IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i4p2338-d752572.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Superheated Steam Torrefaction of Biomass Residues with Valorisation of Platform Chemicals Part—2: Economic Assessment and Commercialisation Opportunities

Author

Listed:
  • Baharam Roy

    (Reutlingen Research Institute (RRI), Reutlingen University, 72762 Reutlingen, Germany)

  • Peter Kleine-Möllhoff

    (ESB Business School, Reutlingen University, 72762 Reutlingen, Germany)

  • Antoine Dalibard

    (Fraunhofer Institute for Interfacial Engineering and Biotechnology IGB, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany)

Abstract

Up to now biorefinery concepts can hardly compete with the conventional production of fossil-based chemicals. On one hand, conventional chemical production has been optimised over many decades in terms of energy, yield and costs. Biorefineries, on the other hand, do not have the benefit of long-term experience and therefore have a huge potential for optimisation. This study deals with the economic evaluation of a newly developed biorefinery concept based on superheated steam (SHS) torrefaction of biomass residues with recovery of valuable platform chemicals. Two variants of the biorefinery were economically investigated. One variant supplies various platform chemicals and torrefied biomass. The second variant supplies thermal energy for external consumers in addition to platform chemicals. The results show that both variants can be operated profitably if the focus of the platform chemicals produced is on high quality and thus on the higher-priced segment. The economic analysis gives clear indications of the most important financial influencing parameters. The economic impact of integration into existing industrial structures is positive. With the analysis, a viable business model can be developed. Based on the results of the present study, an open-innovation platform is recommended for the further development and commercialisation of the novel biorefinery.

