to Africa (US$ per year) barrels per yearBased on BP 2007
Costs of oil provision to Africa?
•Estimated ‘oil expenditure’ for Africa = US$62 billion in 2006
•In Tanzania and Senegal c. 40% of foreign exchange earnings are spent on purchasing oil products
•Estimated ‘expenditure’has tripled since 2002
•Consumption has increased by 10%
Woods, 2007 (Burkina Faso)
Climate ChangeBiofuels can contribute to a meaningful reduction in greenhouse gas emissions but requires the development of highly efficient and integrated supply chains. Existing examples of biofuels programmes around the world starkly illustrate the range of greenhouse gas savings that can be realised.
Average Brazilian ethanol results in reductions of c 80% in greenhouse gas emissions, on a life cycle analysis, compared to petrol (Worldwatch Institute 2006). US maize-based ethanol struggles to deliver reductions in greenhouse gas emissions of 10%. UK- projected reductions in greenhouse gas emissions of anywhere between 10% and 80% could be delivered from wheat to ethanol (Woods & Bauen 2003).
Current policy frameworks and subsidies for biofuels are not directed towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but rather provide incentives for national supply targets. As a result, there is currently no incentive to invest in the systems that would deliver low greenhouse gas biofuels.
Wednesday, 05 March 2008 8
Energy SecurityGlobal primary oil demand projected to grow 1.3% per year up to 2030
reaching 116mb/d (from 84mb/d in 2005), transport sector accounting for most of this increased demand (IEA 2006).
Much of the current demand for oil is met by OPEC; this has energy security implications especially if supply routes are disrupted. The surge of demand for oil from developing regions (China, India and Latin America in particular) + continued high demand from Europe & USA is continuing to drive oil prices higher. The current era of high oil prices has started to make biofuels, and other close to market alternative technologies, a realistic alternative.Virtually any degree of energy security can be achieved if countries are willing / able to pay for it. E.g. exploiting tar sands and oil shales to produce synthetic fuels.
Note: costs of producing synthetic fuels are high and are much more carbon intensive than for conventional oil fuels.
Using unconventional energy resources could seriously compromise objectives to mitigate climate change.
Whether this trade-off between energy security and climate change mitigation is avoided by the production of biofuels will depend on how biofuels are produced and on developments right across the supply chain.
Wednesday, 05 March 2008 9
Rural developmentWill biofuel production compromise food production and decrease the quality of life for the rural poor of the world?Biofuels could provide a part of the answer to this problem by diverting ‘surplus’ production to a new market whilst maintaining productive capacity. In many developing countries, rising food-based commodity prices will assist investment in agriculture and forestry which, in turn, will improve yields and production efficiencies. With careful implementation, the rural poor of these countries could be major beneficiaries of a new biofuel-inspired development dynamic. However, without specific intervention, the urban poor in developing countries will suffer as a result of increased food prices unless (i) economic prosperity rises as a whole, and; (ii) a reasonable amount of the value generated by biofuels is retained locally.
This is a critical component of understanding how to harness FDI beneficially
We do not assess these issues in detail, but highlight the dangers of an overly simplistic food versus fuel debate when synergistic opportunities for food and fuel exist and should be maximised.
Wednesday, 05 March 2008 10
11
Data &
indicators
Environmental Policy & Institutions
• Net emissions to air, water and land
• Climate change mitigation & adaptation
• Inc GHGs
• Above and below-ground carbon balances
• Biodiversity
• Good agricultural practice & soil management
• Waste
• Direct & Indirect Land Use
• New policies & plans
• Directives
• Incentives
• Barriers
• Institutional capacity
• Technology neutral options
Economic
• Competitiveness
• Market breakthrough
• Incentives
• Barriers & Regulations
• Taxes
• IP rights and ownership
• Value chains and value retention
Social
• LCA Social impacts
• health & safety
• environmental quality
• Labour conditions
• Welfare / happiness
• Equitable access to local resources
• e.g. land tenure
• Barriers
Reporting, Assurance & Certification
Regional Strategic Drivers e.g. EU’s Lisbon CriteriaDiaz-Chavez, 2007
Scale &
