Greenhouse gas emission evaluation of the GTL pathway

Environmental Science and Technology

Volumn 45, Issue 20, 2011, Pages 9084-9092

  Forman, Grant S ^a   Hahn, Tristan E ^b   Jensen, Scott D ^c  

^a Sasol North America   (United States)

^b Sasol Synfuels International   (South Africa)

^c Baker & O'Brien Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALLOCATION METHODS; CALIFORNIA; CO-PRODUCTS; COPRODUCT; DISPLACEMENT METHOD; ENERGY ALLOCATIONS; GAS TO LIQUIDS; GHG EMISSION; HEAVY CRUDE OIL; HEAVY CRUDES; HYDROTREATING; INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ORGANIZATIONS; LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS; LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENTS; PETROLEUM DIESEL; PRODUCTION PHASE; SUBSTITUTION METHOD; SYSTEM BOUNDARY EXPANSION;

CRUDE OIL; GAS EMISSIONS; GLOBAL WARMING; LIFE CYCLE; OIL SANDS;

GREENHOUSE GASES;

DIESEL FUEL;

BITUMEN; CARBON EMISSION; CRUDE OIL; DIESEL; ENERGY RESOURCE; GREENHOUSE GAS; HEAVY OIL; LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS; OIL SAND; SUSTAINABILITY;

ARTICLE; CARBON FOOTPRINT; DIESEL ENGINE; GREENHOUSE GAS; LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT; METHODOLOGY;

AIR POLLUTION; CONSERVATION OF ENERGY RESOURCES; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; GASOLINE; GREENHOUSE EFFECT;

CALIFORNIA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 80054710691     PISSN: 0013936X     EISSN: 15205851     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/es202101b     Document Type: Article

References (88)

