Increase RE Ratio. Distributed generation. Sustainability Clean air Global warming. Peak oil

Transcription

1 Modele communautaire de gestion des territoire forestier et production de bioenergie i locale Dr. Eric Bibeau utilisant la cogeneration Mechanical & Industrial Engineering i Dept Manitoba Hydro/NSERC Chair in Alternative Energy

2 Motivation Sustainability Clean air Global warming Increase RE Ratio Peak oil Distributed generation

3 Drivers NYME X Crude Pricing Contract1 1/2/9 97 US$ / barre el 1/2/9 98 1/2/9 99 1/2/0 00 1/2/0 01 1/2/0 02 1/2/0 03 1/2/0 04 1/2/0 05 CHP and CHPC

4 OUTLINE BioEnergy/land management Forest fires in North America Distributed bioenergy systems Community based bioenergy system CHP District heating Small-scale approach to bioenergy Corbis

5 Natural fire cycles Artificially altered by forest practices and dland management Last 20 year trends show Increases in Fire size Fire severity Property damage Corbis Reason Large quantity of biomass accumulated

6 Natural fire cycles Comparing current ponderosa pine forest in Arizona to 1870 conditions (Farnsworth et al. 2003) Modern forest fire control has increased the number of trees from trees/ha to 500-5,000 trees/ha Forest fuel loads from Mg/ha to an average of 49 Mg/ha dnr.wi.gov Impacts on water quality form sediments 70 times worst from wildfire compared to forest thinning (USDA 2003)

7 Natural fire cycles GHG, air emissions and PM from wildfires vs bioenergy several orders of magnitude higher (Morris 1999) Land mangers reducing risk requires active management Corbis active fuel management (O Laughlin 2005) improves ecological conditions has public support reduces wildfire risks

8 Wildfire fire plans Communities reviewing fire plans Exposure to wildfire risks Wildfire control strategies Smaller communities Lack resources Reduced insurance coverage More integrated into forest Pre-emptive wildfire management plans Need to consider smaller & remote communities Corbis Corbis

9 Land management for wildfire control (1) Reactive wildfire suppression No pre-emptive control Results in forest fuel loading Default and current situation for many communities ii Compounded by: Drought Overstock of small trees Tree cutting policies Beetle-infestation Water-stressed forest Corbis

10 Land management for wildfire control (1) Reactive wildfire suppression Effect: 91% more acreage burnt compared to 1870 Recognized as no longer acceptable Ladder fuels+ closely spaced trees Beyond capability of effective fire fighting Interface zones Devastating to property Corbis

11 Land management for wildfire control (2) Prescribed burn Pre-emptive control Selected times and conditions Intentional destruction of ladder fuels Subject to: Weather Smoke regulation Risks of uncontrolled burns Not applicable near properties Corbis Corbis

12 Land management for wildfire control (2) Prescribed burn Less susceptible to unplanned wildfires Cannot be applied to high fuel loading Limited it option in wildland-urban d interface Risk of escape fires Short window Air quality concerns Corbis

13 Land management for wildfire control (3) Mechanical treatment Pre-emptive control Harvest Ladder fuels Underbrush Low level biomass Removal of larger trees Reduces crown fire Forest thinning Corbis

14 Land management for wildfire control (3) Mechanical treatment Biomass collected Limited mercantile value Transported out or become ladder fuel Allow possible productive use of biomass feedstocks Long-distance transportation affects economics Can productive use offset mechanical treatment costs?

