ThermalNet Work Package Leaders ISSUE06 - European … · By Jennifer Holmgre na, Richard Marinangelia, Terry Marke ra, Michael McCalla*, John Petria, Stefan Czernikb, Douglas Elliot

Comments and contributions are most welcome on any aspect of the contents.Please contact Emily Wakefield for further details or to send material.

JUNE 2008 ISSUE 06

The ThermalNet newsletter is published by the Bioenergy Research Group, Aston University, UK and is sponsored by the European Commissionunder the Intelligent Energy- Europe programme and IEA Bioenergy.

The sole responsibility for the content of this newsletter lies with the authors. It does not represent the opinion of the Community or anyother organisation. The European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. De

sign

edan

dprod

uced

by:WAA

+44(0)121

32114

11

ThermalNet Work Package LeadersCo-ordinator (PyNe)

Tony BridgwaterBio-Energy Research GroupAston UniversityBirmingham, B4 7ETUKTel: +44 (0)121 204 3381Fax: +44 (0)121 204 3680Email: [email protected]

Co-ordinator (GasNet)

Hermann HofbauerTechnical University of ViennaGetreidemarkt 9/166WienA-1060AUSTRIATel: +43 1 58801 15970 or

+43 1 58801 15901Fax: +43 1 587 6394Email: [email protected]

Co-ordinator (CombNet)

Sjaak van LooProcede Group BVPO Box 328EnschedeNL-7500 AHNETHERLANDSTel: +31 53 489 4355 / 4636Fax: +31 53 489 5399Email: [email protected]

Austria

Max LauerInstitute of Energy ResearchJoanneum ResearchElisabethstrasse 5A-8010 GrazAUSTRIATel: +43 (0)316 876 1336Fax: +43 (0)316 876 1320Email: [email protected]

Finland

Anja OasmaaVTT Technical Research Centre of FinlandLiquid BiofuelsBiologinkuja 3-5,PO Box 1000, EspooFIN-02044 VTTFINLANDTel: +358 20 722 5594Fax: +358 20 722 7048Email: [email protected]

France

Francois BroustCirad ForêtEnergy Environmental UnitTA 10/1673 Rue Jean Francois BretonMontpellier Cedex 534398FRANCETel : +33 467 61 44 90Fax : +33 467 61 65 15Email: [email protected]

Italy

David ChiaramontiUniversity of FlorenceDepartment of Energetics ‘Sergio Stecco’Faculty of Mechanical EngineeringVia di S. Marta 3Florence 50319ITALYTel: +39 055 4796 239Fax: +39 055 4796 342Email: [email protected]

Colomba di BlasiUniversitá degli Studi di Napoli‘Federico II’Dipartmento di Ingegneria ChimicaP.le V.Tecchio80125 NapoliITALYTel: +39 081 768 2232Fax: +39 081 239 1800Email: [email protected]

Netherlands

Gerrit BremTNOPO Box 342Apeldoorn 7300NETHERLANDSTel: +31 55 549 3290Fax: +31 55 549 3740Email: [email protected]

Hermann den UilEnergy Research Centre of the Netherlands(ECN)Westerduinweg 3PO Box 1PettenNL 1755 ZGNetherlandsTel: +31 224 564106Fax: +31 224 563504Email: [email protected]

Sweden

Eva LarssonTPS Temiska Processor ABStudsvik611 82 NykopingSWEDENTel: +46 8 5352 4813Fax: +46 155 26 30 52Email: [email protected]

UK

Michael DoranRural GenerationBrook Hall Estate65-67 Culmore RoadLondonderryBT48 8JENorthern Ireland, UKTel: +44(0)2871 358215Fax: +44(0)2871 350970Email: [email protected]

Bill LivingstonMitsui Babcock Energy LimitedTechnology CentreHigh StreetRenfrewPA4 8UWScotland, UKTel: +44(0)141 885 3873Email: [email protected]

Patricia ThornleyTyndall Centre (North)Room H4, Pariser BuildingUMISTPO Box 88ManchesterM60 1QDUKTel: +44 (0)161 306 3257Email: [email protected]

USA

Doug ElliottBattelle PNNL902 Battelle BoulevardPO Box 999RichlandWashington 99352USATel: +1 509 375 2248Fax: +1 509 372 4732Email: [email protected]

STARTSPAGE 2

STARTSPAGE 36

STARTSPAGE 12

ISSN 1750-8363

STARTSPAGE 27

ThermalNet meeting, Vienna, Austria, April 2008.

Hot Filtration ofFast Pyrolysis VapoursBio-oil obtained by fast pyrolysis typically contains up to 0.5 wt% char fineswhich are not removable by conventional cyclone separators. These char finescause problems in applications like engines and turbines as well as during storage.

full article on page 2

PyrolysePyro lys is

D ryin g

O x id a tio n

R e d u ctio n

AshAsh

FuelFuel

AirAir

SynSyn GasGas

AirAir

Cooler

a ir

Adsorbant

Baghouse

Scrubber

PYROFORCE® Power fromWood System – CommercialBreakthrough ReachedThe PYROFORCE® technology for CHP application using wood as a renewable energysource has been carefully developed over the last few years and the first commercialapplications are now being realised.


Removal of Particles from BiomassCombustion – a Practical ApproachIn practise one can normally distinguish two types of particles in the flue gas of amodern biomass combustor, namely the submicron fraction (< 1 µm) that results fromevaporation and condensation of inorganic matter and the supermicron fraction(> 1 µm) that consists of ash not evaporated and unburned matter.


Education and Training in Bioenergy:An Investigation of Offer andDemand at European LevelThe implementation of effective and efficient Education and Training (E&T) inBioenergy is a key element for its successful development.


32

PyNe Contact details:

Co-ordinator: Tony BridgwaterTel: +44(0)121 204 3381Fax: +44(0)121 204 3680Email: [email protected]

Newsletter/website administrator:

Emily WakefieldTel: +44(0)121 204 3420Fax: +44(0)121 204 3680Email: [email protected]: www.pyne.co.uk

2

ISSUE 24

PyNe contents

Hot Filtration ofFast Pyrolysis Vapours

Opportunities for Biorenewablesin Petroleum Refineries

5

Current status of BiomassPyrolysis in Brazil

8

In Memoriam to Jan Barynin 11

Transportable pyrolysis:A Solution to

Poultry Litter Disposal

10

Hot Filtration of FastPyrolysis VapoursBio-oil obtained by fast pyrolysis typically contains up to 0.5 wt% char fines whichare not removable by conventional cyclone separators. These char fines cause problemsin applications like engines and turbines as well as during storage. Furthermore theycontain the alkali metal of the oil, as during fast pyrolysis the metals accumulate inthe char. In order to reduce char fines to lower levels, a hot vapour filtration testunit was designed and installed downstream of a 1kg/h fluidising bed reactor tofilter the product stream prior to condensation (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Aston’s 1 kg/h fast pyrolysis reactor with hot filtration test unit.

Figure 2. Dynamic viscosity of filtered bio-oil compared with non-filtered bio-oil before and after accelarated aging.The water content of both oils is ca. 16 wt%.

By Jürgen Sitzmann, Aston University, UK

Experiments

The hot filtration test unit consists of one exchangeable filter candle with a maximum length of 600 mm.The system operates at a temperature of 450°C and is equipped with a reverse pulse cleaning system using nitrogenat 400°C and 6 bar.

The experimental set-up includes a sintered metal and a ceramic filter candle. Furthermore the system operates at twodifferent face velocities, with inclusion or exclusion of a primary cyclone and with a pre-coat on the filter candlebefore filtration.

Beech wood was used as a feedstock and was pyrolysed in the fluidising bed reactor at 500°C.

The experiments were evaluated by determining the mass balance of the process. The pressure difference over thefilter candle was also recorded to assess the filtration performance and the effect of the reverse pulse cleaning.The remaining filter cake on the candle was examined by visual inspection, optical microscopy and Scanning ElectronMicroscopy (SEM). The oils produced were analysed for solids content, water content, viscosity and mean molecularweight (by gel permeation chromatography). Viscosity and mean molecular weight were analysed before and afteraccelerated aging at 80°C for 24 h to determine the storage stability of the oil.

Results

Oil analysis

It was possible to reduce the solid content of the hot vapour filtered oils below 0.01 wt% compared with 0.3 –0.5 wt% solid content in oil produced with cyclone separation. The filtered oils showed superior quality propertiesregarding viscosity and storage stability than standard pyrolysis oils. The dynamic viscosity was reduced by half from42 Pa s to 21 Pa s for the fresh oils and 64 Pa s compared with 100 Pa s for the aged filtered oil which is stillsignificantly less compared to the non-filtered oil (See Figure 2). This is confirmed by the stored oils where the filteredoils are still homogenous, free flowing and without sedimentation after storage at room temperature for 1 year.

0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

10 0

0 10 0 2 00 3 00 4 00

Equivalent storage days

Dynamicviscosityin Pa s

Filtration run

Standard run

Mass Balance

The mass balances (based on dry feedstock) of the experiments showed a decrease of organic liquid yield from ca.55 wt% for the experiments with cyclone separation to 47 – 50 wt% for the filtration experiments. The losses oforganic liquid yield were caused by an increase in non-condensable gases and reaction water due to catalyticsecondary cracking of the vapours on the filter cake.

Continued overleaf...

4

Figure 3. Change of differential pressure over filter candle (filtration experimentwith Tenmat firefly candle).

Figure 4. Used filter candle with charfilter cake showing patchy cleaning.

Figure 5. SEM picture of char filter cake produced at2.0 cm/s face velocity.

Figure 6. SEM picture of filter cake produced at3.5 cm/s face velocity.

0

2

4

0 0 :0 0 0 2 :0 0 0 4 :0 0 0 6 :0 0 0 8 :0 0

time in hh:mm

ReversePulse

delt

ap

inkP

a

Differential Pressure

Figure 3 shows the change of differential pressure over the filter candle during the course of a filtration experimentusing a Tenmat firefly candle. It can be seen that it is possible to regenerate the pressure difference during the firstcouple of cleaning cycles. Thereafter only minor pressure drop recovery was achieved leading to a steady increase inpressure. Visual inspection of the filter candles showed patchy cleaning of the filter cake (See Figure 4).

Filter Cake Analysis

The filter cakes had different particle size distribution at different face velocities. A high face velocity (3.5 cm/s)causes larger char particles to stick on the cake and therefore create a more porous filter cake with a lower specificresistance to flow. On the other hand at a low face velocity (2.0 cm/s) more particles are separated by gravity leadingto a smaller average particle size and to a higher resistance to flow of the filter cake. SEM pictures of filter cakesproduced at different face velocities can be seen in Figure 5 and Figure 6.

Conclusions

With hot filtration of fast pyrolysis vapours a solidcontent below 0.01 wt% is achievable which improvesthe quality of the oils significantly. Additionally theabsence of char fines protects downstream equipmentlike the condensation unit from blockage. However theadditional residence time and catalytic vapour crackingreduces the organic liquid yield of the process.

The filter cake which accumulates on the candleis difficult to remove and leads to an increase indifferential pressure over the filter candle. Theresistance to flow of the filter cake is dependent onthe face velocity and the particle size distribution of

the particulates to be removed. Further investigationsinto the filter cake characteristics are required in orderto improve the detachability of the filter cake.

For further details contact:

Tony BridgwaterBioenergy Research GroupAston UniversityBirmingham B4 7ETUNITED KINGDOMTel: +44 (0)121 204 3381Email: [email protected]

5

Opportunities forBiorenewables inPetroleum RefineriesBy Jennifer Holmgrena, Richard Marinangeli a, Terry Marker a, Michael McCall a*, John Petri a, Stefan Czernikb,Douglas Elliott c, David Shonnardd

aUOP; bNational Renewable Energy Laboratory; cPacific Northwest National Laboratory; dMichigan Technological University; USA

Background

The production of biofuels is expanding worldwide at a rapid pace. The future widespreaduse of biofuels depends on solving several issues such as:

• Identifying a large, consistent quantity of renewable feedstock

• Producing biofuels at costs competitive with other fuels

• Transporting the bio-based feedstock or fuel to distribution centres

• Developing new technology to produce fuels from the unique composition of thesehighly oxygenated feedstocks

• Producing biofuel compatible with the existing transportation and fuel infrastructure

The goal of the study was to identify profitable processing options for integrating bio-renewable feeds and fuels intoexisting refineries by addressing these issues. A schematic showing several options for biofuel production from differentbiomass sources is shown in Figure 1. Some of the routes are already in commercial practice, such as ethanol from thefermentation of corn or sugar cane. Several routes have a considerably longer timeframe for commercialisation due totechnical challenges or feedstock availability.

The US Department of Energy funded collaboration between UOP, the National RenewableEnergy Laboratory, and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to complete anevaluation of the economics of biofuels integration in petroleum refineries. The purposeof this project was to identify economically attractive opportunities for biofuelsproduction and blending using petroleum refinery processes.

Figure 1: Overview of Biofuel Production.


A Honeywell CompanyA Honeywell Company

6

Feedstock Availability

The first question addressed was the availability of bio-renewable feedstocks at 2005 levels. Table 1 shows the U.S.availability of several bio-feedstocks while Figure 2 compares the global volume of petroleum-based liquid transportfuels with available vegetable oil and greases in 2005. For example, vegetable oils and greases could only replacea very small fraction of transport fuel. However, the potential large supply of ligno-cellulosic biomass could supplya high percentage of future liquid transport fuels if commercial processes were available to convert these feeds.One such process evaluated in this study was fast pyrolysis but the quantity of pyrolysis oil is currently very lowsince commercial production is still at an early stage.

