Long-term sustainability of bio-components production
Ivan Souček1, Ozren J. Ocić2
1
2
Prague Institute of Chemical Technology, Prague, Czech Republic
EU – Faculty of International Engineering Management, Belgrade, Serbia
Abstract
Biofuels play an increasingly important role in the motor fuel market. The list of biofuels
(bio-components) in accordance with EU legislations contains a number of substances not
widely used in the market. Traditionally these include fatty acid methyl esters (FAME, in
the Czech Republic methyl ether of rape seed oil) and bioethanol (also ethyl terc. buthyl
ether − ETBE, based on bioethanol). The availability and possible utilizations of biocomponent fuels in Czech Republic and Serbia are discussed. Additional attention is paid
on the identification of the possibilities to improve effectiveness of rapeseed cultivation
and utilization of by-products from FAME production (utilization of sew, rape-meal and
glycerol) which will allow fulfilment of the sustainability criteria for first generation biofuels. Comments on new approaches on renewable co-processing are presented. The
concept of 3E (emissions, energy demand, and economics) is introduced specifying three
main attributes for effective production of FAME production in accordance with legal
compliances. The price change of bio-components is analyzed in comparison to the price of
motor fuels, identifying a possible (speculative) crude price break-even point at the level of
149−176 USD/bbl at which point bio-fuels would become economically cost effective for
the use by refiners.
PROFESSIONAL PAPER
UDC 662.756.3:662.6/.9
Hem. Ind. 66 (2) 235–242 (2012)
doi: 10.2298/HEMIND110718078S
Keywords: biofuels, EU legislation, crude oil price, bioethanol, FAME.
Available online at the Journal website: http://www.ache.org.rs/HI/
Biofuels have become an important part of the
motor fuel production portfolio throughout Europe, as
well as across the world. Motivation factors for biofuels
introduction are:
− The replacement of fossil fuels due to its availability as natural resource, import independency, reduction of GHG emissions (suspected to have impact on
global warming), use of land in the developed countries
due to over-production of agricultural food [1];
− EU legislations in practise throughout EU countries such as Directive 2009/28/ES aim to reach up to
20% renewable resources on total energy consumption
and/or 10% in transportation share in the EU; each EU
country applies a different target on share on total
energy consumption (Table 1) [2] but all have set a goal
at 10% in transportation;
− Sustainability based on criteria on GHG emissions.
MOTOR FUELS
EU Directive 2009/28/ES [2] defines the following
renewable motor fuel components:
Correspondence: I. Souček, Prague Institute of Chemical Technology,
Department of Economics and Management of the Chemical and
Food Industry, Technická 5, 166 28 Praha –Dejvice, Czech Republic.
E-mail: souceki@vscht.cz
Paper received: 18 July, 2011
Paper accepted: 6 October, 2011
− bioethanol from sugar beans, wheat, corn/
/maize, and sugar cane;
− renewable sources part of ETBE (bio-MTBE);
− renewable sources part of TAEE;
− biobutanol;
− biodiesel (methyl ester of fatty acids from rape
seed, sunflower, soybean, palm oil, waste vegetable or
animal oil);
− hydrotreated vegetable oil (from rape seed,
sunflower, palm oil);
− pure vegetable oil from rape seed;
− biogas from municipal organic waste or wet
manure as compressed natural gas;
− farmed or waste wood Fischer-Tropsch diesel;
− farmed or waste wood DME;
− farmed or waste wood biomethanol.
The main biofuels/bio-components used in the EU
are ethanol and FAME (mainly as rapeseed oil based).