15 LAVERTY L and WILLIAMS J. (2000)

16 At risk communities 20,000 communities at risk in the US (Iversen and Demark, 2005) Risk reduction: remove Ladder fuels Thinning Fundamental risk: interface zones Area between community and forest Unresolved area of responsibilities Can default to government control Smaller communities Lack professional fire-fighting equipment Less organized Need cost-effective solution for specific needs Corbis

17 Costs of reactive programs Low up front investment news.bbc.co.uk Greatest uncertainty in budgetary planning Expenditures and property p damage unbounded More uncertain with high h fuel loadings Cost can exceed $1 billion in a single season in the US

18 Costs of pre-emptive emptive programs Prescribed burns least costly $130 to $1,000 Cnd per hectare (USDA 2003) No secondary benefits Higher pollution Mechanical clearing Most costly approach Potential for secondary benefits $50 to $70 Cnd per BDT 25 to 35 BDT per hectare Significant non-monetized benefits (Mason 2003)

19 Bioenergy Use of collected biomass Transport to largest-scale facility Power only CHP Co-firing Wood pellets Bio-oil Local use Small scale CHP community-based model

20 Transportation Economics o cs show (USDA 2003) transport costs being 0.15 to 0.45 $/bdt per km (Cnd) transporting wood chips 140 km would only cover the transportation cost yet alone any of the mechanical treatment operation

21 Small Communities Unrealistic to expect Large scale systems will pay and use relatively l small amounts of biomass Outside services will evaluate plans for all small communities Need a method without significant input from outside experts Need revenues and tangible benefits Displace community energy costs Much higher costs if off-grid

22 Community-based model 100 households in forested area Energy requirements 250 kwe and 1,000 MWth Houses, community buildings, and some businesses Seven year cycle Continuous mechanical treatment t t & regrowth Require 0.5 BDT of residues per hour Assume 75% average capacity use

23 Community-based model Community 250 kwe CHP 2.75 km Mechanical treatment Clear 1 hectare daily Few and local employees Simple tools: ATV, chain saws 5d day work week CHP system unattended operation Forest

24 4 BioPower Systems 10 9 Superheater E conomizer 3 Boiler 2% blowdown F eed Pump 8 4 Attemporator 5 Steam Deaerator Turbine 6 7 Co-generation process 1 C ondensate return and makeup 108 kpa 185 C combustion air 315 C 367 kpa 258 C 377 kpa 127 C Compressor 1000 C Input 310 C 59.9% recovery 1000 C Input 215 C Heater Heater 68.2% recovery 300 C Thermal Oil Heat Transfer 250 C TURBODEN srl synthetic oil ORC Conversion 17% 60 C 80 C ORC Air heat dump Liquid Coolant 400 C Entropic Fluid Heat Transfer Air Heater Recuperator 56.7% recovery Brayton 111 kpa 315 C 336 kpa 483 C 58.3% cycle energy Turbine / E xpander 650 C 13.1% cycle eff. 101 kpa 15.6 C 7.4% overall eff. 170 C ENTROPIC power cycle Conversion 17.6% 60 C 90 C Entropic Air heat dump L iquid C oolant

25 Biopower DG Scale CONVERSION EFFICIENCY 10 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 10 0 % S mall-scale S team EL HE A T Organic Rankine Cycle Entropic Cycle ELEC ELECT HE A T HE A T Air Turbine EL HE A T Size Range (kwe) ,000 5,000 10,000 S mall-scale S team Organic Rankine Cycle Entropic Cycle Air Turbine COST SIZE COST SIZE SIZE COST COST SIZE Cost Range ($/kwe) $1,000 $3,000 $5,000 $7,000 $9,000

26 Distributed BioPower CHP Conversion Chart per BDT (20% MC) Switchgrass at 20% MC Small Steam Air Brayton Organic Rankine E ntropic Large Steam Power delivered 6.0% 8.4% 11.1% 13.1% 28.0% Heat delivered 59.0% 41.0% 56.0% 63.0% - Overall CHP delivered 65.0% 49.4% 67.1% 76.1% 28.0% E lectricity (kwhr/bdt) ,556 Heat (kwhr/bdt) 1 3,278 2,278 3,111 3,500 - E lectricity (GJ/BDT) Heat (GJ/BDT) E lectricity (gallon oil/bdt) Heat (gallon oil/bdt)

