ACV del biodiesel de palma incluyendo la utilización de

resíduos para la generación de electricidad

IV Congreso de Energias Renovables y Biocombustibles, UNAL, Lima, Perú

Prof. Dr. Electo Eduardo Silva Lora

NEST/IEM/UNIFEI

For references look at:

Zoneamiento agro-ambiental en

Brasil

ASPECTOS DE SOSTENIBILIDAD DE BIOCOMBUSTIBLES EN BRASIL: BIODIESEL

Anos de experiência na produção de etanol, incluindo o desarrolho de motores para o uso

de etanol puro.

Programa Nacional de Produção e Uso do Biodiesel: 2004

Capacidade atual de mais de 500 milhões de litros anuais

5

6

LIMITACIONES DEL ACV

• La metodologia ACV no es capaz de considerar/incluir todos los

impactos relevantes (uso de la tierra y del agua, cambios indirectos

en el uso de la tierra y la competición con los alimentos) .

• El ACV falla al considerar la reducción en el uso del suelo relacionada

con la utilización de co-productos. con la utilización de co-productos.

• Se necesita de un abordaje mas amplio (tal como la EAI - Evaluación

Ambiental Integrada ).

• Alto número de categorias de impactos ambientales, lo que dificulta

el proceso de toma de decisiones.

INCONSISTENCIAS DEL ACV

ABORDAJE DE LA CERTIFICACIÓN BASEADA EM LA SOSTENIBILIDAD ??????????

TODO EL MUNDO HABLA DE ESTO !!

Experiencia del NEST/UNIFEI en estudios de sostenibilidad utilizando el ACV.

Desde el año 2004 el NEST/UNIFEI ha realizado los

siguientes estudios utilizando la ACV:

• Biodiesel de palma,

• Tratamiento y disposición de vinazas de etanol,

• Metanol a partir del bagazo de caña.

• Aprovechamiento energético de los resíduos sólidos

urbanos.

C2

C3

C1

C1 C2 C3

Location in Colombia Eastern Region Northern Region Ce ntral Region

Palm area, Adults (ha) 1,200 3,436 4,675

Palm area, nursery (ha) 1,100 64 130

Crop Density (Palm trees ha-1)

145 143 143

FFB Production (ton FFB yr -1)

30,000 85,898 98,175

FFB Process

CHARACTERISTICS AND PARAMETERS OF THE THREE EVALUATED COMPANIES

FFB Process(ton yr -1)

101,324 85,898 154,352

Productivity (ton FFB ha-yr -1)

25 25 21

OER(Oil Extraction Rate, %)

19.8 21.1 20.4

Oil Yield(ton oil ha-yr -1)

4.95 5.27 4.28

Brief description of the energy supplies facilities

Isolated system using diesel

and biogas in engines

Purchase all electricity from

the grid

Electricity from the grid and low

efficiency cogeneration

del biodiesel de palmaEsquema del inventario de ciclo de vida

del biodiesel de palma

RESIDUOS DE

BIOMASA

EFB (20-23%)

CACHOS VACIOS FRESCOS -FFB

100 %

Fruto de la palma

Fibras (11-14%)

Cáscaras (5-7%)

124.8 GJ/ ha.year

ETAPA AGRÍCOLA

INPUTS DE ENERGIA EN LA ETAPA INPUTS DE ENERGIA EN LA ETAPA AGRÍCOLA

INPUTS DE ENERGIA DURANTE LA INPUTS DE ENERGIA DURANTE LA EXTRACCIÓN DEL ACEITE

PARTICIPATION OF LC STAGESIN TOTAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION

Inventario global del ciclo de vida del Inventario global del ciclo de vida del biodiesel de palma

Uso racional de Fertilizantes

Biometanol oetanol

FertilizantesVINAZAS ???

C2C3

RELACIÓN UTPUT/INPUT (renovable/fosil)

C1

Seven thermal cogeneration schemes for the palm oil industry were simulated by using Gatecycle software version 5.0.1, considering different sources and levels of biomass use with a condensing-extraction (CET) and back pressure turbines (BPT) with high pressure boilers (cases A, B, C, F, E F end G).

PERCENTAGE OF BIOMASS PRODUCED DURING OIL EXTRACTION PROCESS USED AS A FUEL

IN THE BOILER

Case Turbine

% of biomass used as a fuel in the boiler

Fiber Shell EFB Biogas

A BPT 75 75 -- --A BPT 75 75 -- --

B CET 100 50 -- --

C CET 100 100 -- --

D BPT 100 100 100 100

E CET 100 100 50 --

F CET 100 100 100 --

G CET 100 100 100 100

30 t FFB/h plant, steam parameters were 2 MPa and 350°C.

Fuel(MW)

Power(MW)

Heat Rate(MJ/kWh)

Effic. of Electricity Generation

* (%)

Generation Index

(kWh.kg -1. biodiesel)

A 21.013 1,74 39.10 9.21 0.2014

Electricity generation index of the cogeneration systems.

B 22.546 1,86 39.25 9.17 0.2153

C 28.010 2,84 32.04 11.24 0.3287

D 51.814 3,96 40.84 8.81 0.4583

E 38.698 4,98 24.55 14.66 0.5764

F 49.368 7,03 21.88 16.45 0.8136

G 51.814 7,55 21.42 16.80 0.8738

Output/Input relation for biodiesel production life cycle.

