Techno-economic analysis of pennycress production, harvest and post-harvest logistics for renewable jet fuel

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 123 (2020) 109764

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Techno-economic analysis of pennycress production, harvest and post-harvest logistics for renewable jet fuel Seyed Hashem Mousavi-Avval, Ajay Shah * Department of Food, Agricultural and Biological Engineering, The Ohio State University, Wooster, OH, United States

A R T I C L E I N F O

A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Feedstock logistics Oilseeds Aviation biofuel Technical feasibility Uncertainty analysis

Pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.) is a winter annual oilseed crop with relatively high seed oil content (25-36%-wet basis), which can be planted as cover crop in corn-soybean rotation in the Midwestern U.S., to provide both economic benefits and ecosystem services. Pennycress oil has adequate quality for conversion to renewable jet fuel (RJF); however, the technical feasibility and cost of pennycress supply at the commercial scale have not been evaluated; so, the objective of this study was to evaluate techno-economics of the production, harvest and postharvest logistics of pennycress as an RJF feedstock. In addition, an uncertainty analysis was performed to address the inherent variability of the parameters used for this evaluation. This study considered the feedstock supply for a biorefinery with RJF production capacity of around 19 million liters per year (i.e., 5 million gallons per year) in Ohio. Technical feasibility included the assessment of resources (land, infrastructure, machineries, fuel, labor, and consumables) for the production (i.e., planting, fertilizer and pesticide applications), harvest and postharvest logistics (i.e., grain handling, transportation, drying and storage). Economic analyses included estima­ tion of pennycress production and logistics costs. Annual pennycress seed requirement for the selected bio­ refinery capacity was estimated to be 90–115 thousand t (90% central range - CR), which would require pennycress plantation in 41–63 thousand ha (90% CR) land in corn-soybean rotation. The direct fossil fuel use ratio (i.e., fossil fuel use per liter of RJF produced) for pennycress production and logistics was estimated to be 0.06–0.09 L/L (90% CR). Estimated total cost for the production and logistics was 170–230 $/t (90% CR); and it was identified to be highly sensitive to pennycress seed yield. The outcomes of this research contribute to identifying the bottlenecks and hotspots for establishment of pennycress at the commercial scale in corn-soybean rotation in Ohio and Midwestern U.S.

1. Introduction In the U.S., the transportation sector contributed to ~29% of the total energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in 2017 [1]. The U.S. aviation industry consumed ~98 billion liters of fossil jet fuel (worth ~$42 billion) in 2017, which was ~8% of the total energy used in the transportation sector [1]. It was also responsible for ~173 million metric tonnes (t) of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2017 [2]. Supply of aviation fuels from renewable biobased resources offers the potential to decrease the environmental emissions associated with this industry and ensure energy security [3,4]. Renewable jet fuel (RJF) can be produced from different biobased sources, including algae, forest residue, municipal solid waste, or oil­ seeds such as canola, camelina, soybean, and carinata [4,5]. Sustainable production of RJF from algae needs the development of technologies to

decrease the processing costs and to increase the product yields [6,7]. Vegetable oil derived from oilseeds can be converted to RJF through the current technology which is at a relatively high maturity level [8]. Hydroprocessing is the most common technology which was approved by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) in 2011 to be used in commercial production of RJF [9]. Through this technology, which involves multi intermediate steps of deoxygenation, cracking and isomerization, vegetable oil is converted into smaller hydrocarbons in different ranges, which includes RJF (C8–C16) as the main product, and by-products of green diesel (C17–C22), naphtha (C5–C7), LPG (C3–C4) and propane [10,11]. Hydroprocessing technology had proved itself to be effective at producing drop-in quality RJF, which is synthetic equiva­ lents of fossil jet fuel, to be used in commercial aircraft at up to a 50% blend with fossil jet fuel [12]. In addition, it has some advantages, including higher cetane number, lower aromatic content, lower sulfur

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (A. Shah). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.109764 Received 24 April 2019; Received in revised form 3 December 2019; Accepted 8 February 2020 Available online 19 February 2020 1364-0321/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 123 (2020) 109764

content, and lower environmental profile for the production and use [13]. The success of large-scale production of RJF from vegetable oils, however, has been rather low. This is mainly due to some challenges including the high cost of production, use of land and consumables, as well as competition with food resources [14,15]. Pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.), a member of the mustard family, is a winter annual crop which is native to Eurasia, and during the recent years, it has been widely distributed throughout temperate North America [16]. Pennycress seed has a relatively high oil content (25-36%-wet basis, wb) compared to other oilseeds, such as soybean (~20% wb). Pennycress oil has also a high content of unsaturated fatty acids, which makes it suitable for RJF production [16,17]. In addition, previous study [16] has shown that production of RJF from pennycress reduces the life cycle GHG emissions by 50% compared to fossil jet fuel. Use of pennycress as RJF feedstock has also several agronomic advan­ tages. It has a relatively earlier harvest date, which makes it suitable to be grown within a conventional corn-soybean rotation in the Midwest­ ern U.S., so, it neither displaces the food crops, nor requires additional land for plantation [17]. In addition, it serves as a winter cover crop to provide both economic benefits and ecosystem services [18]. These characteristics and advantages make pennycress an ideal candidate for use as RJF feedstock [12,16,19]. The large-scale production of alternative feedstocks should be tech­ nically feasible, economically viable, environmentally friendly, and so­ cially acceptable. This requires the thorough assessments of technoeconomics, environmental and social impacts associated with their life cycle from production, harvest and post-harvest logistics to conversion and utilization of the products. In recent years, techno-economic anal­ ysis (TEA) of RJF production from different biobased feedstocks has been the subject of several studies. Chu et al. [20] estimated the cost of production, harvest and delivery of seeds to the oil extraction facility for camelina and carinata to be 314 $/t and 346 $/t, respectively. Shila [21] evaluated the techno-economics of RJF production from camelina, and estimated the feedstock production cost as 228 $/t, with the camelina yield level of 2.3 t/ha. In addition, some of the studies have reported the feedstock supply as the main contributor to the total cost of RJF pro­ duction; for example, Mupondwa et al. [22] performed TEA of camelina oil extraction as feedstock for a 100–750 million liter RJF biorefinery in the Canadian Prairies, and concluded that 81–90% of total production cost is contributed to the feedstock supply; similarly, feedstock acqui­ sition contributed to up to 88% of total biodiesel production costs from camelina and pennycress oilseeds [23]. Despite the efforts on TEA of soybean, camelina, carinata, and other vegetable oils as potential feedstocks for RJF [20,24], limited information exists on technical feasibility and costs of pennycress feedstock supply for RJF production at the commercial scale. Tao et al. [12] performed a comparative cost analysis of RJF production from five oilseeds, including camelina, pennycress, jatropha, castor bean, and yellow grease. They concluded that feedstock production cost contributed to around 70% of total costs. Although their study covered the cost analysis of RJF production from different feedstocks, pennycress was not the focus of the analysis. Pennycress is a new oilseed crop and there is a lack of information on its establishment as a cover crop in existing corn-soybean rotation, and performing the harvest and post-harvest logistics [25]. To reflect the inherent variability of the parameters for a comprehensive model, integrating uncertainties to the techno-economic analysis is necessary. Monte Carlo (MC) simulations approach is a stochastic method which is used to forecast the likelihood of a model response parameter using the probability distributions of independent parameters [26]. Given several advantages of pennycress as a potential RJF feedstock, high contribution of feedstock supply in total RJF production cost [12, 22], as well as existing variability on the pennycress production and supply chain logistics data, the main objective of this research was to perform the stochastic techno-economic evaluation of production, har­ vest and post-harvest logistics of pennycress as RJF feedstock at the commercial scale in Ohio. This study has two primary contributions;

