Upload
vuhanh
View
215
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
APPLYING LCA IN INDONESIAChallenges and Opportunities
Dr. Udin HasanudinAgroindustrial Technology Department, University of LampungAgroindustrial Technology Department, University of Lampung
Member of Indonesian Life Cycle Assessment Network
Email: [email protected]
Workshop on development of life cycle thinking (LCT) and life cycle analysis (LCA)
to achieve sustainable development in Indonesia
JW Marriot Hotel, Jakarta – 16-17 March 2015
SocialSocialPerformancePerformance
Domestic/Regional Gap AbatementDomestic/Regional Gap AbatementFoodFood vs. Energyvs. Energy(Culture, Education, Poverty, (Culture, Education, Poverty, Peace, Human Rights …..)Peace, Human Rights …..)
Triple Bottom Lines Triple Bottom Lines for Sustainable Developmentfor Sustainable Development
Environmental Environmental PerformancePerformance
EconomicEconomicPerformancePerformance
GHG Emission GHG Emission ReductionReduction(Global & (Global & RegionalRegionalEnvironmentEnvironment………)………)by LCAby LCA
Regional Regional GDP, Energy GDP, Energy Security Security (Economic (Economic Development)Development)
2
Sagisaka et.al., 2008
Environmental Issue Toward Sustainable Society
What is LCA?
Shabbir H. Gheewala, JGSEE
Assessment Criteria ?
• Environmental Impact Global Impacts - Global Warming, Statosperic Ozon Depletion
Regional Impact - acidification, nutrient enrichment, persistent toxycity
Local Impact – Photochemical ozone formation
• Resource Consumption• Resource Consumption Raw materials entring the products: wood, plastic, metal, etc.
Resource of energy: Biomass, biogas, Oil, Coal, Natural Gas, etc.
Ancillary Substances: Solvent, acids, detergent, Flocculants, etc.
General Structure of Impact Assessment Method
To other life cycle stages
To other substances
Prevents
Advantages of LCA
To other environmental problems
To other countries
To other nature
Prevents problems shifting
APPLICATION OF LCAAPPLICATION OF LCA
LC-GHG of bioethanol production from cassava
11
Boundary of study systemContract Farmers
Non-Contract Farmers
Wet cake, Cassava peels,
Soil
Composting
12
Ethanol Factory
CO2
Thin slop
Soil
Bioethanol
Markets(Chemicals industries, biofuel etc)
Biogas plant
CO2
CO2
CO2
Power Generator
Coals
CO2
Schematic diagram of ethanol production
PreTreatmentFeed Stock Liquefaction
Slurry Mash Saccharification&
Fermentation
Cassava
Molasses
PW Steam PW
13
Distillation
WWTP
Decantation
Product
Thin Slops
Wet Cake
Treated EffluentBiogas to
Boiler
Steam
Material balance on cassava-based ethanol production (based on a ha of plantation)
14
CO2 emission from ethanol production
Process Source Unit* QuantityCO2e Emission
(kg/L Ethanol) (kg/GJ)***
Plantation Diesel fuel L/ha 13.7 0.0097 0.4596
Urea Kg/ha 192 0.0406 1.9241
NPK (15-15-15) Kg/ha 185.5 0.0173 0.8220
Herbicides Kg/ha 1.747 0.0069 0.3249
Transportation Diesel fuel L/ton 0.41
L/KL ethanol 2.658 0.0082 0.3920
Electricity
15*) every ha produces 4.394 KL ethanol **) neutral***) Low Heating Value of Ethanol = 21.1 MJ/L www.bioenergy.ornl.gov/papers/misc/energy_conv.html)
Processing
Electricity
(Coal) MW 5.7
MWh/KL ethanol 0.760 0.7858 37.2436
CO2 M3/day 0** 0
Waste treatment CH4, flared M3/day 0** 0
CO2 M3/day 0** 0
CH4, vented M3/day 18957.9 1.5798 74.8732
CH4, utilized M3/day 18957.9 -0.1046 -4.9561
TOTAL CO2 EMISSION (SCENARIO 1, FLARED) 0.8686 41.1663
TOTAL CO2 EMISSION (SCENARIO 2, VENTED) 2.4484 116.0395
TOTAL CO2 EMISSION (SCENARIO 3, UTILIZED) 0.7640 36.2102
GHG Emission from Ethanol Production compare to Gasoline (kg CO2e/GJ)
116.04
84.80
Vented
GHG gasoline
Utilized
16(kg CO2e/GJ)
36.21
41.17
0.00 30.00 60.00 90.00 120.00 150.00
Utilized
