Advanced biofuels production by upgrading of pyrolysis bio‐oil

Fermoso, Javier; Pizarro, Patricia; Coronado, Juan M.; Serrano, David

doi:10.1002/wene.245

Cited by 80 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 118 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For 50,000 barrels per stream day FCC unit and 2.25 vol% bio‐oil addition, the process benefits were calculated at $13–26 and at $47–60 per barrel of bio‐oil for renewable identification number (RIN) prices of $1.64/RIN and $2.55/RIN, respectively. Talmadge et al () carried out a techno‐economic analysis for the co‐processing of raw bio‐oil with VGO using data from the Petrobras demonstration plant runs (Almeida & Pinho, ; de Rezende Pinho et al, , , ). Their study suggested that co‐processing up to 5 wt% of bio‐oil would be economically feasible in the near‐term, assuming a 400 dry tonnes/day biomass pyrolysis plant and a bio‐oil cost of $80–84/bbl.…”

Section: Economic Feasibility Of Fcc Co‐processing In the Refinerymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Alternatively, raw bio‐oil can be almost completely deoxygenated and converted into a mixture of liquid hydrocarbons via hydrodeoxygenation (Elliott, ). Hydrodeoxygenation is carried out at intermediate temperature (200–350°C, Fermoso, Pizarro, Coronado, & Serrano, ), high pressure (50–150 bar, Fermoso et al, ) and under hydrogen atmosphere in the presence of a heterogeneous hydrogenation catalyst (Bridgwater, ). Due to the instability of raw bio‐oil and in order to ensure continuous processing, complete hydrodeoxygenation needs to be carried out in multiple steps (Elliott, ), which adds to the complexity of the process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Co‐processing bio‐oil in the refinery for drop‐in biofuels via fluid catalytic cracking

Stefanidis

Kalogiannis

Lappas

2017

WIREs Energy & Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pyrolysis oil from lignocellulosic biomass (bio‐oil) is a promising renewable energy carrier that can be utilized for the production of second‐generation drop‐in biofuels. Co‐processing bio‐oil with petroleum feeds in existing refinery processes, such as fluid catalytic cracking (FCC), has been proposed as a cost‐effective way of transitioning to the production of such biofuels without the need for significant capital‐intensive investments. Several routes are available for the production of bio‐oil, such as fast pyrolysis of biomass (raw bio‐oil), catalytic fast pyrolysis of biomass (catalytic pyrolysis oil, CPO), and fast pyrolysis of biomass followed by hydrogenation of the produced bio‐oil (hydrodeoxygenated oil, HDO). Research has shown that co‐processing raw bio‐oil is challenging but it can be carried out after adoption of appropriate reactor modifications in the commercial scale. A significant body of work has also focused on the co‐processing of HDO and CPO, and has demonstrated that these types of bio‐oil can be co‐processed with less operational issues. Co‐processing bio‐oil results in a liquid hydrocarbon product that contains only a small amount of oxygenates from bio‐oil. A noticeable increase in coke formation is also observed when bio‐oil is introduced in the FCC feed. However, this increase is lower than what would be expected from the conversion of the pure bio‐oil fraction. This has been attributed to the presence of the petroleum feed, which has a beneficial synergistic effect on the cracking of bio‐oil due to hydrogen donation reactions that inhibit coke formation and promote the conversion of the oxygenates to liquid hydrocarbons. This article is categorized under: Energy and Climate > Climate and Environment Bioenergy > Systems and Infrastructure Bioenergy > Economics and Policy

show abstract

Section: Economic Feasibility Of Fcc Co‐processing In the Refinerymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co‐processing bio‐oil in the refinery for drop‐in biofuels via fluid catalytic cracking

Stefanidis

Kalogiannis

Lappas

2017

WIREs Energy & Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In spite of its renewable nature, the low content of S and N, and neutral CO 2 balance for combustion, bio-oil is not suitable for direct use as a fuel due to its instability and properties (such as high water and oxygen content, acidity, corrosiveness and low viscosity). Consequently, several processes have been proposed for stabilizing, conditioning and up-grading bio-oil in order to convert it into platform chemicals (olefins and BTX), liquid fuels or H 2 [10][11][12]. Thus, the bio-oil produced in decentralised pyrolysis units can be subsequently transported to a centralized unit for H 2 production.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oxidative Steam Reforming of Raw Bio-Oil over Supported and Bulk Ni Catalysts for Hydrogen Production