27 Distributed BioPower (20% MC) CHP Revenue Chart Lower power revenues Electical Power (Cnd) Natural Gas (Cnd) Revenue (per BDTon) $ per kwhr $11.65 per GJ Power (90% us e) Heat (60% use) Total Small Steam $18 $82 $100 Air Brayton $25 $57 $83 ORC $33 $78 $112 1 E ntropic $39 $88 $127 Large Steam $84 $0 $84

28 Distributed BioPower (20% MC) CHP Revenue Chart Higher power revenues Electical Power (Cnd) Natural Gas (Cnd) Revenue (per BDTon) $0.10 per kwhr $11.65 per GJ Power (90% us e) Heat (60% use) Total Small Steam $30 $82 $112 1 Air Brayton $42 $57 $99 ORC $56 $78 $134 E ntropic $66 $88 $154 Large Steam $140 $0 $140

29 Break even system Size: Area: This model allows 250 kwe per 100 households in distributed power and heat systems - Power to whole community - Heat to participants (public & commercial buildings, homes, etc) - 2¾ km forest radius (1 system) (5 ¾ km 2 / system interface lands) - 4kmforestradius(2systems) radius systems) Power: 180 kwe average consumption level per system Capital Cost: $750,000 / Turbion TM system $500,000 / district heat system Operating Cost: ($120,000 direct) distributed Turbion TM systems (diesel backup &/or peak supply) 5 year 10% interest ( $68 / BDT) ( $46 / BDT) - expenditures in community ( $38 / BDT) Biomass Clearing: - 7 year 134 hectares / year / system ( $20 / BDT) repeated cycle to handle re-growth 3,350 BDT / year / system 22 / kwhr $110 / BDT Heating Oil: - 270,000 litres / year (equiv.) - town using 40% of available heat - 75 / litre $64 / BDT

30 Utilization Opportunities Expanded use of biomass favors distributed approach Biomass is fundamentally a distributed resource Better technology is needed for a distributed CHP biopower biomass resource is distributed CHP applicable to smaller scale transportation costs eliminated minimizes power grid upgrades

31 1) Bio-Oil Liquid: condense pyrolysis gases Advantages for distributed BioPower increases HHV of fuel lessens cost of energy transport produces value-added added chemicals Disadvantages for distributed BioPower energy left in the char, fuel: dry + sized complex process for remote application low conversion efficiency when using wet biomass

32 2) Gasifier - Producer Gas Sub-stoichiometric combustion syngas: CO, CH 4, H 2, H 2 O contains particles, ash, tars Advantages for distributed BioPower engines and turbines Disadvantages for distributed BioPower flue gas cleaning and cool syngas fuel: dry + sized quality of gas fluctuates with feed complex for remote applications when producing both p pp p g heat and power using ICE or turbine

33 3) & 4) Small 10 Attempor ator Turbine Steam Cycle Superheater Economizer Boiler 6 7 E jector 8% steam Steam Rankine Cycle common approach 2% blowdown Feed Pump 8 4 Condenser water boiled, superheated, expanded, condensed and compressed Advantages distributed BioPower well known technology commercially available equipment Disadvantages distributed BioPower costly in small power sizes large equipment CHP Reduces electrical power 9 3 Deaerator 2 1 makeup

34 5) Air Brayton Cycle Advantages distributed BioPower simple low pressure Disadvantages for small BioPower low efficiency require high inlet turbine temperature 108 kpa 185 C combustion air 315 C 367 kpa 258 C 377 kpa 127 C Compressor Air Heater Recuperator increased compression/expansion ratios require additional turbine stages large equipment 56.7% recovery 111 kpa 315 C 336 kpa 483 C 58.3% cycle energy Turbine/ E xpander 650 C 13.1% cycle eff. 101 kpa 15.6 C 7.4% overall eff. turbine must be almost double the size of that required by a Rankine cycle air compressor absorbs b almost half of turbine power limited CHP

35 6) ORC Advantages distributed BioPower smaller condenser and turbine as high turbine exhaust pressure higher conversion efficiency no chemical treatment or vacuum no government certified operators CHP dry air cooling can reject unused heat Disadvantage for distributed BioPower organic fluid ¼ of water enthalpy binary system systems are expensive

