4.8 Review

Assessment of the technical and economic potentials of biomass use for the production of steam, chemicals and polymers

Journal

RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS
Volume 40, Issue -, Pages 1153-1167

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.114

Keywords

Industrial steam; Chemicals; Polymers; Biomass; Bio-based materials; CO2 emissions

Funding

  1. UNIDO's Energy and Climate Change Branch (Austria, Vienna)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Fossil fuel substitution with biomass is one of the measures to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. This paper estimates the cost-effectiveness of raising industrial steam and producing materials (i.e. chemicals, polymers) from biomass. We quantify their long-term global potentials in terms of energy saving, CO2 emission reduction, cost and resource availability. Technically, biomass can replace all fossil fuels used for the production of materials and for generating low and medium temperature steam. Cost-effective opportunities exist for steam production from biomass residues and by substitution of high value petrochemicals which would together require more than 20 exajoules (EJ) of biomass worldwide in addition to baseline by 2030. Potentials could double in 2050 and reach 38-45 EJ (25% of the total industrial energy use), with most demand in Asia, other developing countries and economies in transition. The economic potential of using biomass as chemical feedstock is nearly as high as for steam production, indicating its importance. The exploitation of these potentials depends on energy prices and industry's access to biomass supply. Given the increasing competition for biomass from several economic sectors, more resource efficient materials need to be developed while steam production is already attractive due to its high effectiveness for reducing CO2 emissions per unit of biomass. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available