Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) of oxymethylene ether as a diesel additive produced from forest biomass

  • LIFE CYCLE SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT
  • Published:
The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Due to efforts to reduce dependence on limited fossil energy reserves and increasing GHG emissions related to fossil fuel extraction and use in transportation vehicles, renewable fuel use is growing rapidly. By adding renewable oxygenated fuel additives such as oxymethylene ether (OME) to conventional diesel, combustion GHG emissions can be reduced significantly without modifications to vehicle engines. However, life cycle sustainability assessments (LCSA) of OME production and its use with diesel are scarce. The objective of this paper is to develop an LCSA model of OME production from forest biomass to be used in vehicles as a diesel additive.

Methods

This study conducts an LCSA of OME production from two types of forest biomass as feedstock, whole tree and forest residue. A framework was developed to assess environmental, economic, and social impacts of unit operations along the life cycle for a functional unit of 1 MJ of heat produced from OME. Then, PROMITHEE (Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment and Evaluation) was used to rank and select the best sustainable pathway for OME production and the most sustainable OME-diesel blend based on a number of indicators.

Results and discussion

Based on the sustainability assessments results, the forest residue pathway is found to be more sustainable than the whole tree pathway. In addition, the environmental, economic, and social impact results for different OME-diesel blends show that a blend of 10% OME in 90% diesel is the most sustainable fuel mix. Assuming that the GHG emissions from biofuel combustion are offset by CO2 sequestered during plant growth, the biomass production operation contributes the highest global GHG emissions in the OME life cycle; this is due to the high energy intensity of harvesting operations for both pathways (13 gCO2eq/MJ for whole tree and 7.13 gCO2eq/MJ for forest residue). OME production costs are higher for the whole tree (1.92 $/L) than the forest residue pathway (1.71 $/L). All the social indicators (i.e., employment potential and employee wages and benefits) are more favorable in the forest residue pathway.

Conclusions

We conducted sensitivity analyses by varying parameters such as sustainability impact weights, threshold values, and indicator impact values. We then determined the parameters’ impacts on overall ranking to verify the robustness of the model. This model can be used to assess and rank other energy technologies that integrate environmental, economic, and social sustainability impacts and thereby contribute to policy-making for the energy industry.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Afgan NH, Carvalho MG, Hovanov NV (2000) Energy system assessment with sustainability indicators. Energy Policy 28:603–612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Afgan N, da Graça Carvalho M (2000) Sustainable assessment method for energy systems indicators, criteria and decision making procedure. Springer US, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Afgan NH, Darwish M (2011) Multi-criteria sustainability assessment of water desalination and energy systems—Kuwait case. Desalin Water Treat 25:241–250

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Agbor E, Oyedun AO, Zhang X, Kumar A (2016) Integrated techno-economic and environmental assessments of sixty scenarios for co-firing biomass with coal and natural gas. Appl Energy 169:433–449

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Aspen-Icarus (2014) Aspen process economic analyzer. Aspen Technology Inc., Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Assefa G, Frostell B (2007) Social sustainability and social acceptance in technology assessment: a case study of energy technologies. Technol Soc 29:63–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beer T, Grant T (2007) Life-cycle analysis of emissions from fuel ethanol and blends in Australian heavy and light vehicles. J Clean Prod 15:833–837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beer T, Grant T, Williams D, Watson H (2002) Fuel-cycle greenhouse gas emissions from alternative fuels in Australian heavy vehicles. Atmos Environ 36:753–763

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Beer T et al (2001) Comparison of transport fuels: final report to the australian greenhouse office on the stage 2 study of life-cycle emissions—analysis of alternative fuels for heavy vehicles. Report No. EV45A/2/F3C, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Aspendale, Victoria, Australia

  • Beer T et al (2003) Appropriateness of a 350 million litre biofuels target: report to the australian government department of industry, tourism and resources. CSIRO, ABARE, BTRE, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Behzadian M, Kazemzadeh RB, Albadvi A, Aghdasi M (2010) PROMETHEE: a comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. Eur J Oper Res 200:198–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benoît Norris C et al (2013) The methodological sheets for subcategories in social life cycle assessment (S-LCA). United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC), Paris

  • Bond TC, Doherty SJ, Fahey DW, Forster PM, Berntsen T, DeAngelo BJ, Flanner MG, Ghan S, Kärcher B, Koch D, Kinne S, Kondo Y, Quinn PK, Sarofim MC, Schultz MG, Schulz M, Venkataraman C, Zhang H, Zhang S, Bellouin N, Guttikunda SK, Hopke PK, Jacobson MZ, Kaiser JW, Klimont Z, Lohmann U, Schwarz JP, Shindell D, Storelvmo T, Warren SG, Zender CS (2013) Bounding the role of black carbon in the climate system: a scientific assessment. J Geophys Res-Atmos 118:5380–5552

