The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) promotes the production of a range of liquid fuels and fuel blendstocks from lignocellulosic biomass feedstocks by funding fundamental and applied research that advances the state of technology in biomass collection, conversion, and sustainability. As part of its involvement in this program, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) investigates the conceptual production economics of these fuels.Between 1999 and 2012, NREL conducted a campaign to quantify the economic implications associated with measured conversion performance for the biochemical production of cellulosic ethanol, with a formal program between 2007-2012 to set cost goals and to benchmark annual performance toward achieving these goals, namely the pilot-scale demonstration by 2012 of biochemical ethanol production at a price competitive with petroleum gasoline based on modeled assumptions for an "n th " plant biorefinery. This goal was successfully achieved through NREL's 2012 pilot plant demonstration runs, representing the culmination of NREL research focused specifically on cellulosic ethanol, and a benchmark for industry to leverage as it commercializes the technology. This important milestone also represented a transition toward a new Program focus on infrastructure-compatible hydrocarbon biofuel pathways, and the establishment of new research directions and cost goals across a number of potential conversion technologies.This report describes in detail one potential conversion process to hydrocarbon products by way of biological conversion of lignocellulosic-derived sugars. The pathway model leverages expertise established over time in core conversion and process integration research at NREL, while adding in new technology areas primarily for hydrocarbon production and associated processing logistics. The overarching process design converts biomass to a hydrocarbon intermediate, represented here as a free fatty acid, using dilute-acid pretreatment, enzymatic saccharification, and bioconversion. Ancillary areas-feed handling, hydrolysate conditioning, product recovery and upgrading (hydrotreating) to a final blendstock material, wastewater treatment, lignin combustion, and utilities-are also included in the design. Detailed material and energy balances and capital and operating costs for this baseline process are also documented.This benchmark case study techno-economic model provides a production cost for a cellulosic renewable diesel blendstock (RDB) that can be used as a baseline to assess its competitiveness and market potential. It can also be used to quantify the economic impact of individual conversion performance targets and prioritize these in terms of their potential to reduce cost. The analysis presented here also includes consideration of the life-cycle implications of the baseline process model, by tracking sustainability metrics for the modeled biorefinery, including greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, fossil energy demand, and consumptive water use.Building on prior design reports for bioch...

Executive SummaryThe goal of the U.S. Department of Energy's Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) is to enable the development of biomass technologies to: Reduce dependence on foreign oil  Promote the use of diverse, domestic, and sustainable energy resource  Establish a domestic bioenergy industry  Reduce carbon emissions from energy production and consumption. (DOE 2013) To meet these goals, the BETO promotes the development of liquid hydrocarbon fuels that can serve as gasoline, jet and diesel blendstocks.This report describes a proposed thermochemical process for converting biomass into liquid transportation fuels via fast pyrolysis followed by hydroprocessing of the condensed pyrolysis oil. As such, the analysis does not reflect the current state of commercially-available technology but includes advancements that are likely, and targeted to be achieved by 2017. The purpose of this study is to quantify the economic impact of individual conversion targets to allow a focused effort towards achieving cost reductions.

No abstract

NREL prints on paper that contains recycled content.

The dry basis elemental composition of the feedstock, shown in Table 2, is identical to previous NREL and PNNL design reports [20,21]. The composition was originally assumed to come from pulpwood. Recent feedstock logistics work at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) suggests that the use of blended material may be required to meet a cost target of $80/dry U.S. ton while still meeting these specifications [22]. For the purpose of this report, it is assumed that any blended material provided to meet this feedstock elemental composition will not adversely affect fast pyrolysis conversion efficiencies. Ongoing studies being conducted jointly by INL, NREL, and PNNL will provide experimental evidence of the impact of blended feedstocks on fast pyrolysis and gasification processes. Future TEA will be modified to reflect conversion impacts inferred from such studies.This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications. not considered in this design in order to focus on the core technology of in situ and ex situ fast pyrolysis vapor upgrading. Aspen Plus ModelAn Aspen Plus Version 7.2 simulation was used as the basis for this report. Since the products in pyrolysis are numerous and varied, only selected model compounds were used to represent the product slate. Additional hydrocarbon species were added to represent hydroprocessing products. Many of the desired molecular species in the desired boiling ranges for light and heavy fractions did not exist in Aspen Plus databanks and physical property parameters needed to be estimated. The biomass feedstock, ash, char, and coke were modeled as non-conventional components. Appendix F provides information about compounds selected to represent the process. The Peng-Robinson with Boston-Mathias modifications (PR-BM) equation of state was used throughout most of the process simulation. The ASME 1967 steam table correlations (STEAM-TA) were used for the steam cycle calculations. Combustor/Regenerator Temperature, °C (°F) 650 (1,202) 720 (1,328) 650 (1,202) Pressure, psia (bar) 117 (8.1) 117 (8.1) 113 (7.8) Excess air (%) 20 20 20 Solids temperature before transfer to reactor, °C (°F) 650 (1,202) 720 (1,328) 341 (645) No. of cyclones per combustor 2 2 2 Area 200 Equipment Cost EstimationsCapital costs for the equipment in this area were estimated by Harris Group. A previously developed spreadsheet tool for gasifier costs was leveraged for this exercise. Cost estimates from this tool were compared with order of magnitude estimates from technology vendors and documented in Appendix I of Worley et al.