4.5 Review

Methodology for biorefinery portfolio assessment using supply-chain fundamentals of bioproducts

Journal

BIOFUELS BIOPRODUCTS & BIOREFINING-BIOFPR
Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages 716-727

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/bbb.1490

Keywords

bioproducts; supply-chain management; product portfolio design; biorefining

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) Environmental Design Engineering Chair at Ecole Polytechnique - Montreal
  2. Le Fond Quebecois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies (FQRNT)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Given the emergence of innovative processes in recent years for the manufacture of bioproducts from second-generation biomass, a range of unique biorefinery strategies are likely to be implemented by forest product companies in the coming years. No matter what biorefinery strategy is employed, to compete in the longer term, it will be critical to have a supply-chain adapted to the targeted products. In order to meet customer needs and at the same time be cost-competitive, there are trade-offs to be made between responsiveness and efficiency in several areas of the supply chain, such as production and customer service. This paper reviews supply-chain characteristics and competitive factors for various bioproducts. An approach that can be used by decision-makers during early-stage design is presented, suitable for screening-out less promising options based on their supply-chain characteristics. Fundamental aspects such as the differentiation of products, their possible green advantage, biomass procurement, and process characteristics are discussed within five categories: bioenergy, biofuels, commodity biochemicals, fine and specialty biochemicals, and biomaterials. Several examples of biorefinery strategies are discussed to illustrate these concepts. (C) 2014 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available