firstly, it evaluates the technical feasibility as well as costs of pennycress production, harvest and post-harvest logistics to supply pennycress for RJF biorefinery at the commercial scale; secondly, it implements MC simulations and sensitivity analysis to evaluate the uncertainty due to variability in the data. This helps test the robustness of the results and reduce the risk associated with the inherent variability in the model parameters. 2. Materials and methods 2.1. Overview of the pennycress production and logistics systems The system boundary for this study included the operations associ­ ated with pennycress production, harvest and post-harvest logistics, as depicted in Fig. 1. 2.1.1. Pennycress production Corn-soybean rotation is the main existing cropping practice in the Midwestern U.S [27,28]. Corn is harvested in October in the first year, and soybean is planted in May and June in the second year. Pennycress has a relatively early harvest date, which makes it suitable for incor­ poration between corn and soybean in the corn-soybean rotation, as depicted in Fig. 2. To avoid late plantation after corn harvest, pennycress is considered to be planted into standing corn in September using aerial seeders [29], or other high clearance machineries. This study considers the land preparation options for the potential corn-pennycress-soybean rotation, as suggested by Fan et al. [16], which include no-till penny­ cress plantation into standing corn in fall, no-till soybean plantation after pennycress harvest in the spring, and conventional or minimal-till corn plantation in the second spring. Using aerial seeders, pennycress is normally seeded at 9–15 kg/ha, depending on geographical region, establishment conditions, and type of planters [30]. Higher seeding rates are used under difficult establishment conditions. Pennycress grows over the winter and spring months. During the growing season, i. e., September until the end of May, farm operations for application of fertilizers and pesticides are required. Farm inputs for pennycress pro­ duction include consumables (seeds, pesticides, fertilizers (N, P2O5, K2O, S)), labor, machineries (aerial seeders, fertilizer spreaders, sprayers), lubricant and fuels (jet fuel for aerial seeders, diesel for other farm machineries) [30]. 2.1.2. Pennycress harvest Small grain combine harvesters are considered for pennycress har­ vest in this study, as these are used for harvesting similar small grain oilseeds, such as canola [31]. Direct combining is a possible option for the harvest of pennycress. During the pennycress harvest in the field, grain carts are needed for in-field handling to unload combines on-the-go and load trucks staying at the edge of the field. To avoid losses during the harvest, pennycress is recommended to be harvested at seed moisture content around 12% (wb) by late May or early June, before soybean plantation (Fig. 2) [28,32]. This enables a full-season soybean production by plantation on the same field immediately following the pennycress harvest. The harvest index for pennycress is 0.48 [16], indicating that total pennycress aboveground biomass is contributed to grain and residues by 48% and 52%, respectively. Considering the pennycress seed yield (1500–2463 kg/ha [16,23,33,34]), pennycress residue harvest will be expensive. So, it was considered that pennycress residue is chopped with combine harvesters and left in the field. Thus, no additional operation is required for pennycress residue management. After harvesting pennycress, soybean is planted using modern grain drills or corn planters [35]. Farm inputs for pennycress harvest include labor, combine harvesters, grain carts, diesel fuel and lubricant [30]. 2.1.3. Pennycress post-harvest logistics During the post-harvest logistics, trucks are used for grain trans­ portation from the field to the grain elevator. Then the hoppers, feed 2

S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 123 (2020) 109764

Fig. 1. The system boundary for pennycress production and logistics operations.

Fig. 2. Potential corn-pennycress-soybean rotation for the Midwestern U.S.

conveyors, and elevators are used for feeding the grain to the dryers and storage bins which is the final point of the system boundary of this study. It was considered that pennycress seeds are transported to the elevator through public road infrastructure using trucks. Use of trucks is less expensive than rail transportation for short distances (less than 250 miles) [36]; in addition, short-line railroads are not available near the farms that would typically be used to supply pennycress in the studied region. Considering the similarities of pennycress and canola seeds, while seeds may be graded as dried at 10% moisture, to prevent spoilage during the storage, preferable moisture content for storage of pennycress seed was considered to be 8% (wb) [37]; thus, drying is needed for pennycress seeds to attain the proper storage moisture level. Continuous flow dryers are usually used for drying similar types of oilseeds, such as canola [37]. Storage of grain in the Midwestern U.S. can be either done using onfarm storage structures, or central storage facilities [38]. This study considered hauling of pennycress seeds to the central storage facilities and storage in the rental space.

content. Harvest losses at the field and dry matter losses during the storage were neglected due to lack of quantitative data; however, har­ vest losses could be important in large-scale production of pennycress; dry matter losses could also be important for pennycress storage over long periods of time. For all the required operations, the amounts of consumables, time, specifications and capacities of required machinery and equipment, fuel and lubricant use, as well as labor need for oper­ ating machines were considered in assessing the technical feasibility of pennycress feedstock supply. 2.2.1. Equipment, fuels, labor and consumable requirements The farm operations for pennycress seed production and harvest are similar to those for winter small grains or oilseeds, such as canola [40]. To estimate the operational need for the selected functional unit, time for machinery operations as well as fuel and lubricant requirements were quantified by following the ASABE standard on machinery man­ agement data [41]. This standard provides data on power and machin­ ery requirements for different farming operations. Further details on this approach are discussed in our previous study [42]. Direct fossil fuel in pennycress production and logistics includes diesel and lubricant for farm operations and transportation, natural gas and electricity for dry­ ing, as well as jet fuel for aerial seeding. Using energy equivalents of diesel, natural gas and lubricant, all forms of direct fossil fuels were presented in terms of diesel fuel equivalent; and the estimations were performed based on direct fossil fuel use ratio, i.e., liter of diesel fuel equivalent used during the production and logistics to supply feedstock for 1 L of RJF. Labor requirement was estimated based on the time needed to operate machineries and equipment for the production, harvest and post-harvest logistics. The number of farm equipment, tractors and harvesters required for field operations of pennycress production and

2.2. Techno-economic modeling of pennycress production and logistics This study analyzed the techno-economics of pennycress production and logistics for feedstock supply to the RJF biorefineries in Ohio. Based on the statistics of the U.S. existing biodiesel plants, their capacities range from one million gallons per year (MGPY) to 180 MGPY; however, almost half of them are functioning with the capacity of 5 MGPY or less [39]. Accordingly, the production capacity of the pennycress-based RJF plant in this study was considered as 5 MGPY, equivalent to around 19 million liters per year (MLPY). The functional unit was mass-based with a reference flow of one t of pennycress seeds at 8% (wb) moisture 3

S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 123 (2020) 109764

harvest were estimated by considering their operational parameters, including working speed, effective working width, working window, and probability of working days in the region. Seeds requirement for pennycress planting was estimated based on the recommendations for aerial seeding of pennycress into standing corn. Although plantation of cover crop without fertilizer application is very common in the region, fertilizer is needed in commercial production of pennycress to compensate nutrient removal by this crop (through seed harvest) and to increase the seed yield. Like other crops in the mustard family, e.g. canola and camelina, pennycress responds to nitrogen, sulfur, phos­ phorus and potassium fertilizers. Chemical fertilizers requirements depend on the yield level, and they were estimated based on nutrient removal by harvesting the pennycress seeds [16,40]. Pennycress, in general, may be grown without the use of any pesticide, but in intensive production of pennycress and mechanized farm operations and harvest, application of 0.26–0.44 kg/ha herbicide for weeds control was rec­ ommended [43]. Table 1 shows chemical fertilizer and pesticide re­ quirements for the production of pennycress and canola.