36 Bioenergy Thermal Conversion in Manitoba

37 Low Cost: Why DG CHP Systems Using Independence: Biomass are Uncommon the primary need Simplicity: p Ruggedness: must not affect process reduce operator qualifications allow remote locations Maintenance Free: reducing cost Automated: simple to operate

38 DG CHP with Steam not Viable Boilers require qualified operators Large equipment Cooling towers Maintenance Poor efficiency Low grade heat rejection need CHP economics High capital and operating cost

39 UofM Bioenergy Projects Distributed CHP biopower Brayton Hybrid Cycle (BHC) Canadian Foundation for Innovation Entropic Rankin Cycle (ERC) Entropic Energy, TEAM and NRCAN Anaerobic Digestion Modelling NSERC/Manitoba Hydro Chair Future experimental digester

40 Brayton Hybrid Cycle (BHC) indirect heat 24% possible overall efficiency simple to operate app. 60 PSI air pressure low temperature turbine and heater no ceramic or expensive materials two fluids: water and air combine Brayton and Rankin cycle advantages $2,500/kW target some CHP potential Patent Pending

41 Window Chimney T flu MC PI flu PI comb_out MV w2 mpt w2 U T heat_in MC PI heat_in PI heat_in MC T comb_out V cold mpt ng V ng Cold Water Input Tee Pu F w ChV w R U Tee 1/2" T bp_out MC T rec_out MC mpt tur_ out V comb Hot Water Input V hot V pump 3/4 or 1/2" mptw1 U T rec_in MC PT tur_ in MV w1 PT com_out Variable Load bank V out/ I out May achieve same efficiency as direct fired microturbine V a_in Air Inlet Lab V a_out mpt com_in F a Window Cold Air Inlet Outside From Capstone Laboratory system

42 BHC Indirect Fired Direct Fired Microturbine

43 Entropic Rankine Cycle (ERC) simple technology twice the power compared to a steam based system produces hot glycol 90ºC- 115ºC for cogeneration small components no certified operators Patent Pending

44 Entropic Cycle CHP System No boiler required: Small equipment: High temp. heat: Dry air heat rejection: Good Power efficiency: High CHP efficiency: Affordable capital cost: uses vapour heater compact system 90 C district heat 60 C return 17%-22% cycle eff. 50%-85% flue heat $2,500/kW target

45 No Vacuum Operation p - reduced volume flow - small equipment Entropic Cycle CHP System Heater Flue Gas Heat Source - combustor flue gas - process exhaust Single Stage Turbine Power Unit Recuperator Simple & Direct Recuperation of Heat p - Keeps energy in the cycle - increases efficiency -simplified, inexpensive - high speed operation Cooler 90 C Hot Water Out Coolant - 100% useable heat - no cooling tower PM Alternator - High efficiency generation - high speed operation 60 C CPE, Compact Heat Exchangers - All welded construction - small footprint

46 4 BioPower Systems 10 9 Superheater E conomizer 3 Boiler 2% blowdown F eed Pump 8 4 Attemporator 5 Steam Deaerator Turbine 6 7 Co-generation process 1 C ondensate return and makeup 108 kpa 185 C combustion air 315 C 367 kpa 258 C 377 kpa 127 C Compressor 1000 C Input 310 C 59.9% recovery 1000 C Input 215 C Heater Heater 68.2% recovery 300 C Thermal Oil Heat Transfer 250 C TURBODEN srl synthetic oil ORC Conversion 17% 60 C 80 C ORC Air heat dump Liquid Coolant 400 C Entropic Fluid Heat Transfer Air Heater Recuperator 56.7% recovery Brayton 111 kpa 315 C 336 kpa 483 C 58.3% cycle energy Turbine / E xpander 650 C 13.1% cycle eff. 101 kpa 15.6 C 7.4% overall eff. 170 C ENTROPIC power cycle Conversion 17.6% 60 C 90 C Entropic Air heat dump L iquid C oolant

