Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 149 (2021) 111340

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Techno-economic analysis of hydroprocessed renewable jet fuel production

from pennycress oilseed
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: Commercial production of jet fuel from biobased feedstocks is still encumbering, mainly due to their high
Oil extraction production cost and competition with food resources. Pennycress oilseed is a potential jet fuel feedstock which
Hydroprocessing technology can be supplied at a lower price compared to similar oilseeds, such as soybean and canola. However, the techno-
Aviation biofuel
economics of pennycress-based jet fuel production needs to be evaluated. The objective of this study was to assess
Renewable jet fuel
Pennycress meal
the technical feasibility and costs of hydroprocessed renewable jet fuel (HRJ) production from pennycress. The
Minimum selling price production capacity was considered to be 18.9 million L/yr (5 million gal/yr). The analysis considered penny­
cress grain handling and conditioning, oil extraction and conversion to HRJ and byproducts, i.e., LPG, naphtha
and green diesel, through hydroprocessing technology, as well as pennycress meal processing as boiler fuel and
wastewater treatment. Total investment for establishing the HRJ biorefinery at the selected capacity was esti­
mated to be 90.8 million USD. Minimum selling price (MSP) of HRJ was estimated to be 1.2 USD/L, which was
comparable to the MSP of HRJ from similar oilseeds, including soybean and canola. It could also be further
reduced by supplying pennycress grain at a lower price, increasing the oil content and increasing the production
capacity of the biorefinery. The outcomes of this research would help establish the performance targets needed to
reach the economic viability of HRJ production from pennycress at the commercial scale.

upgrading or biological conversion processes to produce hydrocarbons

1. Introduction
Renewable jet fuel production from alternative biobased feedstocks
is gaining traction in recent years mainly due to the concerns associated
with the adverse environmental effects of fossil fuel use in the aviation
industry, and the energy security [1]. Several biobased feedstocks, such
as canola, camelina, soybean, and carinata oilseeds, have been consid­
ered as potential sources for the production of renewable jet fuel [1,2].
However, jet fuel production from these feedstocks at the commercial
scale is still encumbering mainly due to high cost of production,
competition with food resources, impacts on the ecosystem due to
changes in land use patterns, as well as environmental impacts associ­
ated with feedstock production and conversion processes [3–6].
Renewable jet fuel production technologies vary based on the type of
feedstock. Four of the most common technologies include alcohol-to-jet,
syngas-to-jet, sugar-to-jet, and oil-to-jet [7]. Alcohols, e.g., ethanol and
butanol, can be converted to jet fuel through dehydration and oligo­
merization processes [8]. Syngas-to-jet technology includes
Fischer-Tropsch and gas fermentation to produce jet fuel from hydrogen
and carbon monoxide [9]. Sugar-to-jet technology includes catalytic
from sugars and sugar intermediates [10]. Oil-to-jet technology is used
for conversion of oil extracted from oleaginous feedstocks, including
oilseeds and other oil- or lipid-based feedstocks, such as algae and waste
oil, into renewable jet fuel [7]. Hydroprocessing technology is currently
the most common oil-to-jet technology [11]. This technology is at a
relatively developed stage, and has been identified as the most profitable
pathway to produce hydroprocessed renewable jet fuel (HRJ) from
oleaginous feedstocks [12–15]. Through hydroprocessing technology,
vegetable oil is converted to hydrocarbons containing the carbon chains
mainly in the range of renewable diesel and jet fuel. This technology is
effective to produce drop-in quality HRJ, which is equivalent of
petroleum-based jet fuel [2], and it can be used as jet fuel blendstocks at
up to 50 vol%, by common aviation fleets [16]; thus, bringing significant
strategic and financial benefits to the aviation industry [17]. In addition,
this technology can be used for conversion of algal and microbial tri­
glycerides to HRJ, which can reduce dependency on food resources, e.g.,
vegetable oils [18]. So far, HRJ from oilseeds has been used by several of
the airlines at the demonstration scale [15,19]; however, to be a viable
alternative to the petroleum-based jet fuel, HRJ should be producible in
large scale with available resources and technology level, be

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: shah.971@osu.edu (A. Shah).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111340
Received 2 July 2020; Received in revised form 5 June 2021; Accepted 9 June 2021
Available online 23 June 2021
1364-0321/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 149 (2021) 111340

such as fertilizer and pesticide [32], as well as without additional land

Nomenclature requirement, because it can serve as a cover-crop to be planted between
corn and soybean in corn-soybean cropping system [1,33,34]. It is
AD Anaerobic digestion estimated that there are ~12 million ha of land under corn-soybean
HRJ Hydroprocessed renewable jet fuel rotation in the Midwestern U.S., which are currently left as fallow dur­
IRR Internal rate of return ing the winter, and cause several environmental consequences, such as
LPG Liquefied petroleum gas soil erosion, run off and nutrients load to the water bodies [35]. Planting
MGPY Million gallon per year pennycress in these lands, i.e., almost half of the U.S. annual soybean
MLPY Million liter per year production land, can potentially produce 9–15 million tons of penny­
MSP Minimum selling price cress grain per year [36]. It will also provide the opportunity for soil and
MT Metric tonne root carbon storage and consequently climate change mitigation [37]. In
MW Megawatt addition, pennycress grain has 25–36% oil content, i.e., comparable to,
NHP Nonhydratable phospholipids or higher than, that of the other oilseeds, such as soybean, camelina and
NPV Net present value canola, with acceptable quality to produce renewable jet fuel [38,39].
PL Phospholipids Pennycress can potentially be supplied at lower price compared to
ROI Return on investment similar oilseeds, such as soybean and canola, due to lower inputs
WWT Wastewater treatment requirement [32]. In addition, due to the similarities of pennycress oil
fatty acid profile to that of the similar oilseeds, such as canola, the yield
and quality of pennycress-based HRJ is expected to be similar to HRJ
from other oilseeds [40]. Despite merits of pennycress as potential HRJ
economically competitive and have environmental benefits. feedstock, literature lacks a thorough assessment of techno-economics of
Evaluation of techno-economics of commercial HRJ production from HRJ production from pennycress at the commercial scale. A recent study
different biobased feedstocks has been the focuse of multiple studies [14] compared the costs of HRJ production from several types of
(Table 1), all of which have identified the high cost of production as the vegetable oil, including pennycress oil (Table 1). Although pennycress
major challenge towards commercialization of biobased HRJ production oil was considered in comparative evaluations, the study did not include
[20–23]. Feedstock has been identified as the largest contributor to the the complete processes of pennycress oil extraction and conversion to
total HRJ production cost from soybean, sunflower, palm and macaw HRJ. It is also worth mentioning that due to the high levels of glyco­
through hydroprocessing technology, as well as from corn, sugarcane, sinolates and erucic acid in pennycress grain, currently pennycress meal
and sweet sorghum through alcohol-to-jet technology [24]. Some oil­ cannot be used as a protein source for animal feed which is the typical
seeds, such as camelina, carinata, and soybean, have been identified as use of meal from similar oilseeds [41,42]. This is expected to highly
the promising feedstocks in terms of low production cost [25,26], and affect the economic viability of pennycress-based HRJ production due to
greenhouse gas emissions reduction [17,27]. Although commercial reducing the byproduct credit associated with the meal [17]. Due to all
production of soybean has been established [28], there are concerns these reasons, thorough assessment of techno-economics of pennycress
regarding technical feasibility of supply of camelina and carinata at the oil extraction and conversion to HRJ at the commercial scale is
commercial scale [29]. In addition, at the current state of technology, becoming more important.
HRJ production from these oilseeds is not economically viable compared The objective of this study was to assess the technical feasibility and
to petroleum-based jet fuel mainly due to high cost of feedstock supply costs of pennycress-based HRJ production at the commercial scale. Re­
which causes higher selling price of HRJ [25]. Minimum selling price sources and consumables requirements, equipment capacities, labor and
(MSP) of HRJ form tallow (0.79–1.42 USD/L), soybean (0.87–1.60 utilities requirements, costs, revenue, and credits were estimated and
USD/L) and camelina (2.90 USD/L) was found to be higher than the the economics of pennycress-based HRJ was evaluated. Sensitivity
5-year average price of petroleum-based jet fuel (0.64 USD/L) [14,15]. analysis was also performed to analyze the influences of potential var­
In addition, recent literature has highlighted the dominant contribution iations in different input parameters and alternative processes on the
of feedstock supply to the overall production cost of HRJ from oilseeds. MSP of pennycress-based HRJ. The outcomes of this research help
For example, contribution of feedstock supply to the overall production identify the bottlenecks and key parameters affecting the technical
cost of camelina-based HRJ was reported as 80–90% [30]; and feedstock feasibility and economic viability of establishing the HRJ biorefineries
supply highly affected the economics of HRJ production from carinata in the Midwestern U.S.; thus they are useful for the biobased industries,
[25]. farmers, investors, and policy makers.
Pennycress (Thalaspi arvense) is a potential jet fuel feedstock with
several advantages, in that it can be grown with low levels of inputs,