Flared
Utilized
Flared
Vented
GHG gasoline
GHG Emission from Ethanol Production compare to Gasoline (%)
137
100
Vented
GHG gasoline
Utilized
16/02/2012 17( % )
43
49
0 25 50 75 100 125 150
Utilized
Flared
Utilized
Flared
Vented
GHG gasoline
LC-GHG of Jatropha Oil Mill
18
19
ITEMS QUANTITYCOST/ UNIT
(IDR)
TOTAL (IDR)
Direct
Costs
Seed input cost 790 kg 1,000/kg 790,000
Labor cost 790 kg 1,000/kg 790,000
Fuel 27.6 L 5,000/L 138,000
Sub-Total 1,718,000
Overhead
Miscellaneous (helper, fees and local
taxes, selling and administrative)
0
TOTAL COST 1,718,000
Costs and returns in CJO production considering a maximum use of waste
20
TOTAL COST 1,718,000
TOTAL OUTPUT, L CJO 239.4 10,000 2,394,000
NET PROFIT 676,000
BY
PRODUCTJatropha peel (0.4 factor) 1264 kg 700 884,800
Biogas from jatropha cake* 275.3 m3 4200 1,156,260
Solid/sludge fertilizer 550.6 kg 630 346,878
ADDITIONAL PROFIT 2,387,938
TOTAL PROFIT (IDR/Ha) from processing 3,063,938
TOTAL PROFIT (IDR/Ha) from farming and processing 1,453,569
*) 1 m3 biogas is equivalent to 0.6 L kerosene
7.4557
10.3012
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0e/
GJ
CO2e emission from jatropha production and utilization for CJO
(5.1707)-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
Plantation Processing Waste treatment
Kg
CO
2e/
GJ
Activity
21
Profit
Sustainability indicators of jatropha production and utilization for CJO
22
D HDI D CO2
LC-GHG of Palm Oil Mill
23
• Oil mill process have the largest environmental impact in this boundary.
24
LC GHG from Palm Oil Industry
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
kgC
O2eq/
tFFB
Refinery精製工程
搾油工程
栽培工程
Oil mill
FFB production
Refinery 11.3
Oil mill 85.1
FFB production 26.7
Total 123.0
Unit:kgCO2e/tFFB
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
kgC
O2eq/
tFFB
Mainly (about 80%) from POME treatment
What the mitigation action ?What the mitigation action ?
Solid WastePOME
Waste generated from Waste generated from PPalm Oil Millalm Oil Mill
Solid Decanter
(3.5% optional)
EFB Fiber Shell Boiler Ash
20-23 % 12-13 % 5-6 % 0.5-0.6 %77-84 %
PLC= 55-65 %
WastewaterFFB
POME Treatment and UtilizationPOME Treatment and Utilization
Wastewater
GHG Emission
(CH4)
The effect of treated POME application on FFB production
Production*)
Productivity (kg of FFB /Ha)
With treated POME Without treated POME
January 805.82 697.87
February 222.51 151.22
March 222.56 182.61
April 201.56 180.00
Mei 395.68 347.83Mei 395.68 347.83
June 526.80 425.15
July 947.38 846.82
August 1159.17 1018.26
September 2161.10 2034.78
October 2835.50 2675.74
November 3679.87 3374.87
December 2202.27 1687.30
Average 15,360.21 13,622.45
*) Age of oil palm trees are 21 years
13% Higher
Methane Capture
OBJECTIVE OF
Produce renewable
energy for in-house used
Replace fossil OBJECTIVE OF
BIOGAS CAPTURE FROM POME
- Increase revenue
- Reduce carbon footprint
Replace fossil fuel for
generating steam and electricity
Reduce GHG emission
Produce electricity for
grid connection
Cover In Ground Anaerobic Reactor (CIGAR)
Palm Oil Mill 45 Ton FFB/hPalm Oil Mill 45 Ton FFB/h
30
Estimation of GHG emission potential from POME
Parameter UnitValue
Min Max
COD of fresh POME mg/l 43,375 60,400
COD of treated POME mg/l 5,500 9,000
POME production m3/ton FFB 0.55 0.65
COD removal kg/ton FFB 20.83 33.41
IPCC default value*) kg CH4/kg COD removal 0.25
CH4 production kg/ton FFB 5.21 8.35
IPCC default value*) m3 CH4/kg COD removal
0.35
CH4 production potential m3 CH4/ton FFB 7.29 11.69
GWP potential of CH4*) kg CO2e/ kg CH4 21
GWP potential kg CO2e/ton FFB 109.41 175.35
*) IPCC, 2006
Based on methane production potential, the energy production from POME is
estimated about:25.3-40.6 kWh/ton FFB.