47 le Steam Biomass Feed 20% moisture 1.8% energy input (fossil fuel) Harvesting 0.4% energy input (fossil fuel) Transport to CHP plant 0.4% energy loss Fuel Preparation (hogging) 34.6% energy loss Steam CHP Plant 315 C Flue Gas 59% Steam Heat Production 6.0% Power Production Energ gy Diag gram DG sca Brayton ORC B iomass F eed 20% moisture Biomass Feed 20% moisture 1.8% energy input (fossil fuel) Harvesting 1.8% energy input (fossil fuel) Harvesting 0.4% energy input (fossil fuel) Transport to CHP plant 0.4% energy input (fossil fuel) Transport to CHP plant 0.4% energy loss F uel Preparation (hogging) 0.4% energy loss Fuel Preparation (hogging) 50.2% energy loss Air T urbine CHP Plant 32.5% energy loss ORC CHP Plant 315 C Flue Gas 310 C Flue Gas 41% Hot A ir Heat Production 8.4% Power Production 56% Hot Water Heat Production 11.1% Power Production Entropic Values for bugwood Biomass Feed 20% moisture 1.8% energy input (fossil fuel) Harvesting 0.4% energy input (fossil fuel) Transport to CHP plant 0.4% energy loss F uel Preparation (hogging) 23.3% energy loss Entropic CHP Plant 215 C Flue Gas 63% Hot Water Heat Production 13.1% Power Production

48 Biopower DG Scale CONVERSIONEFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY 10 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 10 0 % Small-scale Steam EL HE A T Organic Rankine Cycle Entropic Cycle ELEC ELECT HE A T HE A T Air Turbine EL HE A T Size Range (kwe) ,000 5,000 10,000 Small-scale Steam Organic Rankine Cycle Entropic Cycle Air Turbine SIZE COST SIZE COST SIZE COST SIZE COST Cost Range ($/kwe) $1,000 $3,000 $5,000 $7,000 $9,000

49 Distributed BioPower CHP Conversion Chart (20% MC) Switchgrass at 20% MC Small Steam Air Brayton Organic Rankine E ntropic Large Steam Power delivered 6.0% 8.4% 11.1% 13.1% 28.0% Heat delivered 59.0% 41.0% 56.0% 63.0% - Overall CHP delivered 65.0% 49.4% 67.1% 76.1% 28.0% E lectricity (kwhr/bdt) ,556 Heat (kwhr/bdt) 1 3,278 2,278 3,111 3,500 - E lectricity (GJ/BDT) Heat (GJ/BDT) E lectricity (gallon oil/bdt) Heat (gallon oil/bdt)

50 Distributed BioPower CHP Revenue Chart (Manitoba) 20% MC (Cattails) Electical Power (Cnd) Natural Gas (Cnd) Revenue (per BDTon) $0.06 per kwhr $11.65 per GJ Power (90% us e) Heat (60% us e) Total S mall S team $18 $82 $100 Air Brayton $25 $57 $83 ORC 1 $33 $78 $112 Entropic $39 $88 $127 Large S team $84 $0 $84

51 Distributed BioPower CHP Revenue Chart (Ontario: Higher Power Costs) Electical Power (Cnd) Natural Gas (Cnd) Revenue (per BDTon) $0.10 per kwhr $11.65 per GJ Power (90% us e) Heat (60% use) Total Small Steam $30 $82 $112 1 Air Brayton $42 $57 $99 ORC $56 $78 $134 E ntropic $66 $88 $154 Large Steam $140 $0 $140

52 Bioenergy Thermal Conversion in Manitoba

53 Low Cost: Why DG CHP Systems Using Independence: Biomass are Uncommon the primary need Simplicity: p Ruggedness: must not affect process reduce operator qualifications allow remote locations Maintenance Free: reducing cost Automated: simple to operate

54 DG CHP with Steam not Viable Boilers require qualified operators Large equipment Cooling towers Maintenance Poor efficiency Low grade heat rejection need CHP economics High capital and operating cost

