A sustainable biofuel supply chain must be not only economically viable but also environmentally benign. This study addressed a strategic multistage expansion (e.g., a decade) of a cellulosic biofuel supply chain system with supplements of corn grain biofuels. A multiobjective, multiyear optimization framework was proposed, and the compromise method was used to seek best-compromise solutions between economic competitiveness and environmental quality of the supply chain while satisfying evolving fuel demand, feedstock resources, and technological constraints. The model was implemented in an illustrative case study of planning an in-state ethanol supply chain in California between 2015 and 2025. The results indicated that significant trade-offs existed between cost and greenhouse gas emissions in the supply chain and that cellulosic ethanol produced from corn stover and forest residues could be an important alternative to corn ethanol with a low cost of $2.20/gal and emissions of 1.5 carbon dioxide equivalent kg/gal.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
JenkinsB., DempsterP., GildartM., and KaffkaS.California Biomass and Biofuels Production Potential. Draft report. TIAX Research Agreement 07-003016. California Biomass Collaborative, Davis, 2007.
2.
ZhuJ. Y., and PanX. J.Woody Biomass Pretreatment for Cellulosic Ethanol Production: Technology and Energy Consumption Evaluation. Bioresource Technology, Vol. 101, No. 13, 2010, pp. 4992–5002.
3.
ParkerN.Optimizing the Design of Biomass Hydrogen Supply Chains Using Real-World Spatial Distributions: A Case Study Using California Rice Straw. MS thesis. University of California, Davis, 2007.
4.
EkşioğrluS. D., LiS., ZhangS., SokhansanjS., and PetroliaD.Analyzing Impact of Intermodal Facilities on Design and Management of Biofuel Supply Chain. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2191, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2010, pp. 144–151.
5.
EkşioğrluS. D., AcharyaA., LeightleyL. E., and AroraS.Analyzing the Design and Management of Biomass-to-Biorefinery Supply Chain. Computers and Industrial Engineering, Vol. 57, No. 4, 2009, pp. 1342–1352.
6.
BaiY., HwangT., KangS., and OuyangY.Biofuel Refinery Location and Supply Chain Planning Under Traffic Congestion. Transportation Research B: Methodological, Vol. 45, No. 1, 2011, pp. 162–175.
7.
ChenC.-W., and FanY.Bioethanol Supply Chain System Planning Under Supply and Demand Uncertainties. Transportation Research E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 48, No. 1, 2012, pp. 150–164.
8.
CundiffJ. S., DiasN., and SheraliH. D.A Linear Programming Approach for Designing a Herbaceous Biomass Delivery System. Bioresource Technology, Vol. 59, No. 1, 1997, pp. 47–55.
9.
AcharyaA. M., EkşioğrluS. D., and PetroliaD.In-Bound Supply Chain Design for Biomass-to-Ethanol Industry: A Study of Mississippi. Proc., Industrial Engineering Research Conference, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, 2008, pp. 1296–1301.
10.
GunnarssonH., RönnqvistM., and LundgrenJ. T.Supply Chain Modelling of Forest Fuel. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 158, No. 1, 2004, pp. 103–123.
11.
HuangY., ChenC.-W., and FanY.Multistage Optimization of the Supply Chains of Biofuels. Transportation Research E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 46, No. 6, 2010, pp. 820–830.
12.
WaltherG., SchatkaA., and SpenglerT. S.Design of Regional Production Networks for Second Generation Synthetic Bio-Fuel—A Case Study in Northern Germany. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 218, No. 1, 2012, pp. 280–292.
13.
AnH., WilhelmW. E., and SearcyS. W.A Mathematical Model to Design a Lignocellulosic Biofuel Supply Chain System with a Case Study Based on a Region in Central Texas. Bioresource Technology, Vol. 102, No. 17, 2011, pp. 7860–7870.
14.
ZamboniA., BezzoF., and ShahN.Spatially Explicit Static Model for the Strategic Design of Future Bioethanol Production Systems. 2. Multi-Objective Environmental Optimization. Energy and Fuels, Vol. 23, No. 10, 2009, pp. 5134–5143.