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several Ni catalysts of supported (on La 2 O 3 -αAl 2 O 3 , CeO 2 , and CeO 2 -ZrO 2 ) or bulk types (Ni-La perovskites and NiAl 2 O 4 spinel) have been tested in the oxidative steam reforming (OSR) of raw bio-oil, and special attention has been paid to the catalysts' regenerability by means of studies on reaction-regeneration cycles. The experimental set-up consists of two units in series, for the separation of pyrolytic lignin in the first step (at 500 • C) and the on line OSR of the remaining oxygenates in a fluidized bed reactor at 700 • C. The spent catalysts have been characterized by N 2 adsorption-desorption, X-ray diffraction and temperature programmed reduction, and temperature programmed oxidation (TPO). The results reveal that among the supported catalysts, the best balance between activity-H 2 selectivity-stability corresponds to Ni/La 2 O 3 -αAl 2 O 3 , due to its smaller Ni 0 particle size. Additionally, it is more selective to H 2 than perovskite catalysts and more stable than both perovskites and the spinel catalyst. However, the activity of the bulk NiAl 2 O 4 spinel catalyst can be completely recovered after regeneration by coke combustion at 850 • C because the spinel structure is completely recovered, which facilitates the dispersion of Ni in the reduction step prior to reaction. Consequently, this catalyst is suitable for the OSR at a higher scale in reaction-regeneration cycles.

show abstract

“…Besides, certain oxygenated components (particularly the phenolic compounds) polymerize during the bio‐oil vaporization, which is a necessary step for bio‐oil valorization through catalytic processes. Consequently, several methods for stabilizing and/or conditioning the raw bio‐oil have been proposed in the literature with the aim of facilitating its valorization into fuels and raw chemicals …”

Section: Production and Characteristics Of Bio‐oilmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent research progress on bio‐oil conversion into bio‐fuels and raw chemicals: a review

Valle

Remiro

García-Gómez

et al. 2018

J of Chemical Tech & Biotech

144

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent advances in lignocellulosic biomass valorization for producing fuels and commodities (olefins and BTX aromatics) are gathered in this paper, with a focus on the conversion of bio-oil (produced by fast pyrolysis of biomass). The main valorization routes are: (i) conditioning of bio-oil (by esterification, aldol condensation, ketonization, in situ cracking, and mild hydrodeoxygenation) for its use as a fuel or stable raw material for further catalytic processing; (ii) production of fuels by deep hydrodeoxygenation; (iii) ex situ catalytic cracking (in line) of the volatiles produced in biomass pyrolysis, aimed at the selective production of olefins and aromatics; (iv) cracking of raw bio-oil in units designed with specific objectives concerning selectivity; and (v) processing in fluidized bed catalytic cracking (FCC) units. This review deals with the technological evolution of these routes, in terms of catalysts, reaction conditions, reactors, and product yields. A study has been carried out on the current state-of-knowledge of the technological capacity, advantages and disadvantages of the different routes, as well as on the prospects for the implementation of each route within the scope of the Sustainable Refinery. /jctb 2 -C 4 olefins 147 a % Relative area: Percentage of total peak area detected by GC/MS semi-quantitative analysis.

show abstract

Advanced biofuels production by upgrading of pyrolysis bio‐oil

Cited by 80 publications

References 118 publications

Co‐processing bio‐oil in the refinery for drop‐in biofuels via fluid catalytic cracking

Co‐processing bio‐oil in the refinery for drop‐in biofuels via fluid catalytic cracking

Oxidative Steam Reforming of Raw Bio-Oil over Supported and Bulk Ni Catalysts for Hydrogen Production

Recent research progress on bio‐oil conversion into bio‐fuels and raw chemicals: a review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About