Refining Opportunities for Pyrolysis Oil

Fast pyrolysis is a thermo-chemical process with the potential to convert the large volumes of cellulosic biomassavailable in the U.S. and globally into liquid fuels and feeds. A solid biomass feedstock is injected into a fluidisedbed with high heat transfer capability for short contact times followed by quenching to condense a liquid bio-oil in50-75% yields with gas and char forming the balance. The bio-oil contains the thermally cracked products of theoriginal cellulose, hemi-cellulose, and lignin fractions present in the biomass. It also contains a high percentage ofwater, often as high as 30%. The total oil is often homogeneous after quenching but can easily be separated intotwo fractions, a water soluble fraction and a heavier pyrolytic lignin fraction. The addition of more water allows thepyrolytic lignin fraction to be isolated and the majority of it consists of the same phenolic polymer as lignin butwith smaller molecular weight fragments. Pyrolytic lignin is a better feedstock for liquid fuel production than thewater-soluble fraction because of its lower oxygen content and therefore the study focused on evaluating it as apotential feedstock for the production of highly aromatic gasoline. Commercial outlets for the water-soluble oilwere identified and evaluated, such as the production of hydrogen and as a fuel for power generation. These latterapplications will not be discussed here.

Table 3 shows an estimated performance for hydro-processing pyrolytic lignin to produce biofuels based onexperimental results. These estimates were used as a basis for economic calculations. The naphtha and dieselare produced along with a large amount of water and CO2 due to water removal and deoxygenation. As withthe vegetable oil the consumption of hydrogen and yield of CO/CO2 will vary depending on the mechanismof deoxygenation.

The economics for producing fuels from pyrolytic lignin are shown in Table 4, assuming $18/bbl pyrolysis oil($16/bbl +$2/bbl transportation charges) and two crude oil prices: $40 & $50/bbl.

The study took into account both feedstock costs and the projected prices of potential products. Prices of rawvegetable oils, greases, and pyrolysis oils were determined and used in the economic assessment. The costs rangedfrom $16/bbl for pyrolysis oil to $>75/bbl for raw vegetable oils. Each economic analysis was primarily based ona West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude feedstock price of $40 per barrel, a level considerably lower than the recent>$60/bbl price. The cost of each potential biofuel was compared to this crude feedstock price after incorporatinga number of factors including capital costs; transportation costs; CO2 credits; subsidies; and cetane and octanenumbers. Most of the feedstocks looked promising when current subsidies were applied and several wereeconomically attractive without subsidies such as pyrolysis oil and brown grease. Raw vegetable oils were notattractive without subsidies until crude prices are > $70/bbl.

The properties of bio-renewable feedstocks were compared to petroleum as shown in Table 2. The biggest differencebetween bio-renewable and petroleum feedstocks is oxygen content. Bio-renewables have oxygen levels from10-40% while petroleum has essentially none making the chemical properties of bio-renewables very different frompetroleum. For example, these feedstocks are often more polar and some easily entrain water and can therefore beacidic. All have very low sulfur levels and many have low nitrogen levels depending on their amino acid contentduring processing. Several properties are incompatible with typical refinery operations such as the acidity andalkali content so that processes were identified to pretreat many of these feeds before entering refinery operations. Summary

Many economically attractive opportunities were identified in this study for the integration of bio-renewablefeedstocks and biofuels in petroleum refineries, including pyrolysis oil to produce green gasoline. Pyrolysis oilprocessing requires more commercial development and is also limited by the availability of pyrolysis oil sincecommercial production is still in its infancy. In the long term, however, the potential volume of pyrolysis oilcould replace shortages in petroleum fuel since it can process the large amount of cellulosic biomass available.

DefinitionBiorenewable

Feedstock

Amount produced in the

U.S. (bpd)

Amount available for fuel

production in U.S. (bpd)

Vegetable Oils Produced from soybeans, corn, canola, palm 194,000 33,500

Recycled Products Yellow grease, brown (trap) grease 51,700 33,800

Animal Fats Tallow, lard, fish oil 71,000 32,500

Pyrolysis Oil Made from pyrolysis of waste biomass (cellulosic) 1,500 750

$40/bbl Crude $50/bbl Crude

bpd $/D $/D

Feed Pyrolytic Lignin 2,250 40,500 40,500

H2 21.4 T 25,680 25,680

Products Lt Hydrocarbons 64T/D 19,303 23,164

Naphtha 1,010 52,520 62,510

Diesel 250 12,000 15,000

Other Utilities -4,800 -5,760

Net 12,843 28,734

Annual Value $4.2MM $9.5MM

Table 1. Availability of bio-renewable feedstocks in the U.S.1,2,3,4,5

Table 4. Performance Estimates for the Production of Gasoline and Diesel from Pyrolysis Oil.

Table 3. Performance Estimates for theProduction of Naphtha and Diesel from Pyrolysis Oil.

7


Richard MarinangeliUOP-Honeywell, 25 E. Algonquin RoadDes Plaines, IL 60017USAEmail: [email protected]: www.uop.com

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the U.S. Department of Energy for partially funding this study (DOE Project DE-FG36-05GO15085).

References

1. ERBACH, D.C., GRAHAM, R.L , PERLACK, R.D., STOKES, B.J., TURHOLLOW, A.F., WRIGHT, L.L. Biomass as a Feedstock for a Bioenergy and BioProductsIndustry: The Technical Feasibility of a Billion-Ton Annual Supply. DOE/USDA, 2005.

2. GREENE, N. Growing Energy: How Biofuels Can Help End America’s Oil Dependence. NRDC, 2004.3. LYND, L.R. Liquid Transportation Fuels. World Congress on Industrial Biotech and Bioprocessing, Orlando, FL, April 20-22, 2005.4. TYSON, K.S. Oil and Fat R&D. Presentation by NREL to UOP, 2003.5. BOZELI, J., MOENS,L., PETERSEN, E., TYSON, K.S., WALLACE,R. Biomass Oil: Analysis Research Needs and Recommendations. NREL/TP-510-34796, 2004.6. LARSEN, E.D. Expanding roles for modernized biomass energy. Energy for Sustainable Development, 2000, V. IV, No. 3, October 2000.7. BARCHART.COM WEBSITE, Commodity Fundamentals, Tallows and Greases, http://www2.barchart.com/comfund/tallow.asp.8. RADICH, A. Biodiesel Performance, Costs, and Use. Energy Information Administration, 2004. http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/analysispaper/biodiesel/9. SCHNEPF, R., STALLINGS, D., TROSTLE, R., WESCOTT, P., YOUNG, E. USDA Agricultural Baseline Projections to 2012, Staff Report WAOB-2003-1, 2003.10. NATIONAL BIODIESEL BOARD. Tax Incentive Fact Sheet, 2004.11. ADEN, A. Biodiesel Information for UOP. Memorandum prepared for UOP by NREL, 2005.

Figure 2: Availability of bio-renewable feedstocksin the U.S .6,7

Table 2. Typical Properties of Petroleum and Bio-renewable Feedstocks.

Crude Typical Resid Pyrolysis Oil

% C 83-86 84.9 56.2

%H 11-14 10.6 6.6

%S 0-4 (1.8avg) 4.2 -

%N 0-1 (.1avg) .3 .3

%O - - 36.9

H/C 1.8-1.9 1.5 1.4

Density .86(avg) 1.05 1.23

TAN <1 <1 78

ppm alkali metals 60 6 100

Heating value kJ/kg 41,800 40,700 15,200

Feed Wt% bpd

Pyrolytic Lignin 100 2,250

H2 4-5 –

Products – –

Lt ends 15 –

Naphtha 30 1,010

Diesel 8 250

Water, CO2 51-52 –

8 9

Current Status ofBiomass Pyrolysisin BrazilBy J.D. Rocha, J.M. Mesa-Pérez & L.A.B. Cortez, Universidade Estadual de Campinas & Bioware Tecnologia,Campinas, Brazil.

Biomass to energy is becoming more widespread and generating a significant amount ofthe primary energy in Brazil due to the optimal conditions in all regions of Brazil, such asavailability of indigenous raw materials, low biomass cost, great experience in bioenergyuse, technology development, local equipment suppliers, high level of human resources, andlegal and legislation base. 47.5% of the overall primary energy consumption is non-fossil,13.5% is firewood and charcoal, and 16.6% sugar cane products (fuel ethanol and bagassefor bio-electricity). There are many possibilities to introduce biomass pyrolysis and alsobio-oil gasification to syngas in the Brazilian market. The commercialisation of thetechnology has the potential of starting in the range of up to 1 t/h dry biomass.

As well as the successful Brazilian Fuel Ethanol Program which has been running for 30 years, the recentlycreated Biodiesel Program (PNPB) and many other biomass technologies are under development or are runningas commercial plants nationwide. The ECI conference, “BIOENERGY II: Fuels and Chemicals from RenewableResources” in Rio de Janeiro in March 2009 will be a great opportunity to see the rapid development of thebiofuel field in Brazil.

Research at Unicamp

Unicamp Pyrolysis plant

Biomass fast pyrolysis R&D is progressing well in Brazil. The research group at the University of Campinas (Unicamp)in the city of Campinas and the spin-off company BIOWARE have fully developed a pyrolysis technology based on afluidised bed reactor. The new demo plant has a capacity of 200 kg/h and is under Brazilian patent submission.See Figure 1 for an updated picture of the plant located at Unicamp. The main characteristics are the innovativetwo-stage bio-oil recovering system, heat recycling process, and two phase separation equipment. Feedstocks suchas tobacco waste, orange bagasse, sugar cane straw, and sawdust have been tested successfully.

Bio-oil as an emulsion agent

A partnership with Prof. José Falcón from the University of Oriente in Cuba has enabled the application of bio-oil asan emulsion agent to heavy oil, asphalt, fuel oil, diesel, and gas-oil. Interest in using bio-oil based emulsifiers todilute heavy oil is very high, as almost half of Brazilian petroleum production has a high viscosity. Asphalt dilutionwill also avoid the use of naphtha or diesel as a solvent in road paving. These solvents are expensive and highlypollutant for air and soils and are also potentially underground water contaminants. A large scale test involving bio-oilemulsion with fuel oil and diesel co-firing in thermoelectric plants located in Southern Brazil is under contract. Thistype of test is necessary to measure the yield and emissions of the new fuel as a mixture of fossil and renewablefractions. Gas-oil/bio-oil mixtures are being tested in a catalytic cracking unit at Petrobras Research Centre (CENPES)in Rio de Janeiro. Results will be published soon to assess the possibilities of this use in conventional refineries. Theequipment built to prove the emulsions is shown in Figure 2.

Bio-Fertilisers

Unicamp have also driven the research to replace traditional fertilisers with bio-fertilisers from biomass fastpyrolysis products. Char can be aggregated in soil as a kind of young Terra Preta de Indio, an archaeological practiceof Amazonians. Bio-oil and a mixture of bio-oil and char can also help in fixing nitrogen in soils. Acid extract is anaqueous solution produced in the pyrolysis process and is already an agricultural input in organic production.A chapter of a book concerning this subject will be released in the second quarter of this year.

Carbonisation of biomass

Bioware is also developing an innovative carbonisation system based on its proprietary technology of a screw andshell reactor. The first plant, with a capacity of 300 kg/h, will process a variety of agriwaste and elephant grass intosustainable charcoal briquettes and tar. The facility is autothermic and will burn the pyrolysis gas as a source ofprocess heat. Financial support is being provided by a bank (Caixa Econômica Federal).

Another commercial development is the extrusion briquette machine with a capacity of 100 to 500 kg/h and acontinuous torrefaction oven to process briquettes. Both the briquette machine and the oven are enterprisesfinanced by the São Paulo Research Agency (FAPESP) in its special PIPE program (Innovative Research in Smalland Micro Companies). This is being developed under Bioware with the guidance of a collaborator Dr Felix Felfli,an expert in biomass briquette torrefaction.

Syngas production

The group will also soon look at gasification tests for bio-oil. Syngas production in a high pressure, oxygen gasifiercan be a great opportunity to achieve synthetic liquid or gaseous biofuel. There is high interest in this as athermo-chemical route. The demand for bio-oil as a liquid feedstock to feed this kind of process can increase theproduction. The central idea is to produce the bio-oil in a small/medium distributed system followed by a shipmentfrom numerous pyrolysis plants to a large gasification plant connected to a gas cleaning system, a pressurisationunit and a catalytic plant.

BIOWARE

Figure 1. Plant Located at Unicamp.

Figure 2. The Equipment Built to Prove the Emulsions.


Jose RochaBIOWARE TecnologiaCentro de Technologia da UNICAMPBRAZILTel: +55(19)8119-8992Email: [email protected]

[email protected]: www.bioware.com.br

10

Transportable Pyrolysis:a Solution to PoultryLitter Disposal

In Memoriam toJan Barynin

By F.A. Agblevor, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, USA

11

The safe and economical disposal of poultry litter is becoming a major problem for the USApoultry industry. Current disposal methods such as land application and cattle feeding arenow under pressure because of pollution of water resources due to leaching and runoffsand concern for mad cow disease contamination of the human food chain.

It is with profound sorrow that we announce the passingof our friend and colleague, Dr. Jan Barynin. Jan was theVice President of Engineering at Dynamotive for manyyears. He was involved in numerous BioOil developmentactivities in Europe, and the applications of combustingBioOil in North America. In Europe, he became acquaintedwith PyNe members participating in several meetingsand visits. He always believed in the success of thecommercialisation of fast pyrolysis technology and hisoptimistic attitude helped significantly in overcomingthe challenges. Friends and colleagues will miss hisactive correspondence. Jan was passionate about hiswork and committed world-wide to the advancementof the fast pyrolysis technology.

