Introduction to Biopower

NCSL Advisory Council on Energy, San Diego, CA

Richard BainRichard.bain@nrel.gov

December 9, 2009

NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC

OPresentation Outline• Industry Status • Biomass Properties • Direct Combustion• Cofiring• Cofiring• Gasification

12/15/2009 2Photo Credit: Chariton Valley RC&D

Figure 3. USA Renewable Electricity Generation in 2006

S l & PV Wi d

M i i l Bi

Solar & PV0.24%

Wind6.71%

Geothermal

Municipal Waste4.03%

Biomass10.24%

Hydropower74.91%

3.86%

Total = 384.85 TWh

12/15/2009 3

Biopower

Biopower statusBiopower status

2006 Capacity – 10.4 GWe

5 GW Pulp and Paper2 GW Dedicated Biomass3 GW MSW and Landfill Gas0.5 GW Cofiring

2006 Generation – 54.9 TWh

Cost – 0.08 – 0.10 USD/kWh

PotentialPotential• Cost – 0.04-0.06 USD kWh (integrated gasification combined cycle)• 2030 – 160 TWh (net electricity exported to grid from integrated 60

billion gal/yr biorefinery industry)

12/15/2009 4

Sources: Aden,et. al, NREL/TP-510-32438, DOE EIA Annual Energy Outlook, Table A16 (year-by-year)

U.S. Biopower Generation, 1981-2006

70 12000

m)

50

60

MW

)10000

(TW

h/an

nu

40

50

Cap

acity

(M

6000

8000

Generation C i

Gen

erat

ion

(

20

30

et S

umm

er

4000

Capacity

G

0

10

Ne

0

2000

12/15/2009 5

Year1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

0 0

DOE EIA Annual Energy Outlook, Table A16, Individual Yearly Issues

U.S. Biomass Resource

http://rpm.nrel.gov/biopower/biopower/launch

12/15/2009 7

U.S. Biomass Resource Assessment• Updated resource assessment April 2005• Updated resource assessment - April 2005• Jointly developed by U.S. DOE and USDA• Referred to as the “Billion Ton Study”

12/15/2009 8

Bi S l S iBiomass Supply Scenarios

1400

Million Dry Tons/Year

1200

800

1000

Dedicated CropsCRPOther Agricultural

600

Other AgriculturalAgricultural ResiduesUrbanPrimary Mill ResidueForest Residue

200

400

02007

Milbrandt2010

Walsh<$90/ton…

2020Walsh

<$90/ton…

2020National Academy

2025Walsh

<$90/ton…

PotentialPerlack

Example Biomass Supply Curves120

iver

ed

100 2010 2015 2020 2025

y To

n D

el 80

2006

$/D

ry 60

40

Walsh (2008) data, plus $15/ton transportationand handling costs

Million Dry Tons0 200 400 600 800

20

Production PotentialBasis:

•100 MW biopower plant•Heat Rate 14,000 Btu/kWh•80% Capacity Factor•80% Capacity Factor•17 MMBtu/ton biomass HHV

Gives:Gives:

•577 x 103 tons dry biomass/year/100 MW capacity

•For 100 million tons biomass•17.3 GW Capacity•121.2 TWh/year electricity production

Biopower Technology CostsBiopower Technology CostsTechnology code Capital Cost Operating Costs Heat Rate

(2006$) Overnight w AFUDC Fixed Variable FeedRef

1000$/MW 1000$/MW $/kW-yr $/MWh MMBtu/d ton ton/MWh $/ton $/MWh MMBtu/MWh

Combustion Stoker CS 3 268 3 390 88 4 3 6 16 0 0 781 75 0 58 6 12 50 1Combustion, Stoker CS 3,268 3,390 88.4 3.6 16.0 0.781 75.0 58.6 12.50 1

Combustion, CFB CCFB 3,370 3,495 91.0 4.1 16.0 0.781 75.0 58.6 12.50 1

CHP CHP 3,448 3,576 90.0 3.7 16.0 0.891 75.0 66.8 14.25 1

Gasification, Base GB 3,953 4,163 88.8 6.9 16.0 0.593 75.0 44.5 9.49 2

Gasification, Advanced GA 3,390 3,567 56.1 6.9 16.0 0.500 75.0 37.5 8.00 2

Cofiring, PC CPC 496 496 11.6 1.6 16.0 0.625 75.0 46.9 10.00 1

Cofiring, Cyclone CC 315 315 11.6 1.2 16.0 0.625 75.0 46.9 10.00 1

Black Liquor BLQ Default to CHP - assume existing capacity no new generationBlack Liquor BLQ Default to CHP - assume existing capacity, no new generation

