Evaluation of alternatives for the evolution of palm oil mills into biorefineries |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Colombian Oil Palm Research Centre, Cenipalma, Bogotá, Colombia;2. Biological and Agricultural Engineering Department, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA;3. Excellence Group in Thermal Power and Distributed Generation – NEST, Federal University of Itajubá, Itajubá, MG, Brazil;4. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, PO Box 999, Richland, WA 99352, USA;1. UHasselt, Faculty of Business Economics, Centre for Environmental Sciences, Agoralaan, 3590, Diepenbeek, Belgium;2. University of Liege, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, Economy and Rural Development Unit, Passage des Déportés 2, 5030, Gembloux, Belgium;3. VITO, Unit of Separation and Conversion Technologies, Boeretang 200, 2400, Mol, Belgium;4. Antwerp University, Faculty of Applied Economics, Department of Engineering Management, Prinsstraat 13, B-2000, Antwerp, Belgium;1. Irstea, UR OPAALE, F-35044, Rennes, France;2. Irstea, UR HBAN, F-92761, Antony, France;3. LBE, INRA, Narbonne, France;4. Suez Environnement – CIRSEE, Le Pecq, France;1. Excellence Center in Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency – EXCEN, Institute of Electrical Systems and Energy, Federal University of Itajubá – UNIFEI, Av. BPS 1303, Itajubá, MG, Brazil;2. Excellence Group in Thermal Power and Distributed Generation – NEST, Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Federal University of Itajubá – UNIFEI, Av. BPS 1303, Itajubá, MG, Brazil;3. Laboratory of Thermal Sciences – LATERMO, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Universidade Federal Fluminense, Rua Passo da Pátria, 156, Niterói, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil;4. Centro de Innovación y Tecnología – Instituto Colombiano del Petróleo (ICP - Ecopetrol S.A), Gerencia de Desarrollo y Transferencia Tecnológica Km 7, vía Piedecuesta, Santander, Colombia;1. Oil Palm Biology and Breeding Research Program, Colombian Oil Palm Research Center – Cenipalma, Calle 20A # 43A-50, piso 4, Bogota, Colombia;2. Processing Research Program, Colombian Oil Palm Research Center – Cenipalma, Calle 20A # 43A-50, piso 4, Bogotá, Colombia;3. Department of Biology, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Carrera 30 Calle 45, Bogotá, Colombia;1. Study Center of Energy and Industrial Processes, Sancti Spiritus University, Ave de los Martires 360, 60100 Sancti Spiritus, Cuba;2. Applied Chemistry Center, Central University of Las Villas, Road to Camajuaní Km 5.5, 54830 Santa Clara, Villa Clara, Cuba;3. Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Department of Water Management, Section Sanitary Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Stevinweg 1, 2628 CN Delft, The Netherlands;4. Research Group ENVOC, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, 9000 Ghent, Belgium |
| |
| Abstract: | Six alternatives for the conversion of an average Colombian palm oil mill (30 t h?1 of fresh fruit bunches (FFB) into biorefineries were evaluated. The alternatives studied were: (C1) Production of biogas from the Palm Oil Mill Effluents (POME), (C2) Composting of empty fruit bunches (EFB) and fiber, (C3) Biomass combustion for high pressure steam combined heat and power, (C4) Pellets production, (C5) Biochar production and, (C6) Biochar and bio-oil production. The available biomass could result in up to 125 kWh of electricity, 207 kg of compost, 125 kg of pellet, 44 kg of biochar and 63 kg of bio-oil per metric ton of FFB. The global warming potential (GWP), eutrophication potential (EP), net energy ratio (NER), capital expenditures (CAPEX), operational costs (OPEX), net present value (NPV) and internal rate of return (IRR) were calculated for all the alternatives. GHG reductions of more than 33% could be achieved. Anaerobic digestion and composting contributed to 30% reduction of the EP. The CAPEX for all of the biorefinery alternatives studied varies between 0.7 $ t?1 and 2.8 $ t?1 of FFB. The OPEX varies between 1.6 $ t?1 and 7.3 $ t?1 of FFB. The NPV for viable scenarios ranged between 2.5 million and 13.9 million US dollars. The IRR calculated varied between 3% and 56% and the payback periods were between 3 and 8 years. The total extra incomes reached values up to 15.2 $ t?1 of FFB. Overall the pellets production biorefinery was the preferred alternative. |
| |
| Keywords: | Palm oil mill (POM) Biorefinery comparison Empty fruit bunches (EFB) Shell Fiber Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Eutrophication potential (EP) Economic assessment |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
