Effect of biomass species and plant size on cellulosic ethanol: A comparative process and economic analysis

Biomass and Bioenergy

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 234-246

  Huang, Hua Jiang ^a   Ramaswamy, Shri ^a   Al Dajani, Waleed ^a   Tschirner, Ulrike ^a   Cairncross, Richard A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b Drexel University   (United States)

Author keywords

Aspen wood; Biomass species; Biorefinery; Corn stover; Cost estimation; Hybrid poplar; Lignocelluloses to ethanol process; Plant size; Switchgrass; Techno economic modeling

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS; BIOMASS; CELLULOSE; CELLULOSE DERIVATIVES; CELLULOSIC ETHANOL; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COSTS; CROPS; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; ETHANOL; FEEDSTOCKS; LIGNIN; RENEWABLE ENERGY RESOURCES; WOOD;

ASPEN WOOD; BIOMASS SPECIES; BIOREFINERY; CORN STOVER; COST ESTIMATION; HYBRID POPLAR; LIGNOCELLULOSES-TO-ETHANOL PROCESS; PLANT SIZE; SWITCHGRASS; TECHNO-ECONOMIC MODELING;

ELECTRIC GENERATORS;

BIOMASS; CELLULOSE; CHEMICAL COMPOSITION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; CROP RESIDUE; DECIDUOUS TREE; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; ELECTRICITY GENERATION; ENERGY CROP; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; ETHANOL; GRASS;

BIOMASS; CELLULOSE DERIVATIVES; COSTS; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; ELECTRIC GENERATORS; ETHANOL; FARM CROPS; LIGNINS; LIGNOCELLULOSE; POPULUS; PROCESSES; RENEWABLE RESOURCES; WOOD;

PANICUM VIRGATUM; ZEA MAYS;