Table 1
Summary of recent literature on techno-economic analysis of jet fuel production from different feedstocks (prices in 2019 USD).
Feedstock Production capacity Conversion technology Minimum selling price (USD/ Geographic Reference
L) location

Lignocellulosic Feeding rate of 75 MT/h (50 wt% moisture content) Gasification, syngas-to- 2.2–3.0 USA [31]
biomass jet
Sugar cane juice Feeding rate of 222.5 MT/h Sugar-to-jet 2.2 USA [31]
Vegetable oil Feeding rate of 14.9 MT/h, Hydroprocessing 2.0 USA [31]
Vegetable oils 116-378 million L/yr Hydroprocessing 1.19–1.37 USA [12]
Jatropha Feeding rate of 30 MT/h oil Hydroprocessing 1.0 USA [14]
Castor bean Feeding rate of 30 MT/h oil Hydroprocessing 2.6 USA [14]
Pennycress Feeding rate of 30 MT/h oil Hydroprocessing 1.8 USA [14]
Camelina Feeding rate of 30 MT/h oil Hydroprocessing 3.0 USA [14]
Carinata – Hydroprocessing 1.49 Australia [25]
Carinata 260 million L/yr Hydroprocessing 1.1–1.6 USA [22]
Camelina 225 million L/yr Hydroprocessing 1.13 Canada [30]
Camelina 378-116 million L/yr Hydroprocessing 1.3–1.5 USA [17]

