Appendix B: Lifecycle Analysis: DRAFT Oregon Low Carbon Fuel Standards Report

Appendix B: Lifecycle Analysis
DRAFT Oregon Low Carbon Fuel Standards Report
Contents 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 2 2. Oregon Petroleum Pathways Key Inputs and Assumptions .......................................... 3 3. Oregon Ethanol Pathways Key Inputs and Assumptions ............................................... 8 a) Ethanol produced in the Midwest from Midwest Grown Corn .................................... 9
b) Ethanol produced in the Northwest from Midwest Grown Corn ..................................... 9 c) Ethanol produced from Northwest Farmed Trees .......................................................... 10
d) Ethanol produced from Wheat Straw ............................................................................. 11 e) f) Ethanol produced from Forest Residue .......................................................................... 11 Ethanol produced from Mill Waste ................................................................................ 12
g) Sugarcane Ethanol .......................................................................................................... 12 4. Oregon Biodiesel Pathways Key Inputs and Assumptions ........................................... 13 a) Midwest Soybean Biodiesel Pathway ............................................................................ 13
b) Northwest Canola Biodiesels Pathway .......................................................................... 14 c) Yellow Grease Biodiesel ................................................................................................ 14
d) Tallow Biodiesel ............................................................................................................ 14 e) Northwest Renewable Diesel produced from Midwest Soybeans ................................. 14
5. Oregon Electricity Pathway ............................................................................................ 15 6. Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Pathway .................................................................... 15 7. Overview of Oregon Carbon Intensities ......................................................................... 16
Page 1 of 17
DRAFT Low Carbon Fuel Standards Report
1. Introduction
A Lifecycle Analysis of fuel is an evaluation of environmental impact associated with its production and combustion. Figure 1 is a schematic representation of Lifecycle Analysis, also known as a fuel pathway. The Well-to-Tank portion of Lifecycle Analysis of a fuel pathway involves production, storage, and transport of fuel. The Tank-To-Wheel portion of Lifecycle Analysis of a fuel pathway takes into account combustion of fuel in a motor vehicle. Well-To-Wheel is a combination of Well-to-Tank and Tank-To-Wheel, and captures energy inputs and greenhouse gas emissions that result from production, distribution, storage and transportation of a fuel.
Well-To-Wheel
Well-to-Tank
Figure 1: Fuel Lifecycle Analysis chain of events
Tank-To-Wheel
We calculated energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions using GREET (Green House gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy in Transportation) a life cycle analysis model developed and maintained by Argonne National Laboratory. GREET is designed to calculate the energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with production and use of fuels. The model version GREET 1.8c was modified by TIAX and DEQ to reflect Oregon specific conditions. The carbon Intensity of a given fuel represents grams of carbon dioxide released per one megajoule of energy produced during all stages of fuel production, storage, transportation, and use. The carbon intensity values are adjusted to reflect co-products, indirect effects, and energy economy ratios where applicable.
Page 2 of 17
2. Oregon Petroleum Pathways Key Inputs and Assumptions

