US Beau Hoffman - IEA Bioenergy
Transcript of US Beau Hoffman - IEA Bioenergy
1 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
BIOENERGY TECHNOLOGIES OFFICE
US Case Studies on Energy Recovery from Waste
Beau HoffmanConversion R&D Technology ManagerUS Dept of Energy, Bioenergy Technologies Office
2 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
MSW Report to Congress
Congressional interest is largely driven to solve waste disposal challenges
“Deliver a report to the Appropriations Committee a report on R&D opportunities to improve the economic viability of municipal solid waste‐to‐energy”
For existing WTE facilities:• Current Gen AD Improvements
– Co‐digestion advancements– Advanced biogas cleanup– Conversion of biogas to fuels and co‐products– Advanced AD reactor design
• Advanced waste preprocessing and handling strategies– High precision sorting– Development of quality control specs (for waste feedstocks)– Preprocessing/pretreatment processes to remove contaminants
3 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 1 – Catalytic Biogas Upgrading
Questions: Devin [email protected]
John [email protected]
4 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 1 – Catalytic Biogas Upgrading
24 SCFM LFG Feed 75 Gal/Day Diesel
Mobile Pilot Unit (completed 2018)
2016:2012:
5 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 1 – Catalytic Biogas Upgrading
6 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 1 – Catalytic Biogas Upgrading
• Excellent middle distillate boiling point distribution
• Boiling points align with commercial diesel
• Waste derived cleaner burning fuel
Fuel Analysis• Low aromatics (Less particulate/soot
formation)• Zero sulfur (No SOx Emissions)• Isomers improve cold temp properties
Hydrocarbon Family
TRIFTSDiesel
Commercial Diesel
Paraffins 68.61 19.95Isomers 29.98 31.60Olefins 0.86 0.92
Aromatics 0.3 39.48Cyclics 0.25 8.05
7 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 1 – Catalytic Biogas Upgrading
$(5,000,000)
$‐
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15Discoun
ted Cu
mulative Ca
sh Flow
Years
Plant Profitability at Various Wholesale Diesel Prices w/ RIN (600 scfm Biogas)
WS Price $3.5
WS Price $3.0
WS Price $2.5
WS Price $2.0
WS Price $1.5
WS Price $1.0
At current WS pump price of 2.15 NPV = $10.6MM
RIN = $4.25/gal diesel (D3 ~ $2.50/RIN)
Initial Construction Capital $3.9 MM
Breakeven No RIN credit at 646 SCFM biogas production rate
Production Cost = $1.72/gal
8 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 2 – Hydrothermal Liquefaction
Wet waste requires a simple and robust process technology
PNNL’s bench‐scale continuous HTL system
Conversion technology must be: Simple, scalable, robust
Process a range of feedstocks and high ash levels (>20%)
Able to convert directly with minimal dewatering (or by blending in of dry materials)
Achieve high carbon yields to liquid hydrocarbons (40‐60%)
Hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) is…The conversion of solid biomass in hot, compressed water into liquid components
• HTL produces a gravity‐separable biocrude with low oxygen content (5–15 %) that can be upgraded to drop‐in blendstocks
HTL ConditionsTemp: 330-350°CPressure: 2900 psigtres: 10-30 min
Hydrotreating ConditionsTemp: 400°CPressure: 1500 psig H2Sulfided NiMo on Al
Wet biomass material (sludge, manure, algae)
Stable biocrude oil(up to 60% C‐yield)
Fuel blendstocks(95%+ yield)
Questions: Justin [email protected] Snowden‐SwanLesley.Snowden‐[email protected]
9 | Bioenergy Technologies Office 9
• A fixed-bed hydrotreater is critical to quantify catalyst lifetime• Process improvements dropped the MFSP by over $2/GGE
Throughput increased 34% (WHSV of 0.29/h to 0.39/h) – catalyst, capital costTime-on-stream increased from 300 to 550 hours – catalyst cost
• A two-year catalyst life will further reduce MFSP by $0.80/GGE
Case Study 2 – Hydrothermal Liquefaction
10 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 2 – Hydrothermal Liquefaction
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%
gasoline(IBP‐184°C)
jet(153‐256°C)
diesel(184‐390°C)
heavies(>390°C)
Mass Y
ield* %
Sludge (GLWA) Sludge (CCCSD)
Sludge/FOG (80/20) (CCCSD) Swine Manure
• Engine testing at CSU of 5% blends in diesel shows NO negative impact on performance or emissions
• Simulated distillation shows product is Rich in diesel High in cetane (~70)
WoodPyrolysis
WoodHTL
50/50Wood/Algae
HTL
CertificationDiesel
EtOH toDiesel
SludgeHTL
AlgaeHTL
11 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 2 – Hydrothermal Liquefaction
$0.0
$1.0
$2.0
$3.0
$4.0
$5.0
$6.0
$7.0
$8.0
2018 SOT 2018 SOT no NH3removal
