Comparative analyses of forest fuels in a life cycle perspective with a focus on transport systems

Lisa Näslund Eriksson

Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 2008, vol. 52, issue 10, 1190-1197

Abstract: Local, national and international transportation of forest fuels with regard to costs, primary energy use and CO2 emission was analysed. The main issue was the extent to which both mode and distance of transport affect the monetary cost, CO2 emission and primary energy use arising from the use of various types of forest residues for energy purpose. Local applications proved the most efficient options of those studied. Chipping of bundles at a terminal, for transport by rail and sea to national or international end-users, has low costs and produces only modest CO2 emissions. For the pellet options, the cost is about the same as for chipping, but require more primary energy and emit more CO2. The traditional chipping system is more expensive than the other options. The costs of the international options over a transport distance of 1100km vary between 21 and 28€2007/MWh, whereas pellet options cost between 22 and 25€2007/MWh. The primary energy required for transport of logging residues vis-à-vis pellets falls in the range 4–7% and 2–4%, respectively, of the bio-energy delivered. The primary energy needed to produce pellets gives them a lower fossil fuel substitution rate per hectare, compared with bundle systems. Similarly, for chip systems vis-à-vis bundle systems, the biomass delivered to the conversion plant is reduced by the greater physical dry-matter losses entailed by chipping systems in the forest-fuel chain.

Keywords: Chips; Bundles; Pellets; Transportation; Primary energy; CO2 emissions; Costs; Dry-matter losses; Life cycle perspective (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2008
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344908000888
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:recore:v:52:y:2008:i:10:p:1190-1197

DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2008.06.009

Access Statistics for this article

Resources, Conservation & Recycling is currently edited by Ming Xu

More articles in Resources, Conservation & Recycling from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Kai Meng ().