Biomass Wastes from Sustainable Forest Management: Energy and Air Quality Benefits

Transcription

1 Biomass Wastes from Sustainable Forest Management: Energy and Air Quality Benefits Tom Christofk, Air Pollution Control Officer Placer County Air Pollution Control District 2014 California Adaptation Forum Reclaiming Energy: Farms, Forests and Waste Streams August 20, 2014

2 Topical Outline/Discussion Points Background of why Placer County and the Air District are interested in Forests & Fires What initiatives and projects we are supporting regarding forest fuels reduction, wildfire mitigation, and GHG emission reduction opportunities Describe the results of some of those efforts to date

3 Placer County Landscape Sacramento Valley to Lake Tahoe 550,000 acres of forested land ~ 50% of total county land, including three National Forests ~40% in private ownership, 60% public Extensive wildland-urban interface throughout the County Heavy fuel loads throughout forested landscape from decades of successful fire suppression History of major wildfires in local forested areas over the past decade Gap, Ponderosa, Star, Ralston, American River Complex, Angora, Robbers, American 75,000+ acres burned to date (14% of the forested landscape) Wildfires have very significant impact on regional air quality Land managers are making concerted efforts to ramp up forest fuel hazard reduction thinning activities By-product excess biomass waste Very similar situation throughout most of the Sierra Nevada s

4 2013 Wildfire Impact in Placer 1101 ug/mg3 8 am 8/18/13 Foresthill

5 Typical National Forest Management Thinning/partial cutting Remove commercial-sized trees Dispose of excess biomass--burn piles in forest or at landing, or broadcast burn Utilize biomass only if there is sufficient market

6 Targeted Fuels Treatment in California CA Forest Ownership High Fire Danger (acres) Current Treatment (acres/yr) Targeted for Treatment (acres/year) Biomass Produced from Targeted Treatment (green tons/yr) Potential Electricity Production from Biomass from Targeted Treatment (MW) US Forest Service 8,985,800 60, , ,000 4,800,000 12,000, Other Public 1,768,300 25,000 50,000 80,000 1,200,000 1,920, Private 7,244,400 40, , ,000 Totals 17,998, ,000 * 425, ,000 4,200,000 7,200,000 10,200,000 21,120, ,100 Source: US Forest Service, California Forest Association * Current Treatment produces 3 MM green tons/yr, 50% used for fuel (90 MW of the 690 MW total in CA), 50% open pile burned (1.5 MM green tons)

7 Forest Resource Sustainability Initiatives PCAPCD Approach to Wildfire Mitigation Explore and implement market based initiatives to reduce the costs of fuel hazard reduction activities at a strategic pace and scale that will mitigate the severity and impact of catastrophic wildfire events: 1. Bioenergy Conversion -- Utilize excess forest biomass for production of renewable energy in lieu of open burning Confirm project level economics and net air emissions reductions 2. GHG Offset Protocols Biomass Renewable Energy Biochar Black Carbon Forest Fuel Treatment Thinning 3. Small scale distributed generation bio-energy facility assessment 4. State Agency Engagement Monetize benefits of wildfire mitigations & assist in implementation of State 2012 Bio-Energy Action Plan policies Engagement (PCAPCD has party status) in Public Utilities Commission rulemaking proceedings related to renewable energy, interconnection, distributed generation, and pricing

8 Positive Effects of Fuel Treatments Wallow Wildfire, Apache National Forest, Arizona, May 2011, 500,000 acres (largest wildfire in Arizona history) Fire Fuel Treatment Thinning

9 Positive Effects of Fuel Treatments Cone Wildfire, Lassen National Forest, Sept 2002 Thinned Un-thinned Fire

10 Fire Threat Source: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP), prepared for the National Fire Plan, V05_1, 2005.

11 Woody Biomass Wastes

12 Open Burning vs Renewable Energy Open Pile Burn Renewable Biomass Energy Cost to chip and transport biomass to bioenergy facility > Value of biomass for fuel VS 30 MW Co-Gen 18MW - BVBP 0.5 MW Dist Gen Grind and Haul Biomass Controlled Energy Generation

13 Biomass Emission / Economic Process Model Relative Emissions Reduction Prescribed In-Forest Burn Air Pollution / Emissions from open burning Catastrophic Wildfire Biomass/Forest Fuel Loads Emissions from fuelprocessing plant Benefits of Biomass Use Energy production Reduces air emissions Reduces black carbon emissions Displaces need for fossil fuel usage Reduces greenhouse gas burden Reduces landfill burden Watershed protection Forest health improvements Reduces catastrophic wildland fire threats Economics (jobs, community) Biomass Removal Possible Offsets/Credits (Real, Quantifiable, Surplus, Enforceable, Permanent) Carbon Market Products Energy Products Fuel (liquid, gas) Electricity Heat Lumber Products Biochar Bio Refinery CoGen Gasifier Lumbermill Other

14 Air Pollution Comparison

15 Initiative 1. Demonstration of Benefits of Forest Biomass Waste Conversion to Energy Demonstration Project (circa ) Cornerstone of Forest Initiatives

