Emerson, Rachel M | Search NASA

DOE OSTI2023

Failure Modes and Effects Analysis of Biorefinery Pathways

This talk provides an overview of failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) development and implementation as a systematic criticality and risk assessment tool for biorefinery pathways within the FCIC. This supports a quality by design (QbD) approach, and this talk provides a high-level overview of the results for the FMEA evaluation focused on the generation of pine residue materials for high-temperature pyrolysis conversion. the FMEA interviews included two approaches. The first approach was based around the entire system of unit operations giving a wholistic system level view. The second approach used detailed interviews from individual unit operation within the system allowing for specific failures for individual system components. These two approaches provide different resolutions of information about the reliability and risk. The FMEA results focused on failures associated with meeting critical quality attributes (CQAs) identified for the high temperature conversion of loblolly pine residues and were supplemented with experimental data supporting process upsets and reliability also collected within the consortium. Estimations of risk scores for meeting each given CQA specification, identification of the impacts for not meeting a CQA specification, capturing causes associated with material attributes and process parameters for each failure, identification of current detection methods, and speculation of potential mitigation strategies for decreasing a failure’s risk score were gathered through the FMEA interviews, and were combined to understand the overall process risk metrics and where technology, process, and knowledge improvements are needed in order to de-risk emerging biorefineries.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Bio-project “derisking” through development of systematic methodologies and frameworks for risk assessment

One of the primary hindrances to producing a viable, sustainable domestic biomass industry for renewable biofuels, bio-products and bio-power is the lack of understanding and quantification of the risks associated with both the biomass supply chain and preprocessing and conversion technologies. Currently a consistent method for assessing, comparing, and quantifying risks in biomass supply chains does not exist, creating a major investment barrier to bioenergy projects in the U.S. The lack of a standardized approach has resulted in bioenergy stakeholders independently using inconsistent approaches and evaluation criteria, leading to unreliable and incomparable assessments of risks and financing barriers to bio-project development. Along with the challenges of inconsistent risk assessment for supply chain risk, technology specific risks based on variability in biomass properties are not fully understood and can pose significant unforeseen challenges for bioenergy projects. In many cases these properties have not yet been identified and the impacts on the proposed technology and products unquantified. This is particularly challenging for emerging preprocessing and conversion technologies. Without a firm understanding of the preprocessing/conversion technology-specific critical properties, the risk of a proposed bio-project cannot be fully evaluated. To address inconsistent risk evaluation in the biomass supply chain supporting project financing, a Biomass Supply Chain Risk Standards (BSCRS) framework was developed. The BSCRS framework includes a comprehensive list of known and perceived risks (Risk Indicators) to the supply chain developed through 100’s of interviews with bioenergy industry experts spanning from feedstock growers and suppliers to representatives from the financial sector. These risks have been organized into a manageable hierarchy of Risk Categories and Risk Factors that can be practically assessed. This BSCRS framework also provides mitigation strategies for multiple Risk Indicators from best available industry practices and research findings. Additionally, a risk quantification methodology for each Risk Factor, Risk Category, and the bio-project as a whole was developed to enable capital markets to assess feedstock risk more efficiently and more accurately. Multiple case studies representing existing bio-projects have been used to evaluate and verify the BSCRS framework and scoring methodology. To address technological risk along with the supply chain risk captured in the developed BSCRS framework, this work also focuses on development of a systematic criticality assessment tool using well-accepted, quantitative risk analysis methods to evaluate bioenergy feedstock critical properties impacting system unit operations. The proposed Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) approach uses a team of subject area experts (SAEs) for each targeted unit operation within a system. Collectively, the team will develop and use a quantitative scoring system to assess the material attributes, process parameters, and quality attributes for key unit operations that have already been identified. The FMEA process generates Risk Priority Numbers (RPNs) for the various failures and predominant causes for each material/process unit/product combination resulting in a semi-quantitative, standardized methodology for assessing technological risk and biomass properties contributing to that risk.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Data Qualification Framework

Proposed Data Qualification System Background Originally developed as a data qualification system for the Bioenergy Feedstock Library Provide data users a means of assessing data quality based on user driven quality metrics. Give users information regarding common data quality metrics to determine and assess the data quality. Potential Use Same type of quality assessment framework could be potentially applied to other databases and/or datasets for common assessment. Provide metric for assessment of appropriateness of data for various uses.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