1 / 16

Potential of Eichhornia Crassipes for Biomass Refining

AIChE Conference 2007. Potential of Eichhornia Crassipes for Biomass Refining. Jessica E. Hronich, Lealon Martin, Joel Plawsky, & Henry Bungay November 7th, 2007. Introduction. Department of Energy goal: 60 Bgal/yr ethanol by 2030 1 Current production

jaclyn
Download Presentation

Potential of Eichhornia Crassipes for Biomass Refining

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. AIChE Conference 2007 Potential of Eichhornia Crassipes for Biomass Refining Jessica E. Hronich, Lealon Martin, Joel Plawsky, & Henry Bungay November 7th, 2007

  2. Introduction • Department of Energy goal: • 60 Bgal/yr ethanol by 20301 • Current production • 5.4 Bgal/yr blended into gasoline for 20062 • 129 Ethanol plants, and growing • The need for diverse feedstocks • Corn grain can only meet 15% of transportation needs1 • Cellulosic ethanol can fill remainder • Greater energy output/input ratio3 1U.S. DOE. 2006. Breaking the Biological Barriers to Cellulosic Ethanol: A Joint Research Agenda, DOE/SC-0095, U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science and Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (www.doegenomestolife.org/biofuels/).2 “Biofuels in the U.S. Transportation Sector” Energy Information Association, Oct. 15, 2007. (http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/analysispaper/biomass.html#1)3 Bourne, J.K. “Green Dreams” National Geographic, 2007. (http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/2007-10/biofuels/biofuels-interactive.html)

  3. Ideal Attributes Wide availability Ease of cultivation Frequent harvest cycles No / low competition with food crops Easy to process Inexpensive Water hyacinth Global invasive nuisance weed Growth can exceed 200 tons DM / ha / yr 2 week harvest cycle Aquatic plant Low-tech processing Millions of dollars spent each year to remove / dispose Feedstock Evaluation

  4. Process Description • Cultivation • Harvest & Collection • Pressing • Pretreatment / Storage • Hydrolysis / Fermentation

  5. Infested waterways Removal credit Developing countries Hyacinth cultivation (farms) Unused commercial ponds / lakes Cultivation

  6. Harvest & Collection

  7. Harvest & Collection Factory • Novel cutter design • Simply slice mats • Mat width design variable • Length dependent on connectivity • Use less energy than traditional harvesters • Tow swaths of mats to shore • Cut pattern to allow re-growth

  8. Pressing • Can remove approximately 97 wt% of the water • Will decrease volume for silage • Water will be processed (if necessary) and returned to lake

  9. Pretreatment / Storage • Partial Anaerobic digestion • Approximately 14 days • Less energy intensive • Remove loose water • Combine with storage to reduce costs

  10. Process Cost Estimation • Estimation allowed for multiple inputs to affect overall cost per ton to produce • Referenced current biomass-to-ethanol evaluations • Manufacturing cost estimation for chemical process industry adapted for agribusiness plan1 • Key design parameters taken from literature, manufacturers, and best guesses 1Ulrich D, Vasudevan T, (2004)Chemical Engineering Process Design and Economics: A Practical Guide. Ulrich Publishing,409-435

  11. Key Design Parameters • Pressing • 97 wt% water removal • Power usage: 18HP/ton fiber/hr • Pretreatment / Storage • 14 days to digest • Misc. • Labor ($10 / hr + benefits) • Overheads • Taxes, insurance • Depreciation • Cultivation • Lake covered in 300 acres hyacinth • Located in United States • 100 ton dry matter / ha / yr • Harvest / Collection • Cut width of 3.5 m • Cut speed of 45 m / min • Harvested 8 hours / day

  12. Cost Estimation Total Cost: $28 / ton of dry matter

  13. Sensitivity Analysis Biomass Cost ($/dry ton) Cut Width (m) Cut Speed (m/min) • Lowest possible cost • 1 harvester & 1 transport boat • Cut width greater than 7m • Cut speed greater than 45 m/min • Operation most likely at 3.5 m and 45 m/min

  14. Future Work • Investigation of digestion process • Temperature • pH • Residence time • Hydrolysis methods • Acid • Enzymatic • Fermentation yields • Quality of biomass produced • Application to other aquatic nuisance weeds Photo courtesy of Willey Durden, USDA Agricultural Research Service, www.forestryimages.org; Image Number 0002100.

  15. Summary • Water hyacinth as a feedstock • Rapid growth rate • Wide availability • Low cost • Exportable low-technology process • Cost Estimation / Sensitivity Analysis • E. Crassipes is an economically viable biomass feedstock • A blight on an ecosystem can be used as an economic benefit • Cost competitive with other feedstocks (less than $40 per dry ton)

  16. Acknowledgements • NSF IGERT fellowship • Rensselaer Chemical & Biological Engineering • The Martin Group

More Related