Presentation on theme: "BREW Generic Approach by Martin Patel (Un. Utrecht) Tim Nisbet (Shell) Peter Nossin (DSM) BREW plenary meeting - September 9, 2003."— Presentation transcript:
BREW Generic Approach by Martin Patel (Un. Utrecht) Tim Nisbet (Shell) Peter Nossin (DSM) BREW plenary meeting - September 9, 2003
Content Problem Definition Generic Approach Structuring the work
Problem Definition -1 Objective BREW Project: To prepare a study about the opportunities and risks of applying biotechnology to produce bulk chemicals and chemical intermediates from renewable raw materials. Time horizon: Medium (10-20 yrs) to long-term (until 2050) development Deliverables: Overview of: Technical options Sustainability PIs (3Ps) Economics Ecology Society
Problem Definition -2 Stage gate process (Cooper): 1.Discovery stage 2.Scoping 3.Built business case 4.Development 5.Testing and validation 6.Launch Majority of projects are in stage 1-2 Level of uncertainty: HIGH Generic approach - based on current insights (proven technology) - translation to future prospects (expert insights) Reference to current commercial technology (chemical, fossil based)
Purpose of the meeting 1.Gain consensus on selection of products and processes to apply for a generic approach. 2. Agree on structuring of the work
Generic Approach Existing chemicals: Cradle to gate New chemicals: Cradle to grave Harvesting Transport Storage Processing Conversion to chemical Biomass Chemical Ferm. sugar Vegetable oil Conversion to end product End product Energy Water Emissions By-products Consistent energy and mass balance required
Biomass-Water-Energy Future feedstocks: Ligno-cellulosics: Agricultural residues Energy crops Current feedstocks: Starchy crops: Corn Wheat Rice Cassava Sugar crops: Sugar cane Sugar beets Molasses Water: Water management issues? - modeling? Energy: Fixed energy mix (EU) – no modeling Include other C-sources such as glycerol or natural oil/fats? Design of representative EU-scenarios
Harvesting, transport, storage Location: EU 15 EU 30 (incl. Ukrain) Way of collecting/harvesting/transporting Yield per ha average or per individual country Net available biomass potential price-availability relation other uses may be: Hidden use Fuel Fodder Percentage of arable land Plant capacity Land Surface Design 3-4 reference cases
Conversion to chemical Conversion: Fermentation aerobic/anaerobic fed batch/(semi-)continue bacteria/yeast/fungi Followed by a conventional chemical or enzymatic step f.e. hydrogenation free/immobilized enzyme Make assumption on: Fermentation selectivity Fermentation yield % Cell mass Cycle time/residence time Product concentration Productivity micro-organism Number of metabolic steps Down stream processing: Biomass separation Biomass processing anaerobic digestion incineration food landfill Protein separation ultra/nanofiltration Recovery evaporation in effect distillation crystallization membrane separation extraction Packaging liquid/solid
Emissions To water BOD ……. To air GHG Toxic ……. To soil solid waste …….. Case based on - input parameters up/down stream process - guestimate on input parameters conversion to chemical
By-products Lignine energy (steam/electricity) saving of depletable energy sources reference year - 2000 (realized) - 2020-2050 (projection) Lignine upgrading to higher added value chemical saving of depletable carbon sources reference: oil (hydrocarbons), natural gas (ammonia, H 2 ) Other by-products 4 scenarios ?
Cradle-to-grave Only for new end products (not commercial yet) Recycling material recycling back-to-monomers back-to-feedstock thermal recycling (incineration = energy recovery) 4 recycling scenarios ?
Consensus Location Focus Europe Current technology 2 model products (citric acid, ethanol) Future Technology year 2020 and 2050 Products and processes