Suggested Citation

  • Baharam Roy & Peter Kleine-Möllhoff & Antoine Dalibard, 2022. "Superheated Steam Torrefaction of Biomass Residues with Valorisation of Platform Chemicals Part—2: Economic Assessment and Commercialisation Opportunities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-21, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:4:p:2338-:d:752572
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/4/2338/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/4/2338/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ina Rüdenauer & Carl‐Otto Gensch & Rainer Grießhammer & Dirk Bunke, 2005. "Integrated Environmental and Economic Assessment of Products and Processes," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 9(4), pages 105-116, October.
    2. Chai, Li & Saffron, Christopher M., 2016. "Comparing pelletization and torrefaction depots: Optimization of depot capacity and biomass moisture to determine the minimum production cost," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 387-395.
    3. Budzianowski, Wojciech M., 2017. "High-value low-volume bioproducts coupled to bioenergies with potential to enhance business development of sustainable biorefineries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 793-804.
    4. Musiolik, Jörg & Markard, Jochen & Hekkert, Marko & Furrer, Bettina, 2020. "Creating innovation systems: How resource constellations affect the strategies of system builders," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    5. Baharam Roy & Peter Kleine-Möllhoff & Antoine Dalibard, 2022. "Superheated Steam Torrefaction of Biomass Residues with Valorisation of Platform Chemicals—Part 1: Ecological Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-21, January.
    6. Ahlström, Johan M. & Pettersson, Karin & Wetterlund, Elisabeth & Harvey, Simon, 2017. "Value chains for integrated production of liquefied bio-SNG at sawmill sites – Techno-economic and carbon footprint evaluation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 1590-1608.
    7. Martínez Ceseña, E.A. & Mutale, J. & Rivas-Dávalos, F., 2013. "Real options theory applied to electricity generation projects: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 573-581.
    8. Lora Tsvetanova & Laura Carraresi & Michael Wustmans & Stefanie Bröring, 2021. "Actors’ strategic goals in emerging technological innovation systems: evidence from the biorefinery sector in Germany," Post-Print hal-03267347, HAL.
    9. Hellsmark, Hans & Hansen, Teis, 2020. "A new dawn for (oil) incumbents within the bioeconomy? Trade-offs and lessons for policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    10. Budzianowski, Wojciech M. & Postawa, Karol, 2016. "Total Chain Integration of sustainable biorefinery systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 1432-1446.
    11. Börjesson Hagberg, Martin & Pettersson, Karin & Ahlgren, Erik O., 2016. "Bioenergy futures in Sweden – Modeling integration scenarios for biofuel production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 1026-1039.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Antonios Nazos & Dorothea Politi & Georgios Giakoumakis & Dimitrios Sidiras, 2022. "Simulation and Optimization of Lignocellulosic Biomass Wet- and Dry-Torrefaction Process for Energy, Fuels and Materials Production: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-35, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jonas Zetterholm & Elina Bryngemark & Johan Ahlström & Patrik Söderholm & Simon Harvey & Elisabeth Wetterlund, 2020. "Economic Evaluation of Large-Scale Biorefinery Deployment: A Framework Integrating Dynamic Biomass Market and Techno-Economic Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-28, September.
    2. Zetterholm, Jonas & Wetterlund, Elisabeth & Pettersson, Karin & Lundgren, Joakim, 2018. "Evaluation of value chain configurations for fast pyrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass - Integration, feedstock, and product choice," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 564-575.
    3. Mäkitie, Tuukka & Hanson, Jens & Steen, Markus & Hansen, Teis & Andersen, Allan Dahl, 2022. "Complementarity formation mechanisms in technology value chains," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    4. Demichelis, Francesca & Fiore, Silvia & Pleissner, Daniel & Venus, Joachim, 2018. "Technical and economic assessment of food waste valorization through a biorefinery chain," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 38-48.
    5. Monteiro Moretti, Débora & Baum, Chad M. & Ehlers, Melf-Hinrich & Finger, Robert & Bröring, Stefanie, 2023. "Exploring actors' perceptions of the precision agriculture innovation system – A Group Concept Mapping approach in Germany and Switzerland," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    6. Pringles, Rolando & Olsina, Fernando & Penizzotto, Franco, 2020. "Valuation of defer and relocation options in photovoltaic generation investments by a stochastic simulation-based method," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 846-864.
    7. Kumari, Rajni & Kumar, Manish & Vivekanand, V. & Pareek, Nidhi, 2023. "Chitin biorefinery: A narrative and prophecy of crustacean shell waste sustainable transformation into bioactives and renewable energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    8. de Bragança, Gabriel Godofredo Fiuza & Daglish, Toby, 2017. "Investing in vertical integration: electricity retail market participation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 355-365.
    9. Marileena Koskela & Jarmo Vehmas, 2012. "Defining Eco‐efficiency: A Case Study on the Finnish Forest Industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(8), pages 546-566, December.
    10. Gal Hochman & Chrysostomos Tabakis, 2020. "Biofuels and Their Potential in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-17, September.
    11. Bertolini, Marina & D'Alpaos, Chiara & Moretto, Michele, 2018. "Do Smart Grids boost investments in domestic PV plants? Evidence from the Italian electricity market," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 890-902.
    12. Mo, Jian-Lei & Agnolucci, Paolo & Jiang, Mao-Rong & Fan, Ying, 2016. "The impact of Chinese carbon emission trading scheme (ETS) on low carbon energy (LCE) investment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 271-283.
    13. Roberts, Cameron & Greene, Jenna & Nemet, Gregory F., 2023. "Key enablers for carbon dioxide removal through the application of biochar to agricultural soils: Evidence from three historical analogues," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    14. Barta-Rajnai, E. & Wang, L. & Sebestyén, Z. & Barta, Z. & Khalil, R. & Skreiberg, Ø. & Grønli, M. & Jakab, E. & Czégény, Z., 2017. "Comparative study on the thermal behavior of untreated and various torrefied bark, stem wood, and stump of Norway spruce," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 1043-1054.
    15. Rohe, Sebastian & Oltmer, Marie & Wolter, Hendrik & Gmeiner, Nina & Tschersich , Julia, 2022. "Forever Niche: Why do organic vegetable varieties not diffuse?," Papers in Innovation Studies 2022/8, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    16. McLaughlin, Hope & Littlefield, Anna A. & Menefee, Maia & Kinzer, Austin & Hull, Tobias & Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Bazilian, Morgan D. & Kim, Jinsoo & Griffiths, Steven, 2023. "Carbon capture utilization and storage in review: Sociotechnical implications for a carbon reliant world," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    17. Venturini, Giada & Pizarro-Alonso, Amalia & Münster, Marie, 2019. "How to maximise the value of residual biomass resources: The case of straw in Denmark," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 369-388.
    18. Louw, Jeanne & Dogbe, Eunice S. & Yang, Bin & Görgens, Johann F., 2023. "Prioritisation of biomass-derived products for biorefineries based on economic feasibility: A review on the comparability of techno-economic assessment results," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    19. Geissler, Caleb H. & Maravelias, Christos T., 2021. "Economic, energetic, and environmental analysis of lignocellulosic biorefineries with carbon capture," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 302(C).
    20. Abbas Mardani & Dalia Streimikiene & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Mehrbakhsh Nilashi & Ahmad Jusoh & Habib Zare, 2017. "Application of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to Solve Environmental Sustainability Problems: A Comprehensive Review and Meta-Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-65, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:4:p:2338-:d:752572. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.