URBAN FRIENDLY BIOMASS @ SCALE Size Matters Scott Layne, CEM - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Scott Layne, CEM Nexterra System Corp. slayne@nexterra.ca

Advanced Energy Conference October 2011

URBAN FRIENDLY BIOMASS @ SCALE “Size Matters”

US Renewables Demand

• The EIA Annual Energy Outlook for 2010 projects that the demand for renewable energy

will experience robust growth through 2030

• Biomass will account for a significant portion of incremental demand

2 │ Private & Confidential

1

EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2010.

Current U.S. Energy Supply1 U.S. Renewables Forecast1

(billions of kilowatt hours)

Growth of Biomass Energy

3

Advantages of Biomass

• Renewable
• Carbon neutral
• Baseload/dispatchable
• Meets RPS requirements
• Wide availability of biomass fuel
• Substantial cost savings1

% of US Power Supply1 Baseload Dispatchable & Load Following Peaking Intermittent

Coal

49%

√

Nuclear

19%

√

Natural Gas

22%

√ √ √

Wind

<1.0%

√

Solar

<2.0 %

√

Biomass

1.32%

√ √

• Over the last three years, global investment

in new biomass and Waste-to-Energy (WtE) generating capacity has averaged US$9.7 billion per year

• State Renewable Portfolio standards (RPS)

policies require roughly 61 GW of renewable capacity by 2025, equivalent to 15% of projected electricity demand growth.

Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance

1 Spread between biomass

fuel ($1– $3 / MMBtu) and natural gas ($8 / MMBtu).

Diverse & Widely Available Supply of Biomass

80 30 57 7 160

Primary Mill Residuals Urban Wood Residuals Forest Residuals Biosolids Crop Residuals

1 million bone dry tons of wood/yr = 150 MW e.g. Urban Wood (MBDT/Y) = 4,500 MW

U.S. Volume of Biomass (millions of tons/year)

Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

4

The Importance of Scale

Biomass Heat and Power – Smaller Is Better

Conventional Biomass (Large Combustion)

Centralized, rural, industrial, low efficiency, higher emissions, capital intensive Constrained by scale = fuel disruption, fuel risk, financing permitting, community acceptance

6

Next Gen Biomass (Small Gasification)

Small plants, urban, institutional, high efficiency, ultra low emissions, community friendly Constrained by technology response comparable to

• ther renewables (e.g. solar,

wind)

Scale Drives Sustainability Technology Choices Fuel Consumption & Supply Emissions Site Selection

7

– Combustion – Gasification – Digestion – Daily volume of fuel needed – Residuals & urban biomass vs. harvested trees – Other non-woody biomass: agricultural wastes, crop fuels, biosolids, algae – Rate of Criteria Emissions, HAP’s, CO2 – Absolute volume of pollutants released – Secondary sources from fuel processing and transportation – Proximity to load & system losses – Transportation & traffic impact – Ability to use heat/waste heat

30 MW ABB/Zurn biomass plant, CA 2 MW Nexterra biomass CHP plant

Technology Comparison –Combustion vs. Nexterra CHP

8

Old Paradigm

Model Centralized Efficiency (power only) Low (20%) Efficiency (CHP) System dependent Scale (economic) Large (>30 MW) Fuel Footprint High (30 MW = 250,000 dtpy) Fuel Truck Traffic High (30 MW = 36 trucks/day) Steam Plant Operators Yes PM Emissions High volume Permitting/Public Risk Higher Construction Time Long : 24 – 36 months Grid Connection Costs Higher Urban Friendly No – scale, traffic, emissions

New Paradigm

Distributed High (25%) High (60%+) Small (2–10 MW) Low (2 MW = 13,000 dtpy) Low (2 MW = 2 trucks/day) No Ultra Low – natural gas equivalent Lower Short: 12 months Minimal – inside the fence Yes – scale, traffic, emissions

Technology Selection Impact on Emissions

Combustion Emissions* Nexterra Emissions** Nexterra Emissions – as a %

• f TPY of

Combustion Nexterra Emissions - # of Times Lower than Combustion Lbs/MMbtu TPY @ 14 MWth Lbs/MMbtu TPY @ 14 MWth

PM

(with secondary control)

0.0196 5.6 0.005 1.4 26% 4

CO

0.259 73.5 0.0066 1.9 3% 33

VOC

(method 25A)

0.038 10.8 .00135 0.4 4% 25

NOx

0.2287 64.9 .206 58.5 90%

NOx

(with secondary NOx control)

0.1025 29.1 0.045 12.8 44% 2

Total TPY

(no NOx control)

154.8 62.2 40% 2.5

Total TPY

(with NOx control)

119.0 16.5 14% 7 9 │ Private & Confidential * Average of test results from 17 biomass combustion facilities as detailed in Levelton Consultants report ** Average of results from 5 Nexterra gasification facilities

Biomass Fuel Options -- Is it Sustainable?

Woody Biomass – forest products & residuals, crop trees, urban wood waste Agricultural Waste – corn stover, oat/rice hulls, bagass, etc. Organic MSW – food waste, yard waste, FOG’s (fats, oils, greases) Animal Waste – poultry litter, livestock manure Biosolids – sludge from municipal wastewater treatment operations Algae, Kelp, Seaweed Fuel Management Issues include:

• Cost & availability of long term supply
• Processing & handling the fuel
• Emissions & operational characteristics

10

Proximity to Markets

Siting Considerations -- Is it Urban Friendly?

Conclusions about Scale

Distributed Biomass Energy vs. Central Power Stations

Attribute Comparison Benefit

Air Emissions

Lower

Lower PM, NOx, CO, VOC, TOC emissions. Easier permitting, more public acceptance and cleaner air. Lower public health costs

Fuel Flexibility

Better

Able to utilize variety of local feedstocks. More fuel supply options, lower fuel cost, and reduced fuel procurement risk

Efficiency

Better

Higher overall efficiency using thermal energy and lower grid system losses. Dispatchable to a wide range of operating conditions

Forest Sustainability

Better

Use of recovered materials for fuel, plus purpose grown crop fuels. No need to harvest trees for “whole tree” chips

Energy Security

Similar

Locally sourced feedstock less susceptible to supply disruption. Ability to alter fuel mix

Urban Friendly

Unique

Local siting near point of use contributes to

• verall efficiency and potential for rapid

deployment

13

Opportunities and Challenges

OPPORTUNITIES

• Organizations need energy security & fuel supply diversity
• GHG/sustainability goals place a premium on energy from renewable sources
• Carbon accounting is coming
• Government and other incentive programs (REC’s, tax credits, etc.)
• Policy and regulatory consistency
• Biomass fuel supply markets are maturing

CHALLENGES

• Low fossil (natural gas) energy prices
• Biomass systems require operator training and acceptance
• Many projects are seasonal versus 7/24/365
• Customer perceptions about emissions, fuel supply, and scale
• Biomass energy projects are capital intensive
• 3rd party business models require innovation in procurement and contracting

14

Thank You

Scott Layne, CEM Vice President of Sales North Region USA 484.354.5636 slayne@nexterra.ca www.nexterra.ca