2
S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Techno-economic modeling
2.1.1. Process simulation
The HRJ biorefinery capacity was considered based on the U.S.
small-scale biodiesel plants, as it is expected that the initial commercial
biobased HRJ plants will be of smaller size. Out of the total 100 biodiesel
plants currently operational in the U.S., the capacities of the lower 50
are in the range 0.03–15 million gal/yr (MGPY), with the average of
5.09 MGPY [43]. Thus, the capacity of HRJ biorefinery for this analysis
was considered to be 5 MGPY (~18.9 million L/yr (MLPY)).
System boundaries for the analysis included pennycress grain
handling and conditioning, oil extraction, oil conversion to HRJ, meal
processing, wastewater treatment (WWT), and steam and electricity
Fig. 1. Processes overview of pennycress oil extraction and conversion to HRJ. Note: Pennycress meal was considered to be either burned in a boiler to generate
energy or processed to be used as a protein source (specified as dashed lines).
3
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 149 (2021) 111340
generation (Fig. 1), as discussed in detail in the following section. The
process model was built in SuperPro Designer software v10 [44], and the
mass balance was conducted by quantifying the mass rate of inputs and
outputs for the defined system. The process parameters, e.g., tempera­
ture, pressure, efficiencies, residence time, etc., were considered as
indicated in the following section. Process data obtained from SuperPro
Designer built-in model was used for equipment sizing, and determining
the required number of different equipment.
2.1.2. System overview
This study assumed that the oil extraction and HRJ production are
based in the same biorefinery to take advantages of shared resources and
minimize the transportation and storage requirements. The system
comprised of different processes for oil extraction from pennycress grain
up to production of HRJ and byproducts, which includes pennycress
S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah
grain handling and conditioning, mechanical and solvent oil extraction,
oil purification, hydrogenation, hydrocracking, separation, pennycress
meal processing, and WWT processes (Fig. 1).
2.1.2.1. Pennycress grain handling and conditioning. Typical operations
for handling and conditioning of oilseeds include receiving, cleaning,
drying, flaking, and conditioning (or cooking) [45], which have also
been considered for pennycress grain in this study (Fig. 1). Small grains,
e.g., canola, are graded based on multiple factors, e.g., dockage, heating,
rate of infestation, type of grain, moisture, and odor [46]. Grain cleaning
usually includes a vibrating screen designed to remove the fine and
oversized particles, and aspiration to remove the light foreign materials
which include 1.5–1.8% of pennycress grain, similar to that of other
small grains [45,47,48]. For this analysis, foreign materials were
considered to be 1.5w%. Cleaned grain is pre-heated at 30-40 ◦ C to
prevent shattering which is caused when cold grain enters the flaking
unit [17]. The preheating temperature of 35 ◦ C considered for penny­
cress grain conditioning in this study. Preheated grain is then flaked to
break the coat, using a set of roller mills. During the flaking process, the
pennycress grain is squeezed into flakes with 0.30–0.38 mm thickness.
This results in the cell wall of oilseeds being distorted to make the sol­
vent easier to diffuse through the grain particles, which makes the oil
more accessible [45]. The flaked grain is then heated to 75-100 ◦ C
(average 85 ◦ C, also used for this analysis), mainly for rupturing the
intact cells to release the oil, denaturing the protein, and adjusting the
moisture content of conditioned grain before entering the oil extraction
process.
2.1.2.2. Oil extraction. Oil content of pennycress grain ranges from 25
to 36% [38,39]. This study considered an average oil content of 29%.
Typically, oil is extracted from oilseeds in two steps, including me­
chanical press and solvent extraction [49], which were also considered
for pennycress oil extraction in this study. Mechanical press is usually
performed using a screw press to remove 50–60% of available oil from
the flaked and conditioned grain [45], with 55% considered for this
analysis. This makes the solvent extraction more efficient and economic.
The oil flow of the mechanical press usually has meal fine, which is
returned to the mechanical press after passing through a filtration or
sedimentation mechanism [49]. Sedimentation mechanism was
considered for this study.
The pressed material, which is known as press cake, is then processed
with solvent extraction for further oil extraction. During the solvent
extraction, a solvent specifically produced for the vegetable oil industry
(typically n-hexane) is used to achieve sufficiently low residual oil
contents (usually less than 1%) in the meal [50], which was considered
for this study. The solvent is flammable; so, the solvent extraction
operation is usually performed in an isolated area. Solvent extraction
includes three steps, namely extraction, solvent distillation, and
liquid-phase recovery [45]. There are different mechanical designs for
the solvent extraction process; this study considered the basket and
continuous loop extractors which are the most common extractors for oil
extraction from canola and similar oilseeds [51]. In this design, the press
cake is deposited into individual deep baskets of the extractor and
purged or washed with a solvent which releases the oil in the press cake.
The most common flake depth is 2–3 m. The baskets, supported on the
drainage screens, are filled with press cake, and during the rotary
movement, the solvent and oil solution, also known as miscella, are
passed, while the solid part, also known as meal, is retained in the basket
and deposited at the exit [48]. During the extraction, the press cake and
solvent-oil miscella usually move in an opposite direction using a
countercurrent flow device [45]. The upper limit of extractor operating
temperature is 63 ◦ C, which is less than the boiling temperature of
commercial hexane (i.e., 64–69 ◦ C) [42]. To provide a safety margin, the
operating temperature was suggested to be 60 ◦ C [45], and thus was
considered for this study. Total residence time in the extractor, including
4
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 149 (2021) 111340
the washing and draining time, is typically 50 min, which is divided into
30 min for washing and 20 min for draining, as suggested elsewhere
[45]. The oil content of the hexane-saturated meal, which leaves the
extractor, was considered to be less than 1%, containing 25–35% re­
sidual solvent, as suggested in the literature [51]. After extraction, the
pennycress meal is conveyed to the desolventizing equipment. Miscella,
containing 25–30% oil is also proceed to solvent recovery to separate oil
and solvent [45]. The recovered solvent was considered to be recircu­
lated for reuse in the solvent extraction process, as suggested in the
literature [45]. In addition, a make-up solvent was considered to be
added to compensate the solvent losses during the recovery step. After
solvent recovery process, the crude pennycress oil was considered to
pass through the purification process.
2.1.2.3. Oil purification. Crude vegetable oil contains several impu­
rities; and it is usually purified through degumming process [52], which
was also considered for this study. Degumming is used for removing
phosphatides, particulate impurities such as meal residue, as well as
water-soluble compounds such as sugars and glycolipids [53]. In this
step, color pigments and free fatty acids are also separated [45]. During
the degumming step, crude oil is heated up to 80 ◦ C and a water and
citric acid solution, containing 30% citric acid, is added to the degum­
ming reactor and is continuously stirred for 20 min, as it was considered
for this study. This leads to the conversion of nonhydratable phospho­
lipids (NHP) into phospholipids (PL) (Eq. (1)):
1 Citric acid +6 NHP → 6.2 PL (1)
The stream is further processed with washing and centrifugation
(Fig. 1). During the washing process, water is added to the degummed
oil, and the mixed stream proceed to the agitated hydration tank, where
the gums are agglomerated, and separated from the oil. During the
centrifugation, the light phase, i.e., oil, is separated, cooled down and
delivered to the hydrogenation process.
2.1.2.4. Hydrogenation and propane clave. Pennycress oil contains C14
to C24 fatty acids, which can be processed into shorter and more useful
hydrocarbons, and can be used as fuels, including propane (C3), LPG
(C3–C4), naphtha (C5–C7), HRJ (C8–C16), and green diesel (C17–C22)
[54]. Depropanation (Eq. (2)) and hydrogenation reactions (Eqs. (3)–
(5)) are conducted in hydrogenation reactor. During the depropanation
reaction, hydrogen is added to the unsaturated fatty acids at the pres­
ence of catalyst, and saturated fatty acids are produced [54]. Then
propane is cleaved, and 3 mol of free fatty acids are produced (Eq. (2)).
Three reactions then occur simultaneously in the hydrogenation step.
This study considered hydrodeoxygenation (Eq. (3)) by 5%, decarbox­
ylation (Eq. (4)) by 90%, and decarbonylation (Eq. (5)) by 5%, as sug­