different operations, including production, harvest and post-harvest, were quantified using the literature on operational costs in Ohio. The cost items included labor cost, machinery rent, storage custom rate, transportation custom rate, and consumable prices. Prices for the con­ sumables, i.e., fertilizers, pesticides, and pennycress seeds, came from the suppliers in the region. Since pennycress is considered to be planted in the existing corn-soybean rotation, it was assumed that the farmers do not need to invest on new agricultural equipment, or they perform custom farming, because the equipment and machinery for the pro­ duction and harvest of pennycress are the same as those of the other existing crops. In addition, land rent was considered to be zero, because the farmers do not need to pay rent for planting pennycress as a cover crop in corn-soybean rotation. Total cost was estimated based on the summation of the cost of different operations and consumables needed to supply one t of pennycress seeds at the storage. Annual investment was estimated based on total cost of pennycress feedstock supply for the selected biorefinery capacity [47]. Selling price of pennycress was estimated based on the prices of similar oilseeds. Total revenue was estimated by multiplying pennycress seed supply by average selling price of pennycress seeds after the storage [47]. Net return was estimated by subtracting total cost from total revenue [47]. Return on investment was estimated based on the ratio of total return to the annual investment [48].

2.2.2. Transportation modeling The magnitude of transportation of pennycress seeds to the central storage facilities was estimated by considering the area of pennycress harvest, number of storage locations, and average distance of sur­ rounding farms to the nearest storage. The number of storage locations were selected so that the transportation distance be in a reasonable range, and it was considered to be 5–10 locations (Table 2). In addition, it was assumed that pennycress farms are located in circular areas, and the drying and storage facilities are the central points of the circles. This assumption has been made in previous studies on feedstock logistics [22, 44]. Assuming the pennycress farms as points on the circular area, average distance of transportation from surrounding farms to the stor­ age location can be estimated using expression 1 [22]: rffiffiffiffi 2 2 A DT ¼ r ¼ (1) 3 3 π

2.3. Data collection Data of consumables and resource requirements for pennycress production, harvest and post-harvest logistics, as well as the data of yield level, oil content, solvent oil extraction rate and oil to RJF con­ version efficiency through hydroprocessing technology were collected from the literature, as summarized in Table 2. Storage duration came from visiting a central storage facility in Wooster, Ohio. Custom rates for farm operations, transportation and storage came from extension doc­ uments [49]. Prices of consumables were collected from local suppliers and literature.

where DT is the average transportation distance of farms from the central storage facility, in km; r represents the radius of the pennycress harvest area, in km; and A is the area from which pennycress is harvested and transported to central storage, in km2.

2.4. Uncertainty analyses Parameters used in the TEA have intrinsic uncertainty that cannot be reduced without the acquisition of additional measurements. To quan­ tify the ranges of TEA parameters due to variability, uncertainty analysis was performed using MC simulations with 20,000 randomized trials by adopting the procedure described by Laurenzi and Jersey [57]. Using a stochastic model, each of the variables was selected randomly from their distribution or data set in each MC trial. Probability distributions were used to model parameters to investigate how an input uncertainty propagates through the model. These distributions are summarized in Table 2. For the parameters without variation, the average values were used. Triangular distributions were defined to parameters for which there was some confidence in mode and range of possible values, and they were defined as minimum, average and maximum values (Table 2). Triangular distribution is useful where the data are lacking to define any other distributions [58]. The distribution fitting test was performed to explore the best fit for each of the forecast parameters. The goodness-of-fit metrics of Anderson-Darling (AD) and Kolmogor­ ov–Smirnov (KS) were used to test the distribution fitting. P-values of less than α in AD and KS tests show that the fitted distribution is a good estimation of the data at α percent significance level. Sensitivities of inputs on the output parameters were analyzed to quantify the possible variation of estimated costs and resource con­ sumption by changing the inputs. Sensitivity analysis was performed for both technical and economic analyses based on variation from 10th percentile to 90th percentile of the range for individual inputs param­ eters presented in Table 2. The results of sensitivity analysis are pre­ sented as horizontal boxes describing the minimum and maximum changes of each of the output parameters, estimated from the respective

2.2.3. Drying and storage modeling Drying of pennycress seeds is needed to reduce the harvest moisture content of seeds to the level suitable for long time storage. Average pennycress moisture content at harvest was reported as 12% [16], and it was assumed to have triangular distribution in this analysis (Table 2). Continuous flow dryers use natural gas and electricity as energy source [45]. Based on the specifications of available grain dryers, electrical energy and fuel consumption for pennycress seeds drying were esti­ mated [46]. Considering the storage duration, specifications of available grain storage bins, the required capacity of storage, as well as the number of bins were estimated. 2.2.4. Cost analysis For the cost analysis, 2018 was selected as the base year. To estimate the storage gate production and logistics cost, the costs associated with Table 1 Chemical fertilizer and pesticide requirements for pennycress and canola. Fertilizer/pesticide

Pennycress production (kg/t)

Canola production (kg/t)

Nitrogen (N) Sulfur (S) Phosphorus (P2O5) Potassium (K2O) Pesticides (Glyphosate)

38 [16] 9 [16] 19 [16] 14 [16] 1.1 [29]; 0.84 [32]

46-50 [14], 37 [5] – 12-14 [14], 9.86 [5] 13-21 [14], 7.4 [5] 0.6–0.7 [14], 0.17 [5]

4

S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 123 (2020) 109764

Table 2 Range and sources of data for pennycress production and logistics for the selected RJF biorefinery capacity. Parameter RJF biorefinery capacity Density of RJF at 15 C Oil to hydro-renewable diesel (HRD) conversion rate HRD to RJF conversion rate Bulk density of pennycress seeds Density of pennycress oil Oil content of pennycress seeds �

Oil extraction rate Moisture content at harvest Moisture content at storage Pennycress seed yield Corn-soybean rotation land in OH Percent of area adopting pennycress cover crop Number of storage locations Truck capacity Truck returning time ratio Truck loading and unloading time ratio Storage duration Storage cost Labor need at the storage Storage bin size Effective bin size

Units

Min

Average*

Max

Distribution

Data and sources

MGPY (MLPY) kg/m3 %

–

5 (18.93)

–

–

Assumption

775 83.0

807 84.2

840 86.0

Triangular Triangular

775-840 [5] 83.0, 84.2, 86.0 [14]

% kg/m3 kg/m3 %

57.8 582.0 878.0 25.0

58.7 582.7 898.0 30.0

59.9 583.4 918.0 36.3

Triangular Triangular Triangular Triangular

% % % kg/ha 1000 ha/Y %

96.0 11.0 – 1500 1254.6 25

97.5 12.0 9.0 1980 1337.6 30

99.0 13.0 – 2463 1420.5 35

Triangular Triangular – Triangular Triangular Triangular

57.8, 58.7, 59.9 [14] 582.7 � 0.7 [27] 898 � 20 [50] 29.18 [51]; 29 [52]; 28 [19,33,53,54]; 26 [55]; 25–36 [28]; 26.8–36.3 [29] 96 [21]; 99 [22] (using solvent extraction method) 12.0 [16] 9.0 for canola [14] 1500 [8,55]; 2463 [8,34]; 2240 [23,33] 1337 thousand ha/yr�6.2% [56] Assumption

n t decimal decimal month $/bu.m person m3 decimal

5 13.6 0.4 0.3 3 0.022 6 5000 0.7

7 20.0 0.5 0.4 4.5 0.039 7 7500 0.8

10 27.0 0.6 0.5 6 0.056 8 10,000 0.9

Triangular Triangular Triangular Triangular Triangular Triangular Triangular Triangular Triangular

Assumption [21] Assumption Assumption Assumption [49] Interview with representatives in OH (7 � 10%) Assumption Assumption

*Average values were used to specify ‘most likely’ values for the triangular distribution.