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brans JP, Mareschal B (2005) Promethee methods. In: Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. International series in operations research & management science, vol 78. Springer, New York

  • Brans J-P, Vincke P (1985) Note—a preference ranking organisation method: (the PROMETHEE method for multiple criteria decision-making). Manag Sci 31:647–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brans J-P, Vincke P, Mareschal B (1986) How to select and how to rank projects: the PROMETHEE method. Eur J Oper Res 24:228–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canada-Visa (2014) Canada Salary Wizard. http://www.canadavisa.com/canada-salary-wizard.html. Accessed 25 Jan 2015

  • Carrera DG, Mack A (2010) Sustainability assessment of energy technologies via social indicators: results of a survey among European energy experts. Energy Policy 38:1030–1039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cherubini F (2010) The biorefinery concept: using biomass instead of oil for producing energy and chemicals. Energ Convers Manage 51:1412–1421

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chum HL, Overend RP (2001) Biomass and renewable fuels. Fuel Process Technol 71:187–195

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ciroth A, Finkbeier M, Hildenbrand J, Klöpffer W, Mazijn B, Prakash S et al (2011) Towards a life cycle sustainability assessment: making informed choices on products. United Nations Environment Programma (UNEP). http://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/8001/UNEP_LifecycleInit_Dec_FINAL.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y. Accessed 25 Nov 2016

  • Deutsch D, Oestreich D, Lautenschütz L, Haltenort P, Arnold U, Sauer J (2017) High purity oligomeric oxymethylene ethers as diesel fuels. Chem-Ing-Tech 89:486–489

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dincer I (2007) Environmental and sustainability aspects of hydrogen and fuel cell systems. Int J Energy Res 31:29–55

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dominguez-Faus R, Powers SE, Burken JG, Alvarez PJ (2009) The water footprint of biofuels: a drink or drive issue? Environ Sci Technol 43:3005–3010

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Elghali L, Clift R, Sinclair P, Panoutsou C, Bauen A (2007) Developing a sustainability framework for the assessment of bioenergy systems. Energy Policy 35:6075–6083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fülöp J (2005) Introduction to decision making methods. Laboratory of Operations Research and Decision Systems: Computer and Automation Institute, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest

  • Genc T (2014) Sensitivity analysis on PROMETHEE and TOPSIS weights. Int J Manag Decis Mak 13:403–421

    Google Scholar 

  • Government-of-Canada (2016) Forestry: region of Western Canada and the territories: 2014–2016. Available from: http://www.edsc.gc.ca/img/edsc-esdc/jobbank/SectoralProfiles/WT/2A71-RPT-SectProf_WT_Forestry_EN%2D%2DGEN-20150827-VF-MR.pdf. Accessed 21 Oct 2016

  • Guinée J (2016) Life cycle sustainability assessment: what is it and what are its challenges?. In: Clift R, Druckman A (eds) Taking stock of industrial ecology. Springer, Cham

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoekstra AY, Chapagain AK, Aldaya MM, Mekonnen MM (2011) The water footprint assessment manual: setting the global standard. Earthscan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • IEA (2016) CO2 emissions from fuel combustion. International Energy Agency, France. https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/CO2EmissionsfromFuelCombustion_Highlights_2016.pdf. Accessed 21 Feb 2017

  • ISO 14040 (2006) International Standard - Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment – Principles and Framework. Switzerland International Organisation for Standardization, Geneva. Available from: https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html. Accessed 5 Feb 2017

  • Kabir MR, Kumar A (2011) Development of net energy ratio and emission factor for biohydrogen production pathways. Bioresour Technol 102:8972–8985

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kabir MR, Kumar A (2012) Comparison of the energy and environmental performances of nine biomass/coal co-firing pathways. Bioresour Technol 124:394–405

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • King CW, Webber ME (2008) Water intensity of transportation. Environ Sci Technol 42:7866–7872

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kloepffer W (2008) Life cycle sustainability assessment of products. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13:89–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W, Renner I (2007) Lebenszyklusbasierte Nachhaltigkeitsbewertung von Produkten Technikfolgenabschätzung. Theorie Prax 16(3):32–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar A, Cameron JB, Flynn PC (2003) Biomass power cost and optimum plant size in western Canada. Biomass Bioenergy 24:445–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar M, Oyedun AO, Kumar A (2017) Hydrothermal liquefaction of biomass for the production of diluents for bitumen transport. Biofuels Bioprod Biorefin 11:811–829