55 UofM Bioenergy Projects Distributed CHP biopower Brayton Hybrid Cycle (BHC) Canadian Foundation for Innovation Entropic Rankin Cycle (ERC) Entropic Energy, TEAM and NRCAN Anaerobic Digestion Modelling NSERC/Manitoba Hydro Chair Future experimental digester

56 Brayton Hybrid Cycle (BHC) indirect heat 24% possible overall efficiency simple to operate app. 60 PSI air pressure low temperature turbine and heater no ceramic or expensive materials two fluids: water and air combine Brayton and Rankin cycle advantages $2,500/kW target some CHP potential Patent Pending

57 Window Chimney T flu MC PI flu PI comb_out MV w2 mpt w2 U T heat_in MC PI heat_in PI heat_in MC T comb_out V cold mpt ng V ng Cold Water Input Tee Pu F w ChV w R U Tee 1/2" T bp_out MC T rec_out MC mpt tur_ out V comb Hot Water Input V hot V pump 3/4 or 1/2" mptw1 U T rec_in MC PT tur_ in MV w1 PT com_out Variable Load bank V out/ I out May achieve same efficiency as direct fired microturbine V a_in Air Inlet Lab V a_out mpt com_in F a Window Cold Air Inlet Outside From Capstone Laboratory system

58 BHC Indirect Fired Direct Fired Microturbine

59 Entropic Rankine Cycle (ERC) simple technology twice the power compared to a steam based system produces hot glycol 90ºC- 115ºC for cogeneration small components no certified operators Patent Pending

60 Entropic Cycle CHP System No boiler required: Small equipment: High temp. heat: Dry air heat rejection: Good Power efficiency: High CHP efficiency: Affordable capital cost: uses vapour heater compact system 90 C district heat 60 C return 17%-22% cycle eff. 50%-85% flue heat $2,500/kW target

61 No Vacuum Operation p - reduced volume flow - small equipment Entropic Cycle CHP System Heater Flue Gas Heat Source - combustor flue gas - process exhaust Single Stage Turbine Power Unit Recuperator Simple & Direct Recuperation of Heat p - Keeps energy in the cycle - increases efficiency -simplified, inexpensive - high speed operation Cooler 90 C Hot Water Out Coolant - 100% useable heat - no cooling tower PM Alternator - High efficiency generation - high speed operation 60 C CPE, Compact Heat Exchangers - All welded construction - small footprint

62 4 BioPower Systems 10 9 Superheater E conomizer 3 Boiler 2% blowdown F eed Pump 8 4 Attemporator 5 Steam Deaerator Turbine 6 7 Co-generation process 1 C ondensate return and makeup 108 kpa 185 C combustion air 315 C 367 kpa 258 C 377 kpa 127 C Compressor 1000 C Input 310 C 59.9% recovery 1000 C Input 215 C Heater Heater 68.2% recovery 300 C Thermal Oil Heat Transfer 250 C TURBODEN srl synthetic oil ORC Conversion 17% 60 C 80 C ORC Air heat dump Liquid Coolant 400 C Entropic Fluid Heat Transfer Air Heater Recuperator 56.7% recovery Brayton 111 kpa 315 C 336 kpa 483 C 58.3% cycle energy Turbine / E xpander 650 C 13.1% cycle eff. 101 kpa 15.6 C 7.4% overall eff. 170 C ENTROPIC power cycle Conversion 17.6% 60 C 90 C Entropic Air heat dump L iquid C oolant