10th and 90th percentiles of range of variation for each of the individual parameters. The baseline for the changes of each output parameter is the median of the distribution. Sensitivity analysis is useful for identifying the key parameters that highly influence the output parameters of the TEA model.

3. Results and discussion 3.1. Pennycress seed and land requirements Annual pennycress seed requirement for the selected biorefinery capacity was estimated to be 90–115 thousand t (the range is 90% central range, CR, which covers the data between 5th and 95th per­ centiles of the distribution, and will be used throughout this manuscript

Table 3 Test of goodness of fit for estimation of annual pennycress harvest and land requirement, and the descriptive statistics for a 19 MLPY RJF biorefinery. Parameters

Annual seed requirement for biorefinery (12% (wet) moisture content) (Thousand t/yr)

Annual land requirement (Thousand ha/yr)

90-115 99.6 8.4 0.08

41-63 50.8 6.7 0.13

Gamma 22.3 0.00 0.02 0.00

Lognormal 0.1 0.00 0.01 0.00

Probability distribution fitting and the best-fit parameters

Statistics

90% CRa Average SDb CVc Goodness of fit Distribution ADd AD-P value KSe KS-P value a b c d e

Central range. Standard deviation. Coefficient of variation. Anderson-Darling. Kolmogorov–Smirnov. 5

S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 123 (2020) 109764

to present range, unless otherwise stated), with the average of 99.6 thousand t (Table 3). The three-parameter Gamma distribution (Table 3) was the best fit for annual pennycress seed requirement, based on AD and KS goodness-of-fit metrics. To meet this feedstock demand, annual land requirement for pennycress production was estimated to be 41–63 thousand ha with the three-parameter Lognormal distribution as the best fit (Table 3). Considering the total land in corn-soybean rotation in Ohio (average: 1337 thousand ha/yr; standard deviation: �6.2% [56]), pennycress needs to be incorporated in 3–5% of annual corn-soybean rotation area in Ohio to meet the feedstock demand of the selected biorefinery capacity. This shows the huge potential of pennycress-based RJF production in Ohio. The U.S. Department of Energy has estimated that out of 30 million ha land in corn-soybean rotation in the Mid­ western U.S., more than 12 million ha is suitable for plantation of pennycress each year [59]. This can supply enough feedstock to replace ~4.3% of annual fossil jet fuel demand in the U.S. These results further substantiate the energy and environmental benefits associated with establishment of pennycress and development of pennycress-based RJF biorefineries in the region. The oil yield of pennycress was estimated to be 350–850 L/ha, with an average of 565 L/ha, which is in the range of oil yield of pennycress reported in the literature (250–1220 L/ha [23,60]. While pennycress can potentially be planted as a cover crop in the current corn-soybean rotation without additional land requirement, the oil yield of penny­ cress is in the range of oil yields of other similar oilseeds which are planted as main crops. For instance, oil yield of winter canola, flax, camelina, yellow mustard, safflower, sunflower, and soybean was re­ ported in the range of 347–1048 L/ha [22,23,43].

the main contribution of feedstock supply to the fuel consumption for the whole RJF production process [61], supply of pennycress-based RJF can save a considerable amount of fossil fuels. Annual diesel fuel equivalent requirement was estimated to be 1.1–1.8 million L, with an average of 1.4 million L, for the selected biorefinery capacity. Diesel fuel equivalent requirement in the cultivation of pennycress, including planting, fertilizer application and pesticide application, was estimated to be 0.01–0.02 L/L RJF, equivalent to 0.21–0.34 million L/yr for the selected biorefinery capacity, while it was in the range of 0.04–0.08 L/L RJF, equivalent to 0.80–1.57 million L/yr, for the harvest and post­ –harvest logistics. The main contributor to diesel fuel equivalent use was harvest operation, due to high use of fuel by combine harvesters. The results demonstrate that increasing pennycress yield will reduce the harvest area and harvest time, and consequently fuel consumption by combine harvesters. In addition, proper management of grain harvest and in-field handling operations will increase the field efficiency, and consequently, reduce fuel consumption. 3.4. Labor requirement Annual labor required to fulfil different operations of pennycress production and logistics for the selected biorefinery capacity was esti­ mated to be 39–61 thousand h with an average of 47.5 thousand h (Fig. 4). Planting pennycress required 0.6–1.0 thousand h labor annu­ ally, which was the lowest contributor to the total labor needs; this is due to the high capacity of airplane seeders for planting pennycress into standing corn [62]. Labor requirement for pennycress cultivation, i.e., planting, fertilizer application and chemical (pesticide) application, was estimated to be 12–19 thousand h/yr. Harvesting operation needed 13–28 thousand h/yr of labor to operate combine harvesters and grain carts, which was 27–60% of total labor requirement for the production and logistics. Labor need for post-harvest logistics, i.e., transportation, drying and storage, was estimated to be 10–18 thousand h/yr, which was mainly needed at the central storage facilities. Proper machinery management for harvest and in-field handling of pennycress seeds will reduce total labor requirement.

3.2. Equipment and machinery needs The number of equipment and machineries needed to complete the production and logistics of pennycress are presented in Table 4. Plan­ tation of pennycress in standing corn in September annually needed 6–12 aerial seeders (Table 4). The number of required combine harvester was estimated to be 82–194 annually. To meet the feedstock transportation for the selected biorefinery capacity, 44–59 trucks were needed. To store pennycress seeds, annual storage capacity required was estimated to be 152–199 thousand m3, which can be provided by establishing 22-39 storage bins, with the typical bin sizes of 5–10 thousand m3. There was a wide variation in estimation of the number of machineries and equipment needed for the pennycress production and logistics. This is due to several sources of uncertainties for estimation of machineries needs, which included uncertainties due to estimation of land requirement for planting, uncertainties due to operational condi­ tions, including working window in Ohio, probability of working days, operational speed, operational width, and working efficiency, as well as the uncertainties due to machineries characteristics, including different capacities of machineries and equipment.

3.5. Consumable requirements To produce enough pennycress for the selected biorefinery capacity, seed requirement for planting was estimated to be 460–790 t/yr (Fig. 5a). Nitrogen requirement was estimated to be 2490–3890 t/yr, with an average of 3111 t/yr. Similarly, the estimated potassium requirement was 920–1440 t/yr, with the average of 1147 t/yr, and, phosphorus requirement varied between 1250–1940 t/yr, with the average of 1556 t/yr. Application of sulfur fertilizer in pennycress production tends to increase the seed oil content, but not the yield level [63]. Annual sulfur required for pennycress production to meet the feedstock demand for the selected RJF biorefinery capacity was estimated to be 590–920 t. Annual pesticide (herbicide) requirement was estimated to be 12.4–26.0 t. The best fit for the distribution of each parameter, including annual seeds, nitrogen, potassium and phosphorus requirements, was Lognormal with the parameters presented in Fig. 5-a-d. Integration of renewable manure, such as livestock manure, compost, etc., in

3.3. Fuel requirement To produce 1 L of RJF, 0.06–0.09 L of diesel fuel equivalent was required for pennycress production and logistics (Fig. 3). Considering

Table 4 Annual farm machineries and equipment needed for pennycress production and logistics operations for a 19 MLPY RJF biorefinery. Parameter a

90% CR Average SDb CVc (decimal) a b c

Aerial seeder (#)

Fertilizer spreader (#)

Sprayer (#)

Combine harvester (#)

Grain cart (#)

Truck (#)

Storage capacity (thousand m3/yr)

6–12 8 1.8 0.2

28–54 39 7.9 0.2

26–50 36 7.3 0.2

82–194 132 34.0 0.3

82–194 132 34.0 0.3

44–59 51 4.6 0.1

152–199 171 14.4 0.1

Central range. Standard deviation. Coefficient of variation. 6

S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 123 (2020) 109764

Fig. 3. Direct fossil fuel use ratio and annual fossil fuel requirements of pennycress production and logistics operations for a 19 MLPY RJF biorefinery. (Note: error bars represent 90% CR.).

