Alternative fuels from forest residues for passenger cars - an assessment under German framework conditions

Table 2 Technical, economic, and environmental parameters and impacts of fuel production

	Biogenic elec.	Elec. mix (fossil)	SNG		CNG (fossil)	FT diesel		Diesel (fossil)
2020 scenario^a			G	B,E		B	E,G
Technical, biomass per kWh fuel [kg_{50% dry matter}/kWh_{fuel, at tank}]^b
	2.13		1.77			2.94
Economic, fuel costs at filling station (excl. taxes) [€₂₀₁₁-ct/kWh_fuel]^c
2020^d	18.5	16.2	13.4	14.1	5.7	16.0	20.0	7.6
2031^d	17.1	16.5	11.3	12.1	6.0	13.0	14.5	8.2
Environmental, GHG emissions (well to tank) [g CO₂-Eq/kWh_fuel]^e
	17 to 18^f	766^f	69		58	53		45

^aB, business as usual; G, gas age; E, e-mobility age. Biogenic electricity costs were not varied because biogenic electricity use is not dominated by cars. ^bThe used forest residue wood has a lower heating value of approximately 2.2 kWh/kg and a moisture content of 50%. All efficiencies are net efficiencies; production plant consumptions were subtracted. No byproducts were considered or used in the process.
^cDerived from: biogenic electricity, production costs 11 ct/kWh[11]; electricity mix, production costs 4.1 to 7.5 ct/kWh; transport, marketing, and margin 6 to 13 ct/kWh[12–15]; SNG, production costs 5.6 to 13.3 ct/kWh[16]; CNG, production costs 1.0 to 6.4 ct/kWh; transport, compression, marketing, and margin 1.6 to 3 ct/kWh[12, 17–19]; FT diesel, production costs 6.9 to 11.2 ct/kWh[11, 20, 21]; diesel, production costs 2.2 to 9.6 ct/kWh; transport, marketing, and margin 1.5 to 2.6 ct/kWh[19, 22–24]; ^dlinear slope of costs between 2020 and 2031; ^eCalculated using ecoinvent 2.2 database[25] with the following modifications, electricity mix based on[26, 27]; SNG and FT diesel based on[11, 16]; ^fDepending on the number of installed public charging stations. Lower value for scenario E.

ISSN: 2192-0567