16 Pile Burn Biomass to Energy Pile Burn Biomass to Energy Pile Burn Biomass to Energy Pile Burn Biomass to Energy Emissions (lb) Bioenergy Conversion Criteria Air Pollutants Results from biomass energy project that processed 6,800 BDT biomass from thinning project on USFS Tahoe National Forest American River District 140, ,000 1,000,000 Biomass Boiler Biomass Chipping Biomass Transport Open Pile Burn 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 97% 60% 99% 99% 0 PM-10 NOx CO VOC

17 CO2e (tons) Bioenergy Conversion Greenhouse Gases 0.4 tons CO 2 reduced per 1 dry ton biomass Grid electricity (unrealized) Open pile burning (CH4) Open pile burning (CO2)* Transport Chipping Biomass power plant (CH4) Biomass power plant (CO2)* Open Burning Biomass to Energy

18 Initiative 2. Forest Management Greenhouse Gas Offset Protocols 1. Biomass waste for energy -- Reduce methane from open pile burn or in-field decay/decomposition -- Avoided fossil fuel for equivalent electricity 2. Biochar -- Sequester carbon in stable biochar 3. Black carbon -- Reduce black carbon from open pile burn 4. Forest hazardous fuel reduction thinning treatments -- Reduce wildfire severity and size -- Reduce tree mortality -- Stimulate forest growth -- Wood products, biomass energy

19 Biomass Waste for Energy Utilize excess biomass wastes for production of renewable energy as alternative to baseline business as usual (open burning or chip and scatter in field) Monetary support for biomass processing and transport to energy facility Greenhouse gas benefits result from: Avoided methane from open pile burning Renewable biomass energy displaces fossil fuels On-going discussions to clarify CEQA vs RPS benefits of green energy Endorsed by: California Board of Forestry, USFS, and Cal Fire California Air Districts, including San Joaquin, South Coast, Mendocino, Butte, Feather River, and the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA)

20 Biomass Waste for Energy Biomass for Energy Project Excess Biomass Baseline, Business as Usual Operations at Biomass Generation Site Energy Production Biomass Processing Fossil Fuel Engines : CO 2 Biomass Transport Fossil Fuel Engines : CO 2 Energy Recovery Biomass Conversion : CH 4, CO 2 Uncontrolled Open Burning CH 4, CO 2 In-field Decay CH 4 Baseline Energy Supply Fossil Fuel Combustion : CO 2 GHG Reduction = GHG Open Burn + GHG Decay + GHG Baseline Energy GHG Biomass Energy GHG Biomass Processing GHG Biomass Transport

21 Blodgett Bioenergy Project UC Berkeley Blodgett Forest Research Station Buena Vista Biomass Power Plant

22 Blodgett Bioenergy Project Collaboration between UC Berkeley College of Natural Resources, PCAPCD, UC Davis, and USFS Rocky Mountain Research Station 600 BDT of slash from timber operations used to produce 600 MWh electricity (powers 100 homes for one year) Air pollution measurements taken from open pile burn Significant reduction in greenhouse gases and criteria air pollutants

23 GHG Emission Reduction (tons CO 2 e/ton dry biomass) Biomass Waste for Energy Greenhouse Gases Results from UC Berkeley Blodgett Research Forest Station Biomass Project CO 2 CO CH 4 BC NMOC Non-BC Electricity grid Chipping and trucking Pile burn Biomass boiler Pile Burn Biomass Project

24 Biochar Biochar -- porous, carbon-rich, charcoal -like solid Formed from the thermal pyrolysis / gasification of biomass Use as soil amendment: Sequesters carbon -- highly stable and resistant to decomposition Enhances soil fertility -- increases water and nutrient holding capacity Reduces soil emissions, enhances biomass growth Displaces fertilizer manufacturing Also produces renewable energy

25 Biochar All/any Biomass Prasino Group, The Climate Trust, International Biochar Initiative California forest and ag woody biomass that would have been open burned 2012 Oct 2014 American Carbon Registry Carbon sequestration GHG offset protocol PCAPCD / CAPCOA GHG Exchange Dec 2014 Water retention Fertilizer displacement Plant growth Agricultural Field Trials Planning with Cal Food & Ag Dept

26 Biochar Stability

27 Biochar Potential Biochar production rate 0.10 lb biochar/lb biomass Carbon content of biochar 0.75 lb C/lb biochar CO 2 sequestered in biochar 0.28 MT CO 2 /BDT biomass

28 Black Carbon Product of incomplete combustion Soot Small particles Travel long distance through air Short-lived climate forcing 900 times by weight more potent than CO 2

29 Black Carbon 94% reduction in Black Carbon 97% reduction in PM10 Chipvan and grinder contributions are included in plots and are relatively small

30 Black Carbon Working to develop a GHG offset protocol for black carbon reductions achieved through avoided open pile burning Forest slash Agricultural residues (orchard thinnings, removals, food processing wastes) Forming a research team to characterize BC emissions from open pile burning Multi-agencies including UC, CAPCOA, CAL FIRE, USFS Concurrent effort to evaluate black carbon reductions from wood stove upgrades and replacements