The biofuels are largely introduced in all European
countries. It’s worth mentioning that one of the first
country to introduce the so-called “oleo-chemistry”
program on a larger scale (resulting in production of
FAME and biodiesel, among others) was the Czech
Republic [3,4]. As early as the beginning of 1990s, the
biofuel market share reached several percents of the
total diesel fuel consumption in the Czech Republic
[5,6]. At that time, the biodiesel production was significantly subsidized by the government, which sufficiently motivated producers to establish new productions and introduce product to the Czech market. In the
235
I. SOUČEK, O.J. OCIĆ: LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF BIO-COMPONENTS PRODUCTION
Hem. ind. 66 (2) 235–242 (2012)
Table 1. EU countries – share of renewable energy targets 2020 [2]
EU Country
Sweden
Latvia
Finland
Austria
Portugal
Denmark
Estonia
Slovenia
Romania
Lithuania
France
Spain
Greece
Germany
Italy
Ireland
Bulgaria
UK
Poland
Netherlands
Slovakia
Belgium
Cyprus
Hungary
Czech Republic
Luxemburg
Malta
2006 actual percent of renewable energy
on total energy
40
35
29
23
21
17
18
16
18
15
10
9
7
6
5
3
9
1
7
2
7
2
2
4
6
1
0
meantime, the European legislation was developed,
transposed onto the national legislations of member
countries resulting into mandatory use of bio-components for traditional motor fuels (according to EN
228 and 590) gradually eliminating, at the same time,
the state supports. This resulted with the fact that
refiners and car-users are bearing all the extra costs
associated with renewable fuel production. The Czech
Refining Company (major crude oil processing company
in the Czech Republic and key refinery in the region of
Central Europe) established the regular use of biocomponents ever since 2004 [7–10] being associated
with approximately 15 million EUR investment cost and
price difference compared to traditional motor fuels
based on crude oil processing [11]. The final decision,
introduced in 2004 and in effect until now was to directly blend FAME (usually domestic origin based on
rape seed oil) with diesel fuel and directly blend bioethanol (from different origins incl. domestic) with gasoline (taking into the account oxygen content limits
and availability of domestic MTBE). The existing MTBE
236
2020 target percent of renewable energy
on total energy
49
42
38
34
31
30
25
25
24
23
23
20
18
18
17
16
16
15
15
14
14
13
13
13
13
11
10
plant has not yet been converted into ETBE due to investment cost return issues and feasibility to produce
gasoline of required quality while combining traditional
gasoline components (based on crude oil), MTBE and
bioethanol [11,12].
The situation in Serbia is such that the main crude
processing company Petroleum Industry of Serbia (Naftna Industrija Srbije − NIS) does not have actual biofuels
production. This is similar to most of refining companies in Europe (including the Czech Republic). It may
take up to several years for refineries to decide to go
into the business of biofuel production. There are 3 privately owned biodiesel production factory in Serbia:
FAM Kruševac (capacity of 25,000 tonnes per year construction not completed). “Bioplanta” Bačka Topola
(small capacity operated based on different vegetable
and waste oils) and “Victoria Oil” Šid (not operated
capacity of 100,000 tonnes per year). The Šid factory
unit was built according to the Lurgi design. According
to the Serbian energy plan, 10% e.e. of total fuel pro-
I. SOUČEK, O.J. OCIĆ: LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF BIO-COMPONENTS PRODUCTION
duction by the year 2020 will have been comprised of
those coming from renewable sources.
According to Directive 2009/28/EC [2] in the EU
“Each Member State shall ensure that information is
given to the public on the availability and environmental benefits of all different renewable sources of
energy transport. When the percentages of biofuels,
blended in mineral oil derivatives, exceed 10% by volume, Member States shall require this to be indicated
at the sales points.” This regulation is being implemented by all EU countries (including the Czech Republic) and is going to be implemented in the Republic
of Serbia as well.
Price and cost aspects
The motivation of bio-component use for refiners is
influenced by pricing of bioethanol and FAME. The
historical price difference is described in Figure 1.
The historical price development shows that FAME
is usually traded at a price higher than ultra-low-sulphur diesel (ULSD) by 300−500 USD/t, while bioethanol
has its own price development which has recently been
independent of the price of unleaded gasoline 95
(UNL95). It could be concluded that the FAME price
settlement is based on the quoted diesel price plus
margin, while the price of bioethanol is more driven by
production cost (mainly raw material such as wheat,
corn etc.) becoming at times (but rarely) cheaper (per
ton) than gasoline (note 07/2008, 08/2009, 06/2010,
05/2011 on Figure 1). This does not mean that bioethanol is a more effective fuel, due to a much lower energy
content (respectively heating energy of ethanol which
is approx. 60% comparing to gasoline) [12–14].
USD / t
Hem. ind. 66 (2) 235–242 (2012)
Comparing the crude price (and refining products),
the change of bio-component price is seen as the ratio
between FAME and diesel that was between 1.25 and
2.00 (multiple of quoted diesel price) with average ratio
of 1.65. In case of bioethanol/gasoline, the historical
range was between 0.9 and 3.0 (multiple of quoted
gasoline price) with an average ratio of 1.30. The
above-mentioned conclusion on the break-even price
of crude oil is derived from this rough analysis taking
into account that the historical ration of diesel/gasoline
to crude oil (Brent based) is 1.30–1.35.