1. Leiby, P. N. Estimating the Energy Security Benefits of Reduced U.S. Oil Imports; Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory: Oak Ridge TN, February 2007.
2. America's climate choices: Panel on advancing the science of climate change. In Advancing the Science of Climate Change, National Research Council; Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press, 2010.
3. U.S. Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2011, Early Release Overview. http://www.eia.gov/neic/speeches/newell-12162010.pdf (accessed March 2011).
4. Affordable, Low-Carbon Diesel Fuel from Domestic Coal and Biomass; National Energy Technology Laboratory/U.S. Department of Energy, 2009.
5. Simeroth, D. California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard, California Air Resources Board; Hart's World Refining & Fuels Conference, May 2007.
6. Sissine, F. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007: a Summary of Major Provisions (RL34294). CRS Report for Congress, Washington DC, 2007. http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL34294-20071221.pdf (accessed October 2010)
7. Sperling, D.; Sonia, Y. Toward a global low carbon fuel standard Transp. Policy 2010, 17 (1) 47-49
8. Andress, D.; Nguyen, T. D.; Das, S. Low-carbon fuel standard-Status and analytic issues Energy Policy 2010, 38 (1) 580-591
9. Wang, M.; Lee, H.; Molburg, J. Allocation of energy use and emissions to petroleum refining products: Implications for life-cycle assessment of petroleum transportation fuels Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2004, 9 (1) 34-44
10. Kaufman, A. S.; Meier, P. J.; Sinistore, J. C.; Reinemann, D. J. Applying life-cycle assessment to low carbon fuel standards-How allocation choices influence carbon intensity for renewable transportation fuels Energy Policy 2010, 38 (9) 5229-5241
11. Baumann, H. Decision Making and Life Cycle Assessment. thesis. Chalmers University of Technology. Technical Environmental Planning Report 1995.
12. Wang, M. Well-to-wheels energy and greenhouse gas emission results and issues of fuel ethanol. In The Life-Cycle Carbon Footprint of Biofuels; Outlaw, J. L.; Ernstes, D. P., Eds.; Farm Foundation: Oak Brook, IL, 2008; pp 19-34.
13. ISO 14040: Environmental Management - Life Cycle Assessment-Principals and Framework; International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006a.
14. ISO 14044: Environmental Management-Life Cycle Assessment-Requirements and Guidelines; International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006b.
15. Delucchi, M. A. A Lifecycle Emissions Model (LEM): Lifecycle Emissions from Transportation Fuels, Motor Vehicles, Transportation Modes, Electricity Use, Heating and Cooling Fuels, and Materials; Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California at Davis: Davis, CA, 2008.
16. 2 Consultants, Inc., prepared for Natural Resources Canada: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 2008.
17. E3 Database: An Introduction into the Life-Cycle Analysis Calculation Tool; LBST: 3 Ottobrunn, Germany, 2008.
18. Mendoza, A.; van Ruijven, T.; Vad, K.; Wardenaar, T. The Allocation Problem in Bio-Electricity Chains. M.Sc. Thesis, Industrial Ecology, Leiden, The Netherlands, 2008.
19. Ekvall, T.; Weidema, B. P. System boundaries and input data in consequential life cycle inventory analysis Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2004, 9 (3) 161-171
20. Ekvall, T.; Finnveden, G. Allocation in ISO14041-A critical review J. Clean. Prod. 2001, 9, 197-208
21. Bjorklund, A. Survey of approaches to improve reliability in LCA Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2002, 7, 64-72
22. Wang, M.; Huo, H.; Arora, S. Methods of dealing with coproducts of biofuels in life-cycle analysis and consequent results in the U.S. context. Energy Policy 2010, 39 (10), 726-5736.
23. Xie, X.; Wang, M.; Han, J. Assessment of fuel-cycle energy use and greenhouse gas emissions for fischer-tropsch diesel from coal and cellulosic biomass. Env. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45 (7), 3047-3053.