Dr. Barynin graduated from Royal Technology University of Denmark in 1961 as a Chemical Engineer. He arrivedin Canada in 1964 and spent 30 years of his professional career in steam, power, and boiler engineering withCombustion Engineering (CE-Canada), Babcock and Wilcox and H.A. Simons. His latest endeavours have beendedicated to renewable energy and use of agricultural and forestry residues. He developed the full scale BioOil10 tpd demonstation plant for the Vancouver based Dynamotive Energy Systems Corp. and thereafter the gasifiertechnology for the Nexterra Energy Corporation. Jan returned to Dynamotive as VP of Engineering with theresponsibility of bringing the 100 tonnes/day BioOil plant in West Lorne in Ontario on stream. Jan received hisdoctorate in 1970 in Chemical Engineering and Chemical Technology from Imperial College, UK.

Incineration or combustion is potentially applicable tolarge scale operations, but for small growers and EPAnon-attainment areas, this is not a suitable optionbecause of the high cost of operation. Thus, there is aneed to develop suitable technologies to dispose ofpoultry litter. To this end Virginia Polytechnic Instituteand State University are involved in a project todevelop suitable solutions to the problem of poultrylitter disposal. The ultimate goal of this project is todevelop transportable pyrolysis units to process thewaste from growers within one locality and thusreducing transportation cost. This technology will notonly solve the waste disposal and water pollutionproblems but it will convert a potential waste to ahigh-value product such as energy and fertiliser. Figure 1. Poultry Litter Bio-Oil.

Figure 3. The Transportable Pyrolysis Unit.

Figure 2. The Transportable Pyrolysis Unit.

Pyrolysis is a high temperature process in the absence of oxygen that converts organic matter into a complexmixture of non-condensable gas (producer gas), vapours, and solid residue. The vapours can be condensed intoliquids (bio-oil) see Figure 1. Poultry litter from broiler chicken and turkey houses, as well as bedding materialwere converted into bio-oil in a laboratory scale fast pyrolysis fluidised bed reactor. The bio-oil yields ranged from36 wt% to 50 wt% depending on the age and bedding material content of the litter. The bedding material whichwas mostly hardwood shavings had a bio-oil yield as high as 63 wt%. The biochar (solid residue) yield rangedfrom 27 wt% to 40 wt% depending on the source, age and composition of the poultry litter.

The higher heating value (HHV) of the poultry litter bio-oils ranged from 26 MJ/kg to 29 MJ/kg which is closeto the heating value of low quality coal but has very little sulphur content. The oils had relatively high nitrogencontent ranging from 4 wt% to 8 wt%, very low sulphur content that was below 1wt%. The biochar couldpotentially be used as fertiliser or a soil amendment while the non-condensable gases could be recycled andused as fuel for the process.

A community advocacy group, Waste Solutions Forum,consisting of farmers and researchers, was formed inthe Shenandoah Valley and worked with Virginia Techresearchers to secure funding (of one million dollars)from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to buildand demonstrate a scaled-up pyrolysis technology inthe Valley. A transportable pyrolysis unit with a designcapacity of one to five tons per day has been designedand constructed for demonstration on the farm duringthe Spring of 2008 (see Figure 2 and Figure 3).

We are cooperating with farmers in the ShenandoahValley who plan to use the poultry litter bio-oils toheat the chicken houses during the winter. Mr OrenHeatwole, a poultry farmer in the Valley has volunteeredhis facilities to be used in demonstrating thetechnology. He has subsequently constructed awaste heat burner that will be used to demonstrate thetechnology. To ensure that this technology does notcreate air emission problems, the Farm Pilot ProjectsCorporation has provided funding support to evaluate allemissions from both the pyrolysis process and thecombustion of the bio-oil.

ADI Sterling Inc, a Minnesota based company also plansto use the bio-oils to generate electricity. We willinvestigate and demonstrate the suitability of thistechnology during the summer of 2008.

Apart from providing energy and disposing of the litter,the technology also addresses bio-security concernssuch as avian flu. In case of a flu outbreak, thetransportable pyrolysis unit could be moved to thepoultry houses and the litter pyrolysed in place.Because of the high temperatures (400-500ºC) used forthe process, all pathogens and prions will be destroyedduring the process.


Foster AgblevorDepartment of Biological Systems EngineeringVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityBlacksburg, VA 24061USAEmail: [email protected]

JAN ALEXANDER MYGIND

BARYNIN

OCTOBER 3RD, 1937 –JANUARY 15TH, 2008

Jan, you will be missed and remembered with appreciation foryour contributions to pyrolysis.

GasNet Contact details:

Co-ordinator: Hermann HofbauerTel: +43 1 58801 15970 or

+43 1 58801 15901Fax: +43 1 587 6394Email: [email protected]

Newsletter/website administrator:

Harrie KnoefTel: +31 53 486 11 90Fax: +31 53 486 11 80Email: [email protected]: www.gasnet.uk.net

PYROFORCE® Powerfrom Wood System –CommercialBreakthrough ReachedBy Martin Schaub and Herbert Gemperle, Pyroforce Conzepte AG, Switzerland

Comments and contributions are most welcome on any aspect of the contents.Please contact Harrie Knoef for further details or to send material.

PYROFORCE® Power fromWood System - Commercial

Breakthrough Reached

12

Novel Catalysts forBiomass Gasification

15

Gasification:A Hot Topic in Sweden

17

Next Dual Fluidised Bed SteamGasifier Starts Up In Austria

20

The “CombiPower Process” –A Three-Stage

Fluidised Bed Gasifier

22

The Biocarb Project –Commissariat a L’energieAtomique (CEA) – France

23

Cambodia IncreasesUse of Biomass

Gasification Technology

16

GasNet contents

ISSUE 11

12

The PYROFORCE® technology for CHP application using wood as a renewable energy sourcehas been carefully developed over the last few years and the first commercial applicationsare now being realised. A pilot and demonstration unit has been operating in Spiez,Switzerland for several years which was used to optimise the technology and to demonstratethe technical and commercial feasibility of such systems. The technology is based on verylow tar gasification and uses a slightly modified standard gas engine to produce electricalpower. Two commercial plants with commercial warranties went on stream in Güssing, Austriaand Nidwalden, Switzerland before the end of 2007.

Technology

The plant is separated into the three subsystems‘gasification’, ‘synthesis gas cleaning’ and ‘CHPgas engine’.

The wood used is commercially shredded wood(G50) with a limit of fine particles of less than5% by weight. Wood is dried if the moisture ishigher than 15% in order to increase efficiencyand to minimise production of undesirable heavyhydrocarbons. Drying also allows the plant torun waste water free which represents a hugeadvantage considering the very high cost of wastewater treatment.

The gasifier (see Figure 1) is a dual zone downdraftgasifier. Wood is added from the top through arotary valve. In the top zone, some drying andheating (from radiation) takes place and pyrolysisis kept at a minimum. Then combustion air isadded lower down in order to produce the heat forgasification. The combustion air is added throughnozzles into the combustion area at a temperatureof approximately 1200°C. As gases from thedrying/pyrolysis section pass through this zone,tars are cracked effectively. In the lower zone,reduction takes place where the resulting coke isendothermically converted into synthesis gas usingthe heat from the combustion referred to above.The ash is removed from the system using apatented grate system, which also acts as a stirrerfor the char bed. The product gas leaves the gasifierat approximately 800°C and transfers some of itsheat back to the reactor before leaving.

The synthesis gas cleaning (see Figure 2) hasbeen designed to handle both fresh wood anddemolition/waste wood. It is therefore essential thatimpurities from contaminated wood can be removedefficiently. The design chosen was a dry filteringsystem with subsequent cooling and finallyhydrocarbons removal. Hot gas filtering was notconsidered a viable option because it would not bepossible to combine the removal of contaminantslike chlorine and volatile heavy metals with theremoval of solids. The synthesis gas therefore passesa cooler to reduce the temperature to a levelsuitable for combined contaminants and solidsremoval, i.e. approximately 150°C. This also allowsuse of state-of-the-art baghouses. In order to avoidclogging of the material, a suitable pre-coating isused which also acts as an adsorbent for thecontaminants. At these temperatures part of thetar is already condensed, so the filter also acts as atar reducing element. Downstream of the filter, awashing column further reduces the temperature andabsorbs the remaining hydrocarbons thus making thegas suitable for the engine. The washer can be runwith a solvent and RME has proved to be effective.

The engine is a standard GE-Jenbacher gas engineadapted to use very low calorific gas (1.5 kWh/Nm3).The turbocharger has been modified as well as theoperating pressure, due to the different flame speedsbetween natural gas and wood gas.

Figure 3: Pilot and demonstration plant in Spiez.

13

Cooler

a ir

Adsorbant

Baghouse

Scrubber

Figure 2: Synthesis gas cleaning.

PyrolysePyro lys is

D ryin g

O x id a tio n

R e d u ctio n

AshAsh

FuelFuel

AirAir

SynSyn GasGas

AirAir

Figure 1: Dual zone downdraft gasifier.

Experience

Experience gained from the pilot and demonstrationplant in Spiez (see Figure 3), which has so farbeen run for more than 17 000 hrs, has allowedoptimisation of the system for the new plantconcepts. The new plants are based on multiples ofthe standard size gasifier (150 kWe) and can thusbe built in a modular way. The plant also showedthe very high efficiency of the synthesis gascleaning (oil change frequency of the engine: lessthan 1/5000 hours) as well as extremely low heavytar production (average below 0.3 g/Nm3) in theraw gas and low BTX concentration (averageapproximately 1g/Nm3). Operating availability wasalso very high reaching more than 6500 hrs/year.

Commercial Projects

There are currently two projects under constructionwhich will be supplying power to the grid by theend of 2007 and heat to the respective districtheating systems.


14

The project in Güssing (Austria) is designed for the production of 300 kWe of electrical power andapproximately 440 kW of heat for the district heating system (See Figure 4 & 5). It consists of two gasifiersin parallel using one synthesis gas cleaning system and one gas engine (JMS312). The fuel will be woodwaste from the adjacent business.

The project in Nidwalden (Switzerland) is designed for the production of 1200 kWe and 1700 kWh. It willbe fuelled using low contamination waste/demolition wood and will supply power to the grid and heat toa newly established district heating system (see Figures 6 & 7). The project has been established withouthigh power prices because there is no legislation as yet in Switzerland to allow for green power benefits.The system consists of two systems with 600 kWe using four gasifiers each, one gas cleaning system and oneengine (JMS320). The selection was based on the fact that in summer heat demand is low and therefore twoof the systems will be in their annual extended maintenance period during this time one after the other;thus maximizing the heat sales to the district heating system.

Warranties

Experience gained from the Spiez plant has made thegranting of warranties possible to specify efficiency(kg wood/kW power), power and heat productionas well as availability. This makes it attractive forinvestors with additional benefits from renewableenergy sales price and (in Germany) from anadditional technology bonus. In Switzerland thetechnology was awarded the ‘NATURE MADE STAR’label allowing for the sale of explicitly ‘green’ energyto the customers. Investments will therefore berewarding for both the investor and the environment!

Figure 4: View of Güssing plant after placing of gasifiers. Figure 5: View of Güssing plant lower level with scrubber.

Figure 1: Methane decomposing activity at 900°C for a Ni-Mg silicate catalyst insimulated biomass syngas containing up to 20 ppmv of H2S.

Figure 2: Naphthalene decomposing activity for a glass-ceramic catalyst containing10 wt. % NiO and 1.8 wt. % MgO.

Figure 6: View of Nidwalden plant with gasifier in theleft (wooden) building, bunker and peak heaters inthe concrete building.

Figure 7: View into Nidwalden plant with coolers,gasifiers and scrubber.


Martin Schaub,Managing DirectorCTU-Conzepte Technik Umwelt AGTel: +41 52 262 68 91Fax: +41 52 262 00 72mail: [email protected]: www.ctu.ch


Larry G. FelixSenior Engineer, Process Research & EvaluationGas Technology Institute1500 First Avenue, North, Suite L134Birmingham, AL 35203-1821USATel: +1 (205) 307-6691Fax: +1 (205) 307-6696Email: [email protected]

15

Novel Catalysts forBiomass GasificationBy Larry Felix, Gas Technology Institute, USA

Two novel approaches to creating robust, attrition resistant, tar-decomposing catalystshave been developed. Both create Ni, Fe, or Co-based catalysts that are capable ofextended use under process conditions typically found within or downstream of afluid-bed biomass gasifier. These technologies offer the possibility of providing robust,active catalysts for gasification and endothermic processes that employ slurry reactorssuch as Fischer-Tropsch synthesis. Patent applications have been filed that cover thesetechnologies. This work was carried out under US DOE Cooperative AgreementDE-FG36-04GO14314.

Thermally-Induced Impregnation

This approach employs thermal energy to graft catalytically-active metals (e.g. Ni, Fe, Co), and their oxidesand silicates directly onto an attrition-resistant support such as olivine to form robust, active catalysts.An inert environment is required to graft a catalytically-active metal onto olivine. However, the most promisingtar-decomposing catalysts GTI has produced by following this approach utilise Ni and Ni-Mg silicates. Becausethese compounds have a molecular structure similar to olivine and other mineral silicates, when calcined in air,they are amenable to direct thermal impregnation onto an olivine support. By themselves, these Ni-basedcatalysts have been found to exhibit superior tar and methane decomposing activity over a significant time onstream in the presence of H2S, as shown in Figure 1.

Glass-Ceramics

The second technology employs multi-phase glass-ceramics that incorporate up to 40 wt. % catalyst metaloxides. These materials melt at ~1550°C, and are quenched to form amorphous glasses. After cooling, they areheat-treated or cerammed to grow hard olivine-like primary microcrystal (~1-5 micron) structures of the sortthat are known to resist attrition in fluid-bed biomass gasifiers. During ceramming, catalytically-active metaloxides are excluded from each primary cell and concentrate into a secondary crystalline phase that surroundseach primary microcrystal. When reduced under hydrogen, metallic catalysts are formed that cover all exposedsurfaces of the secondary phase. Glass-ceramics catalysts appear to be well suited for biomass gasification andFischer-Tropsch synthesis. Because these glass-ceramic catalysts are first formed as amorphous glasses,ceramming can be carried out after a base glass has been processed into a final shape, monolith, fiber, or lowor high surface area material by employing standard glass processing technology. Thus, this approach offers thepotential for application to a wide variety of industrial processes that require catalysis. Tests of one of the firstexamples of such a catalyst revealed strong tar-decomposing activity for naphthalene in simulated biomasssyngas, as shown in Figure 2.

