Introduction to Biopower

NCSL Advisory Council

on Energy, San Diego,
CA

Richard Bain
Richard.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
 Presentation Outline
O
• Industry Status
• Biomass Properties
• Direct Combustion
• Cofiring
• Gasification

Photo Credit: Chariton Valley RC&D

12/15/2009 2
 Figure 3. USA Renewable Electricity Generation in 2006

SSolar
l & PV Wind
Wi d
0.24% 6.71%

Municipal
M i i l Biomass
Bi
Waste 10.24%
4.03%
Geothermal
3.86%

Hydropower
74.91%

Total = 384.85 TWh

12/15/2009 3
 Biopower

Biopower status
2006 Capacity – 10.4 GWe
ƒ 5 GW Pulp and Paper
ƒ 2 GW Dedicated Biomass
ƒ 3 GW MSW and Landfill Gas
ƒ 0.5 GW Cofiring
2006 Generation – 54.9 TWh
Cost – 0.08 – 0.10 USD/kWh
Potential
• 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)

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

12/15/2009 4
 U.S. Biopower Generation, 1981-2006

70 12000

60
10000

MW)
Generation ((TWh/annum)

et Summer Capacity (M
50
8000

40
Generation 6000
C
Capacity
i
30

4000
20
G

Ne
2000
10

0 0
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Year
DOE EIA Annual Energy Outlook, Table A16, Individual Yearly Issues
12/15/2009 5
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
• Jointly developed by U.S. DOE and USDA
• Referred to as the “Billion Ton Study”

12/15/2009 8
 Bi
Biomass Supply
S l Scenarios
S i
Million Dry Tons/Year
1400

1200

1000

Dedicated Crops
800 CRP
Other Agricultural
Agricultural Residues
600 Urban
Primary Mill Residue
Forest Residue
400

200

0
2007 2010 2020 2020 2025 Potential
Milbrandt Walsh Walsh National Walsh Perlack
<$90/ton… <$90/ton… Academy <$90/ton…
 Example
120
Biomass Supply Curves
100 2010 2015 2020 2025
y Ton Delivered

80
2006$/Dry

60

40

Walsh (2008) data, plus $15/ton transportation

and handling costs

20
0 200 400 600 800
Million Dry Tons
Production Potential
Basis:

• 100 MW biopower plant

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

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 Costs
Technology code Capital Cost Operating Costs Heat Rate

(2006$) Overnight w AFUDC Fixed Variable Feed

Ref

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

Combustion Stoker
Combustion, CS 3 268
3,268 3 390
3,390 88 4
88.4 36
3.6 16 0
16.0 0 781
0.781 75 0
75.0 58 6
58.6 12 50
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

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

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

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

 Figure 5.11: Biomass CHP - Effect of Plant Size on Cost of Electricity and Steam
Feed Cost = $2/MBtu
14

C b ti - Electricity
Combustion El t i it
12
Major Considerations
1000 lb) Costs

10 Combustion - CHP • CHP is less expensive

than electricity only
kWh) and Steam ($/1

• Gasification is less
Gasification - Electricity
8 expensive than
combustion, but needs
Gasification - CHP additional development
6 • Cofiring is by far the
least cost option
Electricity (cents/k

• Only capital is for

4 Purchased Electricity feed system
• Fuel switching
Purchased Steam
option, not
2 capacity increase
15% Cofiring CHP
Incremental Cost

0
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175
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

12/15/2009 13
 Biomass Plant Technical Performance

Case Efficiency Feed Rate Electricity 150 lb Steam H/P

% MBtu/hr (TPH*) MW 1000 lb/hr

25 MW Electric - Direct Comb 30 284 (16

(16.73)
73) 25 0
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
Directt C
Comb
b 62 569 (33
(33.45)
45) 41 5
41.5 214 1 44
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

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 * Dry tons @ 17 MBtu/ton
14
 Combustion

50 MW McNeil Power Station 74 MW Wheelabrator Shasta Plant

Burlington, Vermont Anderson, California

12/15/2009 15
12/15/2009 16
 Historic Biopower Plants, Circa 2000
Plant Location MWe CF, % KTons/yr*
Willi
Williams L
Lake
k C
Canadad 60 106 768
Shasta California 74 70 694
Colmac California 49.9 96 846
Stratton Maine 49 90 573
Kettle Falls Washington 46 82 542
Snomomish Washington 39 60 410
Ridge Florida 40 57 376
y g
Grayling Michigan
g 36 63 320
Bay Front Wisconsin 30 62 251
McNeil Vermont 50 35 255
Multtrade Virginia 79.5 19 214
Madera California 25 60 308
Tracy California 18.5 80 214
Camas Washington 17 65 194
Tacoma Washington 40 27 221
Greenidge New York 10 8
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.
12/15/2009 17
Life Cycle CO2 and Energy Balance
for a Direct-Fired Biomass System
Current biomass power industry

