The value of a saved tree : The lifecycle of CO2-emissions associated with the combination of printing paper and electricity production of wood in the U.S. and Sweden

The pulp- and paper production is a very energy intensive industry sector. Both Sweden and the U.S. are major pulpandpaper producers. This report examines the energy and the CO2-emission connected with the pulp- and paperindustry for the two countries from a lifecycle perspective.New technologies make it possible to increase the electricity production in the integrated pulp- andpaper mill through black liquor gasification and a combined cycle (BLGCC). That way, the mill canproduce excess electricity, which can be sold and replace electricity produced in power plants. In thisprocess the by-products that are formed at the pulp-making process is used as fuel to produce electricity.In pulp- and paper mills today the technology for generating energy from the by-product in aTomlinson boiler is not as efficient as it could be compared to the BLGCC technology. Scenarios havebeen designed to investigate the results from using the BLGCC technique using a life cycle analysis.Two scenarios are being represented by a 1994 mill in the U.S. and a 1994 mill in Sweden.The scenariosare based on the average energy intensity of pulp- and paper mills as operating in 1994 in the U.S.and Sweden respectively. The two other scenarios are constituted by a »reference mill« in the U.S. andSweden using state-of-the-art technology. We investigate the impact of varying recycling rates and totalenergy use and CO2-emissions from the production of printing and writing paper. To economize withthe wood and that way save trees, we can use the trees that are replaced by recycling in a biomassgasification combined cycle (BIGCC) to produce electricity in a power station. This produces extra electricitywith a lower CO2 intensity than electricity generated by, for example, coal-fired power plants.The lifecycle analysis in this thesis also includes the use of waste treatment in the paper lifecycle. Both Sweden and theU.S. are countries that recycle paper. Still there is a lot of paper waste, this paper is a part of the countries municipalsolid waste (MSW). A lot of the MSW is landfilled, but parts of it are incinerated to extract electricity. The thesis hasdesigned special scenarios for the use of MSW in the lifecycle analysis.This report is studying and comparing two different countries and two different efficiencies on theBLGCC in four different scenarios. This gives a wide survey and points to essential parameters to specificallyreflect on, when making assumptions in a lifecycle analysis. The report shows that there arethree key parameters that have to be carefully considered when making a lifecycle analysis of wood inan energy and CO2-emission perspective in the pulp- and paper mill in the U.S. and in Sweden. First,there is the energy efficiency in the pulp- and paper mill, then the efficiency of the BLGCC and last theCO2 intensity of the electricity displaced by BIGCC or BLGCC generatedelectricity. It also show that with the current technology that we havetoday, it is possible to produce CO2 free paper with a waste paper amountup to 30%. The thesis discusses the system boundaries and the assumptions.Further and more detailed research, including amongst others thesystem boundaries and forestry, is recommended for more specificanswers.

Influences of infrastructure and attitudes to health on value of travel time savings in bicycle journeys

In this paper we investigate how attitudes to health and exercise in connection with cycling influence the estimation of values of travel time savings in different kinds of bicycle environments (mixed traffic, bicycle lane in the road way, bicycle path next to the road, and bicycle path not in connection with the road). The results, based on two Swedish stated choice studies, suggest that the values of travel time savings are lower when cycling in better conditions. Surprisingly, the respondents do not consider cycling on a path next to the road worse than cycling on a path not in connection to the road, indicating that they do not take traffic noise and air pollution into account in their decision to cycle. No difference can be found between cycling on a road way (mixed traffic) and cycling in a bicycle lane in the road way. The results also indicate that respondents that include health aspects in their choice to cycle have lower value of travel time savings for cycling than respondents that state that health aspects are of less importance, at least when cycling on a bicycle path. The appraisals of travel time savings regarding cycling also differ a lot depending on the respondents’ alternative travel mode. The individuals who stated that they will take the car if they do not cycle have a much higher valuation of travel time savings than the persons stating public transport as the main alternative to cycling.