The break-even point of crude price (supposing
constant price development of bio-components and
proportional approach to pricing fossil fuels and current ratios of fossil fuels and bio-components) is estimated at 149 USD/t for biodiesel/diesel and 176 USD/t
for bioethanol/gasoline (all based on energy equivalent). The historical crude oil price change can be seen
in Figure 2.
“3E” CONCEPT
As in many other cases, the “3E” concept could be
applied for evaluation of biofuels effectiveness [13].
This concept is taking into account a balance approach
to the three main attributes applied in the modern
industry: Emission impact, Energy demand and Economics/General Effectiveness of the production. All three
attributes are contributing to the economic, commercial, technical (including environment impact) and legislative aspects from the point of suppliers (in our case
bio-components), producers (in our case refiners), public stakeholders (like EU and national governmental au-
Spreads FAME-ULSD And Bioethanol-UNL95 FOB ARA
800
700
600
FAME - ULSD
Bioethanol - UNL95
500
400
300
200
100
0
1/
20
3/ 07
20
5/ 07
20
7/ 07
20
9/ 07
20
11 0
/2 7
0
1/ 07
20
3/ 08
20
5/ 08
20
7/ 08
20
9/ 08
2
11 00
/2 8
0
1/ 08
20
3/ 09
20
5/ 09
20
7/ 09
20
9/ 09
2
11 00
/2 9
0
1/ 09
20
3/ 10
20
5/ 10
20
7/ 10
20
9/ 10
2
11 01
/2 0
0
1/ 10
20
3/ 11
20
11
-100
Figure 1. Price difference FAME – ULSD and bioethanol – UNL95 in the period January 2007−March 2011. Source: based on Platt’s
database [13,14].
237
I. SOUČEK, O.J. OCIĆ: LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF BIO-COMPONENTS PRODUCTION
Hem. ind. 66 (2) 235–242 (2012)
Brent DTD since 2007
USD / barrel
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
00
7
1/
20
08
4/
20
08
7/
20
0
10 8
/2
00
8
1/
20
09
4/
20
09
7/
20
0
10 9
/2
00
9
1/
20
10
4/
20
10
7/
20
1
10 0
/2
01
0
1/
20
11
4/
20
11
07
/2
10
07
7/
20
4/
20
1/
20
07
0
Figure 2. Crude price change over the period 2007−2011. Source: based on Platt’s database [13,14].
thorities, environment authorities, public as in car drivers/users, etc.). The 3E concept is very important in
particular to the first generation biofuels. It is justified
that utilization of bioethanol and especially FAME can
significantly reduce crude oil use and reduce greenhouse gas emission.
Even though ethanol production has for decades
mainly depended on energy crops containing starch
and sugar (corn, sugar cane, etc.), currently, new technologies for converting lignocellulosic biomass into
ethanol (second generation biofuels) are under development. The use of lignocellulosic biomass, such as
agricultural residues, forest and municipal waste, for
the production of biofuels will be unavoidable if liquid
fossil fuels are to be replaced by renewable and sustainable alternatives [15] and definitely will contribute
to 3E.
The traditional methods of ethanol production (as
the first generation approach) are not the subject of
detailed analysis presented in this article, but rather
the energy balance and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that are the issues in the traditional fuel production. This will be further analyzed at the FAME production selected reference units located in the Czech
Republic.
Based on the FAME production in the Czech Republic with capacity of 100,000 tonnes per year the particular emission and energy impact were calculated. Results are provided in Tables 2 and 3. Complete production life-cycle is considered, e.g. rapeseed growth –
oil production – FAME production – logistics [3].
Reduction of GHG emissions compared to reference
fossil fuel is 45.8%, hence most of the emissions are
(surprisingly) allocated to the agricultural activities
(mainly fuel consumption, fertilizers use).
