Bio-Oil Separation and Stabilization by Supercritical Fluid Fractionation. 2014 Final Report
Open accessAbstract
The objective of this project is to use supercritical fluids to separate and fractionate algal-based bio-oils into stable products that can be subsequently upgraded to produce drop-in renewable fuels. To accomplish this objective, algae was grown and thermochemically converted to bio-oils using hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL), pyrolysis, and catalytic pyrolysis. The bio-oils were separated into an extract and a raffinate using near-critical propane or carbon dioxide. The fractions were then subjected to thermal aging studies to determine if the extraction process had stabilized the products. It was found that the propane extract fraction was twice as stable as the parent catalytic pyrolysis bio-oils as measured by the change in viscosity after two weeks of accelerated aging at 80°C. Further, in-situ NMR aging studies found that the propane extract was chemically more stable than the parent bio-oil. Thus the milestone of stabilizing the product was met. A preliminary design of the extraction plant was prepared. The design was based on a depot scale plant processing 20,000,000 gallons per year of bio-oil. It was estimated that the capital costs for such a plant would be $8,700,000 with an operating cost of $3,500,000 per year. On a per gallon of product cost and a 10% annual rate of return, capital costs would represent $0.06 per gallon and operating costs would amount to $0.20 per gallon. Further, it was found that the energy required to run the process represented 6.2% of the energy available in the bio-oil, meeting the milestone of less than 20%. Life cycle analysis and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission analysis found that the energy for running the critical fluid separation process and the GHG emissions were minor compared to all the inputs to the overall well to pump system. For the well to pump system boundary, energetics in biofuel conversion are typically dominated by energy demands in the growth, dewater, and thermochemical process. Bio-oil stabilization by near critical propane extraction had minimal impact in the overall energetics of the process with NER contributions of 0.03. Based on the LCA, the overall conversion pathways were found to be energy intensive with a NER of about 2.3 and 1.2 for catalytic pyrolysis and HTL, respectively. GHG emissions for the catalytic pyrolysis process were greater than that of petroleum diesel at 210 g CO2 eq compared to 18.9 g CO2 eq. Microalgae bio-oil based diesel with thermochemical conversion through HTL meets renewable fuel standards with favorable emission reductions of -10.8 g CO2 eq. The importance of the outcomes is that the critical fluid extraction and stabilization process improved product stability and did so with minimal energy inputs and processing costs. The LCA and GHG emission calculations point toward the HTL pathway as the more favorable thermochemical route towards upgrading algae to bio-fuels. Since the quality of the HTL oil was significantly lower than that of the catalytic pyrolysis bio-oil, the next steps point toward improving the quality of the HTL oils from algae biomass and focusing the critical fluid stabilization on that bio-oil product.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The bio-oil stabilization process uses near-critical liquid propane to remove unwanted components and stabilize the bio-oil.
“The bio-oil stabilization process uses near-critical liquid propane to remove unwanted components and stabilize the bio-oil [70].”
From Lifecycle assessment of microalgae to biofuel: Comparison of thermochemical processing pathways (2015) · cites this paper as [70]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lifecycle assessment of microalgae to biofuel: Comparison of thermochemical processing pathways
Bennion, E. P., Ginosar, D. M., Moses, J., Agblevor, F., & Quinn, J. C. (2015) · Applied Energy · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.12.009 · Cited by 286 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Idaho National Lab. (INL), I. F., Agblevor, F., USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Petkovic, L., Bennion, E., Quinn, J., Moses, J., Newby, D., & Ginosar, D.
- Affiliations
- Utah State University (US)
- Idaho National Lab. (INL), Idaho Falls, ID (United States)
- Idaho National Laboratory (US)
- Published
- 2014-03-01
- OpenAlex
- W4239996945
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
- Type
- report
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.osti.gov
- Locations
- OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)
- DOE (AC07-05ID14517)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Thermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Heat transfer and supercritical fluids
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Catalysis and Hydrodesulfurization Studies
- Keywords
- bio-oil, supercritical fluid fractionation, carbon dioxide extraction, algal biofuels, hydrothermal liquefaction, catalytic pyrolysis, pyrolysis, thermal aging, energy return ratio, greenhouse gas emissions, life cycle assessment, algae cultivation, bio-oil upgrading
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review