31 Forest Fuel Treatment Impact on Wildfires and Emissions Sponsored research effort in Sierra Nevada Adaptive Management Project landscape to quantify GHG and criteria emission reductions accruing from forest fuel thinning treatments Wildfire reduction size, intensity, behavior Forest growth rate enhancement Biochar, carbon credits, timber products, renewable energy Research Team U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Research Station, U.C. Berkeley, and Spatial Informatics Group Results -- significant reductions in wildfire emissions, benefits in renewable energy and timber products

32 Forest Fuel Treatment Impact on Wildfires and Emissions Working to continue research and development of GHG offset protocol for avoided wildfire from forest fuel treatment thinning projects Assembling multi-stakeholder research team USFS, CAL FIRE, Spatial Informatics Group, UC Berkeley, CEC, California Forest Association, private forest land owners Securing funding Case study demonstration Sierra Nevada forested land in watershed at risk for catastrophic wildfire, public and private ownership, on-the-ground inventory Fuel treatment prescription designs considering various management alternatives Evaluate wood products lifecycle specific to local mill and wood products displacement of alternative building materials (concrete, steel) Develop protocol that can be practically implemented but flexible to consider site specific considerations including fire return interval and wildfire emissions on a fire-shed basis

33 What We are Learning about the Carbon Benefits of Forest Management Forest management and fuel hazard reduction provides carbon benefits: Wildfire mitigation -- Reduce wildfire size and severity, reduce tree mortality both on treated land, as well as adjacent untreated land due to wildfire shadow effect Wood products -- Sequestration and substitution for alternative, fossil fuel energy intensive, products of steel and concrete Biochar Byproduct of bioenergy production, provides stable long term sequestration as soil amendment Black carbon -- Reductions from reduced wildfire and open pile burning have potential to provide near term climate change benefits. Renewable energy -- Displaces need for fossil fuels, reducing anthropogenic carbon emissions Hazardous reduction can produce significant carbon benefits especially on landscapes with a short fire return interval (much of the Sierra Nevada). Most forest carbon removed during fuel treatments regrows in 7 15 years. Based on work by Dr. Malcolm North, USFS and UC Davis, and Spatial Informatics Group

34 Greenhouse Gas Impacts kg/ton dry biomass CO2 CH4 BC OC NOx VOC CO Baseline Pile burn Displaced energy 423 Biomass Project Bioenergy Facility Process/transport Reduction (323) (2.9) (0.31) (5.196) (2.51) (4.9) (61.5) Total GWP CO2e Benefit (ton/ton dry biomass) PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES

35 CAPCOA GHG Reduction Exchange Joint effort of several air districts Leverage decades of experience with Emission Reduction Credits (ERC s) for criteria pollutants Uniquely positioned to offer assistance to businesses, and others Keep local investments, jobs, and benefits in California Complementary to state cap-and-trade program Fill a niche for GHG mitigation for CEQA and NEPA; work to expand uses in future

36 CAPCOA GHG Reduction Exchange

37 Initiative 3. Bioenergy Facility Assessment Tahoe Region Biomass Project 2 MW electricity (gasification and internal combustion engine) 16,000 BDT/yr woody biomass from local forest management activities US Dept of Energy/Placer County/Private Investment funding Conditional Use Permit received June 2013 Apply for Air District Permit -- Summer 2014 LLC and Power Purchase Agreement currently being negotiated Final decision to build -- Fall 2014 Construction Integration and testing Online Summer 2016

38 Bioenergy Benefits Net improvement in air quality reduction in criteria air pollutants, toxics, and black carbon Greenhouse gas reduction displacing fossil fuel Baseload, 24/7 renewable energy Supports hazardous fuels reduction and healthy forests Watershed water quality, quantity, timing Wildfire reduces size and intensity Ecosystem services water, carbon, wildlife habitat Community and Infrastructure (including Electrical Transmission) Protection Provides employment (4.9 jobs/mw) Reduces waste material destined for landfills

39 Initiative 4. State Agencies Engagement Initiative Engage in Bioenergy Feed-in Tariff rulemaking, providing staff support to a variety of stakeholders, including BAC, during proceeding. Continue to support the CEC in the implementation of the State s Bioenergy Action Plan and distribution of Electric Program Investment Charge (EPIC) funds in a way that supports forest bio-energy. District has recently been asked by CEC to engage in project or research funding requests. Continue to partner with the Resources Agency to develop long term agreement on term sustainable forest management. Participate in state agency action meeting to determine state policy conflicts relating to use of carbon credits for CEQA and the RPS and Cap and Trade programs. Advocate for use of some Cap & Trade revenue toward forest management and biomass to energy projects.

40 Placer County Air Pollution Control District Award U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Recognizes Outstanding and Innovative Efforts to Achieve Cleaner Air 2011 Clean Air Excellence Award for Forest Resource Sustainability in Placer County We processed and transported 15,000 BDT s of waste to biomass energy facilities which has fueled the generation of 15,000 MW hours of renewable electricity, enough to power more than 1,500 homes for one year. This Project was chosen for its impact, innovation and replicability