Shunichi NAKADA

IITC-IRENA

Ecuador, November 2015

Innovation Technology Outlook

of Advanced Biofuels

production and deployment

in the next three decades

Contents

1. Why advanced Biofuel?

2. Framework of IRENA Innovation Technology

Outlook of Advanced Biofuels

3. Status of deployment

4. Supply potential of advanced biofuel

5. Technology development status

6. R&D opportunities

7. Conclusion

2

1. Why advanced biofuel?

3

RE Penetration is the lowest in transport

sector

• Liquid biofuel will be the only option in transport sector for coming decade or two4

3%37%

13%

Energy consumption in three endues sector (2013)

Liquid biofuel can grow up to 15% by 2030,

technically

5

0.0

500.0

1000.0

1500.0

2000.0

2500.0

3000.0

3500.0

4000.0

2010 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Bill

ion

litr

es/

year

North America South America Europe AfricaAsia Oceania Biofuel (REmap)

There is a potential to increase RE share in transport sector to 10 – 15% by 2030,

from current 3%. Yet, significant investment, market development required.

Advanced biofuel account for only 1% of current liquid biofuel

Global Investments in Biofuels is very low

and even decreasing

6

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Qu

arte

rly

inve

stm

ents

[U

SD b

ln/y

r]

1st gen 2nd gen 4Q running average

Source: BNEF

Stalling investment for liquid biofuel, Why?

• Stagnant investment due to unclear policy support in longer term which

reflects public concern including,

Impact of land use change

GHG emission

Loss of biodiversity

Competitive use of natural resource - land and water -

Food security

Resource depletion: forest, water

Social impact

Land grabbing

Equal benefit sharing

• Advanced biofuel have a potential to overcome above issues – still

technology development and investment is needed

7

2. IRENA Innovation

Technology Outlook of

Advanced Biofuels

8

Objectives

9

This study provides a global technology outlook for

advanced biofuels from 2015 to 2045, specifically liquid

transport fuels.

Report coming up in 2015

Overview of market potential

Comparative assessment of pathways

Technology gaps and opportunities for R&D

Non-technical gaps and opportunities for deployment

Innovation prospects on promising production pathways

Commercialisation strategies

3. Status of deployment

10

There are significant opportunity for

advanced biofuel

• Road transport:

• Aviation: 6% advanced biofuel by 2020 (IATA)

• Fleet: US Navy, 50% of energy from non-conventional by 2020, special

focus on drop in biofuel

• Nov. 2015, DuPont opened world largest cellulosic ethanol plant with

over 100 mil. litter cellulosic ethanol production, which 500 local

farmers provide feedstock, create 85 full time job, and over 150

seasonal job

11

Deployment:

Advanced Biofuel Market Potential

12

Market of advanced biofuel is growing,

yet far more growth is required

13

Installed/planed capacity of Advanced Biofuel (2015)

REmap 2030

37% of total biofuel production

42% annual growth

WEO 2035

18% of total biofuel production

22% annual growth

OFIC 2030

12% of total biofuel production

31% annual growth

Current

Projection

4. Supply potential of

advanced biofuel

14

What is Advanced Biofuel?

Type of feedstock

Food crop / non-food crop

GHG emission reduction

Lifecycle GHG saving >50% (US-RFS)

Technology maturity

Matured / R&D status

Product quality

Similar properties to gasoline, diesel, jet fuel

and bunker fuel, either neat or blended in high

proportions 15

How much biomass can

be available for advanced biofuel?

16

Solid waste, 13

crop residue,

59

Forest residues,

13

Energy crop (non-food),

48

Overall potential 133 (EJ/year) in 2030

Solid waste,13

crop residue, 76

Forest residues, 28

Energy crop (non-food), 107

Overall potential 224 (EJ/year) in 2050

Comparison of Adv. Biofuel Feedstock

- Cost and Supply potential for 2030

17

Sup

ply

co

st (

USD

/GJ)

Supply potential (EJ)

Feedstock supply potential and cost

0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

2.0

2.4

2.8

3.2

3.6

4.0

Forest residue

Solid waste

Crop residuesEnergy crop (non-food)

13EJ 13EJ 59EJ 48EJ

5. Technology

development status

and prospects

18

Advanced biofuels pathways

19Principal pathway for each feedstock shown by bolder lines. Feedstocks are colour-coded by finished biofuel type