15.
MeleF. D., Guillén-GosálbezG., and JiménezL.. Optimal Planning of Supply Chains for Bioethanol and Sugar Production with Economic and Environmental Concerns. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, Vol. 26, 2009, pp. 997–1002.
16.
YouF., and WangB.Life Cycle Optimization of Biomass-to-Liquid Supply Chains with Distributed–Centralized Processing Networks. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 50, No. 17, 2011, pp. 10102–10127.
17.
GebreslassieB. H., YaoY., and YouF.Design Under Uncertainty of Hydrocarbon Biorefinery Supply Chains: Multiobjective Stochastic Programming Models, Decomposition Algorithm, and a Comparison Between CVaR and Downside Risk. AIChE Journal, Vol. 58, No. 7, 2012, pp. 2155–2179.
18.
YouF.Design of Biofuel Supply Chains Under Uncertainty with Multiobjective Stochastic Programming Models and Decomposition Algorithm. In 23rd European Symposium on Computer Aided Engineering (KraslawskiA. and TurunenI., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, Vol. 32, 2013, pp. 493–498.
19.
GebreslassieB. H., SlivinskyM., WangB., and YouF.Life Cycle Optimization for Sustainable Design and Operations of Hydrocarbon Biorefinery Via Fast Pyrolysis, Hydrotreating, and Hydrocracking. Computers and Chemical Engineering, Vol. 50, 2013, pp. 71–91.
WangM., WuY., and ElgowainyA.Operating Manual for GREET: Version 1.7.Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Ill., 2005.
22.
ForsterP., RamaswamyV., ArtaxoP., BerntsenT., BettsR., FaheyD., HaywoodJ., LeanJ., LoweD., MyhreG., NgangaJ., PrinnR., RagaG., SchultzM., and Van DorlandR.. Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2007.
23.
TamizM., JonesD., and RomeroC.Goal Programming for Decision Making: An Overview of the Current State-of-the-Art. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 111, No. 3, 1998, pp. 569–581.
24.
RaphaelS., AusilioB., and NilayS.The Greenhouse Gas Emissions Performance of Cellulosic Ethanol Supply Chains in Europe. Biotechnology for Biofuels, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2009.
25.
SaatyT. L.The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation.McGraw-Hill International, New York, 1980.
26.
LinaresP., and RomeroC.A Multiple Criteria Decision Making Approach for Electricity Planning in Spain: Economic Versus Environmental Objectives. Journal of Operational Research Society, Vol. 51, No. 6, 2000, pp. 736–743.
HartQ., ParkerN., TittmannP., LayM., CunninghamJ., MilbrandtA., NelsonR., SchmidtA., SkogK., and JenkinsB. M.Strategic Assessment of Development of Bioenergy in the Western States Development of Supply Scenarios Linked to Policy Recommendation—Spatial Analysis and Supply Curve Development. USDA/DOE DE-PS36-06GO96002F. Western Governors' Association Clean and Diversified Energy Initiative, University of California, Davis, 2007.
29.
XieF., HuangY., and EkşioğrluS.. Integrating Multimodal Transport into Cellulosic Biofuel Supply Chain Design Under Feedstock Seasonality with a Case Study Based on California. Bioresource Technology, Vol. 152, 2014, pp. 15–23.
WuM., WangM., and HuoH.Fuel-Cycle Assessment of Selected Bioethanol Production Pathways in the United States.Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Ill., 2006.
32.
Detailed California-Modified GREET Pathway for Corn Ethanol.Air Resources Board, California Environmental Protection Agency, Sacramento, 2009.
33.
FourerR., GayD., and KernighanB.AMPL: A Modeling Language for Mathematical Programming.Duxbury Press, Boston, Mass., 2003.
34.
Unsihuay-VilaC., Marangon-LimaJ. W., Zambroni de SouzaA. C., and Perez-ArriagaI. J.. Multistage Expansion Planning of Generation and Interconnections with Sustainable Energy Development Criteria: A Multiobjective Model. International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, Vol. 33, No. 2, 2011, pp. 258–270.
