Energy Analysis and Energy Analysis and Environmental Impacts of Ethanol Environmental Impacts of Ethanol

in Thailandin Thailand

Presented by: CEP-KMUTT research group

Analysis of Ethanol in Analysis of Ethanol in ThailandThailand

Energy to produce 99.5% ethanol using cassava

Environmental effects of ethanol as a fuel supplement

Ethanol Production ProcessEthanol Production Process

Cassava Farm Milling Factory

Starch to Sugar

Distillation

Refining

Fermentation

Ethanol Factory

Transportation

Blending

Locations of Cassava Milling and Ethanol Locations of Cassava Milling and Ethanol FactoriesFactories

Ethanol Factory

Cassava Milling

Average Transportation

Energy Cost

~ 0.62 MJ / L 99.5%

Energy Cost in MJ/L 99.5% EthanolEnergy Cost in MJ/L 99.5% Ethanol

Process Azeotrope Membrane Molecular

Sieve

Cassava Farm 0.54 0.49 0.49

Milling 4.87 4.36 4.36

Ethanol Factory 18.53 16.26 15.71

starch to sugar 0.46 0.41 0.41

fermentation 1.11 0.99 0.99

distillation 15.81 14.17 14.17

refining 1.17 0.69 0.14

Transportation 1.45 1.30 1.30

Total 25.40 22.41 21.85

Chart of Energy CostChart of Energy Cost

Refining3%

Transportation6%

Cassava Farm2%

Fermentation4%

Starch to Sugar2%

Distillation64%

Milling Factory

19%

Energy BalanceEnergy Balance

Net energy loss of ~ 0.75 to 4.3 MJ/L (~ 3 to 20%)

21.125.4 22.41 21.85

0

5

10

15

20

25

30M

J/L

Energy OutputEnergy Input AzeotropeEnergy Input MembraneEnergy Input Molecular Sieve

Conclusion Energy AnalysisConclusion Energy AnalysisThis energy analysis is unique in that it is

the first time the total energy cost of producing and blending 99.5% ethanol in Thailand has been calculated.

Negative energy balanceOther studies have calculated a net energy

gain from the ethanol production process – A 2002 study conducted by the US Department

of Agriculture found a +5.9 MJ/L ethanol gain in energy

DiscussionDiscussion

How do our results affect the benefits from “Greenhouse Neutrality”?

Around 22 to 25 MJ of Fossil Fuel is used to produce 21.1 MJ of EtOH

Advances in Technology and/or Technology Transfer from other countries

Economies of Scale: Can ethanol become a closed system?

Greenhouse Gas emissions trading

Gasohol Emissions vs. Gasohol Emissions vs. Gasoline EmissionsGasoline Emissions

Pollutant Change Effect Acetaldehyde +100% Increase O3 levels

CO -16% Decrease O3 levels, decrease exposure to harmful toxin

NOx -31% < X < +15 % Change in O3 levels

VOC +17% Increase O3 levels

Ethanol +160% Increase O3 levels

CO2 -100% Slows down global warming

PANs Unknown increase Eye irritant, harms plants

Fuel Economy Very small decrease (-1%) Negligible

Stations ModeledStations Modeled

11 km

MET Department

Huay Kwang

Comparison of Measured Comparison of Measured Data and the Template ModelData and the Template Model

Measured Concentrations 8/19/96 at Huay Kwang Station

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900

Time of Day

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n (

pp

b)

O3

NO

NO2

Template Model: 8/19/96 at Huay Kwang Station

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900

Time of Day

Co

cen

trat

ion

(p

pb

)

O3

NO

NO2

Comparison of Measured and Comparison of Measured and Template ModelTemplate Model

Simulated and Measured O3 Concentrations vs. Time

8/19/96 Huay Kwang Station

02468

10

1214161820

900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900

Time of Day

Co

nc

en

tra

tio

n (

pp

b)

Measured O3

Modeled O3

Comparing the Simulated Comparing the Simulated Results with Measured DataResults with Measured Data

The O3 patterns are similar

Max O3 level of Template Model (~14 ppb)

is ~25% lower than measured data (~18 ppb)NO2 patterns are similar

NO concentrations differ greatly, but the overall patterns are similar

Description of Scenarios Description of Scenarios Modeled in OZIPPModeled in OZIPP

VOC NOx CO Notes

Template ------- ------- ------- No ethanol

Scenario 1 +17% -31% -16% PTT data

Scenario 2 +17% +15% -16% Journal Data

Scenario 3 -12% -15% -37% Projected

(~ 5 years)

Comparison of Modeled Comparison of Modeled OO33 levels for 8/19/96 at Huay Kwang levels for 8/19/96 at Huay Kwang

Modeled O3 Concentrations vs. Time

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900

Time of Day

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n o

f O3

(pp

b)

Template

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

Comparison between Comparison between Template,Scenario 2, and Scenario 3Template,Scenario 2, and Scenario 3

Modeled O3 Concentrations vs. Time8/19/96 Huay Kwang Monitoring Station

0

4

8

12

16

20

900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900

Time of Day

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n o

f O3

(pp

b)

Template

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

OZIPP Results for 8/19/96OZIPP Results for 8/19/96

Comparison of Maximum O3 concentrations

for 8/19/96 at Huay Kwang Monitoring Station

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Template Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3

O3

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n (p

pb

)

+171%

+49% +42%

OZIPP Results for 12/23/97OZIPP Results for 12/23/97

Comparison of Maximum O3 concentrations for 12/23/97 at Huay Kwang Monitoring Station

020406080

100120140160180200

Template Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3

O3 C

once

ntra

tion

(ppb

)

+127%

+17%+29%

PANsPANs

PANs Concentration for Models vs. Time12/23/97 Huay Kwang

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900

Time of Day

Co

nc

en

tra

tio

n (

pp

b)

template

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

The Effect of Increased The Effect of Increased Acetaldehyde EmissionsAcetaldehyde Emissions

From our results, the additional acetaldehyde and ethanol emissions from gasohol increase the concentration of ground level ozone.

Ozone levels still increase when VOC, NOx, and CO emissions are reduced below baseline levels, demonstrating acetaldehyde’s influence on ozone formation.

ConclusionsConclusions

From our data, the widespread use of gasohol in the BMR would most likely lead to an increase in ground level ozone; however, the exact increase is not known.

It appears that lower ozone days will experience higher increases in ozone than high ozone days. However, significant increases in ozone concentrations are expected for all days.

Final ThoughtsFinal Thoughts

The potential benefits of producing and using fuel ethanol are obvious:

-Economic stimulus for impoverished agricultural areas-Increased self-sufficiency-Decreased Greenhouse Gas Emissions

-Competitive advantage over other countries

Final ThoughtsFinal Thoughts Our energy analysis and OZIPP modeling was

an objective attempt at producing a more holistic view of how fuel ethanol production and use might effect Thailand.

A positive energy balance must be achieved for most potential benefits to be realized.

Determining the net environmental effects are very complex and require a comprehensive analysis of both ethanol production and use.

Final ThoughtsFinal Thoughts

If Thailand should choose to use fuel ethanol, we strongly recommend that the government vigorously monitor energy cost, energy efficiency, and air quality so that problems are recognized and corrected in a timely manner.