24. Farrell, A. E.; Plevin, R. J.; Turner, B. T.; Jones, A. D.; O'Hare, M.; Kammen, D. M. Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals Science 2006, 311 (5760) 506-508
25. Hill, J.; Nelson, E.; Tilman, D.; Polasky, S.; Tiffany, D. Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2006, 103 (30) 11206-11210
26. Dancuart, L. P.; Steynberg, A. P. Fischer-Tropsch based GTL technology: a new process? Stud. Surf. Sci. Catal. 2007, 163, 379-399
27. Alleman, T. L.; McCormick, R. L.; Vertin, K. Assessment of Criteria Pollutant Emissions from Liquid Fuels Derived From Natural Gas; National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Golden, CO, April 2002.
28. Larsson, M. An Experimental Study of Fischer-Tropsch Fuels in a Diesel Engine. thesis, Department of Applied Mechanics, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden, 2007.
29. Tsujimura, T.; Goto, S.; Matsubara, H. A study on PM emission characteristics of diesel vehicle fueled with GTL Proc. J. SAE Annu. Congr. 2006, 54 (06) 1-6
30. Maly, R. Effect of GTL diesel fuels on emissions and engine performance (DaimlerChrysler). In 10th Diesel Engine Emissions Reduction Conference, August 29 - September 2, 2004, Coronado, California). http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/deer-2004/session2/2004-deer-maly.pdf (accessed February 2011).
31. H.O. Herrmann, H. O.; S. Keppeler, S.; Botha, J. J.; Schaberg, P.; Schnell, M. The Potential of Synthetic Fuels to meet Future Emission Regulations. In 27th Motor Symposium, Vienna, 2006.
32. Lilik, G. K.; Boehman, A. L. Advanced diesel combustion of a high cetane number fuel with low hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions Energy Fuels 2011, 25 (4) 1444-1456
33. Nakamura, D. Product sulfur specs will determine future refining configurations. Oil Gas J., 2009, 107 (13).
34. California Air Resources Board & California Environmental Protection Agency, California Diesel Fuel Fact Sheet, www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/urban/dieselfs. pdf (accessed March, 2011).
35. Alleman, T. L.; McCormick, R. L.; Vertin, K. (NREL) Assessment of Criteria Pollutant Emissions from Liquid Fuels Derived From Natural Gas; National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Golden, CO, April 2002.
36. Thijssen, J. The Impact of Future Diesel Fuel Specifications and Engine Emissions Standards on SOFC; U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, June, 2004.
37. Mitchell, M.; Okamoto, B. Biodiesel and Renewable Diesel Rulemaking, 2nd Public Workshop; California Air Resources Board: Sacramento, CA, May 2010.
38. Norton, P.; Vertin, K.; Bailey, B. (National Renewable Energy Lab, NREL), Clark, N. N.; Lyons, D. W. (Wed Virginia Univ., WVU), Goguen, S.; Eberhardt, J. (US Department of Energy, DOE). Emissions from Trucks using Fischer-Tropsch Diesel Fuel, International Fall Fuels and Lubricants Meeting and Exposition, San Francisco, California, October 19-22, 1998; SAE Technical Paper Series 982526.
39. Greene, D. L. An Assessment of Energy and Environmental Issues Related to the Use of Gas-to-Liquids Fuels in Transportation; Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Center for Transportation Analysis: Oak Ridge TN, November 1999.
40. Bagajewicz, M.; Sujo, D.; Martinez, D.; Savelski, M. Driving Without Petroleum?-A Comparative Guide to Biofuels, Gas-to-Liquids and Coal-to-Liquids as Fuels for Transportation, May 2007.
41. Johnson, E. Carbon Footprints of Biofuels & Petrofuels; SRI Consulting, October 2007.
42. Jaramillo, P.; Griffin, M.; Matthews, S. Comparative analysis of the production costs and life-cycle GHG emissions of FT liquid fuels from coal and natural gas Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42 (20) 7559-7565
43. An Assessment of Energy and Environmental Issues Related to the Use of Gas-to-Liquid Fuels in Transportation; Oak Ridge National Laboratory for U.S. DOE: Oak Ridge, TN, 1999.
44. Kavalov, B. (JRC) Techno-Economic Analysis of Natural Gas Application As an Energy Source for Road Transport in The EU; Joint Research Center: Brussels, January, 2004.