Net greenhouse gas emissions

-410 g CO2 equivalent/kWh
1,204

Avoided Carbon
Emissions Electricity
1.0
1,627 Out
10 3 28.4
Fossil
Energy Landfill and Transportation Construction Power Plant
In uc g
Mulching p
Operation

12/15/2009 134% carbon closure 18

 Di
Direct
t Ai
Air Emissions
E i i from
f Wood
W d Residue
R id Facilities
F iliti by
b Boiler
B il Type
T
lb/MMBtu
SOX NOX CO PM-101 Comments
Biomass Technology
Stoker Boiler, 0.08 2.1 12.2 0.50 Based on 23 Calif ornia grate
Wood Residues (1,4) (biomass type (biomass type (total particulates) boilers, except f or SO2
not specif ied) not specif ied) (biomass type (uncontrolled)
not specif ied)
Fluidized Bed, 0.08 0.9 0.17 0.3 11 FBC boilers in Calif ornia
Biomass (4) (biomass type (biomass type (biomass type (total particulates)
not specif ied) not specif ied) not specif ied) (biomass type
not specif ied)
Energy Crops 0.05 1.10 to 2.2 0.23 0.01 Combustor f lue gas goes
(Poplar) (s ugge s te d value (0.66 to 1.32 w /SNCR; (total through cyclone and
b
based d on SOSOx numbers
b 0.22
0 22 tto 0
0.44
44 w ith SCR) particulates)
ti l t ) baghouse Syngas goes
baghouse.
Gasification
f or Stoker and FBC, through scrubber and
(a,b)
adjusted by a f actor of baghouse bef ore gas turbine.
9,180/13,800 to account No controls on gas turbine.
f or heat rate
improvement)

Coal Technology
Bituminous Coal, 20.2 5.8 2.7 0.62 PM Control only
Stoker Boiler (f) 1 wt% S coal (baghouse)

Pulverized Coal 14.3 6.89 0.35 0.32 Average US PC boiler

Boiler (d) (total particulates) (typically:baghouse,
limestone FGC)
Cofiring 15% Biomass 12.2 6.17 0.35 0.32 (total ?
(d) particulates)
i l )

Fluidized Bed, 3.7 (1 w t% S coal 2.7 9.6 0.30 Baghouse f or PM Control, Ca

Coal (f) Ca/S = 2.5) sorbents used f or SOx

Natural Gas Technology

4-Stroke NG 0.006 7.96-38.3 2.98-35.0 0.09-0.18 No control except
Reciprocating (depends on load (depends on load (depends on load PCC at high-end
g of
and air:f uel ratio) and air:f uel ratio) and air:f uel ratio) PM-10 range
Engine (g)

Natural Gas 0.009 1.72 0.4 .09 Water-steam

Turbine (e) (0.0007 w t% S) (total particulates) injection only

Natural Gas 0.004 0.91 0.06 0.14 Water-steam

Combined Cycle (c,e) (0.21 w / SCR) (total particulates) injection only
 Average Biopower Plant Emissions
Filterable Filterable Filterable
Particulate Matter PM PM-10 PM-2.5
lb./MWh*
Dry Wood No control 6.14 5.53 4.76
Mechanical collector 4.61 4.14 2.46
Wet Wood No control 5.07 4.45 3.84
Mechanical collector 3.38 3.07 1.84
All Fuels Electrolyzed gravel bed 1.54 1.14 1.00
Wet scrubber 1.01 1.00 1.00
Fabric filters 1.54 1.14 1.00
ESP 0.83 0.61 0.54
NOx , SO2, CO NOx SO2 CO
Wet Wood 3.38 0.38 9.21
Dry Wood 7.52 0.38 9.21
Total Organic Compounds (TOC), Volatile
TOC VOC CO2
Organic Compounds (VOC), Carbon Dioxide
All Fuels 0.60 0.26 2993

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

EPA (2009). Clearinghousehouse f or 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
 ock
dst
M Fee
De etal Dump Conveyor #1
tec
to r Ma
Primary Se gnetic
par
Hogger ato Wood
r
Pile Radial
Stacker Truck Tipper

Secondary
Hogger Radial Screw Active
Sca Reclaim Feeder
le System Boundary for
Biomass Feedstock
Disc Feeder
Biomass Existing
Handling System
Feedstock Boiler System
Conveyor
y #2
Rotary
R t Airlock
Ai l k H dli
Handling
Feeder Equipment