2019 SOT 2019 SOTno NH3removal
2022 Projected 2022 Projected no NH3removal
Minim
um Fue
l Sellin
g Price,
$/GGE
Balance of Plants
Biocrude Hydrotreating /Hydrocracking
Biocrude Transportation
HTL Water Treatment
HTL Biocrude Production
Sludge Dewatering
$7.16
$5.11$4.69
$6.74
$3.11$2.77
• Annual state of technology (SOT) assessment tracks progress toward goal• Progress via increased hydrotreating catalyst life and reactor throughput• Increased feed solids, separations, heating configuration and upgrading
(throughput and catalyst life) will enable the 2022 goal
12 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 2 – Hydrothermal Liquefaction
$0.0
$1.0
$2.0
$3.0
$4.0
$5.0
$6.0
Baseline(SOT)
Sludge/FOG(80/20)
Swinemanure
MFSP, $/G
GE
Balance of Plants
BiocrudeHydrotreating /HydrocrackingBiocrudeTransportation
HTL WaterTreatment
HTL BiocrudeProduction
Feedstockdewatering
$5.11$4.44 $4.54
• Blending FOG, even at low levels, improves economics of waste water sludge
• Higher biocrude yields for manure and FOG reduce MFSP by $0.60‐70/gge
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
$4.0
$4.2
$4.4
$4.6
$4.8
$5.0
$5.2
$5.4
$5.6
$5.8
0 5 10 15 20
Biocrude
Yield, g/g fe
ed (D
AF)
MFSP, $/G
GE
Weight % FOG blended with sludge
MFSP Yield
SOT
13 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 2 – Hydrothermal Liquefaction
• Wet waste resources are highly co‐located 80% of non‐sludge waste is generated within 25 miles of a wastewater
treatment plant (WWTP) that is ≥ 1 M Gal/day• Collection and blending reduces costs via larger plant scale
14 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 3 – Advanced CO2 Sorbents
Synthetic, porous metal‐organic frameworks + amines
Combine benefits of aqueous amines and adsorbents“step‐shaped adsorbents”
• “Step‐shaped” adsorption = less energy needed to regenerate• High selectivity for CO2 = higher product purity• Solid phase = easy to handle, increased safety (vs aqueous amines) Questions: Jason Husk
15 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 3 – Advanced CO2 Sorbents
Sorbents for PSA and amine scrubbers…•exhibit low working capacities•require large pressure and/or temperature swings to be cycled
Mosaic’s phase change adsorbents…•exhibit very large working capacities•require small pressure and/or temperature swings to be cycled
Mosaic Typical PSA Process
16 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 3 – Advanced CO2 Sorbents
• 1.2MM grant from California Energy Commission (CEC) thru Sept 2018
• 40% Reduction in OPEX with Mosaic’s Gen‐1 concept system compared to traditional amine scrubbing
• 15% Reduction in CapEx, and plans to pursue further cost reductions
• Stability testing of MOF‐based pellets performed at Davis WWTP
– CO2 capacity maintained over 1000+ cycles
• In‐house manufacturing at 1 kg /week, currently supporting multiple orders.
• Year 1: Pilot system designed/fabricated by Mosaic Materials, EPC Subs
• Year 2: Pilot system deployed at host site to demonstrate efficacy of CO2 removal unit
Sources: American Biogas Council, SoCalGas
Pipeline injection or vehicle
CNG
Biogas Upgrading
Digestion produces
biogas
Waste received
17 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 4 – Next Gen AD
Project goal: Improve the techno‐economic viability of biopower production by developing a sustainable two‐phase anaerobic membrane bioreactor (AnMBR) system that diverts organic fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW) and food waste from landfills and incineration while generating methane and renewable bioproducts.Project outcome: A scalable, high performance, low‐cost, two‐phase modular AnMBR to extend the economic viability of AD to smaller scales
•Modular high rate rumen inspired AD technology
Dynamic Membrane: Filtering biofilm formed on support structure of ~ 10 – 100 microns
2nd Phase Magna Tree
Questions: Meltem Urgun‐[email protected]
18 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 4 – Next Gen AD
Ruminant Inspired Dynamic AnMBR hydrolyzes a high fraction of lignocellulose > 60% in a short time
VFA concentration and VFA yield during operation of the rumen reactor
19 | Bioenergy Technologies Office
Case Study 4 – Next Gen AD
• Modelling AnMBR performance• Previous AD models have been developed to model
one stage AD.• A model is needed that evaluates the feasibility of
different waste stream combinations and the process performance from the lens of two stage AD.
• Why? Hydrolysis step is rate limiting and varies with biodegradability of waste.
• New C++ version of the ADM1 model allows ~40x speedup in computational time while maintaining robustness of results