Municipal Solid Waste MSW 6,544 6,861 239 26.1 -- -- -- -- 16.46 3

Landfill Gas LFG 1,711 1,711 52 13.0 -- -- -- -- 13.50 1

1. McGowan C., (2007). "Renewable Energy Technical Assessment Guide-TAG-RE:2007," EPRI, Palo Alto, CA

Efficiency = 341.4/Heat Rate, e.g., Advanced Gasification = 341.4/8 = 42.7%

2. DeMeo, D.A. and J. F. Galdo (1997). "Renewable Energy Technology Characterizations," EPRI-TR109496, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA

3. EPRI (1993). "EPRI-Technical Assessment Guide, Electricity supply-1993," EPRI TR-10226-V1R7m EPRI, Palo Alto, CA

Figure 5.11: Biomass CHP - Effect of Plant Size on Cost of Electricity and Steam

14

C b ti El t i it

Feed Cost = $2/MBtu

10

12

1000

lb) C

osts

Combustion - Electricity

Combustion - CHP

Major Considerations

• CHP is less expensive than electricity only

6

8

kWh)

and

Ste

am ($

/1

Gasification - Electricity

Gasification - CHP

• Gasification is less expensive than combustion, but needs additional development

• Cofiring is by far the

4

Elec

trici

ty (c

ents

/k

Purchased Electricity

Purchased Steam

least cost option• Only capital is for

feed system• Fuel switching

option, not

0

2

0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175

15% Cofiring CHPIncremental Cost

capacity increase

12/15/2009 13

Equivalent Plant Size (MW)

Bain, R. L.; Amos, W. P.; Downing, M.; Perlack, R. L. (2003). Biopower Technical Assessment: State of the Industry and the Technology. 277 pp.; NREL Report No. TP-510-33123

Biomass Plant Technical Performance

Case Efficiency%

Feed RateMBtu/hr (TPH*)

ElectricityMW

150 lb Steam1000 lb/hr

H/P

25 MW Electric Direct Comb 30 284 (16 73) 25 025 MW Electric - Direct Comb 30 284 (16.73) 25.0

25 MW CHP - Direct Comb 62 284 (16.73) 20.8 107 1.44

50 MW Electric - Direct Comb 30 569 (33.45) 50.0

50 MW CHP Di t C b 62 569 (33 45) 41 5 214 1 4450 MW CHP - Direct Comb 62 569 (33.45) 41.5 214 1.44

75 MW Electric - Direct Comb 30 853 (50.18) 75.0

75 MW CHP - Direct Comb 62 853 (50.18) 62.2 321 1.44

100 MW Electric - Direct Comb 30 1,137 (66.90) 100.0

100 MW CHP - Direct Comb 61 1,137 (66.90) 83.0 428 1.44

75 MW Gasification-Electric 36 711 (41.80) 75.0

75 MW Gasification - CHP 82 711 (41.80) 59.3 324 1.60

150 MW Gasification - CHP 82 1,422 (83.60) 118.6 648 1.60

45 MW Cofiring CHP (15%) 60 518 (30.46) 41.0 170 1.21

105 MW Cofiring CHP (15%) 60 1,208 (71.08) 95.7 397 1.21

* Dry tons @ 17 MBtu/ton14

Bain, R. L.; Amos, W. P.; Downing, M.; Perlack, R. L. (2003). Biopower Technical Assessment: State of the Industry and the Technology. 277 pp.; NREL Report No. TP-510-33123

Combustion

50 MW McNeil Power StationBurlington, Vermont

74 MW Wheelabrator Shasta PlantAnderson, California

12/15/2009 15

12/15/2009 16

Plant Location MWe CF, % KTons/yr*Willi L k C d 60 106 768

Historic Biopower Plants, Circa 2000

Williams Lake Canada 60 106 768Shasta California 74 70 694Colmac California 49.9 96 846Stratton Maine 49 90 573Kettle Falls Washington 46 82 542Snomomish Washington 39 60 410Ridge Florida 40 57 376Grayling Michigan 36 63 320y g gBay Front Wisconsin 30 62 251McNeil Vermont 50 35 255Multtrade Virginia 79.5 19 214Madera California 25 60 308Madera California 25 60 308Tracy California 18.5 80 214Camas Washington 17 65 194Tacoma Washington 40 27 221Greenidge New York 10 8 80 98

12/15/2009 17

Greenidge New York 10.8 80 98 * Wet tons/yr, assuming 4250 Btu/lb

Wiltsee, G. (2000). Lessons Learned from Existing Biomass Power Plants. 149 pp.; NREL Report No. SR-570-26946.