Oregon petroleum pathways overview is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Oregon petroleum pathways chain of events
In calculating the carbon intensities petroleum fuels used in Oregon, DEQ used a combination of GREET defaults and Oregon specific inputs and assumptions. For the purposes of this analysis, DEQ assumed that about 90% of Oregons petroleum is processed at Washington refineries and transported along the Olympic pipeline and by ocean tanker to Portland. Some of it is further transported by barge to Pasco. The remaining 10% of Oregon petroleum fuels is refined in Utah and transported along the Chevron pipeline. Figure 3 is a map from ICF International showing the distribution of Oregons refined petroleum.
Page 3 of 17
Figure 3: Oregon refined fuels
Sources of crude oil in Washington and Utah refineries are shown in Figures 4 and 5
2007 Sources of Crude Refined in Washington (%)
70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Alaska Middle East Africa South America Canada Other
"The Economic Contribution of Washington State's Petroleum Refining Industry in 2007", Washington Research Council, 2009. 2007 EIA Petroleum Imports by State
Figure 4: Sources of crude oil used in Washington refineries
Page 4 of 17
Figure 5: Sources of crude oil used in Utah refineries
Based on the Canada National Energy Board Report (2009 Exports to PADD V), out of the 17% of Canadian crude used at Washington refineries, 51% is conventionally extracted and 49% is extracted from oil sands. The Canada National Energy Board Report 2009 (Exports to Southern PADD IV) estimates that 25% of Utahs crude is conventional while 75% is extracted from oil sands. We used GREET default consumption values for both conventional and oil sands energy. These inputs include process efficiency, process fuel shares, and flaring and venting volumes of natural gas in the recovery process. Process efficiency is a function of crude recovery energy consumption and refining energy consumption related to the unit of fuel energy produced. Process fuel shares distribute the total energy consumed in the process among a variety of fuel types, e.g. 62% of fuel consumed to recover crude is natural gas. GREET default values are shown in Table 1.
Page 5 of 17
Table 1: Energy consumption GREET default inputs
Conventional Crude Recovery

Process Efficiency Process Fuel Shares: Crude Residual Oil Diesel Gasoline Natural gas Electricity Coal Refinery Gas 1% 1% 15% 2% 62% 19% 98%
Oil Sands Mining Recovery

94.8%
Oil Sands In-Situ Recovery

84.3%
Gasoline Blendstock Refining

87.7%
3% 1% 82% 17% 97% 3% 30% 4% 13% 50%
DEQ has adjusted crude and refined fuel transport distances and modes, cargo ship payload values, and electricity mixes. Transportation distances and modes used in Oregon GREET reflect DEQ assumptions that 100% of the crude transported to Washington is by pipeline (646 miles); sixty five percent of gasoline blend stock is then transported to Portland by Olympic pipeline (217 miles) and 35% by ocean tanker (329 miles). Twenty five percent of the gasoline transported to Portland, is further transported from Portland to Pasco by barge (179 miles). Crude extraction electricity mixes for crude extraction from Oil Sands are as follows: Alberta mix used for oil sands recovery; a weighted average of Alberta, Alaska, Saudi Arabia, Angola, and Argentina is used for conventional crudes. Cargo ship crude oil payload values used are 25,000 deadweight ton limit entering port of Seattle and 80,000 deadweight ton limit for Panama Canal. For electricity consumption in Washington, the fuel mix from the 2007 WA Department of Commerce Fuel Mix Disclosure Reports were used; for electricity consumption in Utah, the 2007 Utah Geological Survey fuel mix was used. Washington and Utah electricity source mixes are shown in Figure 6.
Page 6 of 17
Washington
NG 10%
Utah
Renewable 1.6% NG 16.4%
Coal 17%
Nuclear 5% Renewable 1%
Hydro 67%
Coal 81.9%
Figure 6: Electricity source mixes for WA and UT
Vehicle combustion emissions are calculated based on the assumption that all CO will convert to CO2 in the atmosphere. Environmental Protection Agency Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS2) Regulatory Impact Analysis carbon intensity values for vehicle CH4 and N2O emissions were added to the final diesel and gasoline carbon intensities. Oregon gasoline and diesel carbon intensity are presented in Figures 7 and 8.
120 100 80 60 40 20
0.00
Gasoline CI 92.3 g/MJ

120.00
Diesel CI 91.5 g/MJ

102
100.00 80.00 60.00 40.00 20.00 Recovery & Transport Ref ining & Transport Vehicle
102 90 91
103
90
104 92
GHGs, gCO2e/MJ
GHGs, gCO2e/MJ
0 WA Conv. WA Oil Sands UT Conv. UT Oil Sands
WA Conv.
WA Oil Sands
UT Conv.
UT Oil Sands
Figure 7: Oregon Gasoline blend stock carbon intensity Figure 8: Oregon Diesel blend stock carbon intensity
Page 7 of 17
3. Oregon Ethanol Pathways Key Inputs and Assumptions