gested elsewhere [55]. During these reactions paraffin chains are
produced, and oxygen is removed from the fatty acid molecules in the
forms of water, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide in hydro­
deoxygenation (Eq. (3)), decarboxylation (Eq. (4)), and decarbonylation
(Eq. (5)) reactions, respectively [56].
Cn H(2n− 6m− 1) (COOH)3 + 3H2 →3Cn H2n+1 COOH + C3 H8 (2)
Cn H2n+1 COOH + (m + 3)H2 →Cn+1 H2n+4 + 2H2 O (3)
Cn H2n+1 COOH + mH2 →Cn H2n+2 + CO2 (4)
Cn H(2n+1− 2m) COOH + (m + 1)H2 →Cn H2n+2 + CO + H2 O (5)
where n and m denote the number of C and H in the hydrocarbons and
they are varying from 1 to 24 based on the fatty acid profile of penny­
cress oil (Table S1).
The operating temperature and pressure in hydrogenation reactor
were considered as 300 ◦ C and 3 MPa, respectively, as suggested in the
literature [30]. Platinum on Aluminum (Pt/Al2O3) was considered as the
S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah
catalyst for hydrogenation of pennycress oil at 5% (mass ratio), as
suggested in the literature [30]. The lifetime of catalyst depends on
several factors, such as presence of solvent. In this study the lifetime of
catalyst was considered to be one year, as suggested in the literature
[57]. After hydrogenation, dissolved CO2 and CO, as well as most water,
propane and hydrogen are separated from the main flow through a flash
mechanism. The separated flow is further divided into propane and light
gases through condensation and distillation mechanisms (Fig. 1). The
product of hydrogenation is then sent to the hydrocracking process.
2.1.2.5. Hydrocracking. The process flow, after hydrogenation and
breaking the alkanes to hydrocarbons in the range of C15 to C22, was
considered to be treated with selective hydrocracking and isomeriza­
tion, in which the long hydrocarbons are broken down to shorter ones in
the range of HRJ (C8–C16), such that the low freeze point HRJ is pro­
duced and the product after this step meets the requirement of the HRJ
cloud point [30,56]. The operating temperature and pressure during the
hydrocracking reaction were considered as 355 ◦ C and 4 MPa, respec­
tively, as suggested in the literature [30]. The flow is proceeded for the
separation of the main product, as well as the byproducts [58].
2.1.2.6. Separation. The separation of flow into the main product, i.e.,
HRJ, and byproducts, i.e., light gases, LPG, naphtha, and green diesel,
was considered to be conducted in three distillation columns (Fig. 1). In
the first column, light flow containing the mix of light gases, LPG and
hydrogen was considered to be separated. The light flow was considered
to be further separated into different components using a condensation
mechanism. In the second distillation column, the light flow mostly
containing naphtha and water was considered to be separated and
further divided into naphtha and the remaining as wastewater, using a
condensation mechanism. In the third distillation column, light flow of
HRJ was considered to be separated, and the heavy flow, containing
heavy hydrocarbons and catalyst, was considered to proceed to the
centrifuge for catalyst recovery, and green diesel separation [30].
2.1.2.7. Wastewater treatment. At the HRJ biorefinery, wastewater from
oil purification, propane clave, as well as from separation of HRJ and
green diesel is mixed and sent to the WWT section (Fig. 1). The purpose
of using WWT is to manage wastewater for proper disposal. We
considered use of anaerobic digestion (AD) to produce effluent which is
rich in nutrients and suitable for land application, as well as biogas
which is rich in methane [59], and was considered to be fed to the
cogeneration unit for steam and electricity generation (Fig. 1).
2.1.2.8. Pennycress meal processing. Pennycress meal contains ~31%
crude protein, which is comparable to that of canola meal (~36%);
however, it contains a higher level of erucic acid (1.6–1.7%). It also
contains a higher level of glucosinolates (18.2–21.7 μmol/g) [41]
compared to the other oilseed meals typically used as protein source for
animal feed [60]. Due to high levels of glycosinolates and erucic acid on
pennycress meal, recent studies have suggested that pennycress meal
cannot be used as animal feed [41,42]; thus, alternative applications
have been suggested. Pennycress meal contains sinigrin, which makes it
a valuable biofumigant for effective weed control [61,62]. Incorporation
of pennycress meal in the soil has also been suggested to provide sup­
pression of weed seeds [63,64], in addition to its value as an organic
fertilizer by adding nutrients to the agricultural land [61]. Pennycress
meal can also be used as a bio-based filler to be incorporated into plastic
composites and fiber [60]. Regardless of high quantities of fiber, glu­
cosinolates, and erucic acid in pennycress meal, some studies have re­
ported a limited nutritive value of pennycress meal for poultry
production [65]. In addition, recent studies have confirmed its use as a
protein source for the broiler starter diets at up to 8.5% [42]. However,
at the current state of technology, none of these applications have been
approved at the commercial scale. Thus, this study considered direct
5
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 149 (2021) 111340
combustion of pennycress meal as boiler fuel for energy (steam and
electricity) generation as the primary application. In addition, the
impact of alternative application of pennycress meal as a high value
product for animal feed was evaluated.
2.1.2.9. Use of pennycress meal and biogas for steam and electricity gen­
eration. Pennycress meal and biogas from AD were considered to be
burnt in a boiler to generate steam. Part of steam, in high-pressure form,
was considered to be used as utility needed for the plant, and the
remaining to be converted to electricity, which was partially reused in
the process. The excess electricity was also considered to be sold to the
grid. Boiler and turbine-generator efficiencies were considered to be 80
and 85%, respectively, as suggested in the literature [59].
2.1.2.10. Alternative use of pennycress meal as animal feed. After oil
extraction, residual solvent in meal is removed in a desolventizer, and it
is recycled in the process. In this step, the solvent is distilled from the
meal by heating it in a sealed chamber on a series of plates heated by
steam. During this process, the meal enters the chamber at 60 ◦ C, and it
is heated to 95-115 ◦ C using steam. The moisture is also increased to
12–18%. This process takes place over 50–90 min, with an average 70
min considered in this study. Then, pennycress meal is cooled down and
dried until 12% moisture content, and is granulated using a hammer mill
[51].
2.1.3. Economic analysis
The analysis was conducted in 2019. Biorefinery construction period
and startup period were assumed to be 18 and 6 months, respectively
(Table S5). Purchase prices of equipment were estimated based on their
required size using an exponential scaling procedure as suggested in the
literature [59]. Adjustments were made to determine the equipment
purchase price based on the scale of process and the year of analysis. The
parameters and assumptions for estimation of the total investment for
establishing the pennycress oil extraction and conversion facilities were
obtained from the process model developed with SuperPro Designer
software, as presented in Table S6. The cost of equipment installation
was estimated using associated factors taken from the literature [44,59],
and consequently the capital costs of the biorefinery establishment was
estimated.
Annual operating cost was estimated by including the costs associ­
ated with materials, labor, utilities, laboratory and quality control, as
well as facility-dependent cost. Facility-dependent cost accounts for the
costs associated with the equipment maintenance, depreciation, insur­
ance, taxes as well as other overhead costs [44]. Labor hours were
estimated based on the labor needs by different operations or sections in
the process. Labor basic rate was considered as 20 USD/h [63], and
labor cost was estimated using the following eq. [44]:
Labor cost = Basic rate ×
(1+Benefits+Supplies+Supervision+Administration) × Labor use (6)
where the benefits, supplies, supervision, and administration factors
were assumed as 0.40, 0.10, 0.20 and 0.60, respectively [44].
Prices of materials used, utility required, as well as the main product
and byproducts of the process are presented in Table 2. The required
process electricity and steam were generated by using pennycress meal
and biogas as boiler fuel and conversion to electricity and steam. Excess
electricity was considered to be supplied to the grid. In addition, the
byproduct credits associated with propane, LPG, naphtha, green diesel,
and electricity were estimated by considering their market prices
(Table 2). Capital and operating costs data obtained from the TEA model
were used to determine the MSP of HRJ at the biorefinery gate,
considering total credit and an internal rate of return (IRR) of 10%
(Table S5) [59,66]. Financial analysis was conducted by estimating re­
turn on investment (ROI) and net present value (NPV) of establishing the
HRJ biorefinery, as well as the MSP of HRJ production [59].
S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 149 (2021) 111340