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar A, Sokhansanj S, Flynn PC (2006) Development of a multicriteria assessment model for ranking biomass feedstock collection and transportation systems. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 129:71–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li X, Grace J, Lim C, Watkinson A, Chen H, Kim J (2004) Biomass gasification in a circulating fluidized bed. Biomass Bioenergy 26:171–193

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Löfvenberg U (2010) The BEST experiences with low blends in diesel and petrol fuels. BEST (BioEthanol for Sustainable Transport) Deliverable, (D3)

  • Luk J, Fernandes H, Kumar A (2010) A conceptual framework for siting biorefineries in the Canadian prairies. Biofuels Bioprod Biorefin 4:408–422

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mahbub N, Oyedun AO, Kumar A, Oestreich D, Arnold U, Sauer J (2017) A life cycle assessment of oxymethylene ether synthesis from biomass-derived syngas as a diesel additive. J Clean Prod 165:1249–1262

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mann MK, Spath PL (1997) Life cycle assessment of a biomass gasification combined-cycle power system. National Renewable Energy Lab., Golden

    Google Scholar 

  • Mareschal B (2013) Visual PROMETHEE manual, pp 1–192. http://www.promethee-gaia.net/files/VPManual.pdf. Accessed 10 Feb 2016

  • McKendry P (2002) Energy production from biomass (part 1): overview of biomass. Bioresour Technol 83:37–46

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mohamadabadi HS, Tichkowsky G, Kumar A (2009) Development of a multi-criteria assessment model for ranking of renewable and non-renewable transportation fuel vehicles. Energy 34:112–125

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Moore FT (1959) Economies of scale: some statistical evidence. Q J Econ 73(2):232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myhre G, Shindell D, Bréon F-M, Collins W, Fuglestvedt J, Huang J, Koch D, Lamarque J-F, Lee D, Mendoza B, Nakajima T, Robock A, Stephens G, Takemura T, Zhang H (2013) Anthropogenic and natural radiative forcing. In: Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner G-K, Tignor M, Allen SK (eds) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Chagne. Cambridge Universtiy Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Niven RK (2005) Ethanol in gasoline: environmental impacts and sustainability review article. Renew Sustain Energ Rev 9:535–555

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Oestreich D, Lautenschütz L, Arnold U, Sauer J (2017) Reaction kinetics and equilibrium parameters for the production of oxymethylene dimethyl ethers (OME) from methanol and formaldehyde. Chem Eng Sci 163:92–104

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • OMNR (1994) Reasons for decision and decision: class environmental assessment by the ministry of natural resources for timber management on crown lands in Ontario. Environmental Assessment Board: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  • Oyedun AO, Kumar A, Oestreich D, Arnold U, Sauer J (2018) The development of the production cost of oxymethylene ethers as diesel additives from biomass. Biofuels Bioprod Biorefin 12(4):694–710

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrini L, Marchionna M, Patrini R, Florio S (2013) Emission performance of neat and blended polyoxymethylene dimethyl ethers in an old light-duty diesel car. SAE Technical Paper No. 2013-01-1035

  • Pellegrini L, Patrini R, Marchionna M (2014) Effect of POMDME blend on PAH emissions and particulate size distribution from an in-use light-duty diesel engine. SAE Technical Paper No. 2014-01-1951

  • Peters MS, Timmerhaus KD, West RE (2003) Plant design and economics for chemical engineers. MCGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahman MM, Canter C, Kumar A (2015) Well-to-wheel life cycle assessment of transportation fuels derived from different North American conventional crudes. Appl Energy 156:159–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Safari H, Fagheyi MS, Ahangari SS, Fathi MR (2012) Applying PROMETHEE method based on entropy weight for supplier selection. Business Management and Strategy 3:97–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar S, Kumar A (2009) Techno-economic assessment of biohydrogen production from forest biomass in western Canada. Trans ASABE 52:519–530

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar S, Kumar A (2010a) Biohydrogen production from forest and agricultural residues for upgrading of bitumen from oil sands. Energy 35:582–591

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar S, Kumar A (2010b) Large-scale biohydrogen production from bio-oil. Bioresour Technol 101:7350–7361

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shahrukh H, Oyedun AO, Kumar A, Ghiasi B, Kumar L, Sokhansanj S (2015) Net energy ratio for the production of steam pretreated biomass-based pellets. Biomass Bioenergy 80:286–297

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shahrukh H, Oyedun AO, Kumar A, Ghiasi B, Kumar L, Sokhansanj S (2016a) Comparative net energy ratio analysis of pellet produced from steam pretreated biomass from agricultural residues and energy crops. Biomass Bioenergy 90:50–59