Location
Balancing environmental, economic and social issues for sustainable biofuel development
Overview of Biofuel Conversion Pathways
Wednesday, 05 March 2008 12
Solid Biomass *
Sugar-richcrops
Oil crops
Wet Biomass *
Gasification
Pyrolysis
FermentationC6 + C5
Yeast / Bacterial
Extraction
AnaerobicDigestion
CHP
TransportFuels
Biogas
DME Dimethyl Ether
Ethanol /Butanol
Methanol
F-Tropsch
Diesel
CH
4
BiodieselC
O+H
2E
ster
ifica
tion
Bioo
il
Biological
Mechanical
Thermochemical
Biological
H2
Includes:Herbaceous Perennials
e.g. Micsanthus, switchgrass Woody Perennials
Short rotation coppice e.g.willow, poplar
Straw and Forest ResiduesMunicipal Waste
e.g Wheat, Maize, Sugar Beet
e.g. Rape (Canola), Oil Palm, Jatropha, etcAlso waste fats and oils
Electricity& / orHeat
e.g. cattle, pig and human manure
Notes: • Combustion not shown • * Includes Municipal waste• Synthesis gas requires catalysts for upgrading
• Indicates requirement of reformerSource: Revised from DG TREN (Maniatis, 2003; Woods, 2003)
Understanding supply chains and boundary issues
Wednesday, 05 March 2008 13
Feedstock transport
Biofuel production
Cultivation & harvest
Cultivation & harvest
Biofuel transport
Waste materialWaste
material
Alternative waste
management
Boundary for monthly carbon intensity calculationPrevious
land use
Alternative land use
Fossil fuel reference system
Assessed separately
Excludes minor sources, from:
• Manufacture of machinery or equipment
• PFCs, HFCs, SF6
Assessed ex post by RTFO Administrator
Biofuel use
Changes at one point in the supply and use chain have implications for other segments of the chain
E4TECH, 2007
Biofuel pathways- biomass and energy production
Detailed site-specific assessments are needed to evaluate potentialsBeware volumetric comparatorsFuture biofuels may not be ethanol or methyl esters
Wednesday, 05 March 2008 14
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Barle
y
Wheat
Corn (M
aize)
Suga
rbeet
Suga
rcane
UK SRC
EtOH
Soyb
ean
Castor
bean
sSu
nfolow
er see
dRa
pesee
(Can
ola)
Jatrop
haOil P
almUK S
RC FT
Litre
s/ha
0
50
100
150
200
GJ/h
a
l/ha bioethanoll/ha biodieselGJ/ha bioethanolGJ/ha biodiesel
5-Mar-08 [email protected] 15
Somerset Preliminary Results Based on RTFO Defaults
050
100150200250300350400
Gasoli
ne - o
nly
Wheat E
tOH- F
rance
Wheat E
tOH- C
anada
Wheat E
tOH- U
K
Brazil S
ugarc
aneUK S
ugarb
eet
US Maiz
e
UK-'bes
t'UK-'g
ood'
UK-base
UK-wors
t
gCO
2eq/
km
gCO2e/car.km
Wheat Grain
UK- RTFO implications for E85 use in SomersetWoods & Brown (2007; EU-BEST project data)
‘Worst case’ GHG savings between 53% to -25%Using ‘country level (conservative) default factors’ as defined by the UK-Renewable Transport Fuel’s Obligation Reporting Requirements (RFA, 2007)
120gCO2/km tailpipe = c. 132 gCO2eq/km LCA
BiorefineriesA biorefinery concept based on integrated biological and thermal processing for transport fuels and chemicals
Such systems are already emerging
Wednesday, 05 March 2008 16
Distillation
Gasification Synthesis
Hydrogenolysis
Biomass
Surplus electricity
Waste water
EthanolFermentation
Electrolysis
Lignin
H2
Gasification
Pyrolysis
Transport fuels, Chemicals
Catalysis
Methanol synthesis
Syngas
MOGDMTG
Conventional synthetic gasoline and diesel
Biomass
Gasification
Fischer Tropsch HydrogenolysisZeolite cracking
Fast pyrolysis
Vegetable oil
Refining
SNG
Syngas
Liquid bio-oil
RS Biofuels Working Group Conclusions
Wednesday, 05 March 2008 17
A coherent approach will:avoid the unintended consequence of solving one problem at the expense of exacerbating another;see biofuels as part of a portfolio of approaches that also includes, for example, greater energy efficiency, electric vehicles, hydrogen and fuel cells, and fiscal incentives such as carbon pricing based on avoided greenhouse gas emissions;balance growth of feedstock against other uses of land;deploy an assessment of sustainability that encompasses the complete cycle from growth of the raw material to end-use irrespective of where each stage in the cycle takes place;commit to invest properly in the required R&D;provide aptly targeted fiscal incentives;develop a process for effective public engagement on biofuel issues.
Biological Mitigation Options and The Carbon Cycle (GtC)
Source: http://www.vitalgraphics.net/graphic.cfm?filename=climate2/large/11.jpg
121
5.5[20.2 GtCO2] 92
0.5
C-cycle options:
1. Bigger2. Un-balance (more down than up)3. More efficient use of biomass flows4. Fossil-fuel substitution5. Protect major existing carbon stocks
5-Mar-08 [email protected] 19
THANK YOU!
IEA Task 40TSEC Biosys
NILENew & Improved
Lignocellulosic Ethanol
Dr Jeremy Woods (Porter Institute)e-mail: [email protected]: +44 (0)20 7594 9328