Oregon ethanol pathways overview is shown in Figure 9.
Figure 9: Oregon ethanol pathways overview.
Inputs for ethanol pathways differ based on feedstock (corn, farmed trees, forest residue, etc.). Farming and collection energy use assumptions are split by fuel type and by combustion devise. Fertilizer, pesticide, and herbicide applications differ by type, production energy consumption, transport modes and distances and percentage of Nitrogen in fertilizer emitted as N2O. Crop yields; feedstock transport and distances; and ethanol production assumptions such as process efficiency by fuel type and combustion devise, process yields, coproduct credits, and fuel transport and distances are also taken into account. DEQ staff has calculated carbon intensities for seven ethanol pathways: Ethanol produced in the Midwest from Midwest grown corn; Ethanol produced in the Northwest from Midwest grown corn; Ethanol produced in the Northwest from Northwest farmed trees; Ethanol produced from wheat straw; Ethanol produced from forest residue; Ethanol produced from mill waste, and Ethanol produced from Brazilian sugar cane.
Page 8 of 17
a) Ethanol produced in the Midwest from Midwest Grown Corn DEQ used GREET defaults for farming energy (12,635 BTU/bushel), corn yield (158 bushels/acre), and fertilizer and pesticide production and application rates. Corn is assumed to be transported to storage 50 miles by truck. Ethanol production process was assumed 87.5% dry milling and 12.5% wet milling. The dry mill process consumes 36, 000 BTU energy per gallon of fuel produced. Process fuel shares are 80% natural gas, 20% coal. The ethanol yield from the dry milling process is 2.72 gallons per bushels of corn. The wet mill process consumes 45, 950 BTU per gallon with a process fuel mix of 60% natural gas and 40% coal. The ethanol yield from the wet milling process is 2.62 gallons per bushels of corn. An energy and emission credit is given to the ethanol pathway equal to the energy and emissions of the product that is being displaced or substituted (co-products). Dry milling produces distillers grains and solubles (DGS), wet milling produces corn gluten meal (CGM) and corn gluten feed (CGF). The US Average electricity mix shown in figure 10 is used in this pathway. Transportation distance is adjusted to 1850 rail miles to Portland and 71 truck miles to refueling stations.
Renewable Biomass 10% 1%
US Average
Residual Oil 1%
NG 18%
Nuclear 20%
Coal 50%
Figure 10: US average electricity mix
b) Ethanol produced in the Northwest from Midwest Grown Corn GREET defaults were used for farming inputs. Corn transport from Minnesota, South Dakota, and North Dakota to the Pacific Ethanol plant in Oregon was assumed to be 1350 rail miles. Pacific Ethanol information was used for ethanol production inputs. The process is a 100% dry mill with 100% natural gas as process fuel. Ethanol transportation from the plant to Portland is 140 barge miles, and from the barge terminal, an average of 71 miles to fueling stations. Oregon 2007 electricity source mix shown in Figure 11 was used in this pathway. GREET default coproduct substitution values are used for energy and emissions credit.
Page 9 of 17
Oregon
Wind & geo 1.5% NG 14.1% Hydro 43.2% Coal 37.8%
Biomass 0.3%
Nuclear 3.2%
Figure 11: OR average electricity mix
c) Ethanol produced from Northwest Farmed Trees ZeaChem's 250,000 gallon per year demonstration scale cellulosic biorefinery is currently under construction in Boardman, Oregon. This pathway is based on ZeaChems mature technology. Poplar trees will be used as a feedstock and will be supplied by the GreenWood Tree Farm nearby. ZeaChem specific ethanol production parameters such as chemical use, ethanol yield, process fuels shares, and transportation distances and modes were utilized in GREET calculations for this pathway. Poplar farming assumptions: Farming energy consumption: 637,428 BTU/dry ton; Farming energy fuel shares: diesel 33.5%, electricity 66.5%; Nitrogen fertilizer: 1,633.17 gram/dry ton; P2O5 fertilizer 453.59 gram/dry ton; Herbicides: 141.86 gram/dry ton; Insecticides: 11.34 gram/dry ton; Ethanol production assumptions: Ethanol production process: fermentation; Ethanol yield: 135 gal/bone dry tons (BDT); Feedstock transportation: 30 miles; Fuel Distribution: 140 barge miles;