Using this value, palm oil mill with 45 Using this value, palm oil mill with 45 ton FFB/hour or 900 ton FFB/day
capacity will has potential to generate electricity about :0.95 to 1.52 MW.
Energy Consumption in Palm Oil Mill:
17 kWh/ton FFB
Co-Composting EFB and POME
Material balance in POME-EFB co-composting
Parameter Unit Amount
FFB ton 1
Volume of POME m3 0.7
EFB ton 0.23
Water in EFB (moisture 60%) m3 0.138
Total POME utilized for composting(3 m3 of POME/ton EFB) m3 0.690
Total water evaporated Total water evaporated (Evaporation rate = 51 l/ton EFB/day *)**)) m3 0.657
Total water remaining (un-evaporated water) m3 0.171
Total weight of compost (65% of EFB) ton 0,150
Total water in compost (moisture 60%) m3 0.090
Total leachate released m3 0.081
Total un-utilized POME m3 0.010
Total wastewater released m3 0.091
% 13.06*) Schuchardt et. al., 2002**) Effective evaporation conducted for 8 weeks (56 days)
Compost Application
Carbon and Nutrients from EFB and POME are returned to the
plantation
EFB ANAEROBIC COMPOSTING
EFB Digester Effluent
Daily and Cumulative Biogas Productions from dry anaerobic digestion of EFB (16 kg)
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
20
30
40
50
60
70
Cu
mm
ula
tive
Bio
gas
Pro
du
ctio
n (
L)
Dai
ly B
ioga
s P
rod
uct
ion
(L)
0
200
400
0
10
20
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Cu
mm
ula
tive
Bio
gas
Pro
du
ctio
n (
L)
Dai
ly B
ioga
s P
rod
uct
ion
(L)
Day
Coupling POME anaerobic digestion and dry anaerobic co-composting at palm oil mill with 45 ton FFB/hour capacity capable to add another 0.93 MW electricity.Using this system, the palm oil industry also can produce compost and liquid fertilizer which is important to ensure the sustainability of FFB production.
Propose Sustainable POME treatment and Utilization
Biogas Purification
CHP
POME Methane Reactor
L A
Anaerobic Composting
Compost
EFB
LC-GHG of Ethanol Wastewater Industrial Treatment
39
Wastewater characteristic based onfeedstock typeWastewater characteristic based onfeedstock type
Feedstock (Wastewater) pH COD (mg/L)
40
Feedstock (Wastewater) pH COD (mg/L) Cassava (Thinslop) 4,30-4,80 28.233 Molasses (Vinasse) 4,99-5,00 105.000
COD load and COD removal (g/L.day) for thinslop and vinasse
41
Average COD value of thinslop and vinasse
42
Emission potential from thinslop and vinasse treatment at a bioethanol industry with capacity of 180 KLPDEmission potential from thinslop and vinasse treatment at a bioethanol industry with capacity of 180 KLPD
Description Unit Type of wastewater
Thinslop Vinasse Raw material (feedstock)
Cassava Molasses
Flow rate m3/day 1.300 2.053 COD input g/L 28,23 105,00 COD load kg/day 36.703 215.565 COD removal (CODr) % 84,55 74,11
kg/day 31.032 159.755 Conversion factor of CODr to CH4
d) m3 CH4/kg CODr 0,35 0,35 CH4 potential m3/day 10.861 55.914
43
CH4 potential m /day 10.861 55.914
m3/kL ethanol 60,34 310,63
CH4 consentration % 57,00 57,34 Biogas potential Nm3/day 19.055 97.582
Nm3/kL ethanol 105,86 542,12 CH4 mass rate ton/day 7,76 39,94 GWP CH4
e) 21,00 21,00 Emission potential of CH4 (BE) ton CO2e/day 162,96 838,74
ton CO2e/kL ethanol 0,91 4,66
Emission project (PE) % 10 10 Reduction emission potential (REP) ton CO2e/day 146,63 759,95 ton CO2e/kL ethanol 0,82 4,19
GHG potential emission (ton CO e/kL ethanol) from thinslop and vinasse treatmentGHG potential emission (ton CO2e/kL ethanol) from thinslop and vinasse treatment