INPUT [MJ / kg Biodiesel] C1 C2 C3

Agricultural stage 3.20 4.23 2.63

Oil Extraction with Cogeneration

1.06 1.27 0.72

Oil Refining 0.98 0.98 0.98

Transesterification 5.01 5.01 5.01

Total Input 9.96 11.20 9.05

OUTPUT [MJ / kg Biodiesel]

C1 C2 C3Biodiesel]

C1 C2 C3

Fiber 0.85 0.72 0.66

Shell, 2.79 2.64 1.85

Biogas 0.05 0.05 0.05

Kernel cake 2.54 2.38 2.46

Kernel Oil 6.00 5.64 5.82

Glycerin 2.09 2.09 2.09

Fatty acids 1.27 1.27 1.27

Biodiesel 39.60 39.60 39.60

Total Output 55.22 54.42 53.83

O/I (using EFB as Fertilizer)

5.54 4.86 5.95

Case C2 (Without

Cogeneration) Case A Case G

Surplus Generation Index (kWh kg -1biodiesel)

0.00 0.201 0.979

INPUT (MJ/kg biodiesel)

Agricultural stage 3.93 3.93 4.23

Impact of cogeneration on input/output index

Oil Extraction 1.27 0.92 0.92

Oil Refining 0.98 0.98 0.98

Transesterification 5.01 5.02 5.02

Total Input 11.20 10.86 11.16

OUTPUT (MJ/kg biodiesel)

Biodiesel 39.60 39.60 39.60

Electricity - Cogeneration 0.00 0.70 3.05

Total Output 54.42 55.12 54.05

Output /Input 4.86 5.08 4.85

• The LCA for two cases (cases C2 and G) were carried out using the Simapro software and the results were compared with the fossil diesel production LCA indexes diesel production LCA indexes (at the refinery) through data available in the Simapro database.

Mid Point Categories C2/G In relation to C2, (%)

Carcinogens -2.41

Non-Carcinogens -0.67

Respiratory inorganics -4.50

Ionizing radiation -4.25

Ozone layer depletion -33.31

Respiratory organics -6.92

Aquatic ecotoxicity -4.15Aquatic ecotoxicity -4.15

Terrestrial ecotoxicity 0.23

Terrestrial acidification -1.20

Land use -148.11

Aquatic acidification -3.53

Aquatic eutrophication 3.32

Global warming -7.64

Non-renewable energy -16.62

Mineral extraction -11.63

Impact assessmentSingle scoreIMPACT 2002+ method.

C2 C2/G

Damage category Case C2 Case C2/G % Reduction

Total -5.85E-5 -7.925E-5 -35.457

Human Health 3.66E-5 3.517E-5 -4.068

Ecosystem Quality 1.153E-5 1.143E-5 -0.874

Climate Change -0.000152 -0.000164 7.643

Resources 4.53E-05 3.78E-5 -16.619

END

PO

INTS

CA

TEG

OR

IES

C2

FOSSIL DIESEL

C2/G

END

PO

INTS

CA

TEG

OR

IES

CONCLUSIONS AND REMARKS

• The potential for energy production from oil palm biomass residues is 124.8 GJ ha-1 year-1

• Transterification stage have the greater fossil energy input due to the methanol utilization. Efforts must be done for the commercial implementation of the methyl route seeking an increase of biodiesel LC sustainability.seeking an increase of biodiesel LC sustainability.

• The electricity generation index can reach 1.02 kWh per kg of biodiesel when the residues are fully used and a condensing steam turbine with high steam parameters is employed.

• The Output/Input energy ratio for the palm oil biodiesel reaches values as 5.08, almost 3.5 greater than other biodiesels from different vegetable oils.

CONCLUSIONS AND REMARKS

• Outpu/Input index is not able to accurately consider the

effect of cogeneration implementation as the energy

output of biomass residues is evaluated based on its

calorific value.

• In relation to the conventional process, the case with • In relation to the conventional process, the case with

cogeneration presents a very high positive impact on

Land occupation (-148%), Ozone layer depletion (-33%)

and non-renewable energy consumption (-16.62 %).

• Life cycle equivalent CO2 emissions were also reduced

from -0.5346 to -1.4053 kg for biodiesel with and without

cogeneration, respectively.

ESTUDIO DE ACV – Tratamiento de lasESTUDIO DE ACV – Tratamiento de lasvinazas del etanolvinazas del etanolvinazas del etanol

FCDCC- Fertirrigación “in natura”

SCDTT - Concentración de vinazas hasta 40 % y fertirrigación

ABDCC - DIGESTIÓN ANAERÓBIA

SCCBA - CONCENTRACIÓN Y COMBUSTIÓN DE VINAZAS

CONCLUSIONESCONCLUSIONES

• La evaluación de la sostenibilidad es un problema multicriterial.

• La eficiencia energética atraves de la cogeneración baseada en sub-productos y la reducción del consumo de energia en lasdiferentes etapas del ciclo de vida deven ser considerada.

• La metodologia ACV debe ser mejorada y normalizada. Incertezas a resolver: volatilizacion de los componentes de los fertilizantes, asignación de co-productos e impactos del uso de la tierra.

• La certificación baseada en la reducción de las emisiones de GEI, utilizando como herramienta la ACV es actual y debemossaber utilizarla a nuestro favor.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

• The authors are very grateful to the Oil Palm Research Center of Colombia -CENIPALMA and the palm oil mills for providing all the information, so that this providing all the information, so that this study could be carried out.

• Also to the Science Foundation of the Minas Gerais State – FAPEMIG and the National Research Council CNPq for the finantial support and grants.

Muchas gracias

electo@unifei.edu.brelecto@unifei.edu.br

esl43@yahoo.com

Prof. Dr.Electo Silva Lora

electo@unifei.edu.br