Trans-esterification

Pyrolysis oil

Extraction and purification

Pyrolysis

Pre-treatment & hydrolysis

Hydro-treatment

Aqueous phase reforming

Aerobic fermentation

Diesel, jet, gasoline

Diesel, jet, gasoline

FT catalysis & hydro-cracking

HVO diesel, jet

FAME biodiesel

Butanol

Mixed/higher alcohols

Methanol

Syngas

Lipids

Hydro-treatment & refining

C5 & C6 sugars

Feedstock Conversion Intermediate Upgrading Finished biofuel

Other catalysis & refining

Solid biogenic residues & waste

Agricultural residues

Forest residues

Non-food energy crops

Crude glycerine

Tall oil pitch

Palm oil mill effluent

Micro-algae

Macro-algae

Black & brown liquor Gasification

Yeast/bacteria fermentation

Syngas fermentation

Ethanol

Will be replaced by simpler figure

Pathways: Technology readiness

20

Commercialisation

-Major Challenge-

Research CommercialPilot Demonstration

Gas if + Methanol

LC ethanol

TRL

Gas ification + Mixed a lcohols

Pyrolys is oil + Upgrading

Gas ification + Fischer-Tropsch

Syngas fermentation

Aqueous phase reforming

Aerobic fermentation

1-3

LC butanol

4 5 6 7 8 9

FAME

HVO

(us ing glycerol)

ABE

Research Pilot Demonstration Ready for

commercialisation

Source: Preliminary findings from IRENA Advanced Biofuels Technology Outlook (work-in-progress)

Acetone-Butanol-Ethanol

fermentation process

Fatty acid

methyl ester

Hydrotreated Vegetable

Oil

Lignocellulosic ethanol

Lignocellulosic buthanol

Conversion efficiency

21

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

2015 2030 2045 2015 2030 2045 2015 2030 2045 2015 2030 2045 2015 2030 2045 2015 2030 2045 2015 2030 2045

Biomass to liquids:gasification + FT

Fast Pyrorysis +Upgrading

Gasification +Methanol-to-

Gasoline

Aqueous PhaseReforming

Gasification + MixedAlchol Synthesis

Gasification +Syngas

fermentation

Hydrolysis +Fermentation-to-

Ethanol

Diesel / Gasoline substitutes Alcohols

Co

nve

rsio

n E

ffic

ien

cyin

MJ f

uel

/MJ f

eed

sto

ck, d

ry

• Thermochemical pathway have higher efficiency theoretically, including

pyrolysis and Gasification. (For hydrorysis + fermentation, co-products

energy use outside the process is not included)

Cost reduction

22

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

20

15

20

30

20

45

20

15

20

30

20

45

20

15

20

30

20

45

20

15

20

30

20

45

20

15

20

30

20

45

20

15

20

30

20

45

20

15

20

30

20

45

Bio

die

sel

Co

rn E

tOH

Die

sel

Gas

olin

e

Biomass to liquids:gasification + FT

Fast Pyrorysis +Upgrading

Gasification +Methanol-to-

Gasoline

Aqueous PhaseReforming

Gasification + MixedAlchol Synthesis

Gasification +Syngas

fermentation

Hydrolysis +Fermentation-to-

Ethanol

1G Fossil

Diesel / Gasoline substitutes Alcohols Reference

Pro

du

ctio

n c

ost

s in

USD

20

14/

GJ f

ue

l

(2015)

• Lower capital investment make “Gasification + MtG” and “Gasification +

MAS” most competitive. High conversion efficiency of “Gasification + MtG”

also contribute cost reduction

• Conventional biofuel is almost at the same level with cheapest advanced

biofuel. It still in the middle to higher range of fossil fuel

Environmental performance

23

0

10

20

30

40

50

602

01

5

20

30

20

45

20

15

20

30

20

45

20

15

20

30

20

45

20

15

20

30

20

45

20

15

20

30

20

45

20

15

20

30

20

45

20

15

20

30

20

45

Bio

die

sel

Co

rn E

tOH

Biomass to liquids:gasification + FT

Fast Pyrorysis +Upgrading

Gasification +Methanol-to-

Gasoline

Aqueous PhaseReforming

Gasification + MixedAlchol Synthesis

Gasification + Syngasfermentation

Hydrolysis +Fermentation-to-

Ethanol

1G

Diesel / Gasoline substitutes Alcohols Reference

Gre

enh

ou

se g

as e

mis

sio

ns

in g

CO

2-e

q/M

J fu

el

35 % Reduction

50% Reduction

60 % Reduction

(2015)