Page 10 of 17
The default assumption in GREET is that electricity generated from combustion of biomass exceeds what is required for the cellulosic ethanol production process. We assumed that the ZeaChem process would be net zero, therefore, the OR-GREET inputs reflects that no electricity will be imported or exported from the grid for ethanol production process needs.
d) Ethanol produced from Wheat Straw This pathway is based on the corn stover GREET pathway with values of many assumptions modified. Farming assumptions: 5,400 lb/acre wheat with 3,000 lb/acre left behind for erosion and nutrients, based on a 2001 Washington State University report Wheat Straw for Ethanol Production in Washington: A Resource, Technical and Economical Assessment, Kerstetter, Lyons, Washington State University 2001. Increased fertilizer use is assumed to make up for straw removal, assumed straw nutrient values are 11lb N/ton, 3lb P2O5/ton, 15 lb K2O/ton from a May 2007 report Nutrient Value of Wheat Straw, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. Credit is assumed for avoided N2O emissions from straw. Wheat straw collections energy of 205, 657 BTU/dry ton of straw removed is based on hay swather, round baler, and round bale mover diesel consumption of 1.62 gal/acre reported in June 2009 University of Minnesota paper Machinery Cost Estimates by W. Lazarus. Wheat straw transport of 120 truck miles is assumed based on a potential wheat growing area in Southeast Washington and either Pacific Ethanol or ZeaChem biorefinery. Ethanol production assumptions include fermentation as fuel production process, ethanol yield of 65 gal/dry ton, feedstock handling energy of 180 BTU/gal (GREET default). No electricity credit is given, 60% of biomass is assumed to be processed to ethanol and 40% used as process fuel. Ethanol transport is assumed 140 barge miles from Boardman to Portland.
e) Ethanol produced from Forest Residue Forest residue collection energy GREET default of 590,067 BTU/dry ton is used in this pathway. Forest residue is assumed to be transported 75 truck miles to a hypothetical plant near Ellensburg, Washington. Gasification is assumed as the ethanol production process and GREET defaults for gasification are used for process fuel and ethanol yield.
Page 11 of 17
f) Ethanol produced from Mill Waste Since mill waste is a by-product of the lumber industry, no collection energy was calculated for this pathway, using an average transport distance of 75 miles from the mill to the fuel plant. GREET default feedstock handling energy of 180 BTU/gas, process fuels share and allocation to byproducts were used in this pathway. Ethanol transport of 100 truck miles to blending terminals and from there, an average of 71 miles to refueling stations is assumed.
g) Sugarcane Ethanol GREET default farming, feedstock transport, and ethanol production inputs are used for this pathway. Ethanol transport is 500 miles to Marine terminals (50% rail, 50% pipeline), 9060 nautical miles from SE Brazil port to Portland and 71 truck miles to refueling stations. Oregon Ethanol carbon intensity values are shown in Figure 12.
70
Ethanol
64.8 57.0
60 50
GHGs, gCO2e/MJ
40 Farming & Transport 30 20 10 0 MW/MW MW/NW Farmed Trees Wheat Straw Forest Residue Mill Waste Sugarcane
26.4 20.9 15.5 12.3 20.5
Processing & Transport