Fig. 4. Annual labor requirement for pennycress production and logistics operations for a 19 MLPY RJF biorefinery. (Note: error bars represent 90% CR.).

pennycress production system can replace chemical fertilizer require­ ment, and consequently enhance the GHG remediation.

due to the high cost of pennycress seeds for plantation. Total costs of pennycress production operations, i.e. planting, fertilizer and pesticide applications, was estimated to be 109–173 $/t, and it had the highest contribution to the total cost. Harvest and post-harvest operations contributed to the total cost by 27.2–41.5 $/t. Pennycress harvest contributed to the total cost of production and logistics by 14–21%. The shares of transportation and storage to total cost were low. The results are consistent with those of Miller et al. [64] who reported that the field cost of camelina production was between 75 and 85% of overall oil production cost. The cost estimation of canola supply in Iowa also showed that production cost was the main contributor [65]. Total cost of production of wheat, canola, mustard, and camelina in Saskatchewan region of Canada was reported as 199, 422, 597 and 331 $/t, respec­ tively [66]. The production costs of some oilseeds in Oregon’s Will­ amette Valley were reported as 384 $/t for camelina, 338 $/t for winter canola, 658 $/t for spring canola, 345 $/t for winter flax, 371 $/t for spring flax, 612 $/t for yellow mustard, 464 $/t for safflower, and 500 $/t for sunflower were reported [43]. Low cost of pennycress production and logistics compared to that of similar oilseeds is interpreted by less

3.6. Pennycress production and logistics costs Annual cost of pennycress production and logistics for the selected biorefinery capacity was estimated to be 15.9–24.1 million dollars (M$), with an average of 19.5 M$ (Table 5). The main contributors to total cost of production were harvest operation and plantation of seeds, followed by nitrogen fertilizer. Labor cost was in the range of 0.5–0.8 M$/yr, with an average of 0.6 M$/yr. The production costs for one t of pennycress seeds were categorized based on different operations needed for the production and logistics, and the results are presented in Fig. 6. Total cost for production and logistics was estimated to be 170–230 $/t, with an average of 195 $/t (Fig. 6). Cost of fertilizer application was the main contributor to the total operational cost, and it was estimated to be 55.7–84.9 $/t. It was mainly due to the high cost of nitrogen fertilizer. The second main contributor to the total cost was planting (41.0–62.6 $/t), which was 7

S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 123 (2020) 109764

Fig. 5. Probability distributions for (a) annual seeds requirement for planting, and annual fertilizers ((b) nitrogen, (c) potassium, and (d) phosphorus) requirements for pennycress production for a 19 MLPY RJF biorefinery. (Note: the best fit was lognormal, specified with α and β.). Table 5 Annual costs and revenue of pennycress production and logistics operations for a 19 MLPY RJF biorefinery.

Labor Seed Aerial seeding Fertilizer application Chemical application Combine harvester Diesel fuel Lubricating oil Nitrogen (N) Sulfur (S) Phosphorus (P2O5) Potassium (K2O) Pesticides Transportation Storage Total costs Revenue a b c d e

90% CRa (M$/yr)

Average (M$/yr)

SDb (M$/yr)

CVc

Distribution

ADd

AD-P value

KSe

KS-P value

0.5–0.8 2.5–4.4 1.3–2.3 0.6–1.1 0.6–1.1 2.6–4.3 0.9–1.5 0.04–0.06 2.4–3.8 0.5–0.8 1.2–1.8 0.8–1.3 0.6–1.4 1.0–1.3 0.8–1.5 15.9–24.1 22.0–33.2

0.6 3.4 1.7 0.8 0.8 3.4 1.2 0.05 3.0 0.7 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.1 19.5 27.3

0.09 0.56 0.31 0.15 0.15 0.52 0.18 0.01 0.42 0.09 0.20 0.14 0.23 0.10 0.22 2.46 3.37

0.14 0.17 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.25 0.09 0.19 0.13 0.12

Lognormal Lognormal Gamma Beta Lognormal Gamma Gamma Normal Gamma Gamma Gamma Gamma Gamma Lognormal Lognormal Lognormal Gamma

0.45 1.71 0.4 0.5 1.83 0.53 0.26 87.43 0.96 0.92 1.17 0.88 1.11 25.84 1.45 1.22 1.51

0.15 0.01 0.25 0.01 0.01 0.1 0.6 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

0.01 0.01 0.004 0.005 0.01 0.005 0.004 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.34 0.01 0.54 0.01 0.01 0.25 0.64 0.01 0.01 0.12 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.07

Central range. Standard deviation. Coefficient of variation. Anderson-Darling. Kolmogorov–Smirnov.

8

S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 123 (2020) 109764

Fig. 6. Costs of pennycress production and logistics operations. (Note: error bars represent 90% CR.).

requirement of agricultural inputs for pennycress production. Considering the seed price of similar oilseeds, such as camelina, canola, flax, yellow mustard, safflower, and sunflower [43], the seed price of pennycress was estimated as 0.21–0.33 $/kg with an average of 0.28 $/kg. Using the estimated pennycress seed price, total revenue and return on investment were estimated. The probability distributions and

best fits for annual costs, return on investment, annual net return, and mass-based net return for the production and logistics of pennycress are presented in Fig. 7-a-d. Return on investment ratio was estimated to be 0.12–0.72 (Fig. 7-b), with an average of 0.41. It follows a normal dis­ tribution based on the goodness-of-fit metrics. The curve parameters for the best fit are presented in Fig. 7-b. Net return shows that total revenue

Fig. 7. Probability distributions for annual costs (a), return on investment (b), Annual net return (c), and net return per ton (d) of pennycress production, harvest and post-harvest logistics for a 19 MLPY RJF biorefinery. (Note: the lognormal curve was specified with α and β, and normal curves were specified with average (μ) and standard deviation (SD)). 9

S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 123 (2020) 109764

is 12–72% higher than the total cost of production and logistics. Net return was estimated based on both the biorefinery scale (Fig. 7-c) and the mass unit scale (Fig. 7-d), and both of them followed the normal distribution. Average net return was estimated to be 78.26 $/t, which

was equivalent to 7.80 M$/yr for the 19 MLPY RJF biorefinery. Positive net return shows that based on the current selling price of pennycress seed after storage, total production value is more than total production cost of pennycress supply. In addition, net return was in the range of

Fig. 8. Sensitivity analysis of (a) pennycress seed requirement, (b) annual land requirement, (c) annual labor requirement, (d) annual fuel requirement, (e) total production and logistics cost, and (f) return on investment for a 19 MLPY RJF biorefinery. 10

S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 123 (2020) 109764

25.2–127.6 $/t. In a previous study, net return in the production of oilseeds was reported as negative values for camelina, winter canola, spring canola, winter flax, spring flax, yellow mustard, safflower, and sunflower [43]. Negative net return for the production of oilseeds was mainly due to rent for land use of land by primary crops, higher needs for farm operations, and high use of consumables for the production of oilseeds.

supply in different regions of the Midwestern U.S. as well as the cobenefits of establishing this crop are essential in order to sustainably deploy plantation of pennycress at the commercial scale. Third, market development is needed to create market pull for pennycress seeds, and consequently to incentivize farmers to adopt pennycress in their cornsoybean rotation in the region. Fourth, disseminating research find­ ings to the biorefineries, farmers, and other stakeholders is needed. The government, farmers and the RJF industry would jointly benefit from the development and establishment of pennycress in corn-soybean rotation and development of RJF biorefineries in the Midwestern U.S. It would also help reduce associated GHG emissions and ensure the energy security.