Table 2
Prices for material, utilities and products of pennycress oil extraction and con­
version to HRJ (2019 USD).
Item Unit Price (USD/ Reference
Unit)

Bulk material
Citric acid kg 1.07 [27]
Hexane kg 2.04 [57]
Hydrogen kg 2.96 [7]
Pennycress seed kg 0.20 [32]
Catalyst kg 337.03 [30]
Water m3 1.00 [30]
Utilities
Std Power MWh 7.0 [43] (3-year average for the U.S.
Fig. 2. Material flow, electricity generation and utilities requirement rates for
industrial sector)
pennycress oil extraction and conversion to HRJ for the selected bio­
Steam MT 12.00 SuperPro built-in model
Steam (high MT 20.00 SuperPro built-in model refinery capacity.
pressure)
Cooling water MT 0.05 SuperPro built-in model 181 kg/h LPG, 96 kg/h naphtha, and 1656 L/h green diesel would be
Chilled water MT 0.41 SuperPro built-in model
produced after separation of the byproducts through the hydro­
CT water MT 0.07 SuperPro built-in model
Main product processing technology. The process would also generate wastewater
HRJ (C8–C16) USD/L 0.48 [43] (3-year average) which was considered to be treated through AD to produce 1.40 kg/h
Byproducts biogas. Pennycress meal and biogas were considered to be used as boiler
LPG (C3–C4) USD/ 0.23 [20]
fuel to produce steam and electricity. Through this process, ~1% (1,748
kg
Naphtha (C5–C7) USD/ 0.87 [20] kg/h) of the steam generated in the boiler would meet steam require­
kg ment for different processes of HRJ biorefinery at the selected capacity.
Green diesel USD/L 0.78 [43] (3-year average) The remaining steam was considered to be converted to electricity
(C17–C22) through turbine-generator to generate ~26 MW electricity (Fig. 2). The
Steam (atm) MT 12.00 SuperPro Designer built-in model
mass-based conversion rate of pennycress oil-to-HRJ was estimated to be
Electricity MWh 9.37 [43] (3-year average price for the
consumption U.S.) 0.45, and would be affected by the efficiency of hydrogenation, hydro­
cracking and separation processes. The estimated pennycress oil-to-HRJ
conversion rate is comparable to that of HRJ production from camelina
2.1.3.1. Sensitivity analysis. There are different sources of variation in oil (0.5) [17]. By considering the total productions of HRJ and
model inputs. For example, the oil content of pennycress varies within byproducts, including green diesel, naphtha, and LPG, the overall
the range 25–36% [38,39]. The uncertainty associated with the MSP of mass-based conversion rate of pennycress oil-to-products was estimated
HRJ was assessed using sensitivity analysis, which helps determine to be 0.81. In addition, the mass-based conversion rate of pennycress
differences in the model output parameters due to the variations in the grain (at 8% moisture content)-to-HRJ was estimated to be 0.13, which
individual inputs. The biorefinery size, pennycress grain price, fixed is in the range of that of biomass-to-fuel conversion rate (0.126–0.135)
capital investment, oil content, and pennycress meal price were used for reported in the literature [67]. This conversion rate would be affected by
the sensitivity analysis, by considering the 5th and 95th percentiles of different parameters, including oil content of pennycress grain, oil
their distributions, which were obtained either from the process extraction rate for the combined mechanical press and solvent extrac­
modeling or related literature. Pennycress grain price was considered tion, and the oil-to-HRJ conversion rate.
based on the previous study [32], which was reported in the range of The main utilities required for the process were estimated to be
0.17–0.23 USD/kg based on lower and upper limits of 90% central electricity, steam, process water, and cooling water (Fig. 2). Estimated
range, with an average of 0.20 USD/kg. onsite steam and electricity generations were sufficient to fully meet
In addition to the sensitivity analysis, changes in the process tech­ their biorefinery demands. The remaining steam was considered to be
nology to produce higher value byproducts are also expected to cause used to generate electricity through a turbine-generator. For the selected
significant impacts on the overall competitiveness of HRJ. So, the impact biorefinery capacity, a total of ~26 MW electricity was estimated to be
of alternative use of pennycress meal as protein source for animal feed generated through use of pennycress meal and biogas as boiler fuels. The
on the overall economics of pennycress-based HRJ was also assessed. HRJ biorefinery processes would use ~1.8 MW electricity, leaving about
Thus, the study considered partial use of pennycress meal as boiler fuel ~24.2 MW to be sold to the grid. Electricity would be mainly needed for
and on-site energy generation to fulfill the steam and electricity re­ equipment in feedstock handling and conditioning (mainly dryers) as
quirements for the plant, and the remaining pennycress meal to pass well as hydrogenation and solvent extraction processes.
through drying and grinding processes and be used as a protein source
for animal feeding (Fig. 1). The selling price of pennycress meal as a
protein source for animal feed was assumed to be 0.15 USD/kg, which 3.2. Capital cost
was obtained by considering the meal prices of similar oilseeds which
can be used as protein source [16]. Total investment for establishing the HRJ biorefinery of the selected
capacity was estimated to be ~90.8 million USD (Fig. 3). The contri­
3. Results and discussion butions of total plant direct and indirect costs to the total investment
were estimated to be 50 and 30%, respectively. Construction, equipment
3.1. Mass balance and utilities requirements of hydroprocessed renewable purchase, installation and building were estimated to be the main con­
jet fuel biorefinery tributors to total plant direct cost by around 28, 21 and 12%, respec­
tively. High contribution of equipment purchase was mainly due to
For the selected HRJ biorefinery capacity, ~13,310 kg/h pennycress several equipment needed for the overall process of oil extraction,
grain would be required to produce ~2390 L/h HRJ, at an annual conversion, WWT and energy generation. In addition, equipment
operating time of 7920 h (Fig. 2). After oil extraction from pennycress needed for energy generation, hydrogenation, and separation processes
grain, ~10,380 kg/h pennycress meal would be produced. In addition, were the main contributors to the total equipment purchase cost. The