Life Cycle CO2 and Energy Balancefor a Direct-Fired Biomass System

Current biomass power industryCurrent biomass power industry

Net greenhouse gas emissions-410 g CO2 equivalent/kWh

1,204

Avoided Carbon

Landfill andMulching

Transportation Construction Power PlantOperation

10 31,627

Emissions1.0

FossilEnergyIn

FossilEnergyIn

ElectricityOut28.4

12/15/2009 18134% carbon closure

u c g p

Di t Ai E i i f W d R id F iliti b B il T

SOX NOX CO PM-101 Comments

Stoker Boiler,Wood Residues (1,4)

0.08 2.1(biomass typenot specif ied)

12.2(biomass typenot specif ied)

0.50 (total particulates)

(biomass type

Based on 23 California grate boilers, except for SO2

(uncontrolled)

Direct Air Emissions from Wood Residue Facilities by Boiler Type

Biomass Technology

lb/MMBtu

not specif ied)Fluidized Bed,Biomass (4)

0.08(biomass typenot specif ied)

0.9(biomass typenot specif ied)

0.17(biomass typenot specif ied)

0.3 (total particulates)

(biomass typenot specif ied)

11 FBC boilers in California

Energy Crops(Poplar)

0.05 (suggested value

b d SO b

1.10 to 2.2(0.66 to 1.32 w /SNCR; 0 22 t 0 44 ith SCR)

0.23 0.01(totalti l t )

Combustor f lue gas goes through cyclone and

baghouse Syngas goesGasification(a,b)

based on SOx numbers for Stoker and FBC,

adjusted by a factor of 9,180/13,800 to account

for heat rate improvement)

0.22 to 0.44 w ith SCR) particulates) baghouse. Syngas goes through scrubber and

baghouse before gas turbine. No controls on gas turbine.

Coal TechnologyBituminous Coal, Stoker Boiler (f)

20.21 wt% S coal

5.8 2.7 0.62 PM Control only(baghouse)

Pulverized CoalBoiler (d)

14.3 6.89 0.35 0.32(total particulates)

Average US PC boiler (typically:baghouse,

limestone FGC)

Cofiring 15% Biomass 12.2 6.17 0.35 0.32 (total i l )

?

(d) particulates)

Fluidized Bed,Coal (f)

3.7 (1 w t% S coal Ca/S = 2.5)

2.7 9.6 0.30 Baghouse for PM Control, Ca sorbents used for SOx

4-Stroke NGReciprocating

0.006 7.96-38.3(depends on load

2.98-35.0(depends on load

0.09-0.18(depends on load

No control exceptPCC at high-end of

Natural Gas Technology

ReciprocatingEngine (g)

(depends on loadand air:fuel ratio)

(depends on loadand air:fuel ratio)

(depends on loadand air:fuel ratio)

gPM-10 range

Natural GasTurbine (e)

0.009(0.0007 w t% S)

1.72 0.4 .09(total particulates)

Water-steaminjection only

Natural Gas Combined Cycle (c,e)

0.004 0.91(0.21 w / SCR)

0.06 0.14(total particulates)

Water-steaminjection only

Particulate MatterFilterable

PMFilterable

PM-10Filterable PM-2.5

Average Biopower Plant Emissions

Dry Wood No control 6.14 5.53 4.76Mechanical collector 4.61 4.14 2.46

Wet Wood No control 5.07 4.45 3.84

lb./MWh*

Mechanical collector 3.38 3.07 1.84All Fuels Electrolyzed gravel bed 1.54 1.14 1.00

Wet scrubber 1.01 1.00 1.00Fabric filters 1.54 1.14 1.00ESP 0.83 0.61 0.54

NOx, SO2, CO NOx SO2 COWet Wood 3.38 0.38 9.21Dry Wood 7.52 0.38 9.21

TOC VOC CO2

All Fuels 0.60 0.26 2993

Total Organic Compounds (TOC), Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), Carbon Dioxide

* Estimated using w ood EPA NEEDS average heat rate = 15,351 Btu/kWh

EPA (2009). Clearinghousehouse for Inventories and Emissions Factors / AP-42 http://w w w .epa.gov/ttn/chief/index.html (accessed Nov 25, 2009)

Biomass Cofiring

12/15/2009 21

12/15/2009 22

Wood

Feedstock

Dump Conveyor #1MetalDetector MagneticSeparatoPrimaryHogger Wood

PileTruck Tipper

RadialStacker

Radial Screw ActiveReclaim Feeder

R t Ai l k

rator

Scale

Conveyor #2Disc Feeder

Hogger

SecondaryHogger

ExistingBoiler System

BiomassFeedstock

H dli

System Boundary forBiomass FeedstockHandling System

Rotary AirlockFeeder

arat

or

Valve

Air Intake

y HandlingEquipment

ExistingBoiler

Sepa

BinVent

Wood Silo

ValveMechanicalExhauster

Collecting

Biomass Co-Firing SystemRetrofit for 100 MW Pulverized

Scale

Scale

CollectingConveyors

Pressure Blowers

Retrofit for 100 MW PulverizedCoal Boiler

12/15/2009 23

Net Summer Capacity of Plants Cofiring Biomass and Coal 2006

State Plant Name Biomass/ Coal

Cofiring

Total Plant

Capacity

State Plant Name Biomass/ Coal

Cofiring

Total Plant

Capacity

Net Summer Capacity of Plants Cofiring Biomass and Coal, 2006(Megawatts)

gCapacity

p y

AL Mobile Energy Services LLC 91 91AL Georgia Pacific Naheola Mill 31 78AL International Paper Prattville Mill 49 90AR Ashdown 47 156AZ H Wilson Sundt Generating Station 173 558CT Covanta Mid-Connecticut Energy 90 90