238
Table 2. Total emission of GHG in FAME production life-cycle [3]
Production phase
Rape seed growing
Oil production
FAME Production
Logistics
Total
Emission g CO2 Emission g CO2 Share
eq/MJ
%
eq/kg
1073
29.0
64
203
5.5
12
367
9.9
22
37
1.0
2
1680
45.4
100
Table 3. Total energy balance of FAME production and use
life-cycle [3,13]
Input
GJ/t
Output
t/t
GJ/t
Rape seed growing
Oil production
FAME Production
Total
14.1
3.7
3.2
21.0
FAME
Rape meal
Glycerine, 80%
–
1.00
1.50
0.12
–
37.0
22.9
1.5
61.4
Table 2 shows the energy balance of the total life
cycle of FAME production (e.g., consumption of energy
required for plant growing, seeds harvesting, seeds
processing, FAME production, and including other cost
like distribution versus energy gained by using FAME as
motor fuel component, and possibly use of by-products
and production wastes) with the reference to real FAME
production unit mentioned above.
As a result of the energy balance, 0.34 GJ is consumed for 1 GJ of energy gained, e.g., energy demand
is 34% (“well to wheal” – WTW concept).
Improvement of effectiveness of biofuels is connected with the whole production life cycle (e.g. not
only to FAME production; so called “well to tank”– WTT
concept), which covers original raw material, technology for biofuel production, effectiveness of biofuels
use in engines and possible utilization of by-products.
I. SOUČEK, O.J. OCIĆ: LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF BIO-COMPONENTS PRODUCTION
Opportunities for improvement of effectiveness of
FAME production
As already mentioned, the main energy consumption for whole biodiesel cycle is allocated on growing of
rapeseed. This could be improved by:
− use of used vegetable oil (eliminate production of seeds and “fresh” oil);
− increase of yields of rapeseed harvest (improve effectiveness of agricultural treatment);
− use of straw (use waste material for energy
production);
− improvement of technology for FAME production;
− possible use of by-products from FAME (possibly also oil) production.
Rape seeds replacement with the use of
vegetable/animal oils
Utilisation of used vegetable/animal oils in practice
will replace the need of “fresh” seeds and “freshly”
produced oil, and consequently would contribute to
eliminating the costs of growing the rape seeds thus
transferring the actual production costs to the oil
production itself. The total emission will decrease from
45.5 to 12 g CO2 eq./MJ. GHG emission saving compared to fossil fuel will increase from 45.8 to 85.0%.
Use of used vegetable/animal oils eliminates energy
consumption for rape seed growing, decrease energy
consumption for oil processing and treatment but does
not allow to use energy from sew. Total energy consumption will be 48.5 GJ/t. Energy demand will decrease from 34 to 8% [3,13].
Increase rapeseed harvest yield
The main contributors of GHG emissions in the
phase of rape growing are: fertilizers (70%), motor fuels
(20%) and other sources (10%). The efficiency could be
improved by the increase in rapeseed yield and use of
sew [3]. The harvest yield in the climatic conditions of
the Central Europe could be increased from 3.1 t/ha
(average yield in the Czech Republic) to 3.6 t/ha (average yield in Germany) contributing to GHG emission
reduction by 4.6 g/MJ (increasing efficiency of GHG
saving to 51.3%) and improving energy demand by 16%
[3,13]. Increase of efficiency of harvest eliminates
energy consumption for rapeseed growth while the additional energy could be used for straw. The total
energy saving is 2.2 GJ/t resulting in a total energy
demand decrease from 34 to 30% [3,13].
Use of straw
The estimated calculations of GHG emissions do not
contain possible use of straw (with possible yield up to
5.4 t/ha) [13]. Straw could be used as ecological fuel or
raw material for production of second-generation biofuels. In case of use of rape straw, the part of emission
Hem. ind. 66 (2) 235–242 (2012)
(50%) in the phase of growing could be allocated to
straw (14.5 g CO2 eq./MJ) [3]. The use of straw will
contribute to decrease GHG emissions of FAME production from 45.4 to 30.9 g CO2 eq./MJ. Full use of
straw as by-product contributes to total energy demand decrease from 34 to 17%, and may significantly
improve economics of FAME production [3,13].
Improvement of FAME production technology
The current technological processes for production
of vegetable oils and their etherification by methanol
are on a relatively high level. However, contribution to
GHG emission savings is still insignificant although some
efficiency improvement could be expected (new catalyst, especially heterogenic, further improvement of
energy balance of existing production units, simplifycation of treatment of FAME and glycerine phases, etc.)
[3,13].
Use of by-products
Significant secondary effects to 3E improvement
might be achieved with optimal use of by-products, as
follows [3]:
− use of rape-meal for heat and electric energy
production;
− gasification and pyrolysis of rape-meal;
− larger chemical use of glycerine.