45. Edwards, R. Well-to-Wheels Analysis of Future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains in the European Context, Concawe, Eucar, European Commissions, well-to-wheels report, version 2a, December 2005.
46. Beer, T.; Grant, T.; Morgan, G.; Lapszewicz, J.; Anyon, P.; Edwards, P.; Nelson, P.; Watson, H.; Williams, D. Comparison of Transport Fuels -Life-Cycle Emissions Analysis of Alternative Fuels for Heavy Vehicles; Australian Greenhouse Office, CSIRO, 2006.
47. Marano, J. J.; Ciferno, J. P. Life-Cycle Greenhouse-Gas Emissions Inventory for Fischer-Tropsch Fuels; U.S. Department of Energy: Washington, DC, June 2001.
48. General Motors Well-to-Wheel Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Advanced Fuel/Vehicle Systems-North American Analysis, June 2001.
49. Wang, M.; Wu, M.; Huo, H. Life-Cycle Energy and Greenhouse Gas Results of Fischer-Tropsch Diesel Produced from Natural Gas, Coal, and Biomass; Center for Transportation Research, Argonne National Laboratory: Argonne, IL, May 2007.
50. Brandt, A. R; Farrell, A. E. Scraping the bottom of the barrel: greenhouse gas emission consequences of a transition to low-quality and synthetic petroleum resources Clim. Change 2007, 84, 241-263
51. Van Vliet, O. P. R.; Faaij, A. P. C.; Turkenburg, W. C. Fischer-Tropsch diesel production in a well-to-wheel perspective: A carbon, energy flow and cost analysis Energy Convers. Manage. 2009, 50, 855-876
52. Stratton, R. W.; Wong, H. M.; Hileman, J. I. Quantifying variability in life cycle greenhouse gas inventories of alternative middle distillate transportation fuels. Environ. Sci. Technol., 2011, 10, 4637-4644.
53. Hao, H.; Wang, H.; Song, L.; Li, X.; Ouyang, M. Energy consumption and GHG emissions of GTL fuel by LCA: Results from eight demonstration transit buses in Beijing Appl. Energy 2010, 87, 3212-3217
54. CONCAWE, EUCAR, JRC. Well to Wheels Analysis of Future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains in the European Context, March 2007.
55. An Assesment of Health and Environmental Impacts of GTL Diesel; Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IFEU): Takoma Park, MD, August 2005.
56. Use of a Life Cycle Approach to Compare the Environmental Implications of Sasol Chevron's Slurry Phase Distillate Technology with Alternative Processes producing Transportation Fuels-European case update; SasolChevron, March 2006.
57. Shell Middle Distillate Synthesis (SMDS) Update of a Life Cycle Approach to Assess the Environmental Inputs and Outputs, and Associated Environmental Impacts, of Production and Use of Distillates from a Complex Refinery and SMDS Route; Shell: The Hague, The Netherlands, May 2003.
58. Gas to Liquids Life Cycle Assessment Synthesis Report, ConocoPhillips, Sasol Chevron and Shell International Gas; Prepared by Five Winds International, August 2004.
59. Based on Higher Heating Value (HHV).
60. Dancuart, L.; Mayer, J.; Tallman, M. J.; Adams, J. Performance of the Sasol SPD Naphtha as Steam Cracking Feedstock Pet. Chem. Div. Preprints 2003, 48 (2) 132
61. Maase, B.; Dirkzwager, H. Gas to Liquids Paraffins and Their Impact on the Detergent Industry, CESIO Conference, 2004.
62. Franke, M.; Schwalbach; Berna, J. L.; Cavalli, L.; Renta, C.; Stalmans, M.; Strombeek-Bever, M.; Thomas, H. A Life cycle inventory for the production of petrochemical intermediates in Europe: Paraffins, olefins, benzene, ethylene and ethylene oxide Tenside, Surfactants, Deterg. 1995, 32, 384
63. Normal Paraffins-World Markets 2000-2010; Colin A. Houston & Associates, Inc. (CAHA): Aiken, SC.
64. Beret, S.; Deskin, S.; Rosenbaum, J.; Van der Mervwe, D. Lubricants from Gas-to-Liquids (GTL) Base Oils; Lubricants (Chevron), December 2006.
65. Kobayashi, M.; Saitoh, M.; Togawa, S.; Ishida, K. Branching structure of diesel and lubricant base oils prepared by isomerization/hydrocracking of Fischer-Tropsch Waxes and α- olefins Energy Fuels 2009, 23 (1) 513-518
66. Clark, R. H.; Wedlock, D. J.; Cherillo, R. A. Future fuels and lubricant base oils from shell gas to liquids (GTL) technology, SAE Series Technical Paper Series, 2005-01-2191; SAE International: Warrendale, PA.