Vehicle
Figure 12: Oregon Ethanol carbon intensity values. ILUC emissions are not accounted for.
Page 12 of 17
4. Oregon Biodiesel Pathways Key Inputs and Assumptions

Oregon biodiesel pathways overview is shown in Figure 13.
Figure 13: Oregon biodiesel pathways overview
We have calculated carbon intensities for five biodiesel pathways: Midwest soybeans biodiesel; Northwest Canola; Yellow grease; Tallow, and Midwest Soybeans renewable diesel.
a) Midwest Soybean Biodiesel Pathway Midwest average soybean production, GREET default farming, and soybean transport assumptions are used in this pathway. Soy oil extraction and biodiesel production assumptions include data from EPA RFS2, and GHGenius, a model for lifecycle assessment of transportation fuels, with emphasis on Canada. Biodiesel transport is adjusted to 40 truck miles to rail terminals, 1,850 rail miles to Portland, and from there, an average of 71 miles to refueling stations.
Page 13 of 17
b) Northwest Canola Biodiesels Pathway The main assumption for this pathway is that canola is farmed and processed to biodiesel in Eastern Washington and transported to Portland, Oregon. Farming assumptions include energy consumption of 27, 149 BTU/bu (GHGenius). Fertilizer and pesticide use is based on 2005 GHGenius farm survey data. Based on the GEGenius 2005 update, oil yield is assumed to be 0.41 lb oil/lb seed; extraction energy is 1,053 BTU per gallon of oil; process fuels share 87% NG, and 13% electricity. Mass basis allocation of energy between canola oil (37%) and meal (63%) is based on CARBs approach. Biodiesel production assumptions: process fuel use is assumed to be 1840 BTU per pound which is an average of EPA RFS2 and GHGenius values for natural gas, electricity, and methanol. Biodiesel yield is one pound of biodiesel per pound of canola oil based on EPA RFS2 and 0.1lb of glycerin per pound of biodiesel based on CARB. Energy basis allocation of process energy between glycerin (5%) and biodisel (95%) is assumed. Biodiesel transport is assumed to be 150 rail miles, 150 track miles to terminal and 71 truck miles to refueling stations. c) Yellow Grease Biodiesel This pathway is based on CARB Used Cooking Oil pathway. SeQuential-Pacific Biodiesel plant in Salem, Oregon utilizes regionally sourced feedstock to produce over 17 million gallons of biodiesel per year. Energy consumption of 140 BTU/lb with fuel shares of 80% NG and 20 % electricity is assumed in this pathway. Oregon 2007 average electricity mix is used. The production process assumptions are based on the combination of GREET defaults and SeQuential provided information. d) Tallow Biodiesel Tallow is oil produced in meat rendering plants; meat is crushed and cooked to liquefy the fat; tallow is drained and screw pressed from the solids and filtered. There is no current tallow biodiesel production in Oregon. This process is based on CARB Tallow and Used Cooking Oil pathways. A combination of GREET defaults, CARB data, and SeQuential information are used in assumptions for this pathway. e) Northwest Renewable Diesel produced from Midwest Soybeans The main assumption of this pathway is the Midwest soy oil is processed to biodiesel at a Northwest refinery. GREET Renewable Diesel II (RDII) pathway is used and an operational plant in Arlington, Washington is assumed based on the June 2008 Washington State University report Biofuel Development in Washington. An 8 Mgal/year facility in Arlington is described as shifting its standard biodiesel operation to renewable diesel. The renewable diesel production process co-produces propane. Farming assumptions and soybean transport are GREET defaults; 2,000 rail miles soy oil transport to Arlington, WA is assumed. Renewable diesel production assumptions are based on a
Page 14 of 17
combination of CARB, EPA, and GHGenius updates. Renewable diesel transport to Portland assumes 190 track miles from Arlington to Portland and 71 miles to refueling stations. Figure 14 represents OR biodiesel carbon intensities.
30
27.3
25
21.7 20.0
GHGs, gCO2e/MJ
20
16.9
15 Feedstock & Transport
10.3
10
Processing & Transport

Vehicle
0 MW Soybeans NW Canola Yellow Grease Tallow NW RD/ MW soy oil
Figure 14: Oregon biodiesel carbon intensities
5. Oregon Electricity Pathway