This use will not have the direct impact effectiveness of FAME production itself but will contribute to
GHG emissions decrease and energy savings by further
processing.
Use of by-products – use of rape-meal for heat and
electric energy production
Rape-meal is commonly used as proteinic feedstuff
for animals. In case of its surplus, it could be used for
energy production also. Rape-meal could be burnt separately or together with “classic” fuels like coal (participating at several subsidization programs applied in
most of EU countries). Due to content of sulphur and
nitrogen (proteins) flue gases should be de-sulphurised
and possibly de-nitrified. Rape-meal energy content is
15.3 GJ/t [3].
Use of by-products – gasification and pyrolysis of
rape-meal
Rape-meal could be used for production of syn-gas
by its gasification or pyrolysis and consequently for production of hydrocarbon fuels. Due to the fact that such
processes are already applied in petrochemical and/or
refining industry at large scale, the combined processes
should be taken into consideration, as some recent reference research activities in the Czech Republic aimed
to co-pyrolysis of brown coal and rape-meal [16] and
partial oxidation of mixture of vegetable (rape) oil with
liquid (crude oil based) hydrocarbons show [17,18].
239
I. SOUČEK, O.J. OCIĆ: LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF BIO-COMPONENTS PRODUCTION
It was demonstrated by experimental testing [16]
that co-pyrolysis of brown coal and rape-meal jointly
can bring process improvements in many areas: lower
appearance of coke, higher yield of pyrolysis oil, and
higher yield of aliphatic hydrocarbons.
Another process – partial oxidation of vegetable
and crude oil-based liquids [17,18] and suspension of
crude oil-based liquids with rape-meal was studied in
laboratory and pilot plant scale with the objective to
propose feasible solution for the improvement of 3E by
co-processing of the wastes and by-products formed
during biofuels production. Biomass “gasification” (by
partial oxidation by oxygen in presence of steam) is a
way to utilize energy content of biomass and in the
same time to create/produce raw material for consequent chemical synthesis (in this case H2 and CO).
Use of by-products − chemical valuation of glycerine
Glycerine could be the basic raw material for number of chemical substances, including motor fuel components [3]. Production of glycerine has sharply grown
together with wide development of biodiesel (its market price has, at the same time, significantly decreased)
[13]. Typical products derived from glycerin are:
− di-hydroxy acetone;
− 1,3-propandiol by biochemical route [19,20];
− 1,2-propandiol, iso-propanol (usable also as
motor fuel likewise bioethanol or biobutanol) by hydrogenation;
− tri-, di- and mono-isobutyl ether of glycerine
(as diesel component) by etherification; of glycerine
and iso-butylene (similar to the principles of the synthesis of MTBE and/or ETBE process).
All these products produced the “bio-way” could
replace traditional synthesis from classic raw materials
by routine technologies based on hydrocarbons derived
from crude oil (such as propylene, butane, etc.).
Optimal use of glycerine depends, of course, from
number of process related factors like real yields, energy
and material balance, robustness of technology, etc.
The best glycerine derivatives synthesis results are
achieved when minimal molecule reduction (elimination of de-hydratation, de-carbonisation) and/or molecule growth is achieved [14] (Table 4).
Final remarks
The FAME producers in EU are mainly oriented to
the core product and utilization of by-products and
wastes are not yet implemented in practice. Long-term
sustainability of the first generation biofuels will be
feasible only in case of improvement of their production effectiveness.
The energy and refining sector are partly subsidized
to use renewable raw materials for energy and motor
fuels production. Another sector, the chemical industry, with the utilization of biofuels by-products, could
240
Hem. ind. 66 (2) 235–242 (2012)
be the next target for the improvement of general 3E
conceptual position and, as such, be considered for
renewable sources utilization support similar to energy
and refining sectors [21,22].
Table 4. Use of by-products − chemical valuation of glycerine
[13,14]
Derivative
Glycerine
Propandiol
Isopropanol
Dihydroxy acetone
Mono-isobutyl ether
Di-isobutyl ether
Tri-isobutyl ether
Molar mass
g mol–1
92
76
60
90
148
204
260
Theorical yield
%
83
65
98
160
222
283
Comparing the crude price (and refining products)
development with bio-component price change, the
average ratio between FAME and diesel was 1.65. In
case of bioethanol versus gasoline the historical range
was at average 1.30. This confirms and shows current
demotivation of the refiners to use bio-components indicating break-even points of crude oil price at around
180 USD/bbl for bio-components economic “attractiveness”.
CONCLUSIONS
The bio-components are definitely contributing to
total motor fuels balance and to reaching the renewable energy use targets defined by EU Commission and
Parliament. The goal of reaching 10% e.e. in 2020 is respected by all EU countries (including the Czech Republic) and it is expected to be introduced to Republic
of Serbia as well.