6
S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 149 (2021) 111340

Fig. 3. Breakdown of total investment needed for establishment of the selected biorefinery capacity.

most expensive pieces of equipment were found to be boiler and turbine-
generator, mainly due to their high capacities for conversion of high rate
of pennycress meal (~10,380 kg/h) to energy (~26 MW electricity) at
the selected biorefinery capacity. In addition, several processes were
considered for hydrogenation of pennycress oil and propane clave,
which would lead to high purchase cost of this section. High contribu­
tion of separation section to equipment purchase cost was mainly due to
equipment needed for three steps of distillation to separate HRJ,
different byproducts and emissions. The results are in line with those of
previous studies on HRJ production from vegetable oils [15,25,30].
Indirect cost would be mainly contributed to biorefinery construction. In
addition, working capital (2.8 million USD) and startup cost (4.2 million
USD) were estimated to contribute to ~8% of the total investment
(Fig. 3).
3.3. Operating cost and minimum selling price
The contributions of grain conditioning, hydrogenation, oil extrac­
tion and separation processes on annual utility cost (1.4 million USD)
were estimated to be 36, 32, 18 and 14%, respectively (Fig. 4-a). High
utility cost of grain conditioning was mainly due to higher amount of
energy used for drying of pennycress grain. In addition, solvent used for
oil extraction as well as hydrogen and catalyst used for hydrogenation of
pennycress oil were estimated to be the main contributors to utility cost
of these processes. The utilities cost for other sections were estimated to
be minimal (Fig. 4-a). The main contributors to annual labor cost of
biorefinery (6.3 million USD) were oil extraction, separation and hy­
drogenation processed by 29, 24, 15%, respectively. In oil extraction
section, labor was mainly needed for solvent extraction and oil purifi­
cation processes. The high contribution of separation section to labor
cost was due to high labor requirement for multiple separation steps
needed for different products, including LPG, naphtha, green diesel and
HRJ. Operator need for each of the distillation units was considered to
be 0.5 labor-h/h. Pennycress grain supply and conditioning were esti­
mated to contribute to ~46% of annual operating cost (i.e., ~47 million
USD) of the HRJ biorefinery at the selected capacity (Fig. 4-c). Facility-
dependent cost of boiler and turbine-generator equipment was the main
reason for the high contribution (~20%) of energy generation process
on the annual operating cost. High purchase prices of boiler and turbine-
generator, mainly due to their high capacities, were the main reason for
the high contributions of these facility-dependent costs. In hydrogena­
tion process, costs of raw materials, i.e., hydrogen and catalyst, and

Fig. 4. Breakdown of (a) annual utilities cost, (b) annual labor cost and (c) annual operating cost for the HRJ biorefinery at the selected capacity. Note: Costs are
presented in 2019 USD. Cost of pennycress grain is included only in annual operating cost (c).

7
S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 149 (2021) 111340

utilities were found to be the main drivers. naphtha and green diesel. Thus, any upgrading in the byproducts’ values
Total operating cost of HRJ production was estimated to be ~2.5 could increase the selling prices and further reduce the MSP of HRJ.
USD/L (Fig. 5). Raw materials contributed to around half of operating Thus, evaluating the impacts of variabilities in the prices of byproducts
cost. The other main contributors were facility-dependent cost (~34%), can help identify the key parameters affecting the economics of HRJ.
and labor cost (~14%). Among raw materials, pennycress grain had the
highest contribution (~45%) to the total operating cost of HRJ pro­ 3.4. Sensitivity analysis
duction. The main reason for the high contribution of pennycress grain
was the high amount of feedstock required for conversion to HRJ at the MSP of HRJ was found to be the most sensitive to the pennycress
selected biorefinery capacity. In previous studies, feedstock supply was grain price, which is in line with the results of previous study [57]. When
reported as the main contributor to the operating cost of similar prod­ pennycress grain price was considered to be 0.17 USD/kg, i.e., the lower
ucts, including HRJ from camelina [30] and hydrogenated renewable limit of its 90% central range [32], the MSP of HRJ could decrease to
diesel from canola [57]. Reduction of feedstock supply cost would 1.07 USD/L (Fig. 6). The other most influencing parameter was found to
significantly improve the economics of HRJ. Pennycress grain price was be fixed capital investment. Biorefinery size, and pennycress oil content
considered based on a previous work [32] on techno-economics of could also inversely affect the MSP of HRJ. Increasing the biorefinery
pennycress supply in Ohio, in which pennycress yield and oil content of size could reduce the cost of production mainly because of the economy
grain highly affected the pennycress grain price. In addition, increasing of scale, and consequently the MSP of HRJ. At a certain biorefinery size,
oil content of pennycress grain could reduce pennycress grain require­ increasing the pennycress oil content would reduce the pennycress grain
ment for the selected biorefinery, and consequently feedstock supply requirement. It would also reduce the capital and operating costs, and
cost. Other consumables, including citric acid, hydrogen, solvent, and consequently reduce the MSP of HRJ. These results are consistent with
catalyst, contributed to ~13.5% of total operating cost. In a previous those of technical feasibility and costs of camelina-based HRJ produc­
study the operating cost of HRJ production from camelina oil was re­ tion at the commercial scale [17].
ported as 0.4–1.7 USD/L, depending on the variations in biorefinery size
and feedstock supply price [30]. Slightly higher operating cost in this
3.5. Potential improvements in economics of pennycress-based jet fuel
study was due to expanding the system boundary to cover the oil
extraction from pennycress grain and conversion to HRJ. In addition, the
Effects of variations in pennycress grain price (at three levels,
size of biorefinery considered in the previous study was bigger than that
including low: 0.17 USD/kg, average: 0.20 USD/kg and high 0.23 USD/
of our study.
kg, as presented in the previous study [32]), biorefinery size (1–400
For this design, a total of ~24.8 MW electricity was estimated to be
MLPY, as suggested in the literature [43,48,69]), and alternative
supplied to the grid. No credit was assigned for the generated steam at
application of pennycress meal (as energy source and animal feed, as
the biorefinery, as it was considered to be reused for the processes. Total
suggested in the literature [42,60]), on the competitiveness of HRJ were
byproducts credit was estimated to be 1.3 USD/L HRJ (Fig. 5). The main
evaluated and the results are presented in Figs. 7–9. Although the
contributors to total credit were electrical power (0.7 USD/L HRJ) and
pennycress grain price was considered to be lower than that of similar
green diesel (0.5 USD/L HRJ). The net HRJ production cost was esti­
oilseeds [32], the byproducts credit associated with electrical power was
mated to be 1.1 USD/L. By considering a 10% IRR [59], the MSP of HRJ
estimated to be less than the byproduct credit associated with meal of
at the biorefinery gate was estimated to be 1.2 USD/L, which is in the
range of MSP of HRJ from similar biobased feedstocks. In a previous
study, MSP of HRJ from vegetable oils through the hydroprocessing
technology was reported as 1.1–1.3 USD/L (in 2019 USD) for the HRJ
biorefinery size of 116–378 MLPY [12,17]. However, the MSP of
pennycress-based HRJ, at the biorefinery gate was estimated to be more
than 2 times of the 5-year average price of the commercial jet fuel (Jet A)
for the end-users, i.e., 0.5 USD/L, which is in line with the results of
previous studies on techno-economics of HRJ production from similar
biobased feedstocks [3,12,15,68]. The HRJ biorefineries typically
Fig. 6. Sensitivity of minimum selling price (MSP) of HRJ to input parameters.
generate additional credit from selling byproducts, including LPG,

Fig. 5. Operating cost, byproducts credit and minimum selling price of HRJ production.

