Optimal blending management of biomass resources used for biochemical conversion | Zendy

Roni Mohammad S. | Zendy; Thompson David | Zendy; Hartley Damon | Zendy; Searcy Erin | Zendy; Nguyen Quang | Zendy

AI Assistant Blog Pricing

Home ZAIA Blog

Premium

Optimal blending management of biomass resources used for biochemical conversion

Author(s) -

Roni Mohammad S.,

Thompson David,

Hartley Damon,

Searcy Erin,

Nguyen Quang

Publication year - 2018

Publication title -

biofuels, bioproducts and biorefining

Language(s) - English

Resource type - Journals

SCImago Journal Rank - 0.931

H-Index - 83

eISSN - 1932-1031

pISSN - 1932-104X

DOI - 10.1002/bbb.1877

Subject(s) - corn stover , biorefining , biorefinery , raw material , biofuel , bioproducts , biomass (ecology) , miscanthus , stover , cellulosic ethanol , pulp and paper industry , environmental science , bioenergy , waste management , microbiology and biotechnology , chemistry , engineering , agronomy , cellulose , crop , organic chemistry , biology

This research develops an optimization model to describe the tradeoff among blend components in the least‐cost biomass blend, based on resource availability, quality requirements, and logistics cost for a biochemical conversion. A mixed‐integer linear programming model is developed to determine the least‐cost blend from a set of candidate feedstocks. A case study – based on a biorefinery located in western Kansas that uses three‐pass corn stover, two‐pass corn stover, switchgrass, miscanthus, and municipal solid waste fractions to meet biochemical conversion specifications and feedstock demand – shows that the delivered cost of an optimal blend that meets carbohydrate and ash specifications is 12.12% higher than the delivered cost of optimal blend that meets a carbohydrate specification only. The results indicate that a least‐cost blend that meets both carbohydrate and ash specifications consists of miscanthus (48.2%) and switchgrass (29.4%) whereas the least‐cost blend meeting carbohydrate specification only comprises three‐pass corn stover (55.4%) and two‐pass corn stover (20.4%). An optimal blend uses a low‐cost municipal solid waste fraction in all cases, implying that blending could be a potential strategy to reduce delivered feedstock cost. Published 2018. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining published by Society of Industrial Chemistry and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here

Accelerating Research