16

Cambodia IncreasesUse of BiomassGasification TechnologyBy: Tony Knowles and Erik Middelink, SME Renewable Energy Ltd, Cambodia

In October 2005 SME Renewable Energy Ltd. (SME-RE Ltd.) was created through a jointventure partnership of SME Cambodia, a Cambodian NGO promoting rural private sectordevelopment, and E+Co Inc., a U.S.-based non-profit, renewable energy investmentcompany. In the three years since it was created, SME-RE Ltd. has established itself asthe Cambodian leader in the field of biomass gasification systems. As the electrificationrate in Cambodia is only 17%, most rural Cambodian enterprises depend on increasinglyexpensive, imported diesel fuel for their energy needs. Small and medium sizedenterprises (SMEs) including rice mills, brick factories, ice plants and rural electricityenterprises (REEs) are prime targets for SME-RE systems.

17

Figure 1: Wood Storage.

Back in 2003-4, SME Cambodia began to promote andintroduce biomass gasification technology developedat ANKUR Scientific Energy Technologies based inBaroda, India. “It has been a tough, sometimesfrustrating and slow process to introduce this newconcept and method of energy production andconvince very conservative Cambodian entrepreneurssuch as rice millers” says Rin Seyha, ManagingDirector of SME-RE Ltd. During 2004-5, SME Cambodiasupported “exposure” visits by Cambodian ruralentrepreneurs to India and Sri Lanka to see biomassgasification equipment at work in power plants andrice mills. “Seeing gasifiers in operation is necessaryfor Cambodians to accept that the technology reallyworks. It helps them visualise how the equipment

could be used in their own operations and appreciatethe potential benefits of the technology in terms ofreducing their energy costs and their dependence onexpensive diesel fuel”.

A major problem in introducing the technology hasbeen the lack of credit funds available for long terminvestment in production equipment and machinery.“It has been rare for any Cambodian bank to lend torural enterprises for periods longer than 2 years,without 200-300 % collateral, with interest rates of16-18% per annum and other restrictive conditions”says Tony Knowles, Director of SME Cambodia andSME-RE Ltd. “Cambodian financial institutions havenot been able nor interested in working with rural

entrepreneurs to form a risk partnership as would bethe case in a developed country.” To address theproblem of introducing new technology and at thesame time overcoming the financial constraints thatface rural entrepreneurs, SME-RE and E+Co developedan innovative approach to facilitate Cambodianentrepreneurs’ adoption of this valuable energy savingtechnology. SME-RE and E+Co have developed abusiness model that combines prudent risk assessmentanalysis, risk minimisation and good business practiceand procedures. Intimate knowledge of the SMEsoperations and history permits a flexible, tailoredapproach to designing and approving loans for SMEsto purchase gasification systems.

Cambodian millers, REEs and other SMEs have nowbegun purchasing gasification systems, led by theexample of Mr. Song Hong, owner of the Song HengRice Mill in Battambang and President of theBattambang Rice Millers Association, who was thefirst to buy a gasifier. The number of installations hassteadily grown from 1 in 2006 to 4 in 2007, with 11more systems to be installed thus far for 2008. Thestaff of SME-RE are delighted with this upward trend

of sales and are gearing up to train more staff toprovide after-sales services. Plans are being madeto begin manufacturing system components withinCambodia. The market potential for the next threeyears is estimated to be 100 units. “We have alwaysbeen optimistic concerning the potential for growthin the use of this technology in Cambodia,” saysKnowles. “The economic benefit of using low costbiomass (e.g. rice husks already owned by the millers)or other agricultural waste that can substitute for70% -75% of the fuel bill, offers tremendousopportunity to reduce energy costs. More than 70%of mill direct operating expenses are for fuel.” Atypical 2 tonne/hr rice mill operating 10 hrs per dayfor 25 days a month will save more than 60,000 litresof diesel, currently worth about $ 54,000 per year.“The payback period on the investment is typicallybetween 1.5 to 3 years” says Tony Knowles. However,according to Mr. Song Hong, “most Cambodian familybusinessmen are not used to making investmentdecisions based strictly on numerical calculations orrates of return. They are used to working season byseason and making do with whatever funds areavailable from their family networks”.

SME-RE Ltd. plans to save its rural entrepreneurs andthe Cambodian economy millions of litres of importedfossil fuel per year, save millions of dollars throughlowered energy costs and reduce greenhouse gasemissions. This will in turn strengthen thecompetitiveness of the agriculture sector andimprove incomes to rural residents.


SME Renewable Energy Ltd.#92K, Russian Federation BoulevardToul Kork, Phnom Penh, P.O. Box 614CAMBODIATel/Fax: +855 23 882354Email: [email protected]

[email protected]: www.smerenewables.com

Gasification:A Hot Topic in SwedenBy Staffan Karlsson and Jörgen Held, Swedish Gas Centre, Sweden

On 20-21st September 2007 the Swedish Gas Centre (SGC) arranged an internationalseminar on gasification and methanation in Gothenburg. In total 17 speakers wereinvited to give presentations and the seminar was chaired by Staffan Karlsson, SGC.The seminar was divided into three parts:

• International R&D activities

• National R&D activities

• Study tour to Rya CHP plant and Chalmers CFB-furnace

International R&D activities were presented on the first day of the seminar. Most of these have alreadybeen highlighted in previous issues of ThermalNet. The following updates were presented:

(i) The Güssing gasification plant by IE Leipzig, TU Vienna, PSI and CTU.

(ii) Advanced gas cleaning by ECN.

(iii) TREMP methanation technology by Haldor Topsoe.

(iv) Biomass gasification technologies by Carbona and Choren Industries


On the second day the focus was on gasificationactivities in Sweden as described below.

GoBiGas

Ingemar Gunnarsson from Gothenburg Energy ABreported on the progress of the project “GoBiGas”(Gothenburg Biomass Gasification plant). The purposeof the project is to demonstrate the possibilities ofthe biomass gasification technology at a commercialscale. Gothenburg Energy intends to build agasification plant that will use biomass such asforestry residues to produce SNG. The plan is to builda plant that will have a capacity of around 100 MWand a biomass to gas efficiency of 60-70 %.The total efficiency of the plant is expected to beapproximately 90 % since waste heat from the plantcan be used for district heating. The produced gascan be distributed via the existing gas grid where itcould be used for vehicles, industrial purposes andCHP production. There are different technicalsolutions available and discussions with suppliers areongoing. A preliminary investment decision will betaken during the summer of 2008. The plan is to aimfor a gasification plant for SNG production to be inoperation by 2012.

E.ON Plans Within the Gasification Area

Owe Jönsson from E.ON Gas Sweden AB presentedthe gasification activities within E.ON. A pilot studyto investigate the technical and economicalconditions for a gasification plant in Sweden, eitherfor electricity production (IGCC) and/or to producebio-methane as a complement to natural gas hasbeen completed. The aim is to build a demonstrationplant at a scale of approx. 50 MWth in Sweden.The plant is expected to be in operation by around2012/2013.

Piteå (Black Liquor Gasification)

Rikard Gebart from the Energy Technology Centre, ETC,in Piteå presented experiences of the operation of the3.5 MW pilot plant. It is an entrained flow gasifier,located at ETC, just beside the Smurfit KappaKraftliner pulp mill.

The gasifier has more than 3,500 h of accumulatedoperation (December 2007). So far the producedsyngas has been flared but in the next developmentstep production of DME will be demonstrated.The concept is expected to be demonstrated in alarge scale plant, somewhere in Sweden as well asin New Page, USA.

More information is available at:www.etcpitea.se and www.chemrec.se

Värnamo (Oxygen-Blown Pressurised Gasification)

Sune Bengtsson from Växjö Värnamo BiomassGasification Centre, VVBGC, presented an update ofthe CHRISGAS-project. In the EC project, CHRISGAS,clean hydrogen-rich synthesis gas will be producedbased on steam/oxygen-blown gasification ofbiomass, hot gas cleaning and steam reforming.The rebuilding of the Värnamo plant is expected tobe completed in May 2009.

However on 14th December 2007 the Swedish EnergyAgency took the decision to stop the financial supportfor the rebuilding of the plant since the required levelof industrial co-financing had not been reached.

Different options are now under consideration andthere is an ongoing discussion between the ownersof the plant and the Swedish Energy Agency aboutthe future of the project.

More information available at:www.chrisgas.com and www.vvbgc.com

1918

Chalmers (Rebuilding of the Chalmers CFBFurnace to Accommodate an Indirect Gasifier)

Henrik Thunman from Chalmers University ofTechnology presented on the implementation of a2 MW indirect gasifier at the existing 8 MW CFBboiler. The objective of the project is to demonstratethe technique to integrate a biomass gasifier asan add-on unit to existing CFB or BFB boilers,by replacing the particle cooler with a gasifier.The rebuilding cost of 1.1 million € is being financedby Gothenburg Energy Research Foundation. Initialtests of the system were accomplished in November2007 and the gasifier was taken over by GothenburgEnergy and Chalmers in January 2008. In February thefirst measurement campaign of the gasifier started.The plant will continue to provide the universitywith heat just like before the implementation ofthe indirect gasifier.

KTH (Development of a Selective Tar Cracker)

Krister Sjöström from the Royal Institute ofTechnology presented results achieved so far fromthe ongoing project “Development of a selectivetar cracker”. The main objective of this project isto show that catalytic tar decomposition withoutdecomposition of methane is a way to increase theefficiency for methane production from biomassgasification.

More information about the seminar and all thepresentations can be found at the seminarhomepage www.sgc.se/biomethane

SGC co-ordinates the technological development andoperates a national research programme within thefield of gas technology. The research programmeis divided into five areas and gasification andmethanation is one of them.

The seminar was sponsored by the Swedish EnergyAgency and several companies within SGC´s interestgroup related to the programme area gasification andmethanation. SGC’s goal is to turn the seminar intoan annual event and the next event is scheduled for9-10th October in Malmö, Sweden.

Figure 1: The conference audience.

Figure 2: Chalmers study tour.


Staffan Karlsson or Jörgen HeldSwedish Gas CentreMalmöSWEDENTel: +46 (0)40-680 07 61Email: [email protected]

[email protected]

Description of the New CHP Plant in Oberwart

The new plant is based on the same DFB gasification process as that realised in Güssing, Austria. (For adetailed description of the overall process in Güssing see for example: Hofbauer, H., Rauch, R., Bosch, K.,Koch, R., Aichernig, C., 2003, “Biomass CHP plant Güssing – a success story,” in: Bridgwater, A.V. (Ed.):Pyrolysis and Gasification of Biomass and Waste, CPL Press, Newbury, UK, pp. 527-536.)

Major process steps such as gas production in the steam blown gasifier and downstream gas cleaning aretherefore very similar to the design found and optimised at the Güssing plant. Gas cooling in Oberwart ismainly achieved through heating up thermo oil, which is circulating in a rather complex pipeline network.The heated thermo oil can be used for district heat generation as well as for additional power production inan Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC), the distribution between district heat and electricity from the ORC-unit beingsolely dependent upon consumer demands. Gas utilisation for main power and heat production is realisedthrough two Jenbacher J-612 gas engines, each of them delivering about 1150 kWel and 650 kWth.Additional performance data as well as estimated plant efficiencies for the “next generation” CHP plant inOberwart are given in Table 1.

The following list summarises some of the most relevant improvements made for the “next generation“ DFBbiomass gasification plant in Oberwart:

• The integration of a biomass dryer eliminates undesirable fluctuations in biomass moisture thuscontinuously providing the gasifier with biomass of constant water content.

• An alternative control strategy for the gasification temperature has been developed in order tomaximise utilisation of the available clean producer gas.

• In order to maximise electricity yield, the residual heat of the process is converted into electricityusing an Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC).

• Various constructional improvements concerning heat exchangers and other apparatuses have beenconducted to increase resistance against fouling and contamination.

Summary

A “next generation” CHP biomass gasification plantstarted up operation in Oberwart, Austria at theend of December 2007. It is based on a DFB steamgasification technology that has already beensuccessfully implemented in Güssing, Austria.Improvements in reactor design, process controland overall heat utilisation should result in enhancedplant performance and greater overall plantefficiencies. Several small factories including thelocal hospital as well as the community of Oberwartwill benefit from ~ 2,7 MWel of electricity and upto 6 MWth of district heat derived from reliable andproven gasification of renewable energy sources,i.e. wood chips from forestry.

Owner and Operator

ENERGIE OBERWART – ERRICHTUNGS-GmbH, anaffiliated company of BEGAS AG and BEWAG AG

Manufacturer

ORTNER - Ges.m.b.H, Innsbruck-Vienna


Ing. DI (FH) Dr.techn. Klaus BoschBEGAS Kraftwerk GmbHKasernenstraße 10A-7000 EisenstadtAUSTRIAEmail: [email protected]: +43(3325)40172-713Fax: +43(3325)40172-711

Table 1. Performance data, estimated efficiencies for the CHP plant in Oberwart.

Pth, plant 8500 kW

Pel, tot 2740 kW

Pel, gas engine 1+2 2300 kW

Pel, ORC 440 kW

Qdh max, incl. Natural gas-boiler 6000 kW

Qdh, max. el. output 1500 kW

Qengine 1+2 1300 kW

ηchem, gas generation 73 %

ηel, brut 32 %

(th=thermal, tot=total, el=electrical, dh=district heat, chem.=chemical).

2120

Next Dual FluidisedBed Steam GasifierStarts Up In Austria

IntroductionA dual fluidised bed (DFB) technology for steam gasification of solid biomass has beendeveloped and successfully demonstrated at the 8 MWth combined heat and power (CHP)plant in Güssing, Austria since 2002. The basic concept consists of gas generation ina DFB system, gas cooling and gas clean-up in a bag filter followed by a tar scrubber.The cooled and cleaned producer gas is fed into a gas engine for power generation.

By Wolfgang Madl, Ortner GmbH, Klaus Bosch, Energie Oberwart GmbH and Jan Kotik,Vienna University of Technology, Austria

Driven by the success of the “Güssing concept” andthe continuing demand for biomass-based small scaleCHP plants in Austria, an advanced biomassgasification concept, based on the DFB process inGüssing, was developed. Simulation tools have beenused to assess the potential of an improved process

configuration which includes an integrated fuel dryerand heat utilisation in an Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC)to increase the amount of electricity production.

This “next generation” CHP plant will be located inOberwart, Austria. Figure 1 shows a general view ofthe plant from Autumn 2007.

Figure 1: “Next generation” CHP plant based on DFB gasification in Oberwart, Austria. View during the construction period.

2322

The “CombiPowerProcess” –A Three-StageFluidised Bed GasifierBy: Dipl.-Ing. Madeleine Berger, Dipl.-Ing. Gert Palitzsch, Dr.-Ing. Sascha Schröder andDipl.-Ing. Norbert Topf, Dresden, VER, Germany

Process DescriptionThe CombiPower process is designed for the purpose of decentralised generation ofpower and heat from solid fuels such as biomass, brown coal, commercial waste-derivedfuels (WDF) from processed domestic waste or commercial waste.

The process combines fluidised bed gasification with air as the gasification medium, a fluidised bed gas coolerand purification and fluidised bed combustion. With this process, decentralised generation of electric energyand heat from biomass is feasible, in compliance with the regulations of Germany’s Renewable Energy Act (EEG),both with regard to the processing equipment required and in terms of economic efficiency as well. By enrichingthe oxygen content in the air, e.g. to around 50% 02, in the CombiPower-Plus process, an industrial gas witha caloric value of around 8 MJ/kg can be produced. Moreover, compared to an otherwise identical CombiPowerplant, the fuel rating can be increased by a factor of 2.5 to 3.

For this purpose the process is simply extended with oxygen enrichment in a pressure swing adsorption plant.At a throughput of 3.5 t/h fuel, the nett electric power = 1.5 MW/h, thermal energy = 2 MW/h, and industrialgas = 8 MW/h.

CombiPower-Plus Plant in Naundorf, Grossenhain – Germany

The first CombiPower-Plus plant will be realised in Grossenhain, Germany. The project focuses on a plant designwith an output of 6MW electrical energy and up to 8MW thermal energy. According to the German EEG laws theelectric energy will be supplied into the regional electricity network whereas the thermal energy will be suppliedto the local district heating network for the heating of more than 1000 households.

Figure 1: Flowsheet of the CombiPower-Plus process.

Figure 2: View of the three-stage fluidised bed system of the CombiPower process.

All the approvals for the legally binding land-use planwere confirmed at the end of 2007.

All the engineering and planning processes have alsoreached an advanced stage and the investors areawaiting the governmental approvals to start theconstruction work for April 2008. The plant is scheduledto start operation by the second half of 2009.


Dr.-Ing. Sascha SchröderGeneral DirectorVER Verfahrensingenieure GmbHBreitscheidstr. 7801237 DresdenGERMANYTel: +49 (351) 204 8-244Fax: +49 (351) 203 16 60

The Biocarb Project –Commissariat aL’energie Atomique(CEA) – FranceBy C. Dupont and S. Rougé, Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique, France

The Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique, initially created in 1945 for Nuclear Energy,is one of the major Energy Research Centres in France, with 15,000 people working ondifferent research areas from Fundamental Physics to Biotechnology and New Technologyfor Energy. This latter research area is in continuous expansion, due to the attentionwhich the topic of energy has received recently. For this reason CEA started a projectcalled BIOCARB in 2000. Its major aim is to develop an innovative Biomass to Liquid(BtL) process and to promote the implementation of the first pilot plants in France.To achieve this goal, an R&D programme was established to cover the main steps ofthe process up to the final gas cleaning stage before fuel synthesis.

The project is being carried out by a team of 20 CEA scientists reinforced by 5 PhD and post-PhD staff workingin a laboratory which specialises in Thermal hydraulics and Physico-chemical modelling. Partnerships have alsobeen developed with other R&D actors in the biomass sector, in France (Universities, CIRAD, IFP, and energyfirms such as EdF, GdF and TOTAL) and also in Europe (VTT in Finland, ECN in the Netherlands, FZK in Germany),notably through French ANR projects or European projects (e.g. Green Fuel Cell).


Air[ 02 21-50 % ]

Fuelstorage FB gasification FB gas cooling/

purification FB combustion

Preheating

Districtpower &heatingstation

Waste gas

Waste coke Waste for

Flue gasClean gasRaw gas

utilisation

Industrialgas

Power

Heat

Ash

2524

R&D Approach

As shown in Figure 1 below, the CEA R&D is assessing the different steps of the process up to a syngas pureenough for fuel synthesis as detailed below:

• Biomass characterisation and supply, in relation to the fields of forestry and agriculture.• Biomass pre-treatment (torrefaction, fast or slow pyrolysis)• Biomass gasification (entrained flow reactor, fluidised bed)• Gas cleaning

• A steam bubbling fluidised bed (LFHT) running with a wood flow rate of 0.5 to several Kg h-1, attemperatures up to 1000°C and pressure up to 40 bars (see Figure 3a). As shown in Figure 3b, anexcess of steam significantly promotes the H2 yield, notably due to the water-gas shift reaction.The effect of pressure at 850°C has recently been investigated, showing that the CH4 yield significantlyincreases when pressure is increased to 7.5 bars. New feedstocks (agricultural materials including strawand energy crops such as miscanthus, Short Rotation Coppice of poplar and willow) are now going tobe tested, first in a thermogravimetric facility, operating up to 1500°C under 30 vol.% steam, then inthe LFHT.

• A non-catalytic high temperature reformer (PEGASE, see Figure 4a), which will soon be connectedwith the LFHT, and which runs up to 1500°C and 4 bars with a gas residence time of about 2 s.As can be seen in Figure 4b, for a mixture of gases representative of the gas released during pyrolysisunder fluidised bed conditions, the CH4 conversion is nearly achieved at 1370°C after 2 s, theconversion being higher than 90%.

Figure 1: The CEA R&D scope in the BIOCARB project.

Figure 3: a) Left- The bubbling fluidised bed; b) Right- Influence of steam on the gas yields at 950°C.

The R&D approach aims at coupling modelling and experiments on different scales:

• At the particle scale: understanding phenomena using lab scale facilities and detailedphenomenological modelling

• At the reactor scale: reactor design using pilot scale facilities and reactor modelling• At the process scale: process assessment through mass and energy balances, leading to technology

choices and demonstration plants• At the industrial scale: economic and environmental assessment leading to industrial implementation

of the process

Two promising gasification technologies for BtLproduction are being studied: the fluidised bedreactor and the entrained flow reactor (EFR). A moreprospective route of allothermic gasification is alsobeing studied in order to significantly increase thebiofuel mass yield. This route requires the adjunctionof external CO2 neutral energy, which may be doneeither indirectly through the injection of hydrogen, ordirectly with electricity fed plasma technology.

Experimental Facilities

• A rotary kiln for biomass pre-treatment by slow pyrolysis (FT), running at a biomass flow rate of about1 Kg h-1, coupled with a catalytic reformer of the pyrolysis gases (RTGP), working at 1000°C (see Figure 2).

Figure 2: Rotary kiln and catalytic reformer.

0 %

1 0 %

2 0 %

3 0 %

4 0 %

5 0 %

6 0 %

H 2 C O C O 2 C H 4

Volu

me

cont

ent

inth

edr

yga

s

9 5 0 °C - g a s a tm o s p h e re : N 2 + H 2 O

9 5 0 °C - g a s a tm o s p h e re : N 2

Figure 4: a) Left- Non catalytic reformer PEGASE; b) Right- CH4 conversion in PEGASE versus T for a gas residence time of 2 s.

H 2O : 2 5% ; H 2 : 16 % ; C O : 1 9% ; C O 2 : 1 4%ga s re s ide n ce tim e : 2 s

0%

2 0%

4 0%

6 0%

8 0%

1 0 0%

95 0 1 05 0 11 5 0 1 2 5 0 1 3 5 0T e m p e ra tu re (°C )

C H 4 7%

C H 4 14%

CH4

conv

ersi

onra

te


26


Sylvie Rougé – Biocarb Project ManagerCommissariat à l’Energie Atomique – GrenobleDTN/SE2T/LPTM17 rue des Martyrs38054 Grenoble cedex 9FRANCETel: 33 4 38 78 68 84Fax: 33 4 38 78 52 51Email: [email protected]

• A non transferred plasma torch reactor dedicated to the study of allothermic gasification (BIOMAP),operating at 1 bar and at biomass flow rate from 1 to 10 Kg h-1 with a reduced 20 kW plasma torch(see Figure 5). The reactor can be either fed by gas, liquid or solid feedstock.

• A facility dedicated to the collection of solid inorganic pollutants (COLINE).

• A high temperature inorganic pollutants cleaning train (BANBINO) including a high temperature filter(900°C), three fixed beds of sorbents (500°C) and a polishing filter (500°C), coupled with measuringdevices of inorganic traces (see Figure 6).

• A test rig focused on the interaction between syngas pollutants and materials (MATISSE) operatingup to 800°C. Successful long duration tests (100 h) have been achieved on SOFC materials with syngascontaining several ppm of H2S, in collaboration with another CEA team that develops materials andSOFC stacks.

Modelling Work

Modelling work is systematically associated with the experimental tests at different scales for understanding,validation and prediction:

• Organic and inorganic species behaviour, condensation and interactions with materials are predictedthrough thermodynamic calculations with the software FACTSAGE.

• 1D software called GASPAR is under development. It describes both the organic phases and the meltedashes in an entrained flow reactor. It includes detailed kinetics of solid decomposition, taking intoaccount both physical and chemical phenomena, and detailed gas phase kinetics computed throughCHEMKIN II. Simplified kinetic models are also coupled with 3D thermohydraulic software such asFLUENT or an internal CEA tool (TRIO-U) in order to simulate complex reactor geometry.

• Assessment of the overall process is carried out using commercial tools such as ProsimPlus to obtainmass and energy balances. Overall process efficiency and costs are also being calculated. Finally,macroeconomic and environmental issues are being looked at using E3Database software.

Large Scale Projects

In parallel with this R&D program located at the CEA centres, the CEA is involved in French projects of BtLplants as:

• A partner of a BtL development plant (biomass flow rate: 500 Kg h-1) north of Paris, France

• A leader of a BtL demonstration plant in Bure in North East France, a 50 MW plant that will gasifya dry biomass flow rate of 10 tons.h-1.

Figure 5: The plasma torch reactor BIOMAP. Figure 6: The high temperature inorganic pollutantstrain BANBINO.

Removal of Particlesfrom Biomass Combustion -

a Practical Approach

27

Development of Co-firing PowerGeneration Market Opportunities

to Enhance InternationalCooperation with China

29

Survey on Measurementsand Emission Factors on

Particulate Matter from BiomassCombustion in IEA Countries

33

CombNet contents

ISSUE 06

CombNet Contact details:

Co-ordinator: Sjaak van LooTel: +31 53 489 4355/4636Fax: +31 53 489 5399Email: [email protected]

Newsletter/website:

Administrator: Jaap KoppejanTel: +31 55 549 3167Fax: +31 55 549 3287Email: [email protected]: www.combnet.com

By Kurt Carlsson, EcoExpert, Sweden

Removal of Particlesfrom BiomassCombustion - aPractical ApproachIn practise one can normally distinguish two types of particles in the flue gas of amodern biomass combustor, namely the submicron fraction (< 1 µm) that results fromevaporation and condensation of inorganic matter and the supermicron fraction (> 1 µm)that consists of ash not evaporated and unburned matter. The small particles - thesubmicron fraction - penetrate the narrowest part of the lung - the alveoli. It is thereforeimportant to remove both fractions of the particles or dust as they are also called.

The uniqueness of almost each biomass plant in termsof its location, size, fuel specifications, combustionsystem, operation etc. requires that a particleseparation system must always be specifically designed.

The well known and well proven dust separators, dryand wet electrostatic precipitators (DESP and WESP)and fabric or barrier filters (FF or BF), are veryeffective in removing the super- as well as thesubmicron particles but each have their advantagesand disadvantages. In a dry ESP (DESP) the collectingplates are cleaned by rapping or tapping or knocking.In the wet ESP (WESP) the collecting plates arewashed. An ESP can in principle be designed forany removal efficiency also for submicron dust;costs are the main issue here.

A WESP, used in combination with a flue gascondenser and a multicyclone as a pre-collector,is often a good solution if low temperature wasteheat is to be recovered. WESP is also a solution ifwet scrubbers are chosen for absorption of e.g. HCland/or SO2. In other cases wet systems are seldomthe best solution.

The resistivity of the dust is important for a dryelectrostatic precipitator, since fuels with a highresistivity may disturb DESP operation. Biomassfuels with a high chlorine content, e.g. straw,generate a fine dust with a high resistivity.For plants which burn biomass of known originand controlled composition, a DESP is often a goodsolution. Pulsed high tension supply reduces thisnegative effect. WESP is not influenced as it hasno dry dust layer on the collecting plates.

Electrostatic forces may be used to improve thecollection efficiency of submicron dust of gravelbed filters and wet scrubbers. A few biomass fuelledboilers have already been equiped with electrifiedgravel bed filters (EGBF). This technology is notsensistive for high dust resistivity. Electrified wetscrubbers are offered by at least one company andthere are some installations on waste fired boilers.


27Comments and contributions are most welcome on any aspect of the contents.

Please contact Emily Wakefield for further details or to send material.

Figure 1: A WESP installed downstream of a multicycloneand condensor.

2928

Fabric filters or other types of barrier filters (FF/BF)are less sensitive to the composition of the dust.The technology can also be used as a chemicalreactor - a fixed bed reactor. FF/BF is often a goodsolution when contaminated biomass is burnt and/orwhen a high degree of flexibility is required.

CHEUBIO is a two year duration specific support action within the European Commission Sixth FrameworkProgramme that started in November 2006. The aim is to aid the development of co-firing power generationmarket opportunities in China as a means to ensure comprehensive utilisation of potential energy resourceswhilst also offering the prospect of significant mitigation of greenhouse gas CO2 emissions through areduction of coal use in the power generation sector. The project is being undertaken by a well-establishedEU-China consortium that comprises:

This team has determined the sources and availability of biomass/biogenic wastes in China; determined variousconcepts for the co-firing of such renewable energy materials with coal in the various types of Chinese coalfired plants; carried out techno-economic, socio-economic and environmental assessments of these concepts;and considered the policy, institutional and regulatory impacts. From these assessments and evaluations, thecommercial attractiveness and realistic market potential of introducing co-firing into the Chinese power sectorhave been determined.

Overview of Technical and Techno-Economic Results

The major sources of biomass are agricultural residues, namely rice husk, rice and wheat stalks, corn residues,plus various forestry wastes (see Table 1 overleaf).

The Ministry of Agriculture in China wishes to address the need for sustainable utilisation of agriculturalresidues. Its first priority is to deal with the wheat and corn wastes in middle China, as typified by thesituation in Henan Province and Shandong Province. As such this project is focusing on this region but is alsoexamining options for dealing with rice straw and rice husks as found in the South and the North of China.


• IEA Environmental Projects Limited, UK

• Aston University, UK

• VTT Processes, Finland

• Exergia, Greece

• European Biomass Association, Belgium

• China Electricity Council, China

• Tsinghua University, China

• Energy Research Institute of Henan Province,China

Table 1. Dry electrostatic precipitators and fabric filters – a comparison.

Dry Electrostatic Precipitators (DESP)

− are well proven on biomass - there are more than a thousand DESPs in

operation on very large black liquor boilers as well as very small wood

fired boilers.

− are very reliable with low maintenance and operation cost.

− can normally be designed for very low dust emissions e.g. 10 mg/m3.

− can operate up to 400°C

− are sensistive to dust with a high resistivity which can occur when e.g.

biomass with a high content of chlorides is burnt

Fabric Filters (FF)

− can normally be designed for an extremely low dust emission or only a

few mg/m3 also for submicron dust.

− are good for fixed bed reactors which are valuable when contaminated

biofuel is to be burnt.

− can be built in a compact way

− are sensistive for a high rate of sticky dust.

− often have a lower initial cost but a higher operation and maintenance

cost than ESP.

For more information please contact:

Kurt CarlssonEcoExpertS-35242 VaxjoSWEDENTel: +46470 216 88Mobile: +4670 529 16 88Email: [email protected]

Figure 2: Condensor to the right, water treatment down to the left, ID fan on the top, heat exchanger below thecondensor, above the water treatment the top of the WESP can be seen.

Figure 3: Pulse cleaned, also called high ratio, fabricfilter for big boilers (FLÄKT). The sketch shows a filterwith six compartments. The flow direction around thebags are mainly from top to bottom which improvesthe settling of released dust.

Figure 1: Members of the EU-China consortium.

By Andrew Minchener, IEA Environmental Projects Limited, UK

Development ofCo-firing PowerGeneration MarketOpportunities toEnhance InternationalCooperation with ChinaIntroductionThe experts of IEA Bioenergy Task 32 (Biomass Combustion and Co-firing) and theEU Project CHEUBIO arranged to meet in April 2008 for an expert meeting on Biomassco-firing opportunities in China.

3130

Table 1. Main agricultural crop residues (straw and stalk) outputs in 2000.

Crop Product output Straw and stalk Coefficient Standard coal(1,000 tons) (1,000 tons) equal to tce (1,000 tce)

Rice 185,230 115,398 0.429 49,505

Wheat 102,210 139,618 0.500 69,809

Corn 111,990 223,980 0.529 118,485

Other miscellaneous 16,690 166,690 0.050 8,345

Soybeans 17,875 26,812 0.543 14,559

Tubers 36,220 16,310 0.486 7,926

Oil crops 22,503 45,006 0.529 23,808

Cotton 4,768 14,304 0.543 7,767

Sugarcane 65,417 6,541 0.441 2,884

Total 754,659 303,092

With regard to MSW, the annual production in China was some 150 million tonnes in 2000, with a predictedannual growth rate of 8-10%. The area used for landfill in China is believed to have exceeded 500 millionsquare meters and there is increasing concern regarding both the direct environmental impact (e.g. leachingof pollutants into water courses) as well as the adverse impact on land availability for crop production.This is a particularly acute problem in major cities where the per capita annual production of waste is over400kg. Consequently China has an urgent need to establish an alternative disposal route, which offers theopportunity for various energy recovery schemes.

The potential impact of biomass co-firing is large.If half of the biomass wastes produced in 2000 couldbe utilised in the older existing power plants it coulddisplace nearly 200 million tonnes of coal. The useof biogenic waste arising from the processing ofMSW could displace up to a further 50 Mt coal.

On such a basis, the likely number of power stationsthat would need retrofitting with co-firing technologywould be close to 200. The amount of such renewableenergy material is increasing by approximately 5% peryear while the power sector is continuing to growrapidly and so the market potential may well be muchgreater. Secondly, the effective use of such renewablefuels will avoid the uncontrolled burning of theagricultural residues in the fields, thereby avoidingmajor environmental pollution. Thirdly the use ofbiogenic wastes will reduce the landfill disposalrequirements for MSW, thereby reducing major damageto agricultural land and water courses close to cities.

The distribution and the routes for processing anddisposal vary with geographical location. The otherkey factor is the location of the coal-fired powerplants in relation to the sources of biomass andbiogenic wastes. The business case for introducingco-firing of biomass/biogenic waste into thecoal-fired power generation sector in China has beenquantified, with particular emphasis on cost effectivereduction of CO2 emissions, including CDM benefits.This has been based around a series of case studiesof the co-firing concept on representative coal-firedpower plants in China. From this, the potential marketimpact of this approach has been determined,including the scope for EU-China cooperation ontechnology choices and expertise.

Potential Benefits and Issues Arising for China

The study has shown that the various EU approachesto co-firing should have equal technical merit inChina. Thus there are no significant technical barriersto generating power by biomass co-firing and, on thebasis of EU studies, co-firing as an incrementalretrofit to an existing coal fired plant offers severaladvantages over power generation through directfiring of biomass in a dedicated plant. These includelower capital investment and a shorter constructionperiod, which will further result in a faster return oninvestment. From a Chinese perspective, biomassco-firing can provide societal benefits as it offersa route to utilisation rather than disposal ofagricultural residues, with additional employmentand income generation for the rural population.

At present, there are sufficient agricultural residuesand wood wastes available in China to support asignificant level of co-firing power generation, withvarious types of straw being the main optionsavailable. Therefore, in overall terms, the resourcesnecessary for biomass co-firing power generationcan be ensured on a sustainable basis althoughthere is increasing competition to use some ofthese agricultural wastes, which may limit powergeneration applications in certain regions.

However, while very small scale biomass powergeneration is starting to be established, with helpfrom Government financial incentives, co-firing hasnot yet been deployed extensively within the powersector. The economic assessment for biomass co-firingindicates the current level of uncertainty about thistechnique within China. The analyses show co-firing isa more expensive way of generating electricity thancoal alone. This is due to the additional capital

investment that is required for biomass preparationand feeding together with the slight decrease ingeneration efficiency as a result of biomass replacingcoal. In an ideal situation, these additional costswould be balanced by the biomass fuel costs beinglower than that for coal in order to support theswitch. However, the project studies suggest that thelikely biomass fuel costs would be higher than thisbalancing level and there would also be the costs oftransporting, storing and pre-treating the biomassmaterials to take into account. Therefore, biomassco-firing projects need financial support from thegovernment, which can be justified in line withseveral policy initiatives, including the generationof ‘green‘ electricity, the comprehensive utilisationof energy resources, and CO2 mitigation.

The studies undertaken by the EU-China consortiumhave assumed that co-firing projects can takeadvantage of the feed-in tariffs that are alreadyavailable to 100% biomass combustion projects.While this most certainly improves the financialattractiveness of the projects, in some cases furthersupport may be necessary, not least because there isevidence that in certain regions biomass prices mayeither rise steadily or be volatile, thereby creatinginvestment uncertainty. Such support could bethrough additional tax breaks as well as the use ofthe carbon markets, particularly with CDM as anadditional source of income.

However, the Government has declared that thebiomass component of the fuel feed should be atleast 80% by energy input for co-firing projects inorder to qualify for the improved feed-in tariff.This approach is driven by the Government’s lack ofconfidence that Chinese enterprises would be able toaccurately monitor and verify biomass use, to ensurethat co-firing would occur in line with declaredintentions. The 80% biomass level is technicallyinappropriate for coal fired power plant applications.Consequently, since enterprises cannot attain thepreferential tariff for the amount of electricitygenerated from biomass without monitoring andverification of the amount of biomass used, therehave been very few projects initiated. Therefore, thedevelopment of monitoring equipment and techniquesto accurately determine the amount of biomass to beused in co-firing projects is a critical stage for thedeployment of the technology.


Figure 2: 2 x 25 MWe retro-fitted CFB power plant(previously PC boilers) in Chi-zhou City of An-huiProvince. Steam parameters 130 tp.

Steam parameters 130 tph, 450°C and 38 bar. Net electricalefficiency is 28%. A case study is conducted on unit 1 witha fuel mix consisting of high quality bituminous coal and ricestraw, although normally the CFB boilers are operated withcoal mine waste.

Figure 3: The Zao-Zhuang South Suburb CHP Plant hastwo 50 MWe units with CFB boilers (steam 220 tn/h,540°C, 98 bar).

The plant supplies electric power, steam for industrial processesand hot water for space heating. Unit 1 became operational inOctober 2005 and Unit 2 in June 2006. The case study hasbeen conducted for unit 1 which uses bituminous coal andcoal refuse.

32

The other overall concern is the lack of knowledge and practical experience due to there being few actualexamples of co-firing in China, and consequently power plant operators are reluctant to get involved.This appears to be particularly the case for those operators of the newer, large (500MWe or bigger) power plantsin which the co-firing of a few percent of biomass with coal would actually be easier and more effective thantrying to fire a far greater proportion in a smaller, older unit.

In conclusion, it certainly appears that co-firing offers significant potential benefits to China. However, forthat potential to be realised, there is a need to establish a framework so that co-firing can compete withinthe power generation sector. This should include the need for:

• The Government to develop clear policy objectives for co-firing in China and to define the role thatco-firing should fill in meeting China's renewable energy targets. The EU has established a strong policyframework to support renewable energy usage, including co-firing, and there is considerable scope forcooperation with Chinese stakeholders.

• The Government to encourage equipment suppliers to cooperate with international organisations todevelop a monitoring and verification methodology to accurately measure the proportion of electricitygenerated from biomass in a co-firing plant. This is a critical issue but one in which EU companieshave considerable expertise that should be utilised to support China.

• The Government to consider how best to financially support co-firing. The range of measures might wellinclude the use of CDM, for which EU companies could provide assistance with the preparation of themethodology that could be used for developing a Chinese system.

• The Government should also consider establishing regional/ local biomass fuel supply companies toensure a sustainable biomass collection and supply function for co-firing applications. This would serveboth the farmers and the power plant operators who would need a reliable and cost effective means ofpurchasing, collecting and transporting the agricultural wastes to their power plants.

The latter point links to the need for China to decide how best to utilise its biomass resources in China.While there appears to be considerable quantities of suitable agricultural wastes available at present, there issome evidence that competition for some of these potential resources is increasing in certain provinces(through use in dedicated biomass power plants, paper making, animal litter, fodder). It would therefore beappropriate for the Government to consider whether co-firing should be limited to certain (significant) regionsof China where supplies can be sustained without massive competition from other applications. In this way,upward pressure on prices to obtain the agricultural residues would be limited.

It is also important that China determines, from a national and international perspective, that co-firing shouldnot be seen as a way to keep old, inefficient and polluting plants operating, irrespective of any perceivedsocietal benefits. In fact, it would be a better use of resources to co-use biomass in newer, more efficient,coal fired power plants.

The Way Forward

This report is being disseminated to EU and Chinese stakeholders and there will then be further initiativesto assist those stakeholders to establish cooperative opportunities, from which the basis for technologydemonstrations and subsequent deployment in China will be determined. These activities include workshops andspecific meetings for Chinese stakeholders, to be followed by various promotion and dissemination events forEU stakeholders. It is also recognised that ‘seeing is believing’ and a key part of this project will be an inwardmission to Europe by a selected party of Chinese industrialists and policymakers so that they can see and hearfirst hand of the EU successes with co-firing, thereby allowing them to determine how best to adapt the EUexperience to address the Chinese situation.