67. 0W-20 and 5W-20 motor oil grades have a lighter viscosity than lower quality oils, such as 5W-30 and therefore has less internal engine frictional losses, or less drag on the crankshaft, pistons and valvetrain, which in turn promotes increased fuel efficiency.
68. ILSAC GF-5 Standard for Passenger Car Engine Oils. http://www.gf-5.com/ uploads/File/ILSAC-GF-5-Dec-22-09-final.pdf (accessed October, 2010).
69. Dos Santos, A. A. C. B.; Sousa-Aguiar, E. F. Surging GTL promises lube market opportunities, Oil Gas J., 2010, 108 (28), 98 (6).
70. Lehmus, M. (Neste Oil) Contribution of High Quality Base Oils to Cleaner Traffic. In 15th World Base Oils & Lubricants Conference, London, U.K., February 2011.
71. Tanaka, H.; Nagashima, T.; Sato, T.; Kawauchi, S. (Honda R+D Co., Ltd) The Effect of OW-20 Low Viscosity Engine oil on Fuel Economy, SAE Series Technical Paper Series, 1999-01-3468; SAE International: Warrendal, PA.
72. Extended drain intervals are supported by original equipment manufacturer (OEM) warranties; see Amsoil Product Recommendation and Drain Interval Chart. www.barmacinc.com/amsoilpdfs/.../ AMSOIL%20Product%20Change%20Interval%20Guide. pdf (accessed March, 2011).
73. McFall, D. Drain Intervals: How Long Must We Wait?, March 2003, Lubes'n'creases, www.donsoil.com/drainintervals.pdf (accessed March, 2011).
74. Effect of GTL Fuels on Emissions and Engine Performance, Daimler Chrysler presentation September 2, 2004.
75. Light Cycle Oil (LCO) Material Safety Data Sheet. Houston Refining, 2006.
76. O'Rear, D. J.; Bacha, J. D.; Tiedemann, A. N. Thermally stable blends of Fischer-Tropsch and LCO diesel fuel components Energy Fuels 2004, 18, 682-684
77. Karras, G. Combustion emissions from refining lower quality oil: What is the global warming potential? Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44 (24) 9584-9589
78. Anabtawi, J. A.; Ali, S. A.; Ali, M. A. Impact of gasoline and diesel specifications on refining industry Energy Sources 1993, 18, 203-214
79. Zhai, Y.; Pierre, D.; Weiling Deng, R. S.; Ferrin, P.; Nilekar, A. U.; Peng, G.; Herron, J. A.; Bell, D. C.; Saltsburg, H.; Mavrikakis, M.; Flytzani-Stephanopoulos, M. Alkali-stabilized Pt-OHx species catalyze low-temperature water-gas shift reactions Science 2010, 329, 1633-1636
80. Best Available Techniques for Hydrogen Production by Steam Methane Reforming, IGC Document 155/09/E; European Industrial Gases Association AISBL, 2009.
81. Spath, P. L.; Mann, M. R. Life Cycle Assessment of Hydrogen Production via Natural Gas Steam Reforming, NREL/TP-570-27637; National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Golden, CO, February 2001.
82. Wang, M. Estimation of Energy Efficiencies of U.S. Petroleum Refineries; Center for Transportation Research, Argonne National Laboratory: Argonne, IL, March 2008.
83. Worrell, E.; Galitsky, C. Profile of the Petroleum Refining Industry in California; California Industries of the Future Program, Energy Analysis Department, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory: Berkeley, CA, July 2003.
84. Diesel Fuel Comparison Study Workshop; California Environmental Protection Agency, California Air Resources Board (CARB): Sacramento, CA, January 8, 2009.
85. Total, Fuel Economy Lubricants for Passenger Cars, http://www.total-fuel- economy-lubricants.com/#/home (accessed March, 2011).
86. Sustainable Way for Alternative Fuels and Energy in Aviation; Final Report; April 2011: Submitted to the European Commission under contract Tren/F2/ 408.2008/SI2.518403/SI2.519012. http://www.swafea.eu/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket= llISmYPFNxY%3d&tabid=77 (accessed August, 2011).
87. Lee, D. S.; Pitari, G.; Grewec, V.; Gierens, K.; Penner, J. E.; Petzold, A.; Prather, M. J.; Schumann, U.; Bais, A.; Berntsen, T.; Iachetti, D.; Lim, L. L.; Sausen, R. Transport impacts on atmosphere and climate: Aviation Atmos. Environ. 2010, 44, 4678-4734
88. Burkhardt, U.; Kärcher, B. Global radiative forcing from contrail cirrus Nature Clim. Change 2011, 1, 54-58