3.7. Sensitivity analysis Pennycress seed oil content had high sensitivity on annual penny­ cress seed requirement, annual land requirement, annual labor requirement, and annual diesel fuel equivalent requirement (Fig. 8). Increasing seed oil content reduces the annual seed requirement for the selected biorefinery capacity, which consequently reduces annual land requirement, as well as labor and fuel requirements for farm operations. In addition, pennycress seed yield had high sensitivity on annual land requirement, annual labor requirement, annual diesel fuel equivalent requirement, and total production and logistics cost. Increasing penny­ cress seed yield reduces land and consumable requirements for the selected biorefinery capacity, which consequently reduces the produc­ tion and logistics cost. Labor need for harvest had a high impact on annual labor requirement, and fuel consumption for harvest had high sensitivity on annual diesel fuel equivalent requirement. Increase of pennycress seed yield to the 90th percentile of the selected range will reduce the diesel fuel equivalent requirement to 1330 thousand L/yr. High impact of pennycress seed yield and oil content on pennycress production and logistics showed the importance of genetic improvement of pennycress plant to boost the pennycress oil content as well as pennycress seed yield [30,32,67]. Increasing the pennycress seed yield to 90% of the highest level will decrease the total cost of production to 170 $/t, which would lead to increases in return on investment and economic productivity. These results are in agreement with findings of the recent study in which camelina yield and oil content were identified as important breeding goals in the commercialization of camelina [22]. Seed rate for aerial seeding also showed a direct relationship with the total production and logistics cost. In addition, return on investment of pennycress supply had the highest sensitivities to the pennycress seed price, pennycress seed yield, seed rate of aerial seeding, and harvest cost (Fig. 8-f). High influence of pennycress seeding rate on total cost and return on investment was mainly because of the wide range for penny­ cress seeding rate in aerial seeding. Broadcasting pennycress seeds with aerial seeders is affected by several factors, including wind speed, di­ rection of seed distribution, weight of seed, broadcast width, height of flight, and shape of field [68]. In addition to broadcasting seeds, pennycress germination and establishment into standing corn is affected by seed predation [69]. Rainfall and soil conditions also affect seed contact with soil and consequently seed germination [68]. Some of the alternative practices for establishing pennycress into standing corn in large-scale include broadcasting with highboy seeders, high clearance machineries, modified sprayers, and applying a coating to the seeds [68, 70].

3.9. Practical implications Techno-economic evaluation of pennycress production and logistics is useful as it supports strategic planning and decision-making processes for establishing production systems at the commercial scale [7]. How­ ever, there are multiple issues to be taken into consideration in the large-scale establishment of pennycress as RJF feedstock. First, as the analysis demonstrated, in addition to achieving the baseline estimates, further improvement in total production cost and economic productivity would be possible by improving the pennycress seed yield and oil con­ tent. This shows the need for genetic improvement of pennycress agro­ nomic characteristics and oil quantity. Improving these characteristics will advance large-scale production of pennycress as a sustainable feedstock for the development of RJF biorefineries in Ohio and in the Midwestern U.S [71]. Second, establishment of pennycress as cover crop needs specific infrastructure in the region. Plantation of pennycress into standing corn is one of the challenges which would benefit from addi­ tional research on alternative options. Aerial seeding also faces a lack of accessibility of farmers to aerial seeders in several states of the Mid­ western U.S [68]. Third, low cost of pennycress supply and the capa­ bility of plantation on marginal lands with minimum resources requirement are motivations for development of pennycress in the re­ gion [19,33,51]; however, sustainable development of pennycress-based RJF biorefineries in the region needs further studies to focus on life cycle energy and environmental impacts of pennycress supply [72]. In this study, we made the assumption to estimate the transportation of pennycress seeds to the central storage facility. Even though this assumption has been widely made in the literature, the result of esti­ mation may be different from the real transportation distance of the fields from the storage. A more precise estimation of transportation distance is possible using the transportation network after establishment of pennycress in the corn-soybean rotation, central storage facilities and RJF biorefineries in the region. This research evaluated the TEA of pennycress establishment in cornsoybean rotation in the Midwestern U.S. However, the results of this research are applicable to a global scope, as agronomic characteristics of pennycress permit its growth in a wide range of geographic region, other than the U.S., including parts of Canada, Asia, Europe, Australia, Africa, and South America [73]. In addition, there is a global interest in pro­ duction of pennycress as shown by research studies in the U.S. [16], Germany [74], Italy and Greece [75], and it has been considered as a potential feedstock for RJF [16,75]. This work can also be adopted for establishment of new oilseed feedstocks for biorefineries.

3.8. Policy implications Sustainable feedstock supply for RJF biorefineries is necessary for the development of aviation biofuel industry, which could help mitigate environmental emissions and climate change. In this study, the key parameters affecting the viability of pennycress supply for RJF bio­ refineries were identified. In order to develop and exploit the supply of pennycress feedstock at the commercial scale, some policy actions are needed. First, governmental financing for establishing the market for the by-products of pennycress-based RJF can help the RJF industry with a reduction of the risk associated with RJF supply due to variation in petroleum price and overcome the financial barrier of the high upfront cost of RJF supply. Second, capitalizing on the potential feedstock

4. Conclusions Pennycress is a new RJF feedstock, and the technical feasibility and costs of pennycress seeds supply at the commercial scale have not been evaluated yet. Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate the techno-economics of pennycress production and logistics at the com­ mercial scale (~19 MLPY RJF biorefinery) in Ohio; in addition, uncer­ tainty and sensitivity analyses were performed using MC simulations 11

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 123 (2020) 109764

S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah

technique. Supply of pennycress feedstock for the selected biorefinery capacity annually required 41–63 thousand ha of existing land in the corn-soybean rotation for the annual harvest of 90–115 thousand t. Fuel was mainly required for harvest and post-harvest logistics and the direct fossil fuel use ratio was low (0.06–0.09 L/L of RJF), indicating that fossil fuel required for the pennycress production and logistics is less than 10% of RJF produced. Cost of production and logistics was low when compared with the other RJF feedstocks, such as canola, camelina, and carinata. Pennycress production and logistics had the highest sensitiv­ ities to pennycress seed yield, oil content, harvester fuel consumption, and seeding rate. Pennycress nitrogen requirement was estimated to be almost half of canola nitrogen demand. Pennycress can potentially be incorporated in corn-soybean rotation without additional land require­ ment, and without negatively influencing the subsequent crops [28]. Therefore, pennycress presents the potentials to be a promising feed­ stock for RJF. The outcomes of this study help the sustainable devel­ opment of commercial-scale pennycress production as RJF feedstock by evaluating the technical feasibility, resources requirements, as well as the cost of the production and logistics.