Oregon 2007 statewide weighted average provided by ODOE and shown in Figure 11 was used in this pathway. Electricity pathways carbon intensity is comprised of 8.88 gCO2e/MJ from feedstock recovery and transport to the power plant and 146.10 gCO2e/MJ from electricity production at the power plant, resulting in a carbon intensity of 154.98 gCO2e/MJ. This value is then adjusted with an energy economy ratio (EER) to account for the difference in energy use per electric vehicle mile compared to that of a conventional light-duty or heavy-duty vehicle. The EER applied depends on the year and whether the electric vehicle substitutes for a light-duty or heavy-duty vehicle. For the final carbon intensities, please see the Fuel Carbon Intensity Lookup Table chapter in the report. For a description of EERs please see Calculating Carbon Intensities for Oregons Fuels chapter in the report.
6. Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Pathway

This pathway represents pipeline natural gas compressed to CNG at the refueling station. GREET default recovery, processing, pipeline transmission, and natural gas properties assumptions are used. CARB method and values for transmission leakage and an assumption that all station compressors are electric drive are utilized. Oregon 2007 average mix electricity is used in this pathway. Compressor efficiency is assumed to be 98% as per CARB. CNG pathways carbon intensity amounts to 8.2 gCO2e/MJ from recovery, processing, and transport; 3.16 gCO2e/MJ from compression, and 58.8 gCO2e/MJ from vehicle combustion to a total CI of 70.2 gCO2e/MJ for CNG pathway. This value is then adjusted with an energy economy ratio
Page 15 of 17
(EER) to account for the difference in energy use per CNG vehicle mile compared to that of a conventional light-duty or heavy-duty vehicle. The EER applied depends on the year and whether the CNG vehicle substitutes for a light-duty or heavy-duty vehicle. For the final carbon intensities, please see the Fuel Carbon Intensity Lookup Table chapter in the report. For a description of EERs please see Calculating Carbon Intensities for Oregons Fuels chapter in the report.
7. Overview of Oregon Carbon Intensities

Carbon Intensity Values of all Oregon pathways is summarized in Table 2. These do not include indirect land use change, and have not been adjusted with energy economy rations.
Table 2: Summary of OR Carbon Intensity Values
Pathway Gasoline Blendstock Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Ethanol MW Corn Average NW production, MW Corn Farmed Trees Wheat Straw Forest Residue Mill Waste Brazil Sugarcane Biodiesel MW Soybeans NW Canola Yellow Grease Average Tallow Average Renewable Diesel. NW Production, MW soy oil Electricity, 2007 OR avg. mix CNG, pipeline NG
Wheel to Tank (WTT), g CO2e/MJ Feedstock & Production WTT Transport T&D Total 6.80 11.23 18.03 6.79 9.71 16.51 21.45 21.77 11.03 15.29 11.38 3.68 20.00 6.00 15.74 0.83 7.40 5.80 8.88 8.24 42.54 34.39 3.68 4.78 8.28 7.80 5.61 10.29 7.87 5.75 5.75 15.20 146.10 3.16 63.99 56.16 14.71 20.07 19.66 11.48 25.61 16.29 23.61 6.58 13.15 21.00 154.98 12.59
Tank-to-Wheel, g CO2e/MJ
Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle CO2 CH4 N2O 72.83 0.07 1.41 74.95 0.02 0.05
Total Direct, g CO2e/MJ1

Total with equivalents 92.34 91.53
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.04 3.04 3.04 3.04 0.00 0.00 56.32
0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.20
0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.00 2.30
64.82 56.99 15.54 20.90 20.49 12.31 26.44 19.99 27.31 10.28 16.85 21.66 154.98 70.22
No EER has been applied to the carbon intensity value. For the final carbon intensities, please see the Fuel Carbon Intensity Lookup Table chapter in the report.
Page 16 of 17
Page 17 of 17

Appendix B: Lifecycle Analysis: DRAFT Oregon Low Carbon Fuel Standards Report

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Appendix B: Lifecycle Analysis: DRAFT Oregon Low Carbon Fuel Standards Report

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Appendix B: Lifecycle Analysis

DRAFT Oregon Low Carbon Fuel Standards Report

b) Northwest Canola Biodiesels Pathway .......................................................................... 14 c) Yellow Grease Biodiesel ................................................................................................ 14