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shahrukh H, Oyedun AO, Kumar A, Ghiasi B, Kumar L, Sokhansanj S (2016b) Techno-economic assessment of pellets produced from steam pretreated biomass feedstock. Biomass Bioenergy 87:131–143

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Singh S, Kumar A (2011) Development of water requirement factors for biomass conversion pathway. Bioresour Technol 102:1316–1328

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Singh S, Kumar A, Jain S (2014) Impact of biofuel production on water demand in Alberta. Can Biosysts Eng 56(8):11–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith DM, Larson BC, Kelty MJ, Ashton PMS (1997) The practice of silviculture: applied forest ecology, 9th edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Spath P, Aden A, Eggeman T, Ringer M, Wallace B, Jechura J (2005) Biomass to hydrogen production detailed design and economics utilizing the battelle columbus heated gasifier. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Spath PL, Mann MK (2000) Life cycle assessment of hydrogen production via natural gas steam reforming. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sx H (2001) Life cycle assessment of road—a pilot study for inventory. Analysis—2nd revised edition. IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute, Göteborg

  • Sultana A, Kumar A (2011) Development of energy and emission parameters for densified form of lignocellulosic biomass. Energy 36:2716–2732

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sultana A, Kumar A (2012) Ranking of biomass pellets by integration of economic, environmental and technical factors. Biomass Bioenergy 39:344–355

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sultana A, Kumar A, Harfield D (2010) Development of agri-pellet production cost and optimum size. Bioresour Technol 101:5609–5621

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson RM, Platon A, Satrio JA, Brown RC, Hsu DD (2010) Techno-economic analysis of biofuels production based on gasification. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thakur A, Canter CE, Kumar A (2014) Life-cycle energy and emission analysis of power generation from forest biomass. Appl Energy 128:246–253

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Valente C, Spinelli R, Hillring BG (2011) LCA of environmental and socio-economic impacts related to wood energy production in alpine conditions: Valle di Fiemme (Italy). J Clean Prod 19:1931–1938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Vliet OP, Faaij AP, Turkenburg WC (2009) Fischer–Tropsch diesel production in a well-to-wheel perspective: a carbon, energy flow and cost analysis. Energy Convers Manag 50:855–876

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Visual-PROMETHEE (2015) Multicriteria decision aid—methods, modeling and software. Solvay Brussels School of Economics & Management, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  • Winkler N (1998) A manual for the planning, design and construction of forest roads in steep terrain. Forest Harvesting Case Study 10. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

  • Wong AJL (2015) Life cycle assessment of lignocellulosic biomass conversion pathways to hydrogenation derived renewable diesel. MSc Thesis, University of Alberta, Edmonton

  • Wong A, Zhang H, Kumar A (2016) Life cycle water footprint of hydrogenation-derived renewable diesel production from lignocellulosic biomass. Water Res 102:330–345

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yang J, Xu M, Zhang X, Hu Q, Sommerfeld M, Chen Y (2011) Life-cycle analysis on biodiesel production from microalgae: water footprint and nutrients balance. Bioresour Technol 102:159–165

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang H, Haapala KR (2015) Integrating sustainable manufacturing assessment into decision making for a production work cell. J Clean Prod 105:52–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang X, Kumar A, Arnold U, Sauer J (2014) Biomass-derived oxymethylene ethers as diesel additives: a thermodynamic analysis. Energy Procedia 61:1921–1924

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang X, Oyedun AO, Kumar A, Oestreich D, Arnold U, Sauer J (2016) An optimized process design for oxymethylene ether production from woody-biomass-derived syngas. Biomass Bioenergy 90:7–14

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the partners in the Helmholtz-Alberta Initiative, the Helmholtz Association, and the University of Alberta, whose financial support has made this research possible. In addition, the authors would like to acknowledge the researchers of KIT (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology) for their help and support to conduct this research work. Astrid Blodgett is acknowledged for editing the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, 10-263 Donadeo Innovation Centre for Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 1H9, Canada

    Nafisa Mahbub, Adetoyese Olajire Oyedun, Hao Zhang & Amit Kumar

  2. Institute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis (ITAS), Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany

    Witold-Roger Poganietz

Authors
  1. Nafisa Mahbub
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adetoyese Olajire Oyedun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hao Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Amit Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Witold-Roger Poganietz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amit Kumar.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Wulf-Peter Schmidt

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 47 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mahbub, N., Oyedun, A.O., Zhang, H. et al. A life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) of oxymethylene ether as a diesel additive produced from forest biomass. Int J Life Cycle Assess 24, 881–899 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1529-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1529-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation