Preliminary Report on Resource and Technology Assessment Cellulosic Biofuel Feasibility Study Presented by Mark Broses, SEH Inc. and Andy Datko, Bois Forte Development Corporation Community Meeting at Nett Lake School June 24, 2008
Outline of Presentation Project Goals and Objectives Project Background Resource Assessment and Competition Resource Harvesting Biomass to Energy Technology Assessment Technology Selection Process Next Steps
Project Goal: Produce a renewable and sustainable energy source Increase employment opportunities for members of Nett Lake Reservation Make more efficient use of resources of the Bois Forte Reservation and surrounding area
Bois Forte Project Concept Cellulosic biofuel demonstration project Reasonable scale (process 50 200 dry tons biomass /day) 2 to 3 dozen jobs (harvest and process) Sustainable over long term Positive Publicity and Exposure Destination Draw
$300,000 State grant Feasibility Study Technology assessment & selection Economic feasibility, financial proforma, business plan Siting, permitting, environmental review Project finance: federal grants, loan guarantees, other Determine job numbers & types
Project Activities Planning Committee (Bois Forte Natural Resources, Forestry, and Environmental services) Resource Assessment Literature review Multiple meetings with various technology developers, researchers, and vendors Multiple meetings with potential customers Community Updates Legislative updates
Bois Forte Resource Analysis NRRI Determine availability of woody biomass for a potential facility at Nett Lake Sources include: Roundwood Forest Harvest Residues Thinnings Red Pine/Aspen Brushland Biomass Other Rights of Way/Land Clearing
Bois Forte Resource Analysis Distance analysis at 25, 50, 75 and 100 miles Allows estimates of trucking costs
Roundwood Resources Larger portion of the tree Forest products industry debarks wood requires larger diameter Typically more expensive due to higher use Some potential opportunities to use lower-stumpage species
Roundwood Resource Analysis 14.9 of 16.3 million acres is timberland Evaluated timberland acreage surrounding Nett Lake Allocated statewide timber resources according to acreage Assumes a uniform harvest across Minnesota generally true with time Statewide harvest level estimated at 3.2 million cords annually Recent historical harvest is closer to 3.8 million cords Long term maximum sustainable is 5.5 million cords
Forest Harvest Residues Associated with roundwood harvest Used a value of 25% of roundwood biomass Conventional harvesting system best suited for collection Thanks to Chuck Baxter for photo
Roundwood & Residue Resource Analysis Two harvest levels 50, 100, and 200 dry tons per day
Roundwood & Residue Resource Analysis Coverage ratio amount available/amount needed 25 mile radius 50 mile radius 75 Mile radius 100 Mile radius Cords Coverage 200 dry tpd 3.5 9.8 17.7 28.2 Cords Coverage 100 dry tpd 7.0 19.6 35.4 56.4 Cords Coverage 50 dry tpd 14.0 39.3 70.7 112.8 Residue Coverage 200 dry tpd 0.9 2.5 4.4 7.1 Residue Coverage 100 dry tpd 1.7 4.9 8.8 14.1 Residue Coverage 50 dry tpd 3.5 9.8 17.7 28.2
Bois Forte Forest Resources Total potential roundwood needed: 50 tons/day = 18,250 dry tons/year 100 tons/day = 36,500 dry tons/year 200 tons/day = 73,000 dry tons/year Bois Forte Resources: Tribal and allotted allowable cut: 12,866 cords roundwood or 14,819 dry tons Additional harvest residues of 3,705 dry tons Total of 18,523 dry tons Including both tribal and allotted lands, Bois Forte resources could supply roughly 100% of the low demand level, 50% of mid level and 25 % of the high level
Pine Thinnings Thinning done to increase tree size and quality Evaluated acreage from Nett Lake Generally farther away than 25-50 miles (high ground) Estimated 6,000 tons within 50 miles pulp only
Analysis of Equipment Needs Development of logging equipment/infrastructure Chippers versus Grinders Economics and logistics of each type Equipment purchases?