63 le Steam Biomass Feed 20% moisture 1.8% energy input (fossil fuel) Harvesting 0.4% energy input (fossil fuel) Transport to CHP plant 0.4% energy loss Fuel Preparation (hogging) 34.6% energy loss Steam CHP Plant 315 C Flue Gas 59% Steam Heat Production 6.0% Power Production Energ gy Diag gram DG sca Brayton ORC B iomass F eed 20% moisture Biomass Feed 20% moisture 1.8% energy input (fossil fuel) Harvesting 1.8% energy input (fossil fuel) Harvesting 0.4% energy input (fossil fuel) Transport to CHP plant 0.4% energy input (fossil fuel) Transport to CHP plant 0.4% energy loss F uel Preparation (hogging) 0.4% energy loss Fuel Preparation (hogging) 50.2% energy loss Air T urbine CHP Plant 32.5% energy loss ORC CHP Plant 315 C Flue Gas 310 C Flue Gas 41% Hot A ir Heat Production 8.4% Power Production 56% Hot Water Heat Production 11.1% Power Production Entropic Values for bugwood Biomass Feed 20% moisture 1.8% energy input (fossil fuel) Harvesting 0.4% energy input (fossil fuel) Transport to CHP plant 0.4% energy loss F uel Preparation (hogging) 23.3% energy loss Entropic CHP Plant 215 C Flue Gas 63% Hot Water Heat Production 13.1% Power Production

64 Biopower DG Scale CONVERSIONEFFICIENCY EFFICIENCY 10 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 10 0 % Small-scale Steam EL HE A T Organic Rankine Cycle Entropic Cycle ELEC ELECT HE A T HE A T Air Turbine EL HE A T Size Range (kwe) ,000 5,000 10,000 Small-scale Steam Organic Rankine Cycle Entropic Cycle Air Turbine SIZE COST SIZE COST SIZE COST SIZE COST Cost Range ($/kwe) $1,000 $3,000 $5,000 $7,000 $9,000

65 Distributed BioPower CHP Conversion Chart (20% MC) Switchgrass at 20% MC Small Steam Air Brayton Organic Rankine E ntropic Large Steam Power delivered 6.0% 8.4% 11.1% 13.1% 28.0% Heat delivered 59.0% 41.0% 56.0% 63.0% - Overall CHP delivered 65.0% 49.4% 67.1% 76.1% 28.0% E lectricity (kwhr/bdt) ,556 Heat (kwhr/bdt) 1 3,278 2,278 3,111 3,500 - E lectricity (GJ/BDT) Heat (GJ/BDT) E lectricity (gallon oil/bdt) Heat (gallon oil/bdt)

66 Distributed BioPower CHP Revenue Chart (Manitoba) 20% MC (Cattails) Electical Power (Cnd) Natural Gas (Cnd) Revenue (per BDTon) $0.06 per kwhr $11.65 per GJ Power (90% us e) Heat (60% us e) Total S mall S team $18 $82 $100 Air Brayton $25 $57 $83 ORC 1 $33 $78 $112 Entropic $39 $88 $127 Large S team $84 $0 $84

67 Distributed BioPower CHP Revenue Chart (Ontario: Higher Power Costs) Electical Power (Cnd) Natural Gas (Cnd) Revenue (per BDTon) $0.10 per kwhr $11.65 per GJ Power (90% us e) Heat (60% use) Total Small Steam $30 $82 $112 1 Air Brayton $42 $57 $99 ORC $56 $78 $134 E ntropic $66 $88 $154 Large Steam $140 $0 $140

68 BioEnergy in a Northern Community Subsidized Power System CHOICES? BioPower System Power: Diesel Fuel ~233 liters / MWe-hr ~2.83 K g CO2/ liter Heat: Oil ~93 liters/ MWth-hr ~2.83 K g CO2/ liter Northern Community (Biomass district heat already installed) Turbion Power CHP ~1 MWe-hr ~No G HG Heat ~5 MWth-hr ~No G HG Biomass (local or pellets) 2BDt tonne/mwe-hr 2 MWe Community Subsidized Power System BioPower System Power (2 MWe) tonne CO 2 0 tonne CO 2 Heat (10 MWth) tonne CO 2 0 tonne CO 2 Total 34,608 tonne CO 2 0 tonne CO 2