44
GHG Emission Reduction in Bioethanol Industry
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
Coal GHG Biogas GHG Total GHG
GHG e
mission p
ote
ntial
(to
n C
O2e/k
L eth
anol)
0,427 ton CO2e/kL
0,213 ton CO2e/kL0,289 ton CO2e/kL
45
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
Coal GHG Biogas GHG Total GHG
GHG e
mission p
ote
ntial
(to
n C
O
Source of GHG Emission
thinslop
vinasse
0,81 ton CO2e/kL
Challanges and OpportunitiesOpportunities
Human Resources
Sustainability AwarenessSustainability Awareness
Technical Support
INDONESIA LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT
Human Resources
INDONESIA LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT NETWORK
Indonesian LCA Network
• ILCAN is a voluntary initiative with the objectives to promote LCA application in Indonesia. It is a network to share information and to build capacity on LCA to interested parties in academia, government, and industry.industry.
• Programs:
- Development of websites on LCA activities in Indonesia
- Workshop/Seminar
- Short courses on LCA
- Development of LCI databases
• Establishment:
17 December 2014
• Chairman: Ir. Edi Iswanto Wiloso, MASc (LIPI)
• Vice Chairman:Dr. Novizar Nazir (U. of Andalas)
• Founding Members:
Dr. Sidharta Sahirman (U. of Jenderal Soedirman)
Ir. Soni Sisbudi Harsono, MEng, MPhil (U. of Jember)
Dr. Kiman Siregar (U. of Syiah Kuala)
• Website:http://indonesian-lca-network.org/
• Secretariat:Arief A.R. Setiawan, MEng.Research Center for Chemistry,Indonesian Institute of Sciences (Puslit Kimia – LIPI)Indonesian Institute of Sciences (Puslit Kimia – LIPI)Puspiptek, Serpong, Tangerang Selatan 15314Telp: (21) 756-0929 Fax: (21) 756-0549Email: [email protected]
• Legal status: Akta notaris perkumpulan (in preparation)
Publications on
LCA by authors
affiliated with
institutions in
Indonesia
Web Of Science
database as per
28-2-2015
Research areas of LCA publications about Indonesia or written by authors affiliated with institutions in Indonesia
Technical Support
Development LCI DataBasedDataBasedEmission factor for Indonesian case ?
100%
Biogas 0.60tonCH4 14%(35%)CO2 26%(65%)
-Flow rate400m3/day
Pond No.1Inlet Pond No.3Pond No.2
40%
100%
Biogas 1.9ton-C/day
Biogas 0.60t-C/day
Biogas 53%
CH4 9%(67%)CO2 4%(33%)
13%
edimentation
8,000
25%100%400m /day
-COD 31,550ppm
35%Sedimentation
COD8,000ppm1.2t-C/day4.7t-C/day
25%
12%
COD ?ppm
1.5t-C/day
100%
Carbon Flow in Palm Oil Mill Lagoon
Anaerobic digestion Experiment
57
Methane Production from POME
80,0%
71,43%
EF = 0,35 m3/kg CODr
54,29%
Co-Composting of POME and EFB
Emission Factor ?
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
Emission factor m3 CH4
kg COD
EMISSION FACTOR FROM OBSERVATION
Average = 0.325
Emission factor of methane determined based on the experimentally observed data in small scale tapioca factory
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00
4
kg COD
Loading rate (kg COD/m3.d)
Present research EF=0.325 m3 CH4/kg COD = 0.23 kg CH4/kg CODKamahara et al. (2010) EF=0.16-0.31 gCH4/g COD (average=0.23 kg CH4/kg COD)
Human Resources
Development of Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) and Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) to Achieve Sustainable Development In Indonesia
Human Resources
Sustainability Awareness
Technical Support
Thank you for your kind Thank you for your kind attention