Cofiring Capacity

Capacity

MN Rapids Energy Center 26 28MS Weyerhaeuser Columbus MS 123 123NC Corn Products Winston Salem 8 8NC Primary Energy Roxboro 68 68NC Weyerhaeuser Plymouth NC 162 162CT Covanta Mid Connecticut Energy 90 90

DE Edge Moor 252 710FL International Paper Pensacola 83 83FL Jefferson Smurfit Fernandina Beach 74 128FL Stone Container Panama City Mill 20 34GA Georgia Pacific Cedar Springs 101 101GA International Paper Augusta Mill 85 85GA SP N i t 45 82

NY AES Greenidge LLC 112 162NY AES Hickling LLC 70 70NY AES Jennison LLC 60 60NY Black River Generation 56 56SC International Paper Eastover Facility 48 110SC Stone Container Florence Mill 79 108SC C S th 99 99GA SP Newsprint 45 82

HI Hawaiian Comm & Sugar Puunene Mill 46 62IA AG Processing Inc 8 8IA University of Iowa Main Power Plant 21 23KY H L Spurlock 329 1,279LA International Paper Louisiana Mill 59 59MD Luke Mill 65 65

SC Cogen South 99 99UT Desert Power LP 43 135VA Bassett Table 2 2VA Georgia Pacific Big Island 8 8VA International Paper Franklin Mill 96 155VA Covington Facility 105 105WA Steam plant 50 50ME Rumford Cogeneration 103 103

ME S D Warren Westbrook 62 81MI Decorative Panels Intl 8 8MI Escanaba Paper Company 81 103MI TES Filer City Station 70 70MN M L Hibbard 73 123

WA Steam plant 50 50WI Blount Street 100 188WI Manitowoc 10 90WI Fox Valley Energy Center 6 6WI Mosinee Paper 20 23WI Bay Front 40 68WI Biron Mill 22 62

12/15/2009 24

WI Biron Mill 22 62WI Whiting Mill 4 4WI Wisconsin Rapids Pulp Mill 72 72WI Niagara Mill 12 24

Total 3,569 6,317

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/page/trends/table9.html3/11/2009

Gasification

12/15/2009 25

12/15/2009 26

Small and medium size combined heat and power is a good opportunity for biomass

5 MWe + District HeatSkive, Denmark

15-100 kWe

12/15/2009 27

Credit: Community Power Corp

Credit: Carbona Corp

SKIVE PROCESS DIAGRAM

Carbona: SKIVE GASIFICATION CHP-PLANT, DENMARK6 MWe and 12 Mwth

SKIVE PROCESS DIAGRAMGAS FILTER

BIOMASS, 28 MWth

FLY ASH

2 BOILERS

TO STACK

GAS SCRUBBER

2x10 MWth

TAR REFORMERGASIFIER

DISTRICT HEATING11.5 MWth

WATER

2x10 MWth

POWER3x2 MWe

3 GAS ENGINES

GAS BUFFERTANK

BOTTOM ASH

AIR/STEAM

GAS COOLERS

WOODPELLETS

GASIFIER BODY

PELLETS3 JENBACHER GAS ENGINES

FLARE

February 2009

2 GAS BOILERS Source: CarbonaStatus: >1000 hours with enginesApril 2009

Frontline Bioenergy, LLC, Ames, Iowa

BiomassSilo

Commercial Installation in Benson, MNGasifier

Char/Ash

GasifierBuilding

FlareTest

Char/Ash Load-Out

Gas ProductGas Product Pipe Line

B bbli Fl id B d i /

Phase-1 (shown): 75 TPD input (12 5 MW )

Boiler• Bubbling Fluid Bed: air or oxy/steam• Pressure Operation: up to 5 bar• Gas Conditioning: high efficiency filtration;

tar reforming development Phase-1 (shown): 75 TPD input (12.5 MWth)Phase-2 (future): 300 TPD input (50 MWth)

www.frontlinebioenergy.com, 515-292-1200, Ames, IA USA

g p• Capacity: up to 70 MWth per train

Nexterra Energy Corporation

12/15/2009 30

Credit:http://www.nexterra.ca/

Questions

31