EID: 59049108399     PISSN: 09619534     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2008.05.007     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Morrow W.R., Griffin W.M., and Matthews H.S. Modeling switchgrass derived cellulosic ethanol distribution in the United States. Environmental Science & Technology 40 9 (2006) 2877-2886
2. Japan for Sustainability, Japan. Commercial-scale wood-based ethanol production begins. Available from: (March 28, 2007). [accessed 12.12.08]
3. Farrell A.E., Plevin R.J., Turner B.T., Jones A.D., O'Hare M., and Kammen D.M. Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science 311 (2006) 506-508
4. Brown L.R. Plan B 2.0: rescuing a plant under stress and a civilization in trouble (2006), W.W. Norton & Company, New York, USA
5. Kszos L.A., McLaughlin S.B., and Walsh M. Bioenergy from switchgrass: reducing production costs by improving yield and optimizing crop management (2001), Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, USA. Available from: [accessed 12.12.08]
6. Kim S., and Dale B.E. Environmental aspects of ethanol derived from no-tilled corn grain: nonrenewable energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Biomass and Bioenergy 28 (2005) 475-489
7. Kim S., and Dale B.E. Life cycle assessment of various cropping systems utilized for producing biofuels: bioethanol and biodiesel. Biomass and Bioenergy 29 (2005) 426-439
8. Adler P.R., Grosso S.J.D., and Parton W.J. Life-cycle assessment of net greenhouse-gas flux for bioenergy cropping systems. Ecological Applications 17 3 (2007) 675-691
9. Lynd L.R., Wyman C.E., and Gerngross T.U. Biocommodity engineering. Biotechnology Progress 15 (1999) 777-793
10. International Energy Agency (IEA). Biofuels for transport: an international perspective. Available from: (2004). [accessed 12.12.08]
11. Aden A, Ruth M, Ibsen K, Jechura J, Neeves K, Sheehan J, et al. Lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol process design and economics utilizing co-current dilute acid prehydrolysis and enzymatic hydrolysis for corn stover. National Renewable Energy Laboratory report no. NREL/TP-510-32438; 2002.
12. Wooley R, Ruth M, Sheehan J, Ibsen K, Majdeski H, Galvez A. Lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol process design and economics utilizing co-current dilute acid prehydrolysis and enzymatic hydrolysis current and futuristic scenarios. National Renewable Energy Laboratory report no. NREL report TP-580-26157; 1999.
13. Gregg D., and Saddler J.N. A techno-economic assessment of the pretreatment and fractionation steps of a biomass-to-ethanol process. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 57 Suppl. (1995) 711-727
14. Gregg D.J., Boussaid A., and Saddler J.N. Techno-economic evaluations of a generic wood to-ethanol process: effect of increased cellulose yields and enzyme recycle. Bioresource Technology 63 (1998) 7-12
15. Huang HJ, Ramaswamy S, Tschirner UW, Ramarao BV. A review of separation technologies in current and future biorefineries. Separation and Purification Technology 2008;62(1):1--21.
16. California Energy Commission. Evaluation of biomass-to-ethanol fuel potential in California. Available from: (December 1999). [accessed 12.12.08]
17. United States Department of Energy - Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Biomass feedstock composition and property database. Available from: (January 25, 2006). [accessed 12.12.08]
18. Wooley RJ, Putsch V. Development of an Aspen Plus physical property database for biofuels components. National Renewable Energy Laboratory report no. NREL/MP-425-20685; 1996.
19. Kumar A., Cameron J.B., and Flynn P.C. Pipeline transport and simultaneous saccharification of corn Stover. Bioresource Technology 96 (2005) 819-829
20. Kumar A., and Sokhansanj S. Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum, L.) delivery to a biorefinery using integrated biomass supply analysis and logistics (IBSAL) model. Bioresource Technology 98 (2007) 1033-1044
21. Cameron J.B., Kumar A., and Flynn P.C. The impact of feedstock cost on technology selection and optimum size. Biomass and Bioenergy 31 (2007) 137-144
22. Bain RL, Amos WA, Downing M, Perlack RL. Biopower technical assessment: state of the industry and technology. National Renewable Energy Laboratory report no. NREL/TP-510-33123; 2003.
23. Glassner D., Birrell S., and Schechinger T. BMAP project, DOE/USDA biomass feedstock gate review meeting. Available from: (March 14-16, 2005). [accessed 12.12.08]
24. Walsh M., Perlack R., Turhollow A., de la Torre Ugarte D., Becker D., Graham R., et al. Biomass feedstock availability in the United States: 1999 state level analysis. Available from: (April 30, 1999). [accessed 12.12.08]
25. Sokhansanj S., and Turhollow A.F. Baseline cost for corn stover collection. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 18 5 (2002) 525-530
26. Perlack R.D., and Turhollow A.F. Feedstock cost analysis of corn stover residues for further processing. Energy 28 (2003) 1395-1403
27. Sokhansanj S., and Turhollow A.F. Biomass densification - cubing operations and costs for corn stover. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 20 4 (2004) 495-499
28. Atchison JE, Hettenhaus JR. Innovative methods for corn stover collecting, handling, storing and transporting. National Renewable Energy Laboratory report no. NREL/SR-510-33893; 2004.
29. Sokhansanj S., Kumar A., and Turhollow A.F. Development and implementation of integrated biomass supply analysis and logistics model (IBSAL). Biomass and Bioenergy 30 (2006) 838-847
30. Graham R.L., Nelson R., Sheehan J., Perlack R.D., and Wright L.L. Current and potential U.S. corn stover supplies. Agronomy Journal 99 1 (2007) 1-11
31. Perlack R.D., Walsh M.E., Wright L.L., and Ostlie D. The economic potential of whole-tree feedstock production. Bioresource biotechnology 55 (1996) 223-229
32. Gallagher T., Shaffer B., and Rummer B. An economic analysis of hardwood fiber production on dryland irrigated sites in the US Southeast. Biomass and Bioenergy 30 (2006) 794-802
33. Duffy M., and Nanhou V.Y. Costs of producing switchgrass for biomass in southern Iowa. In: Janick J., and Whipkey A. (Eds). Trends in new crops and new uses (2002), ASHS Press, Alexandria, VA
34. Cundiff J.S. Simulation of five large round bale harvesting systems for biomass. Bioresource Technology 56 (1996) 77-82
35. Walsh M.E., Ugarte D.G.D., Shapouri H., and Slinsky S.P. Bioenergy crop production in the United States - potential quantities, land use changes, and economic impacts on the agricultural sector. Environmental and Resource Economics 24 (2003) 313-333
36. Venturi P., Monti A., Piani I., and Venturi G. Evaluation of harvesting and post harvesting techniques for energy destination of switchgrass. In: Swaaij W.P.M.V. (Ed). Proceedings of the second world conference and technology exhibition on biomass for energy, industry and climate protection, Rome, Italy (2004), ETA-Florence 234-236
37. McNeil Technologies, Inc. Assessment of biomass energy opportunities Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians. Final report. U.S. Department of Energy, Tribal Energy Program Prime Contract Number: DE-FG36-03GO13123; 2005. Available from: [accessed 12.12.08].
38. Demchik M, Current D, Johnson W, Riemenschneider D, Vongroven S, Wene E. Hybrid poplars as an alternative crop. Natural resources special report NRSR-2; July 2002. Available from: [accessed 12.12.08].
39. 2005 Minnesota public stumpage price review (Spring 2006), Department of Natural Resources of Minnesota. Available from: [accessed 12.12.08]
40. Minnesota's Forest Resources. Available from: (2006). [accessed 12.12.08]
41. Overend R.P. The average haul distance and transportation work factors for biomass delivered to a central plant. Biomass 2 (1982) 75-79
42. Nguyen M.H., and Prince R.G.H. A simple rule for bioenergy conversion plant size optimization: bioethanol from sugar cane and sweet sorghum. Biomass and Bioenergy 10 5/6 (1996) 361-365
43. Berguson B., Buchman D., and Maly C. Analysis of forest harvest residue availability for the Laurentian Energy Authority Project (February 28, 2005), Natural Resources Research Institute, University of Minnesota, Duluth
44. Dornburg V., and Faaij A.P.C. Efficiency and economy of wood-fired biomass energy systems in relation to scale regarding heat and power generation using combustion and gasification technologies. Biomass and Bioenergy 21 2 (2001) 91-108
45. Kumar A., Cameron J.B., and Flynn P.C. Pipeline transport of biomass. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 113 1-3 (2004) 27-40