69 Integrated Sawmill Concept

70 Biopower DG Scale CONVERSION EFFICIENCY 10 % 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 10 0 % Small-scale Steam EL HE A T Organic Rankine Cycle Entropic Cycle ELEC ELECT HE A T HE A T Air Turbine EL HE A T Size Range (kwe) ,000 5,000 10,000 S mall-scale S team Organic Rankine Cycle Entropic Cycle Air Turbine COST SIZE COST SIZE SIZE COST COST SIZE Cost Range ($/kwe) $1,000 $3,000 $5,000 $7,000 $9,000

71 Distributed BioPower CHP Conversion Chart (20% MC) Switchgrass at 20% MC Small Steam Air Brayton Organic Rankine E ntropic Large Steam Power delivered 6.0% 8.4% 11.1% 13.1% 28.0% Heat delivered 59.0% 41.0% 56.0% 63.0% - Overall CHP delivered 65.0% 49.4% 67.1% 76.1% 28.0% E lectricity (kwhr/bdt) ,556 Heat (kwhr/bdt) 1 3,278 2,278 3,111 3,500 - E lectricity (GJ/BDT) Heat (GJ/BDT) E lectricity (gallon oil/bdt) Heat (gallon oil/bdt)

72 Distributed BioPower (20% MC) CHP Revenue Chart (Manitoba) Electical Power (Cnd) Natural Gas (Cnd) Revenue (per BDTon) $0.06 per kwhr $11.65 per GJ Power (90% us e) Heat (60% use) Total S mall S team $18 $82 $100 Air Brayton $25 $57 $83 ORC $33 $78 $112 1 E ntropic $39 $88 $127 Large S team $84 $0 $84 Natural Gas (Cnd) Heat Only Furnance $11.65 per GJ Revenue (per BDTon) Heat (80% us e) $158

73 Distributed BioPower CHP Revenue Chart (Industrial 90% heat use) Electical Power (Cnd) Natural Gas (Cnd) Revenue (per BDTon) $0.06 per kwhr $11.65 per GJ Power (90% us e) Heat (90% use) Total S mall S team $18 $124 $142 Air Brayton $25 $86 $111 ORC 1 $33 $117 $151 Entropic $39 $132 $171 Large S team $84 $0 $84

74 Distributed BioPower CHP Revenue Chart (Ontario: Higher Power Costs) Electical Power (Cnd) Natural Gas (Cnd) Revenue (per BDTon) $0.10 per kwhr $11.65 per GJ Power (90% us e) Heat (60% use) Total Small Steam $30 $82 $112 1 Air Brayton $42 $57 $99 ORC $56 $78 $134 E ntropic $66 $88 $154 Large Steam $140 $0 $140 DG: Displace power as part of DSM

75 Conclusion A community-based model is proposed Mechanical treatment of interface zone Break even economic model Well suite for small communities Community workers for local employment For 100 household h require 2.75 km Forest mitigation and energy production by the communities Achieve Reduction in fire hazards Decrease in property damage Growth of local economy

76 Acknowledgement NSERC/Manitoba Hydro Chair in Alternative Energy Presentations on alternative energy and ind/prof/bibe au/

77 What is BioPower (Thermal Conversion) BIOMASS = SOLAR CELL Biomass: natures way to store solar energy Renewable solar battery with a shelf life Biomass cycle sunlight Decomposition 6CO 2 + 6H0 2 = C 6 H 12 O 6 + 6O 2 => CO 2 + others Components Cellulose, hemi-cellulose, lignin Biomass Feedstocks Crop residues, Forest residues, Energy crops, Animal waste, Municipal waste, Wetlands

78 Green House Gases Natural processes 770 BMT/yr GHG Human activity ty adds 30 BMT/yr? Earth dynamic system Add new ball every 2 years Time Bioenergy? CO 2 levels in atmosphere 1850: 250 ppm Now: ppm

79 Biomass Emissions Direct energy use of biomass can lead to less emissions can it reduce GHG from natural processes SO 2 no influence of technology CH 4 is 21 times worst of a GHG than CO 2 CO 2 no change except for composting Natural way has more NOx