The several views are considerable:
− Economic view: more effective production of
bio-components may bring more acceptable pricing for
refiners;
− Commercial view: larger product portfolio could
be more preferable by refiners;
− Technical view: diversification of component
quality could contribute for improvement of refining
product quality;
Legislative view: EU countries bio-legislation might
be unified in accordance with EU standards being fully
accepted by the bio- and refining sectors.
Used abbreviations
bbl
Barel (volume unit used for crude oil, approx.159 liters)
Brent DTD Forward price of crude “dated” Brent-Forties-Oseberg-Ekofisk according its physical
deliveries for next 10-23 days in parity FOB
I. SOUČEK, O.J. OCIĆ: LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF BIO-COMPONENTS PRODUCTION
DME
EU
ETBE
EtOH
FAME
GHG
MTBE
TAEE
ULSD
Di-methyl ether
European union
Ethyl terc. buthyl ether
Ethanol (usually bio)
Fatty acid methyl ether
Green-house gases (mainly CO2)
Methyl- terc. buthyl ether
Ethyl-terc.amyl ether
Ultra low sulphur diesel (sulphur content
below 10 ppm)
UNL 95 Unleaded gasoline with octane number 95
USD
American dollar
WTT
“Well to tank”, analysis of motor fuel impact
(cost, emissions etc.) for cycle: exploration to
production (usually crude exploration or growing of agricultural raw material, crude or other
feedstock transportation, crude or other feedstock processing)
WTW “Well to wheal”, analysis of motor fuel impact
(cost, emissions, etc.) from exploration to final
use (e.g., WTT Combined with effects from
fuel in the car, usually heating value, CO2 emissions etc.)
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
G. Šebor, M. Pospíšil, J. Žákovec, Feasibility analysis of
suitable alternative fuels for transport (study for the
Czech Republic), VŠCHT, Prague, June 2006. (in Czech).
Directive 2009/28/ec of the European Parlament and of
the Council of 23 April 2009 on the Promotion of the
Use of Energy from Renewable Sources and Amending
and Subsequently Repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and
2003/30/EC, Strassburg, (OR.en), 23.4.2009.
J. Souček, Biodiesel – Prospective of production and
consumption in the Czech Republic, Paliva 1 (2009) 12–
–15 (in Czech).
I. Souček, Blending of bio-components into motor fuels,
Petrol magazín 2 (2006) 24–25 (in Czech).
I. Souček, Response by Česká rafinerská to EU conventional and alternative fuel policy, Conference paper:
IFQC Briefing, Prague, 11/2004.
I. Souček, Outlook for Biofuels in the Czech Republic,
Conference paper: First Alternative Fuels Technology
Conference & Exhibition AFTC, Prague, 02/2008.
I. Souček, Česká rafinérská – key regional player (Biofuel
response), Conference paper: World Refining Association, Central European Refining and Petrochemical Roundtable, Prague, 10/2004.
I. Souček, Clean fuels and biofuels related programs in
CRC, Conference paper: World Refining Association,
Central European Refining and Petrochemical Roundtable, Warsaw, 10/2005.
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
Hem. ind. 66 (2) 235–242 (2012)
I. Souček, Readiness of České rafinérské for bio-component use for motor fuels (biofuels) production, Conference paper: Alternative Fuels, Prague, 12/2006 (in
Czech).
I. Souček, Experience with use of bio-components in
Česká rafinérská, Conference paper: pre-conference Biofuels – 43rd International Petroleum Conference, Bratislava, 09/2007 (in Czech).
I. Souček, H. Kittel, V. Pražák, The role of bio-components in the modern refinery (Options and CRC adaptation scenario), Conference paper: The European Fuels
Conference – 9th Annual Meeting, Paris, 03/2008.
I. Souček, P. Neumann, Experience with motor fuels production with bio-components in Česká rafinérská, Conference paper: Alternative fuels in Transport, Prague,
02/2009.