8
S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah
Fig. 7. Variation of total capital cost over a range of HRJ biorefinery sizes, if
pennycress meal is used as energy source for boiler fuel, or animal feed.
Fig. 8. Distribution of (a) net present value (NPV) and (b) return on investment
(ROI) of pennycress-based HRJ biorefinery establishment, at alternative ap­
plications of pennycress meal (energy source or animal feed) and feedstock
prices, over different biorefinery sizes.
Fig. 9. Variation of the minimum selling price of HRJ, at alternative applica­
tions of pennycress meal (energy source or animal feed) and feedstock prices,
over different biorefinery sizes. (all prices are in 2019 USD).
9
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 149 (2021) 111340
similar oilseeds which is typically used for animal feed.
Total capital cost of HRJ production increased by increasing the
biorefinery size (Fig. 7). When pennycress meal was considered as a
source of energy or animal feed, the scaling factors were estimated to be
0.76 and 0.60, respectively, which were in the range of scaling factors
for the processing industries, i.e., 0.4–0.8 [70]. However, when
pennycress meal was considered to be used as energy source, the scaling
factor was estimated to be higher than those of the common chemical
processing industries [27]. The scaling factor of 0.76 indicates that
doubling the biorefinery size would increase the capital cost by 76%.
Higher scaling factor of the HRJ biorefinery, with pennycress meal use
as energy source, is interpreted by the higher prices of boiler and
turbine-generator, compared to those of the meal processing equipment.
NPV of establishing the HRJ biorefinery showed the most increasing
trends at low feedstock supply price (i.e., 0.17 USD/kg), for both ap­
plications of pennycress meal as energy source and animal feed. Simi­
larly, it showed the most decreasing trends when pennycress grain was
considered to be supplied at high price (i.e., 0.23 USD/kg), regardless of
different applications of pennycress meal (Fig. 8-a). The results indi­
cated that NPV of establishing the HRJ biorefinery is mostly affected by
feedstock supply price, rather than alternative applications of penny­
cress meal. When feedstock was considered to be supplied at the low
price (0.17 USD/kg) and pennycress meal was considered to be used for
animal feed at the price of 0.15 USD/kg, the HRJ biorefinery was esti­
mated to generate positive NPV at sizes greater than ~80 MLPY, while
the minimum size to generate positive NPV at low feedstock price and
use of pennycress meal as energy source was estimated to be ~120
MLPY (Fig. 8-a). Similar trends of NPV with biorefinery size and feed­
stock price were observed in a previous study on techno-economic
evaluation of HRJ production from camelina [30]. Upgrading penny­
cress meal to high-value product, e.g., protein source for animal feed,
would increase the byproduct credit due to higher selling price of
pennycress meal, which would reduce the net production cost and in­
crease the NPV of pennycress-based HRJ production.
ROI of establishing the HRJ biorefinery was increased by increasing
the biorefinery size (Fig. 8-b). The highest ROI could be obtained when
pennycress grain was considered to be supplied at low price, and
pennycress meal was considered to be used as animal feed. Conversely,
when pennycress meal was considered to be used as animal feed and
pennycress grain be supplied at the high price, the minimum ROI was
estimated. Overall, it was estimated that the impact of feedstock price
could be higher than alternative application of pennycress meal on
achieving a higher ROI.
MSP of HRJ was estimated to be highly affected by pennycress
feedstock price, followed by pennycress meal use, and biorefinery size
(Fig. 9). It was estimated to decrease by increasing the biorefinery size in
both alternative uses of pennycress meal, i.e., boiler fuel or animal feed,
and all ranges of feedstock price, especially when the biorefinery size
was less than ~40 MLPY; however, the MSP curves became relatively
flat at the biorefinery sizes greater than ~100 MLPY (Fig. 9). This flat­
ness was mainly due to lower impact of economy of scale at higher
production capacities. These findings are in line with those of previous
study on techno-economics of commercial production of hydroprocessed
renewable diesel from camelina and canola feedstocks [57]. In addition,
when pennycress meal was considered as animal feed and feedstock was
considered to be supplied at low price, the minimum MSP of HRJ could
be achieved. MSP of HRJ at the biorefinery gate would be competitive
with jet A fuel price when the biorefinery size be greater than ~57 MLPY
and pennycress meal be used as animal feed with a selling price of 0.15
USD/kg, and pennycress grain price be considered at the low level (0.17
USD/kg). When pennycress meal was considered to be used as animal
feed at average feedstock price and pennycress meal was considered as
energy source at low feedstock price, the minimum biorefinery size to
reach a competitive MSP of HRJ would be ~100 MLPY. Li et al. [30]
analyzed the variation of MSP of camelina-based HRJ over variations in
biorefinery size, camelina oil price, and byproduct credit. They reported
S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah
that at 225 MLPY biorefinery size, when feedstock was supplied as
lowest price and the byproduct credit was the highest, the MSP of HRJ
dropped to 0.43 USD/L, or even to 0.40 USD/L when the biorefinery size
increased to 675 MLPY.
Overall, the results highlighted the main parameters affecting the
techno-economics of HRJ production from pennycress. NPV of HRJ
biorefinery at the selected capacity was negative for both alternative
applications of pennycress meal as energy source and animal feed.
Feedstock price was the main parameter affecting the economics of HRJ.
Alternative use of pennycress meal as animal feed rather than energy
source would improve the economics of HRJ. In addition, maximizing
the biorefinery size showed a better economic performance, due to the
economy of scale. To generate a positive NPV, the feedstock needs to be
supplied at low price (0.17 USD/kg) and the biorefinery size be greater
than ~120 MLPY, when pennycress meal is used as energy source.
However, use of pennycress meal as animal feed would increase the
NPV, due to increasing the byproduct credit. Thus, for this scenario, the
minimum biorefinery size for observing positive NPV was estimated to
be ~80 MLPY. Research efforts are needed to identify possible options
for commercial uses of pennycress meal, and the market development
would be required for pennycress meal as a high-value product. In
addition, for increasing the biorefinery size, the risks associated with
feedstock supply and consistency in terms of both the quality and
quantity at the commercial scale need to be taken into account. Devel­
oping integrated biorefineries to feed with similar types of feedstock
would be an alternative strategy to maximize the HRJ biorefinery size in
the region and consequently make HRJ economically more competitive.
In addition, exergoeconomic evaluation of biorefinery would help
establish resource-efficient and cost-effective pennycress-based HRJ
biorefineries in the region [71].
3.6. Practical implications
There is a growing interest in making the aviation sector more
environmentally sustainable by implementing aviation biofuels from
renewable resources. To help accomplish this, the feedstock types and
production technologies are developing rapidly. This study provides a
comprehensive evaluation of the technical feasibility and costs of pro­
ducing HRJ from pennycress, a new jet fuel feedstock with several ad­
vantages [32]. Feedstock price, capital investment for establishing the
oil extraction and conversion facilities, biorefinery size, oil content of
pennycress grain, as well as alternative use of pennycress meal as
high-value product were identified as the main parameters affecting the
economics of pennycress-based HRJ; and the potential improvements
were critically analyzed. The findings can help researchers in this area to
focus on improving the key parameters for sustainable development of
locally appropriate feedstocks and conversion technologies for com­
mercial HRJ production. This study can also help identify the local op­
portunities, potential resources and competitive advantages associated
with establishment of pennycress-based HRJ biorefineries. In addition, it
can help policy makers in developing the sustainability criteria, estab­
lishing minimum aviation biofuel standards, as well as developing the
supportive plans for sustainable development of aviation biofuel
industry.
4. Conclusions and prospects
The estimated minimum selling price of HRJ (1.2 USD/L) was similar
to that of HRJ from similar oilseeds, and it could be further reduced by
decreasing the price of pennycress grain at the biorefinery, increasing
the pennycress oil content, increasing the production capacity as well as
upgrading pennycress meal to higher value products. Increasing
pennycress grain yield would reduce the cost of pennycress production
through increasing the grain harvest per unit area.
Further work needs to focus on identifying the best locations for the
HRJ biorefinery to minimize the transportation distance and costs, and
10
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 149 (2021) 111340
consequently the feedstock supply price at the biorefinery. In addition,
evaluating the social, environmental, and exergoeconomic perfor­
mances would help sustainable establishment of pennycress-based HRJ
biorefineries in the region. Genetic modification of pennycress seeds can
also be considered as an effective strategy to increase the oil yield per
unit harvest area, and consequently to minimize the cost of feedstock
supply. In addition, future research studies need to focus on identifying
the potential applications of pennycress meal as higher-value products,
such as protein source for animal feed, to help improve the economics of
HRJ through increasing the byproduct credit. In addition, governmental
subsidy would support economic viability of HRJ production from
pennycress.
This work is useful for establishing the performance targets needed
to improve the techno-economics of HRJ production from pennycress.
The outcomes of this research would help the researchers, farmers, in­
vestors, and policy makers towards establishing the commercial pro­
duction of HRJ from pennycress in the region.
Credit author statement
Seyed Hashem Mousavi-Avval: Investigation, Data curation, Soft­
ware, Visualization, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft Ajay Shah:
Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Writing – re­
view & editing, Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgment
This work was partially supported by funding from the U.S.
Department of Energy, 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.2021.111340.
References
[1] 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2012.12.040.
[2] Liu G, Yan B, Chen G. Technical review on jet fuel production. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2013;25:59–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2013.03.025.
[3] Kandaramath Hari T, Yaakob Z, Binitha NN. Aviation biofuel from renewable
resources: routes, opportunities and challenges. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;
42:1234–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.10.095.
[4] Wang M, Dewil R, Maniatis K, Wheeldon J, Tan T, Baeyens J, et al. Biomass-derived
aviation fuels: challenges and perspective. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2019;74:
31–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2019.04.004.
[5] Wei H, Liu W, Chen X, Yang Q, Li J, Chen H. Renewable bio-jet fuel production for
aviation: a review. Fuel 2019;254:115599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuel.2019.06.007.
[6] Searle S, Pavlenko N, Kharina A, Giuntoli J. Long-term aviation fuel
decarbonization: Progress, roadblocks, and policy opportunities. n.d.
[7] 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/TP-
5100-66291 2016.
[8] Geleynse S, Brandt K, Garcia-Perez M, Wolcott M, Zhang X. The alcohol-to-jet
conversion pathway for drop-in biofuels: techno-economic evaluation.
ChemSusChem 2018;11:3728–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/cssc.201801690.
[9] Yan Q, Yu F, Liu J, Street J, Gao J, Cai Z, et al. Catalytic conversion wood syngas to