• In terms of GHG emission reduction, all advanced biofuel show significantly

higher performance mainly due to the difference in feedstock. It is also

energy self-sufficient in conversion process using by-product as a heat

source

Pathways comparison

24

Efficiency CostGHG

emission

% USD/GJ gCO2/MJ

Biomass to liquids: gasification + FT 48 35 3

Fast Pyrorysis + Upgrading 59 45 18

●Gasification + Methanol-to-Gasoline 57 24 5

Aqueous Phase Reforming 42 75 25

●Gasification + Mixed Alchol Synthesis 47 32 6

Gasification + Syngas fermentation 54 37 3

Hydrolysis + Fermentation-to-Ethanol 45 35 9

• Numbers represent projection for 2030

• Color indicates: ● best ● worst

6. R&D Opportunities

25

Innovation impact: Preliminary results

26

Gasification and syngas cleaning: (Quality control of syngas, adaptation to diverse feedstock)• Energy integration: 15% savings on production costs for FT

• Greater feedstock tolerance:

Fischer-Tropsch synthesis: (Quality control of syngas, scale down of FT system)• Modular micro channel reactor: 8% gain in efficiency and 10% saving in CAPEX

• Co processing of FT waxes: 15% savings in CAPEX

Fast pyrolysis and upgrading: (Oil yield improvement, quality control of pyrolysis oil)

• Hydro deoxygenation upgrading, pyrolysis oil co-feeding in existing infrastructure, co-cracking of pyrolysis oil:

10-30 % fuel cost reduction

Pre-treatment and hydrolysis: (Separation of lignin/celluloce, cost and sensitivity of enzyme)• Optimization and dosage requirements: 10% of current enzyme costs (by 2050)

Fermentation to ethanol and upgrading: (Energy intensive distillation process)• Membrane separation/osmosis or induce phase separation techniques: 50% energy savings compare to

distillation

• Control systems for plant optimization: 37-42% efficiency increase

• One processing step for pretreatment, hydrolysis and fermentation: 80% reduction in production costs

Fermentation to butanol and upgrading: (Fermentation inhibitor)• Acid recovery: 15% yield gain

Aqueous phase reforming: (Low yield of liquid hydrocarbon, short lifetime of catalyst)• Hydro treating catalyst development: Increase efficiency from 25% to 55%

Advanced Biofuels Commercialisation

27

TRL Barriers Intervention

8

Lack of market and high costs Mandate or subsidy

Public procurement

High credit risks Loan guarantee

Lack interest in lending, limited knowledge of market demand Loan softening programme

Insufficient loans for projects, lack of long-term lending capacity Project loan facility

6/7

Commercial expansion, financial restrictions, market integration Brokered partnership

Technology proving, testing and evaluation of claims Demonstration (research and evaluation)

Lack of technology proving, investor and public apprehension

Demonstration project (High profile)

Investment risk in new technologies Project investment insurance

Financing gap during project development Public/private co-financed debt

Soft loan programmes

4/5

Risk of investing in start-ups Investment tax incentives

Protecting IP ownership IP protection - Legal frameworks and

assistance with protection

<4 Lack of funding for research Research framework

Lack of funding for innovation organisations Grants

7. Conclusion

28

Conclusions and recommendation

Number of commercial scale project are on the way

29

R&D Opportunities for deployment in the next 3 decades

1. Lignocellulosic fermentation is closest to full commercialization, with complemented by butanol fermentation in the longer term

2. Gasification can be a main source of different tech. pathway, which still require improvement in energy efficiency and syngas cleaning

3. Among different upgrading, syngas fermentation may achieve earlier commercialization. FT attracts high interest. the key is system downsizing

4. Fast pyrolysis + upgrading are still in the early stage, however cost reduction opportunity can be seen in upgrading

Current obstacles

- High production cost because of early development stage

- Uncertainty in policy framework to prioritize advanced biofuel causes

- Slow investments in the sector

Advanced biofuel advantages

● supply potential ● energy security ● environmental impact ● food security

Conclusions and recommendation

• Technical and non-technical factors needed:

Support policy framework to cover four key area:

technology research and development,

company development,

market formulation and

integrated policies (energy, transport, agriculture, environment,…)

developed in close collaboration/coordination with all relevant

stakeholder, primarily industry research and project developers

• IRENA will support the sector through

Networking stakeholders from different sector, region

Providing key information to support member countries

Guiding countries for policy development, project guidance

30

31

Thank Yousnakada@irena.org

www.irena.org