[13] Pearlson M. A techno-economic and environmental assessment of hydroprocessed renewable distillate fuels. Masters Thesis, Univ Massachusetts; 2011. [14] Stratton RW. Life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions and non-CO2 combustion effects from alternative jet fuels. M.Sc. Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 2010. [15] Koizumi T. Biofuels and food security. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;52:829–41. [16] Fan J, Shonnard DR, Kalnes TN, Johnsen PB, Rao S. A life cycle assessment of pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.) -derived jet fuel and diesel. Biomass Bioenergy 2013;55:87–100. [17] Boateng AA, Mullen CA, Goldberg NM. Producing stable pyrolysis liquids from the oil-seed presscakes of mustard family plants: pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.) and camelina (camelina sativa). Energy Fuel 2010;24:6624–32. [18] Sedbrook JC, Phippen WB, Marks MD. New approaches to facilitate rapid domestication of a wild plant to an oilseed crop: example pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.). Plant Sci 2014;227:122–32. [19] Moser BR, Knothe G, Vaughn SF, Isbell TA. Production and evaluation of biodiesel from field pennycress (Thlaspi arWense L.) oil. Energ Fuel 2009;23(8):4149–55. [20] Chu PL, Vanderghem C, MacLean HL, Saville BA. Financial analysis and risk assessment of hydroprocessed renewable jet fuel production from camelina, carinata and used cooking oil. Appl Energy 2017;198:401–9. [21] Shila JJH. Techno-economic analysis of camelina-derived hydroprocessed renewable jet fuel and its implications on the aviation industry. Ph.D. Dissertation, Purdue University; 2017. [22] Mupondwa E, Li X, Tabil L, Falk K, Gugel R. Technoeconomic analysis of camelina oil extraction as feedstock for biojet fuel in the Canadian prairies. Biomass Bioenergy 2016;95:221–34. [23] Moser BR. Biodiesel from alternative oilseed feedstocks: camelina and field pennycress. Biofuels 2012;3:193–209. [24] Liu G, Yan B, Chen G. Technical review on jet fuel production. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;25:59–70. [25] Ewertowska A, Pozo C, Gavald� a J, Jim� enez L, Guill� en-Gos� albez G. Combined use of life cycle assessment, data envelopment analysis and Monte Carlo simulation for quantifying environmental efficiencies under uncertainty. J Clean Prod 2017;166: 771–83. [26] Morgan MG, Henrion M, Small M. Uncertainty: a guide to dealing with uncertainty in quantitative risk and policy analysis. Reprint Edition. Cambridge University Press; 1990. [27] Evangelista RL, Isbell TA, Cermak SC. Extraction of pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.) seed oil by full pressing. Ind Crop Prod 2012;37:76–81. [28] Phippen WB, Phippen ME. Soybean seed yield and quality as a response to field pennycress residue. Crop Sci 2012;52:2767. [29] Dose HL, Eberle CA, Forcella F, Gesch RW. Early planting dates maximize winter annual field pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.) yield and oil content. Ind Crop Prod 2017;97:477–83. [30] US EPA. United States environmental protection agency. Announcement Renew Fuel Standard 2015. Available at: . [Accessed 16 March 2019]. 2015. (accessed on Https://WwwEpaGov/Renewable-Fuel-Standard-Program/2015-AnnouncementsRenewable-Fuel-Standard. [31] Stamm M. Harvesting options for winter canola. Available at:(accessed on, htt ps://www.no-tillfarmer.com/articles/5766-harvesting-options-for-winter-canola. [Accessed 19 March 2019]. [32] Johnson GA, Kantar MB, Betts KJ, Wyse DL. Field pennycress production and weed control in a double crop system with soybean in Minnesota. Agron J 2015;107:532. [33] Singh Sidhu VP. Establishing a vegetative cap for sustainable stabilization of copper contaminated soils in torch lake. Michigan: Ph.D. Dissertation. Montclair State University; 2016. [34] Phippen W, Phippen M. Evaluation of field pennycress (thlaspi arvense L.) populations. Association for the advancement of industrial crops conference; september 19-22; Fort Collins, CO. New Crops: Exploring Diversity, Preserving our Future. 2010. [35] Northern New York Agricultural Development Program. FACT SHEET #1 in a series on soybeans growing soybeans in NNY. Available at: http://www.nnyagdev. org/PDF/NNYSoybeansFS.pdf. [Accessed 19 March 2019]. accessed on. [36] Frittelli JF. CRS report for congress grain transport: modal trends and infrastructure implications. 2005. [37] Canola Council of Canada. Canola Storage Management tips for conditioning and drying. 2012. [38] Johanns AM. Grain storage alternatives: an economic comparison. Ag Decision Maker; 2018. [39] EIA. US. Energy information administration. Monthly biodiesel production report. Available at:accessed on, https://www.eia.gov/biofuels/biodiesel. [Accessed 29 December 2018]. [40] AgMRC. Agricultural marketing resource center. A national information resource for value-added agriculture: Pennycress. Available at: https://www.agmrc.org/co mmodities-products/grains-oilseeds/pennycress/. [Accessed 13 September 2018]. accessed on. [41] ASABE D497 Standard. Agricultural machinery management data. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. vols. 349–57. February 2006. ASABE, St Joseph,MI, USA. [42] Tassielli G, Renzulli PA, Mousavi-Avval SH, Notarnicola B. Quantifying life cycle inventories of agricultural field operations by considering different operational parameters. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2018:1–18. [43] Jaeger WK, Siegel R. Economics of oilseed crops and their biodiesel potential in Oregon’s Willamette valley. Spectr Rep 2008;1081:18–30.

Author contribution statement Seyed Hashem Mousavi-Avval: Investigation, Data curation, Soft­ ware, Visualization, Formal analysis, Writing - Original Draft. Ajay Shah: Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Writing Review & Editing, Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition. Acknowledgments This project was supported in parts by the U.S. Department of En­ ergy, Award No: DE-SC0019233. Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi. org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.109764. References [1] Davis SC, Boundy RG. Transportation energy data book: edition 37. Oak Ridge Natl. Lab; 2019. https://cta.ornl.gov/data/index.shtml. [Accessed 19 April 2019]. [2] EPA. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Inventory of U. S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2016. EPA 430-R-18-003. 2018. Available at: www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissionsand-sinks-1990-2016. [Accessed 19 March 2019]. accessed. [3] O’Connell A, Kousoulidou M, Lonza L, Weindorf W. Considerations on GHG emissions and energy balances of promising aviation biofuel pathways. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2019;101:504–15. [4] Wang W-C, Tao L. Bio-jet fuel conversion technologies. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;53:801–22. [5] Fan J. Sustainable energy production in the United States: life cycle assessment of biofuels and bioenergy. Ph.D. Dissertation. Michigan Technological University; 2013. [6] Raslavi�cius L, Semenov VG, Chernova NI, Ker�sys A, Kopeyka AK. Producing transportation fuels from algae: in search of synergy. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;40:133–42. [7] P� erez-L� opez P, Montazeri M, Feijoo G, Moreira MT, Eckelman MJ. Integrating uncertainties to the combined environmental and economic assessment of algal biorefineries: a Monte Carlo approach. Sci Total Environ 2018;626:762–75. [8] Wang W-C, Tao L, Markham J, Zhang Y, Tan E, Batan L, et al. Review of biojet fuel conversion technologies. Denver, CO Natl Renew Energy Lab Rep No NREL/TP5100-66291 2016. [9] Pearlson M, Wollersheim C, Hileman J. A techno-economic review of hydroprocessed renewable esters and fatty acids for jet fuel production. Biofuel Bioprod Biorefin 2013;7:89–96. [10] Li X, Mupondwa E, Tabil L. Technoeconomic analysis of biojet fuel production from camelina at commercial scale: case of Canadian Prairies. Bioresour Technol 2018;249:196–205. [11] Why ESK, Ong HC, Lee HV, Gan YY, Chen W-H, Chong CT. Renewable aviation fuel by advanced hydroprocessing of biomass: challenges and perspective. Energy Convers Manag 2019;199:11201–5. [12] Tao L, Milbrandt A, Zhang Y, Wang W-C. Techno-economic and resource analysis of hydroprocessed renewable jet fuel. Biotechnol Biofuels 2017;10:261.