IEA Environmental Projects LimitedTel/Fax: +44 1452 857559Email: [email protected]

Prof Li DingkaiTsinghua UniversityBeijingCHINATel: +86 10 62781741Email: [email protected]

33

By Thomas Nussbaumer1,2, Norbert Klippel2, Linda Johansson3

1University of Applied Sciences Lucerne, Switzerland, 2Verenum Research, Switzerland,3SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden, Sweden

Survey ofMeasurements andEmission Factors ofParticulate Matter fromBiomass Combustionin IEA Countries

IntroductionBiomass combustion is related to high emissions of particulate matter smaller than10 microns (PM10). Since PM10 is regarded as a major indicator for the health relevanceof air pollution, more widespread use of biomass combustion is hindered by thedisadvantage of high PM emissions. IEA Bioenergy Task 32 (Biomass Combustion andCo-firing) recently funded a study on the development and implementation of technicallyand economically feasible measures for PM reduction. As a basis to set priorities for theimplementation of measures and as a guideline for future regulations, emission factorsfrom different types of combustion devices under different operation modes are needed.

To this end a survey on emission factors as reportedfrom the member countries of IEA Task 32 was carriedout. To collect information, a questionnaire was sentto all member countries. A total of 16 institutionsfrom seven countries, i.e., Austria, Denmark,Germany, Norway, The Netherlands, Sweden, andSwitzerland, participated in the survey.

The reported emission factors from manual woodcombustion devices exhibit huge ranges from lessthan 20 mg/MJ under ideal conditions up to morethan 5000 mg/MJ under poor conditions (data referto end energy indicated as lower heating value).Even national emission factors vary from less than100 mg/MJ (measured as solid particles in thechimney) up to almost 2000 mg/MJ (measured ina dilution tunnel) and shows that huge ranges arefound for manual wood combustion devices. Henceideal operation is regarded as a major target.

Furthermore, the implementation of heat storagetanks is regarded essential for log wood boilers.

As a variety of methods for sampling PMmeasurements can be used, the influence of thechosen sampling method, (i.e., hot filter probe,

quenching, and dilution tunnel) was looked at.Results from parallel measurements reveal, thatthe mass on solid particles in the hot flue gas(as collected on filters) and the additional mass ofcondensables need to be distinguished. Under poorcombustion conditions, the mass of condensablescan exceed the mass of solid particles and henceshould be considered in future emission inventories

1. Comparison of Different Measurement Techniques

For PM measurements, different sampling methods areapplied. Hence comparison of measurements performedaccording to different standards cannot be directlycompared. The paper discusses the comparison ofmeasurements of PM on heated filter probes thusresulting in solid particles (SP). In addition,condensable organic compounds can be detected byquenching the flue gas after filter in impinger bottles,thus resulting in condensables (C). Finally, PM aresampled on a filter in diluted flue gas as in a dilutiontunnel (DT), which results in all filterable solidparticles and most or all condensables, dependingon the conditions in the diluted flue gas.


Figure 4: The DaTang Shou-Yang-Shan Power Plantis located in Luo-Yang city of Henan province.

The plant includes 2x220 MWe units built in 1987/88 and2x300 MWe units built in 1995/96. There are plans to build2x600 MWe units. The case study has been conducted for unit1 (a tangentially boiler fired with bituminous coal, producing670 tph of steam(540°C and 137 bar) to generate 220 MWe).

34

Figure 1: Comparison of different sampling methods with total PM in the flue gas.

Figure 2: Comparison of PM emission factors on solid particles (SP), particles in dilution tunnel (DT), and solid particlesplus condensables from impinger (SPC) for wood stoves.

Figure 3: Ratio DT/SP and SPC/SP for wood stoves acc. to Figure 2.

Figure 4: Range of emission factors for PM measured as Solid Particles (SP) from worst to best (where available) forwood stoves depending on type of operation and/or equipment.

Figure 5: Range of emission factors for PM measured in Dilution Tunnel (DT) except for data from Verenum measured asSolid Particles and Condensables in impingers (SPC) from worst to best (where available) for wood stoves depending ontype of operation and/or equipment.

Explanations:

PM: Total Particulate Matter in flue gas atambient temperature.

SP: Filter (Method a) resulting in solid particles SP.

SPC: Filter + Impinger (Method b) resulting in solidparticles and condensables SPC.

DT: Dilution Tunnel (Method c) resulting in a PMmeasurement including SPC and most or all C.Hence DT is identical or slightly smaller than SPC+ C due to potentially incomplete condensationdepending on dilution ratio and samplingtemperature (since dilution reduces not onlythe temperature but also the partial pressureof contaminants).

*SO2 and other soluble gaseous compounds in the flue gas may bedissolved in the impingers.

**In case of determination of TOC in impingers, the mass of O, H,N, S and other elements contained in the organic condensablesneeds to be accounted for separately.

***Organic compounds which are liquid or solid at partial pressurein the flue gas and ambient temperature but volatileat sampling due to reduced partial pressure by dilution andtemperature above ambient.

Figure 1 shows the qualitative difference between the three sampling methods, i.e. hot filter only (SP),hot filter and impingers (SP+C), and dilution tunnel (DT).

To evaluate the influence of the sampling method, the contribution of condensables to the total PM emissionsis crucial. Hence measurements on wood stoves in Sweden and Switzerland were performed which allow anestimation of the influence of condensable organic matter available in the flue gas.

Figure 2 shows that the PM emission factor found in the dilution tunnel is significantly higher than the solid particleemissions detected in the chimney. The same is true for the data found including condensables in impingers.

Figure 3 illustrates the ratio of DT/SP in case of dilution tunnel and of SPC/SP in case of condensables foundin impingers. In one single case (Verenum stove 3) which corresponds to a high combustion quality resultingin low total PM emissions, the ratio SPC/SP is only slightly above 1 (≤ 1.1), while in all other cases with poorcombustion conditions (throttled air supply), the reported ratios DT/SP are between 2.5 and close to 10 (datafrom Sweden) and the ratios of SPC/SP are between 3 to 6 (Switzerland).

2. Results of PM Emission Factors for Wood Stoves

To enable a comparison of different measurements, all original data were transformed into mg/MJ. Furthermore,results from PM measurements on hot filters and results from dilution tunnels were distinguished, since theycannot be directly compared.

Figures 4 and 5 show the huge range of emission factors reported from different IEA countries.

35


Thomas NussbaumerVerenum, Langmauerstrasse 109,Zurich, CH – 8006, SwitzerlandTel: +41 1 377 70 70Fax: +41 1 377 70 77Email: [email protected]

36Comments and contributions are most welcome on any aspect of the contents.Please contact Emily Wakefield for further details or to send material. 37

Education and Training inBioenergy: An Investigation

of Offer and Demand atEuropean Level

36

Energy Prices and Taxes 2006 38

Diary of Events 42

Farewell from ThermalNet! 43

ThermalNet contents

Education and Trainingin Bioenergy:An Investigation of Offer and Demandat European LevelBy Leonardo Nibbi and David Chiaramonti, University of Florence, Italy

IntroductionThe implementation of effective and efficient Education and Training (E&T) in Bioenergyis a key element for its successful development. A large number of educational activitieson Renewable Energy in general and on Bioenergy in particular already exist in the EUand abroad. It is important to investigate how this education matches the real needsof the bioenergy industry and public sector stakeholders, and how it could be furthersatisfied. For this purpose two main activities have been considered in Work Package3C of the ThermalNet Project:

1. An overview of current and ongoing Education and Training activities

2. An investigation of the current educational needs of industry and the public sectors

In order to achieve these targets, two online surveys were developed in collaboration with ThermalNet experts andpartners which were implemented on the web in June 2006. The survey was disseminated widely, mostly via e-mail.For example more than 10,000 emails were sent to Universities/Research Centres/Industries operating in theBioenergy sector in order to invite targeted people to give their valuable contribution to the surveys.

The results discussed in this article are those collated from information collected up to December 31, 2007.

Investigation of Existing E&T in Bioenergy

Thirty-five people answered this survey, presenting44 existing education and training activities in thebioenergy field, thus providing a description of thecurrent market in bioenergy courses in Europe.

The survey found that the short seminars and shortcourses on bioenergy topics market is poorly served,in comparison to the growing market in renewableenergy and bioenergy masters courses.

The Bioenergy Network of Excellence (Bioenergy NoE)review of undergraduate, postgraduate and researchtraining in the EU has also drawn this conclusion.

The geographical locations of the surveyed courseswere located on a Google™ Maps layer available onthe web (www.crear.unifi.it/tnet/map.education.php)as shown in Figure 1.

Key Statistics

From the courses presented, most of them are currentlyactive and 79% of these active courses were activatedafter the year 2000. English language is the mostcommonly used for educational activities and coursesare mainly organised by High Schools and Universities.

Investigation of Educational Needs

A total number of 149 people, mostly from Europeancountries, answered the survey on educational needs.The survey is divided into five main sections.

The first section aimed to determine the personalprofile of the interviewee. The analysis of the answersof this section helped to work out the typical profile ofa person working in the Bioenergy sector. This wasfound to be: age class under 45; no specific BioenergyEducation; works in Consultancy, R&D or Educationalorganisation with more than 16 employees; company isactive at national or higher level. In particular, thetypical profile person is specifically active in Researchand Development.

The second section of the survey is a set of questionswhich aims to find out which target groups mostrequire education or training in the bioenergy field, andwhat kind of bioenergy courses are the most relevant toeach target group. The survey found that “Publicdecision makers” is the target group that mostly needsE&T in the bioenergy field (37% of the votes) and thatthe education should be provided in the form of ShortCourses. The result was the same from intervieweesworking in the Private and Public Sector.

A further target group that also has a greatrequirement in terms of education or training inthe bioenergy field is “Students” both in general andas a need from the Public Sector in particular; theBioenergy Course suggested as the most relevant for“Students” was Masters Courses.

Other target groups with a great requirement in termsof education or training in the bioenergy field are“Managers of Utilities / ESCOs / Energy Companies /etc.” as well as “Farmers” as perceived by the PrivateSector; the Bioenergy Course suggested as the mostrelevant for these target groups is the Short Seminar(Duration 1/2 days).

A summary of the results of this section is presentedwithin Table 1: target groups.

The third part of the survey points out that there iscurrently a problem in finding employees with relevantbioenergy know-how, but there is the perception thatthis difficulty should decrease in the next 5-10 years.This fact reveals positive expectations for the futureavailability of workers with a bioenergy background;this is equally perceived and highlighted by both thePublic and Private Sector.

The fourth section collated suggestions on how E&T inthe bioenergy sector could be qualitatively improved tobetter fit the needs of the labour market. In general,results showed that the theme of bioenergy should beintegrated with education on other renewable energysources or on the rational use of energy and theseissues should be included at Undergraduate Courselevel. At all levels, general bioenergy issues arenecessary for the improvement of Bioenergy education.Postgraduate (Master and Ph.D.) courses should focuson energy conversion, biomass production, cost,technology and sustainability assessment as wellas on the LCA applied to bioenergy.

75% of courses last more than 1 month; 37% lastmore than 6 months; distance learning is not wellrepresented (10%), only 23% of courses surveyedinclude an industrial placement stage, 86% of courseshave an exam at course conclusion and 95% of courseshas a final certification (ECTS, Certificate etc.).

Figure 1: Geographical locations of the surveyed courses.

Table 1. Summary of results (target groups).


38

Interviewees also declared that when recruiting junior research staff, they focus initially on graduates, then onthose who have qualified with an M.Sc. or PhD.

Both the Public and Private sector perceived almost identical Bioenergy E&T needs in general.

The last section of the survey asked how many interviewees and/or their companies could directly contributeto E&T in Bioenergy and how. Most of them were available for support in various ways (providing teachers orprojects, advertising or organisation) but only a very low percentage were available for financial support.

These survey results may also help in the identification of new education & training curricula based on theneeds from the operators, which was one of the expected outcomes of the ThermalNet Project. These curriculashould be implemented based on the following guidelines:

• Undergraduate education; it is necessary to implement bioenergy issues at undergraduate level; withinthis E&T activity particular attention should be devoted to general bioenergy topics, with specific careto energy conversion, environmental issues and biomass production topics

• Postgraduate education; education at this level should be implemented mostly in the form of MastersCourses. It should be specifically devoted to energy conversion issues, then it should focus on biomassproduction, cost and technology assessment, biofuels, legislation, LCA, sustainability and market

• Targeted education; Public Decision Makers, Technicians, Professionals, Farmers, Investors etc. shouldbe addressed by an educational approach managed by Short Seminars or Courses (lasting maximum oneweek) targeted on the basis of the group attending the course

Cross Comparison of Survey Results

A cross comparison of the results from both surveys has also been performed. The most important result of thiscomparison is the poor market for short seminars and short courses on bioenergy topics in comparison to thegrowing market in renewable energy and bioenergy masters' courses. For each target group which most requireseducation or training in the bioenergy field, it was suggested that education should be in the form of shortseminars (Duration 1/2 days). It will therefore be important at EU level to concentrate efforts in the creationof short courses rather than on Masters courses.

The complete results of the surveys are available online on the ThermalNet website devoted to Educationand Training Work Package 3C (www.crear.unifi.it/tnet).

The authors would like to acknowledge the European Commission Intelligent Energy for Europe Programme fortheir support.