Bois Forte Resource Analysis Status Sufficient material for scale of project Balance between roundwood price and going further for harvest residues Technology may affect the type of material required Value-added important to ensure long-term ability to compete for resource
LEA Potential Competition for Resource Residuals Hoyt Lakes Minnesota Power (may be on hold now) Ft Francis (Canada) Potential Pellet Plant in Mt Iron Potential Briquette Plant in NE Minn Scale of BF project versus BF control of resources appears we will be fine
Biomass to Energy Technology Assessment Solid (wood chips, pellets, briquettes) Liquid (ethanol, bio-oil, methanol, diesel) Gas (gasification to create syngas or DME as a propane substitute; or gasification for electrical generation or CHP)
Process and Product Overview Process (level of complexity) Inputs, outputs and scale (demo or commercial) Market for product (robustness, competition, sensitivity) Technology Assessment (level of development, vendors, R&D interest) Environmental Resources (feedstock, water, site selection, discharges, toxicity) Economics (jobs, capital, OM, funding support) Business Issues (ownership, access, branding) Regulatory (CAA, CWA, RCRA, OSHA, BATF, ) Social Issues (24/7 operations, safety, noise,????)
Solids Green Wood Chips (baseline) $22/ green ton delivered to LEA Increasing market (Ft Francis, Mt Iron, etc) Increased job opportunities on harvest side - ( approx 4 per / 100 dt/day) if equipment available to tribal loggers
Solids Wood Pellets / Briquettes
Pellets / Briquettes Overview 100 dtpd system = approx $6 M capital Low to Medium Skilled Labor - approx 10 new jobs (assuming 3 shifts) Low impact (low water usage, low air emissions, combustible product, no toxic by-products) Pros Well developed technology (more than 100 plants in US) Several Equipment vendors available Growing market (industrial, schools, commercial, residential, and possible export overseas) Products compete with Propane at ($11 vs $32/MMBTU) Cons Funding source interest is questionable Local competition (pellet and briquette plants proposed)
Liquids Cellulosic Ethanol
Cellulosic Ethanol Minimum Scale = 100 dtpd = approx $10-20M capital Medium to High Skilled Labor approx 20 to 30 new jobs (assuming 3 shifts) Opportunities for demonstration project may be off-site Medium impact (water usage, air emissions, flammable product) Pros Market for ethanol well developed Federal government is spending $$$ on demonstration plants new Farm Bill Production tax credits (PTC) $1.01/gallon new Farm Bill State of MN is very interested in cellulosic ethanol development Have identified 2 potential technology developers with interest Cons Technology still being developed - many approaches being researched unclear which will win out Technology not economically proven yet yields still low Most CE plants are co-located with corn ethanol plants or processing facilities with free biomass and in-place infrastructure. Few examples of stand-alone forestry wood waste to ethanol.
Liquids Bio-Oil - photos courtesy of www.dynamotive.com
Bio Oil Minimum Scale = 100 to 200 dtpd = approx $10-30M capital Medium to High Skilled Labor approx 20 new jobs (assuming 3 shifts) Low impact (low water usage, low air emissions, combustible product) Pros Some commercial scale plants in Canada and US Local markets for bio oil may include mines and/or refineries Competes with bunker fuel or Alberta Crude (dependant on customer) Federal government (and U Minn) is spending $$$ on R&D to improve chemical characteristics for storage and secondary uses High degree of interest in this technology Cons Fuel stability issues May not be competitive if traditional oil prices dip back down below $90 barrel
Gasification to produce other products (methanol, diesel, DME) Research ongoing at NREL, EERC, etc, to economically produce from syngas Technology for project scale size is less developed than for CE small scale demonstration projects ongoing
Gasification for Heat & Power 50-200 dtpd = 3 10 MW (1,500 to 10,000 homes) plus waste heat $5-20M capital costs Medium to High Skilled Labor approx 20 new jobs (3 shifts) Power to the grid at Nett Lake with Net Metering for excess Tribal Utility Authority would need to be set up Year round use for waste heat would makes this option more feasible Would need to confirm if transmission lines can handle excess power Photo courtesy of Prime Energy LLC
Technology Selection Community meeting (tonight) to define issues and to get input Recommendation on what makes most sense overall narrow down to two (July) Follow-up visits to technology site with Tribal Council members (August - September) Selection (October?)
Next Steps Community Meeting in Nett Lake - June 24 Technology Selection Site Selection (on-site or off-site) Detailed Business Plan Funding Applications for Interim Studies and/or Engineering/Procurement/Construction of Full Scale System
Summary of Opportunities Resources Enough local biomass to support a plant 50 200 dry ton scale Technology Several feasible technologies. Detailed Economic Feasibility Will be determined after technology type narrowed down Site Location Nett Lake or offsite locations?