12

S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 123 (2020) 109764 [61] Agusdinata DB, Zhao F, Ileleji K, DeLaurentis D. Life cycle assessment of potential biojet fuel production in the United States. Environ Sci Technol 2011;45:9133–43. [62] USDA, United States Department of Agriculture. Natural resources conservation service. Iowa Agronomy Technical Note 36: Interseeding of Cover Crops. https ://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/PA_NRCSConsumption/download?cid¼nrcseprd9 77406&ext¼pdf;2016. [Accessed 19 March 2019]. accessed on. [63] Ehrensing DT, Guy SO. Camelina. Oregon State University Extension Services; 2008. Available: https://catalog.extension.oregonstate.edu/sites/catalog/files/pro ject/pdf/em8953.pdf. [Accessed 13 March 2018]. [64] Miller PE. Renewable diesel production from canola and camelina. M.Sc. Thesis. University of Alberta; 2012. [65] Martinez-Feria R, Jacobs K, Wiedenhoeft M. File A1-24 - estimated costs of production for winter canola in Iowa. Iowa state univ ext outreach. Available at: https://WwwExtensionIastateEdu/Agdm/Crops/Pdf/A1-24Pdf. [Accessed 4 April 2019]. accessed on. [66] Saskatchewan Ministry of Agricunture. Crop planning guide. Available at: http ://www.agriculture.gov.sk.ca/. [Accessed 13 September 2018]. accessed on. [67] Dorn KM, Fankhauser JD, Wyse DL, Marks MD. De novo assembly of the pennycress (Thlaspi arvense) transcriptome provides tools for the development of a winter cover crop and biodiesel feedstock. Plant J 2013;75:1028–38. [68] Wilson ML, Allan DL, Baker JM. Aerially seeding cover crops in the northern US Corn Belt: limitations, future research needs, and alternative practices. J Soil Water Conserv 2014;69:67A–72A. [69] Lessiter M. Failed aerial seeding of cover crops reported. No-Till Farmer. Available at: https://www.no-tillfarmer.com/articles/901-failed-aerial-seeding-of-cover-c rops-reported. [Accessed 16 March 2019]. accessed on. [70] Robison D. Experiences of establishing cover crops in Indiana. Indianapolis: Presented at the Indiana Certified Crop Advisor Conference; 2011. December 2021. [71] Phippen WB, Phippen ME. Seed oil characteristics of wild field pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.) populations and USDA accessions. 2013. Available at: http://www.wiu. edu/pennycress/current-experiments/Pennycressseed-oil2013.pdf. [Accessed 12 January 2019]. accessed on. [72] Mousavi-Avval SH, Rafiee S, Sharifi M, Hosseinpour S, Notarnicola B, Tassielli G, Renzulli PA, Khanali M. Use of LCA indicators to assess Iranian rapeseed production systems with different residue management practices. Ecol Indicat 2017;80:31–9. [73] USDA, United States Department of Agriculture. Weed risk assessment for thlaspi arvense. Raleigh, NC: Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory; 2015. [74] Groeneveld JH, Klein A-M. Pollination of two oil-producing plant species: camelina (Camelina sativa L. Crantz) and pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.) double-cropping in Germany. GCB Bioenergy 2014;6:242–51. [75] Zanetti F, Isbell TA, Gesch RW, Evangelista RL, Alexopoulou E, Moser B, Monti A. Turning a burden into an opportunity: pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.) a new oilseed crop for biofuel production. Biomass Bioenerg; 2019. p. 130.

[44] Sokhansanj S, Fenton J. Cost benefit of biomass supply and pre-processing. A BIOCAP res integr progr synth pap available Https//WwwCesarnet.ca/BiocapArchive/Rif/Report/Sokhansanj_SPdf 2006. (accessed on: Oct 24, 2019). [45] Ward J. Continuous flow grain dryer operating cost estimation. Mississippi State University Extension Services; 2013. Available: https://extension.msstate.edu/si tes/default/files/publications/publications/p2747.pdf. [Accessed 4 April 2019]. [46] Edwards W. Estimating the cost for drying corn. A2-31. Iowa State University Extension Outreach; 2014. [47] Li C, Wang H, Miao H, Ye B. The economic and social performance of integrated photovoltaic and agricultural greenhouses systems: case study in China. Appl Energy 2017;190:204–12. [48] Cheah KW, Yusup S, Gurdeep Singh HK, Uemura Y, Lam HL. Process simulation and techno economic analysis of renewable diesel production via catalytic decarboxylation of rubber seed oil – a case study in Malaysia. J Environ Manag 2017;203:950–61. [49] Ward B, Barker FJ. AEDE-11-16 - Ohio farm custom rates 2016. Ohio State University Extension; 2017. Available: https://ohioline.osu.edu/factsheet/aede -11-16. [Accessed 4 April 2019]. [50] Muthukumarappan K. A novel continuous oil seed extraction method for jet fuel production. South Dakota State University; 2018. Available: https://www.bio. org/sites/default/files/Kasiviswanathan%20Muthu.pdf. [Accessed 4 April 2019]. [51] Dolya VS, Koreshchuk KE, Shkurupii EN, Kaminskii NA. Oils of three representatives of the family Cruciferae. II. Chem Nat Compd 1974;10:447–9. [52] Moser BR, Shah SN, Winkler-Moser JK, Vaughn SF, Evangelista RL. Composition and physical properties of cress (Lepidium sativum L.) and field pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.) oils. Ind Crop Prod 2009;30:199–205. [53] No S-Y. Inedible vegetable oils and their derivatives for alternative diesel fuels in CI engines: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15:131–49. [54] Bankovi�c-Ili�c IB, Stamenkovi�c OS, Veljkovi�c VB. Biodiesel production from nonedible plant oils. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:3621–47. [55] Carr PM. Potential of fanweed and other weeds as novel industrial oilseed crops. In: Janick J, Simon JE, editors. New crops. NY: Wiley; 1993. p. 384–8. [56] Sindelar AJ, Schmer MR, Gesch RW, Forcella F, Eberle CA, Thom MD, Archer DW. Winter oilseed production for biofuel in the US Corn Belt: opportunities and limitations. GCB Bioenergy 2017;9:508–24. [57] Laurenzi IJ, Jersey GR. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions and freshwater consumption of marcellus shale gas. Environ Sci Technol 2013;47(9):4896–903. [58] Hsu DD. Life cycle assessment of gasoline and diesel produced via fast pyrolysis and hydroprocessing. Biomass Bioenergy 2012;45:41–7. [59] Sedbrook J, Phippen W, Marks D. Advancing field pennycress as a new oilseed biofuels feedstock that does not require new land commitments. Genomic Sci Progr Annu Princ Investig Meet Febr 2019;24–27. VA 2019. [60] Marek LF, Bingaman B, Gardner CA, Isabel TA. Thlaspi arvense, a potential biodiesel crop: preliminary evaluation of the USDA germplasm collection. Proceedings of the 20th annual meeting of the association for the advancement of industrial crops, 7–11 September. TX, USA: College Station; 2008.

13