Air Intake
Existing
Valve Boiler
arator
Sepa

Valve
Bin Mechanical
Vent Exhauster

Wood Silo

Biomass Co-Firing System

Collecting Retrofit for 100 MW Pulverized
Conveyors
Coal Boiler
Scale

Scale

Pressure Blowers

12/15/2009 23
 Net Summer Capacity of Plants Cofiring Biomass and Coal
Coal, 2006
(Megawatts)

State Plant Name Biomass/ Total State Plant Name Biomass/ Total
Coal Plant Coal Plant
Cofiring
g Capacity
p y Cofiring Capacity
Capacity Capacity
AL Mobile Energy Services LLC 91 91 MN Rapids Energy Center 26 28
AL Georgia Pacific Naheola Mill 31 78
MS Weyerhaeuser Columbus MS 123 123
AL International Paper Prattville Mill 49 90
NC Corn Products Winston Salem 8 8
AR Ashdown 47 156
NC Primary Energy Roxboro 68 68
AZ H Wilson Sundt Generating Station 173 558
CT Covanta Mid-Connecticut
Mid Connecticut Energy 90 90 NC Weyerhaeuser Plymouth NC 162 162
DE Edge Moor 252 710 NY AES Greenidge LLC 112 162
FL International Paper Pensacola 83 83 NY AES Hickling LLC 70 70
FL Jefferson Smurfit Fernandina Beach 74 128 NY AES Jennison LLC 60 60
FL Stone Container Panama City Mill 20 34 NY Black River Generation 56 56
GA Georgia Pacific Cedar Springs 101 101 SC International Paper Eastover Facility 48 110
GA International Paper Augusta Mill 85 85 SC Stone Container Florence Mill 79 108
GA SP Newsprint
N i t 45 82 SC C
Cogen S
Southth 99 99
HI Hawaiian Comm & Sugar Puunene Mill 46 62 UT Desert Power LP 43 135
IA AG Processing Inc 8 8 VA Bassett Table 2 2
IA University of Iowa Main Power Plant 21 23 VA Georgia Pacific Big Island 8 8
KY H L Spurlock 329 1,279
VA International Paper Franklin Mill 96 155
LA International Paper Louisiana Mill 59 59
VA Covington Facility 105 105
MD Luke Mill 65 65
WA Steam plant 50 50
ME Rumford Cogeneration 103 103
ME S D Warren Westbrook 62 81 WI Blount Street 100 188
MI Decorative Panels Intl 8 8 WI Manitowoc 10 90
MI Escanaba Paper Company 81 103 WI Fox Valley Energy Center 6 6
MI TES Filer City Station 70 70 WI Mosinee Paper 20 23
MN M L Hibbard 73 123 WI Bay Front 40 68
WI Biron Mill 22 62
WI Whiting Mill 4 4
WI Wisconsin Rapids Pulp Mill 72 72
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/page/trends/table9.html WI Niagara Mill 12 24
3/11/2009
Total 3,569 6,317
12/15/2009 24
 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 Heat
Skive, Denmark

15-100 kWe

Credit: Community Power Corp

Credit: Carbona Corp

12/15/2009 27
 Carbona: SKIVE GASIFICATION CHP-PLANT, DENMARK
6 MWe and 12 Mwth

BIOMASS, 28 MWth SKIVE PROCESS DIAGRAM TO STACK

GAS FILTER
TAR REFORMER
GASIFIER 2 BOILERS
GAS
SCRUBBER

FLY ASH 2x10 MWth

DISTRICT
HEATING
11.5 MWth

WATER

POWER
AIR/STEAM GAS BUFFER 3x2 MWe
TANK

3 GAS ENGINES
BOTTOM ASH GAS COOLERS
GASIFIER BODY
WOOD
PELLETS
3 JENBACHER GAS ENGINES

FLARE

Status: >1000 hours with engines Source: Carbona

April 2009 2 GAS BOILERS

February 2009
 Frontline Bioenergy, LLC, Ames, Iowa

Commercial Installation in Benson, MN

Biomass Gasifier
Silo

Flare
Gasifier Test
Building
Char/Ash
Load-Out

Gas Product
Pipe Line

• Bubbling
B bbli Fluid
Fl id Bed:
B d airi or oxy/steam
/
Boiler
• Pressure Operation: up to 5 bar
• Gas Conditioning: high efficiency filtration;
tar reforming
g development
p Phase-1 (shown): 75 TPD input (12.5
(12 5 MWth)
• Capacity: up to 70 MWth per train Phase-2 (future): 300 TPD input (50 MWth)

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

Nexterra Energy Corporation

Credit:http://www.nexterra.ca/
12/15/2009 30
Questions

31