J. Souček, I. Souček, Direction for improvement of
effectiveness of biofuels production, Paliva 3 (2011) 1–7
(in Czech).
I. Souček, Aspects of effectiveness of bio-components
production, Conference paper: Green Forum EPC, Dubrovnik, 2011.
V.V. Semenčenko, L.V. Mojović, S.D. Petrović, O.J. Ocić,
Recent trends in bioethanol production, Hem. ind. 65
(2011) 103–114 (in Serbian).
K. Ciahotný, J. Kusý, L. Jílková, Procházková A., Vrbová
V., Káňa J., Copyrolysis of brown coal and rape meal,
Conference-book, Aprochem 2011 – part 1, 2011, pp.
305–315.
V. Tukač, J. Hanika, V. Veselý, D. Kovač, J. Lederer, Fr.
Nečesaný, Simulation of hydrogen production from biomass Conference-book: Aprochem 2010 – part 1, 2010,
pp. 1163-1169 (in Czech).
V. Tukač, J. Hanika, V. Veselý, D. Kovač, J. Lederer,
Simulation of biomass partial oxidation, Conferencebook, Aprochem 2011 – part 1, 2011, pp. 173–180 (in
Czech).
X. Chena, Z. Xiu, J. Wang, D. Zhang, P. Xub, Stoichiometric analysis and experimental investigation of glycerol bioconversion to 1,3-propanediol by Klebsiella
pneumoniae under microaerobic conditions, Enzyme
Microb. Tech. 33 (2003) 386–394.
G. Polakovičová, S. Nagyová, V. Ležovičová Microbiological transfer of glycerine to 1,3-propándiol, Conference-book, Aprochem 2011 – part 1, 2011, pp. 187–
193 (in Slovak).
I. Souček, Aspects of renewables production in the
Czech Republic for: Energy use, Motor fuels, Production
of chemical derivatives, Conference paper, Aprochem,
Milovy, 04/2006 (in Czech).
I. Souček, Renewable prospectives: Issues related to
renewable sources from global point of view and in the
Czech Republic prospectives: energy use, motor fuels,
production of chemical derivatives, Conference paper:
Central and Eastern European Refining and Petrochemicals 12th Annual Meeting, Prague, 10/2009.
241
I. SOUČEK, O.J. OCIĆ: LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF BIO-COMPONENTS PRODUCTION
Hem. ind. 66 (2) 235–242 (2012)
IZVOD
DUGOROČNA ODRŽIVOST PROIZVODNJE BIOKOMPONENTI
Ivan Souček1, Ozren J. Ocić2
1
2
Univerzitet hemijskih tehnologija, Fakultet za hemijsko inženjerstvo, Prag, Republika Češka
EU – Fakultet za inženjerski internacionalni menadžment, Beograd, Srbija
(Stručni rad)
Biogoriva igraju sve važniju ulogu na tržištu motornih goriva. Lista biogoriva
(biokomponenti) u saglasnosti sa EU legislativom sadrži brojna jedinjenja kojih
nema u velikoj meri na tržištu. Uobičajeno, one sadrže metil ester masnih kiselina
(FAME, u Češkoj Republici, metil etar uljane repice) i bioethanol (takođe etil tercijarni butil etar – ETBE, baziran na bioetanolu). U radu su razmotreni raspoloživost i moguća primena biokomponentnih goriva u Češkoj i Srbiji. Posvećena je
posebna pažnja na identifikaciji mogućnosti poboljšanja efektivnosti uzgajanja
uljane repice i iskorišćenju nusprodukata proizvodnje FAME (repičinog brašna i
glicerola) što bi obezbedilo ispunjenje kriterijuma održivosti za prvu generaciju
biogoriva. Komentarisani su novi pristupi obnovljivog koprocesiranja. Koncept 3E
(emisije, energetski zahtevi i ekonomika) uvedeni su specificiranjem tri glavna
atributa za efektivnu proizvodnju FAME, u skladu sa pravnom usaglašenošću. Promena cene biokomponenti analizirana je u poređenju sa cenama motornih goriva,
identifikujući moguću (spekulativnu) prelomnu tačku pri ceni sirove nafte od 149–
–176 USD/bbl, kada bi biogoriva postala ekonomski isplativa za primenu u rafinerijama.
242
Ključne reči: Biogoriva • EU legislativa •
Cene sirove nafte • Bioetanol • FAME