synthetic aviation turbine fuels over a multifunctional catalyst. 2013. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.09.069.
[10] Han J, Tao L, Wang M. Well-to-wake analysis of ethanol-to-jet and sugar-to-jet
pathways. Biotechnol Biofuels 2017;10:21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-017-
0698-z.
S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah
[11] ASTM. ASTM D7566-19. Standard Specification for Aviation Turbine Fuel
Containing Synthesized Hydrocarbons. West Conshohocken, PA Doi https//
DoiOrg/101520/D7566-19 2019.
[12] Pearlson M, Wollersheim C, Hileman J. A techno-economic review of
hydroprocessed renewable esters and fatty acids for jet fuel production. Biofuels,
Bioprod Biorefining 2013;7:89–96. https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.1378.
[13] Gutiérrez-Antonio C, Gómez-Castro FI, de Lira-Flores JA, Hernández S. A review on
the production processes of renewable jet fuel. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.108.
[14] Tao L, Milbrandt A, Zhang Y, Wang W-C. Techno-economic and resource analysis
of hydroprocessed renewable jet fuel. Biotechnol Biofuels 2017;10:261.
[15] Bann SJ, Malina R, Staples MD, Suresh P, Pearlson M, Tyner WE, et al. The costs of
production of alternative jet fuel: a harmonized stochastic assessment. Bioresour
Technol 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.12.032.
[16] Zech KM, Dietrich S, Reichmuth M, Weindorf W, Müller-Langer F. Techno-
economic assessment of a renewable bio-jet-fuel production using power-to-gas.
Appl Energy 2018;231:997–1006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2018.09.169.
[17] Shila J, Johnson ME. Techno-economic analysis of Camelina-derived
hydroprocessed renewable jet fuel within the US context. Appl Energy 2021;287:
116525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.116525.
[18] Panahi HKS, Dehhaghi M, Kinder JE, Ezeji TC. A review on green liquid fuels for
the transportation sector: a prospect of microbial solutions to climate change.
Biofuel Res J 2019;6:995–1024. https://doi.org/10.18331/brj2019.6.3.2.
[19] Kinder J, Rahmes T. Evaluation of bio-derived synthetic paraffinic kerosenes.
Seattle WA Boeing Company, Sustain Biofuels Res Technol Program 2009 June 16.
[20] Diederichs GW, Ali Mandegari M, Farzad S, Görgens JF. Techno-economic
comparison of biojet fuel production from lignocellulose, vegetable oil and sugar
cane juice. Bioresour Technol 2016;216:331–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
BIORTECH.2016.05.090.
[21] Staples MD. Bioenergy and its use to mitigate the climate impact of aviation. PhD
Diss. Massachusetts Inst Technol; 2017.
[22] McGarvey E, Tyner WE. A stochastic techno-economic analysis of the catalytic
hydrothermolysis aviation biofuel technology. Biofuels, Bioprod Biorefining 2018.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.1863.
[23] Reimer JJ, Zheng X. Economic analysis of an aviation bioenergy supply chain.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;77:945–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2016.12.036.
[24] Cervi WR, Lamparelli RAC, Seabra JEA, Junginger M, Jong S, Hilst F. Spatial
modeling of techno-economic potential of biojet fuel production in Brazil. GCB
Bioenergy 2020;12:136–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12659.
[25] Diniz APMM, Sargeant R, Millar GJ. Stochastic techno-economic analysis of the
production of aviation biofuel from oilseeds. Biotechnol Biofuels 2018;11:161.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-018-1158-0.
[26] 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. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.APENERGY.2016.12.001.
[27] Mupondwa E, Li X, Falk K, Gugel R, Tabil L. Technoeconomic analysis of small-
scale farmer-owned Camelina oil extraction as feedstock for biodiesel production: a
case study in the Canadian prairies. Ind Crop Prod 2016;90:76–86. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.INDCROP.2016.05.042.
[28] de Souza LM, Mendes PAS, Aranda DAG. Oleaginous feedstocks for hydro-
processed esters and fatty acids (HEFA) biojet production in southeastern Brazil: a
multi-criteria decision analysis. Renew Energy 2020;149:1339–51. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.10.125.
[29] Rosillo-Calle F, Teelucksingh S, Thran D, Seiffert M. The potential and role of
biofuels in commercial air transport – biojetfuel, task 40: sustainable international
bioenergy trade, interantional energy administration (IEA) bioenergy. Available
Adv (Accessed January 27, 2020) 2012.
[30] 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIORTECH.2017.09.183.
[31] Diederichs GW, Ali Mandegari M, Farzad S, Görgens JF. Techno-economic
comparison of biojet fuel production from lignocellulose, vegetable oil and sugar
cane juice. Bioresour Technol 2016;216:331–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
biortech.2016.05.090.
[32] Mousavi-Avval SH, Shah A. Techno-economic analysis of pennycress production,
harvest and post-harvest logistics for renewable jet fuel. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2020;123:109764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.109764.
[33] Li L, Jákli B, Lu P, Ren T, Ming J, Liu S, et al. Assessing leaf nitrogen concentration
of winter oilseed rape with canopy hyperspectral technique considering a non-
uniform vertical nitrogen distribution. Ind Crop Prod 2018;116:1–14. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2018.02.051.
[34] 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 Fuels 2010;24:6624–32. https://doi.org/
10.1021/ef101223a.
[35] 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.
[36] 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
plantsci.2014.07.008.
11
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 149 (2021) 111340
[37] Yang Y, Tilman D. Soil and root carbon storage is key to climate benefits of
bioenergy crops. Biofuel Res J 2020;7:1143–8. https://doi.org/10.18331/
BRJ2020.7.2.2.
[38] Phippen WB, Phippen ME. Soybean seed yield and quality as a response to field
pennycress residue. Crop Sci 2012;52:2767. https://doi.org/10.2135/
cropsci2012.03.0192.
[39] 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2016.12.039.
[40] Kalnes T, McCall M, Dr S. Renewable diesel and jet-fuel production from fats and
oils. In: Crocker M, editor. Thermochemical conversion of biomass to liquid fuels
and chemicals. Cambridge RSC Publ; 2010. p. 468–95.
[41] Alhotan RA. Strategies to improve poultry feed formulation for maximum
performance and profitability. Athens, Georgia: The University of Georgia; 2016.
[42] Alhotan RA, Wang RL, Holser RA, Pesti GM. Nutritive value and the maximum
inclusion level of pennycress meal for broiler chickens. Poultry Sci 2017;96:
2281–93. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pex019.
[43] EIA. U.S. Energy Information Administration. Independent statistics and analysis.
Available at: WwwEiaGov (Accessed on 02,02,2020) 2020.
[44] Intelligen. Intelligen, inc. Superpro designer-user’s guide. Scotch Plains, New
Jersey Available, http://WwwIntelligenCom/Downloads/SuperPro_ManualForPrin
ting_v10Pdf; 2015 (Accessed 11/27/2019).
[45] Anderson A. A primer on oils processing technology. Bailey’s Ind Oil Fat Prod Ed
by S Shahidi Sixth. John Wiley; 2005.
[46] USDA. Chapter 3: canola. In: Book II: grain inspection handbook. Grain insp
packers adm fed grain insp serv; 2013.
[47] Mag T. Canola Seed and Oil Processing. Canola Counc Canada; 2011.
[48] 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOMBIOE.2016.10.014.
[49] Nde D, Foncha A. Optimization methods for the extraction of vegetable oils: a
review. Processes 2020;8:209. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8020209.
[50] Uitterhaegen E, Nguyen QH, Sampaio KA, Stevens CV, Merah O, Talou T, et al.
Extraction of coriander oil using twin-screw extrusion: feasibility study and
potential press cake applications. JAOCS. J Am Oil Chem Soc 2015;92:1219–33.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11746-015-2678-4.
[51] Canola-council-of-Canada. Steps in oil and meal processing. Available Https//
WwwCanolacouncilOrg/Oil-and-Meal/What-Is-Canola/How-Canola-Is-Processed/
Steps-in-Oil-and-Meal-Processing (Accessed Sep 6, 2019) 2017.
[52] Costa E, Almeida MF, Alvim-Ferraz M da C, Dias JM. Effect of Crambe abyssinica
oil degumming in phosphorus concentration of refined oil and derived biodiesel.
Renew Energy 2018;124:27–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.08.089.
[53] Dijkstra AJ. Oil Refining. Sunflower Chem. Prod. Process. Util. Elsevier Inc.; 2015.
p. 227–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-893997-94-3.50015-5.
[54] 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. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.indcrop.2009.03.007.
[55] Martinez-Hernandez E, Ramírez-Verduzco LF, Amezcua-Allieri MA, Aburto J.
Process simulation and techno-economic analysis of bio-jet fuel and green diesel
production — minimum selling prices. Chem Eng Res Des 2019;146:60–70.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHERD.2019.03.042.
[56] Kalnes TN, McCall MM, Shonnard DR. Chapter 18. Renewable Diesel and Jet-Fuel
Production from Fats and Oils; 2010. p. 468–95. https://doi.org/10.1039/
9781849732260-00468.
[57] Miller P, Kumar A. Techno-economic assessment of hydrogenation-derived
renewable diesel production from canola and camelina. Sustain Energy Technol
Assessments 2014;6:105–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2014.01.008.
[58] Abhari R, Tomlinson L, Halik P, Jannasch N. Process for Co-Producing Jet Fuel and
LPG from Renewable Sources. USPA Publ United States; 2008. WO/2008/124607.
[59] Humbird D, Davis R, Tao L, Kinchin C, Hsu D, Aden A, et al. Process design and
economics for biochemical conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol: dilute-
acid pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis of corn stover. Natl Renew Energy Lab
Tech Report, NREL/TP-5100-47764 2011.
[60] Reifschneider L, Tisserat B, Harry O, Kuru RE. Mechanical properties of high
density polyethylene–pennycress press cake composites. Proc 71st ANTEC-Society
Plast Eng 2013;143:1986–90.
[61] Cubins JA, Wells MS, Frels K, Ott MA, Forcella F, Johnson GA, et al. Management
of pennycress as a winter annual cash cover crop. A review. Agron Sustain Dev
2019;39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-019-0592-0.
[62] Vaughn SF, Palmquist DE, Duval SM, Berhow MA. Herbicidal activity of
glucosinolate-containing seedmeals. Weed Sci 2006;54:743–8. https://doi.org/
10.1614/ws-06-007r.1.
[63] 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.
https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj14.0292.
[64] Isbell TA. US effort in the development of new crops (Lesquerella, Pennycress
Coriander and Cuphea). Oléagineux, Corps Gras, Lipides 2009;16:205–10. https://
doi.org/10.1051/ocl.2009.0269.
[65] Hojilla-Evangelista MP, Selling GW, Berhow MA, Evangelista RL. Preparation,
composition and functional properties of pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.) seed
protein isolates. Ind Crop Prod 2014;55:173–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
indcrop.2014.02.016.
[66] Ou L, Thilakaratne R, Brown RC, Wright MM. Techno-economic analysis of
transportation fuels from defatted microalgae via hydrothermal liquefaction and
S.H. Mousavi-Avval and A. Shah
hydroprocessing. Biomass Bioenergy 2015;72:45–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
biombioe.2014.11.018.
[67] Li B, Ou L, Dang Q, Meyer P, Jones S, Brown R, et al. Techno-economic and
uncertainty analysis of in situ and ex situ fast pyrolysis for biofuel production.
Bioresour Technol 2015;196:49–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
biortech.2015.07.073.
[68] 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;199:112015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enconman.2019.112015.
12
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 149 (2021) 111340
[69] Pearlson M. A techno-economic and environmental assessment of hydroprocessed
renewable distillate fuels. Masters Thesis, Univ Massachusetts; 2011.
[70] Sinnott RK. Coulson and Richardson’s Chemical Engineering Design. fourth ed.
Oxford, Jordon Hill: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann; 2008.
[71] Soltanian S, Aghbashlo M, Farzad S, Tabatabaei M, Mandegari M, Görgens JF.
Exergoeconomic analysis of lactic acid and power cogeneration from sugarcane
residues through a biorefinery approach. Renew Energy 2019;143:872–89. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.05.016.