Leonardo NibbiUniversity of FlorenceCREAR, c/o Department of Energetics “Sergio Stecco”Via S. Marta, 3 - 50139 FirenzeITALYTel: +39 055 4796436Fax: +39 055 4796342Email: [email protected]

Energy Pricesand Taxes 2006By Dr. John Brammer, Aston University, UK

Notes• Average end-use prices over 2006, except *2005, **2004• All liquid fuel prices in Euro per 1000 litres• All gas and electricity prices in Euro per 100 kWh (or cents per kWh), gas on GCV basis• All currency conversions based on exchange rates only 1 Euro = 1.255 US$• Average crude oil spot price in 2006: 50.8 Euro/bbl, 319 Euro/1000 lit

Principal source: IEA Energy Prices and Taxes, 4th Quarter 2007 (ISSN 0256-2332)Brazil omitted as no data available

39

Country Heavy Fuel Oil Light Fuel Oil (Industry) Light Fuel Oil (Domestic)

ex-tax tax total ex-tax tax total ex-tax tax total

Austria 258 66 324 364 108 472 463 222 685Belgium 256 15 271 458 18 477 458 119 577Canada – – 257 – – 410 518 59 577Denmark 289 47 336 564 29 594 529 484 1013Finland 284 58 342 457 71 527 457 187 643France 270 18 288 448 57 504 486 163 649Germany 263 24 287 443 61 504 443 142 585Greece 262* 18* 280* 459* 133* 592* 459* 239* 698*Ireland 372 13 385 502 47 549 574 131 706Italy 300 30 331 528 403 930 528 589 1117Japan 415 21 436 378 19 397 – – –Netherlands 288 31 319 – – – 526 356 881Norway – – – 550 118 668 550 285 835Portugal 370 15 385 – – – 527 166 693Spain 321 14 335 446 85 531 446 170 616Sweden 337 384 722 430 60 489 486 576 1062Switzerland 266 3 269 438 5 442 463 40 503United Kingdom 246 89 336 399 96 495 416 122 538United States 254 13 267 366 19 384 494 16 511

Fuel OilsEuros per 1000 litres

Heavy fuel oil is low sulphur, except Canada and Ireland (high sulphur) and US (unspecified)Heavy fuel oil density 0.97 kg/l

Prices for Heavy Fuel Oil

Prices for Light Fuel (Domestic)

Prices for Light Fuel (Industry)

40

Country Diesel (Commercial) Diesel (Non-commercial) Gasoline

ex-tax tax total ex-tax tax total ex-tax tax total

Austria 322 335 657 506 503 1009 483 608 1091Belgium 561 331 892 561 518 1079 526 827 1353Canada 508 169 678 – – – 509 221 730Denmark 511 366 877 511 586 1097 488 798 1285Finland 519 319 838 518 504 1022 468 820 1288France 485 417 902 485 594 1079 445 792 1237Germany 493 470 963 492 624 1116 456 833 1289Greece 496* 245* 741* 496* 378* 874* 448* 430* 878*Ireland 537 368 905 537 558 1095 480 637 1117Italy 557 414 971 557 608 1165 507 778 1285Japan 395 251 646 527 257 785 529 413 941Netherlands 542 371 913 542 545 1087 513 902 1415Norway 624 435 1058 624 699 1323 531 892 1423Portugal 539 430 969 539 522 1061 526 784 1310Spain 522 294 816 522 425 947 483 537 1020Sweden 567 396 963 567 637 1204 455 788 1243Switzerland 468 485 953 543 564 1107 504 541 1045United Kingdom 496 693 1189 496 901 1397 448 892 1340United States 473 97 571 473 97 571 480 84 563

Transport FuelsEuros per 1000 litres

Gasoline is unleaded, premium 95 RON except Japan (regular 91 RON)Diesel is automotive, commercial is business price, non-commercial is individual consumer price.

Prices for Diesel (Commercial)

Prices for Gasoline

Prices for Diesel (Non-Commercial)

Prices for Natural Gas Prices for Electricity

Notes• Average end-use prices over 2006, except *2005, **2004• All liquid fuel prices in Euro per 1000 litres• All gas and electricity prices in Euro per 100 kWh

(or cents per kWh), gas on GCV basis• All currency conversions based on exchange rates

only 1 Euro = 1.255 US$• Average crude oil spot price in 2006: 50.8 Euro/bbl,

319 Euro/1000 lit

Principal source: IEA Energy Prices and Taxes, 4th Quarter 2007 (ISSN 0256-2332)Brazil omitted as no data available

Country Natural Gas (Industry) Natural Gas (Domestic)

ex-tax tax total ex-tax tax total

Austria – – – 3.89 1.49 5.38Belgium – – – – – –Canada – – 1.86 – – 3.30Denmark – – – 4.35* 4.32* 8.67*Finland 1.53 0.17 1.70 1.52 0.54 2.06France 2.73 0.10 2.82 4.12 0.73 4.84Germany – – – – – –Greece 2.16* – 2.16* 3.82* 0.33* 4.16*Ireland 3.19 – 3.19 5.54 0.75 6.28Italy 2.71 0.41 3.11 4.13 2.29 6.42Japan 2.84 0.14 2.98 8.08 0.40 8.49Netherlands – – – 4.13 2.03 6.17Norway – – – – – –Portugal 2.73 – 2.73 6.73 0.34 7.06Spain 2.43 – 2.43 4.47 0.72 5.19SwedenSwitzerland 3.32 0.02 3.34 4.85 0.39 5.25United Kingdom 2.56 0.07 2.63 4.20 0.21 4.41United States – – 2.06 – – 3.64

GasEuros per 100 kWh or Euro cents per kWh.

Country Electricity (Industry) Electricity (Domestic)

ex-tax tax total ex-tax tax total

Austria 6.70 2.00 8.70 9.40 4.50 13.90Belgium – – – – – –Canada 3.98* 0.47* 4.45* 5.49* 0.60* 6.09*Denmark 7.04** 0.67** 7.72** 11.60 14.07 25.67Finland 5.21* 0.45* 5.66* 7.62 2.58 10.20France 3.59 0.45 4.04 8.61 2.85 11.46Germany 7.51 – 7.51 15.23 2.44 17.67Greece 5.39* – 5.39* 8.30* 0.73* 9.03*Ireland 9.70 – 9.70 14.00 1.90 15.90Italy 13.00 3.70 16.70 13.00 5.00 18.00Japan 8.61 0.72 9.33 13.24 0.95 14.19Netherlands 12.14 8.42 20.56Norway 3.53 0.88 4.41 8.69 3.80 12.49Portugal 8.80 – 8.80 14.00 0.70 14.70Spain 6.93 0.35 7.28 10.77 2.36 13.13Sweden – – – – – –Switzerland 6.40 – 6.40 9.67 0.74 10.41United Kingdom 8.98 0.34 9.32 14.15 0.70 14.85United States 4.82 – – 8.27 – –

ElectricityEuros per 100 kWh or Euro cents per kWh.

41


Dr John BrammerAston UniversityBioenergy Research GroupSchool of Engineering & Applied ScienceAston TriangleBirminghamB4 7ETTel: +44 (0)121 204 3380Fax: +44 (0)121 204 36820Email: [email protected]

Biomass '08 Technical WorkshopDate: 15th – 16th July 2008Venue: The Alerus Center, Grand Forks,

North DakotaWebsite: www.undeerc.org/biomass08

Renewable Energy 2008 Tokyo FairDate: 30th July 2008 – 1st August 2008Venue: Tokyo Big Sight, JapanWebsite: www.renewableenergy.jp/english/

index.htmlContact: RENEWABLE ENERGY 2008 TOKYO

FAIR Show Office2-2-2 KandaTsukasa-cho, Chiyoda-ku,Tokyo101-0048 Japan

Tel: 81-3-5297-8855Fax: 81-3-5294-0909Email: [email protected]

Southeast Bioenergy Conference 2008Date: 12 – 14th August 2008Venue: The University of Georgia, Tifton,

Georgia, USAWebsite: www.sebioenergy.org/index.htmlContact: Evelyn FoldsEmail: [email protected]: +1 (229) 386-7274Fax: +1 (229) 386-7371

IIRWM 2008 - India InternationalRecyclye & Waste Management ExhibitionDate: 16th – 18th August 2008Venue: Pratai Maidan, New Delhi, IndiaWebsite: www.iirwm.com/index.phpContact: Indian Recycle & Waste Management

Company27M/1 Zamrudpur,New Delhi - 110 048, INDIA

Tel: 0091-11-29231868/6563764Fax: 0091-11-29235871Email: [email protected]

International Bioenergy & BioproductsConferenceDate: 27 – 29th August 2008Venue: Doubletree Hotel & Executive

Conference Centre, Portland, OR USAWebsite: www.tappi.org/s_tappi/doc_events.

asp?CID=11315&DID=558506Email: [email protected]: 800.332.8686 (US);

800.446.9431 (Canada);+1.770.446.1400 (worldwide)

Fax: +1.770.209.7206

Forest Bioenergy - Fuels Supply Chains 2008Date: 28th – 30th August 2008Venue: FinlandWebsite: www.bioforest.finbioenergy.fi/

default.asp?SivuID=24109

Chempor 2008: 10th International Conferenceon Chemical & Biological EngineeringDate: 4th – 8th September 2008Venue: University of Minho, Braga, PortugalWebsite: www.deb.uminho.pt/chempor2008

2008 Conference of the InternationalBiochar InitiativeBiochar, Sustainability and Security in a Changing Climate

Date: 8th – 10th September 2008Venue: Newcastle, UKWebsite: www.biochar-international

.org/ibi2008conference.html

Global Waste Management SymposiumDate: 7th – 10th September 2008Venue: Copper Mountain Conference Centre,

Colorado, USAWebsite: www.wastesymposium.com

/gws2008/public/enter.aspx

Bioenergy AmericaDate: 9 – 10th September 2008Venue: Buenos Aires, ArgentinaWebsite: www.greenpowerconferences.com

/biofuelsmarkets/bioenergy_americas.htmlTel: +44 207 801 6333

ECOWOOD 2008 - International Conference& Exhibition on Environmentally CompatibleForest ProductsDate: 10th – 12th September 2008Venue: Fernando Pessoa University, Oporto,

PortugalWebsite: homepage.ufp.pt/ecowood/

Utilising African Capacity to ProduceSustainable BiofuelsDate: 17th – 18th September 2008Venue: Kilimanjaro Hotel Kempinski, Dar es

Salaam, TanzaniaEmail: [email protected]: 0044 207 801 6333Fax: 0044 207 900 1853Web: www.greenpowerconferences.com

/biofuelsmarkets/biofuelsmarkets_eastafrica.html

The Recycling & Waste Management ShowDate: 16th – 18th September 2008Venue: NEC Birmingham, UKWebsite: www.rwminfo.com/page.cfm

/Link=152/t=m/goSection=25

4th International Conference on“Biomass for Energy”Date: 22nd – 24th September 2008Venue: Kiev, UkraineWebsite: www.biomass.kiev.ua/conf2008/

index.php?lang=en

IAWPS International Symposium onWood Science & TechnologyDate: 27th – 29th September 2008Venue: Northeast Forestry University,

Harbin, ChinaWebsite: iawps2008.woodlab.org/front.cfmTel: +86-451-82190134Email: [email protected]

International Seminar on GasificationDate: 9 – 10 October 2008Venue: Malmo, SwedenWebsite: www.sgc.se/gasification/Email: [email protected]: Swedish Gas Centre,

Scheelegatan 3,SE-212 28, MalmöSweden

Tel: +46 40 680 07 60Fax: +46 40 680 07 69

RENEXPO 2008Date: 9th – 12th October 2008Venue: Trade Fair Center Augsburg, GermanyWebsite: www.renexpo.de/%20class=

Energy from Biomass and WasteDate: 14th – 16th October 2008Venue: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USAWebsite: www.ebw-expo.com/

International Conference and Trade Fairon Hydrogen and Fuel Cell TechnologiesDate: 22nd – 23rd October 2008Venue: CCH – Congress Center

Hamburg, GermanyWebsite: www.hamburg-messe.de

/H2Expo/h2_en/start_main.php

Alternative Sources of Energy for Big CitiesDate: 23 – 24th October 2008Venue: Moscow City Hall Building,

Moscow, RussiaWebsite: www.alterenergy2008.ru (registration)

www.iahe.org/journal (paper guidelines)Tel: +7 (495) 915-2007, 915 0349Fax: +7 (495) 915-0935Address: PO Box 45, 109247, Moscow, RussiaEmail: [email protected]

(sending papers)[email protected](registration)

8th Pellets Industry ForumDate: 28th – 29th October 2008Venue: Stuttgart, GermanyWebsite: www.pelletsforum.de/

National Renewable Energy MarketingConferenceDate: 26th – 29th October 2008Venue: Marriott City Centre, Denver, USAWebsite: www.renewableenergymarketing.net/

World Ethanol 2008Date: 3 – 6 November 2008Venue: Le Meridien Montparnasse Hotel,

ParisTel: +44 (0) 207 017 7499Email: [email protected]: www.agra-net.com/worldethanol

ETH EnergieTage Hessen 2008Date: 7th – 9th November 2008Venue: Stadthalle Wetzlar, GermanyWebsite: www.energietage.com

Venice 2008 - 2nd International Symposiumon Energy from Biomass and WasteDate: 17th – 20th November 2008Venue: Venice, ItalyEmail: [email protected]

(for abstracts)Email: [email protected]

(for conference info)Website: www.venicesymposium.it

International Conference on BiomassTechnologies (ICBT2008)Date: 29th November – 1st December 2008Venue: Guangzhou, ChinaEmail: [email protected]

(for paper submissions)Website: www.newenergy.com.cn

/gz/index.asp

5th International Conference on Combustion,Incineration/Pyrolysis and Emission Control(i-CIPEC2008)Date: 16th – 19th December 2008Venue: Chiang Mai, ThailandWebsite: www.me.kmitnb.ac.th/~icipecContact: Dr Somrat Kerdsuwan

(i-CIPEC Program Coordinator)Email: [email protected]

CEP (Clean Energy Power) 09Date: 29th – 31st January 2009Venue: Neue Messe Stuttgart, GermanyWebsite: www.cep-expo.de/

index.php?id=7&L=1Tel: +49 (0) 7121 30 16 - 0Fax: +49 (0) 7121 30 16 - 100Email: [email protected]

Asia-Pacific Power and EnergyEngineering Conference (APPEEC 2009)Date: 28th – 30th March 2009Venue: Wuhan, ChinaWebsite: www.srpublishing.org/

appeec2009Submission/website/appeec/index.aspx

Email: [email protected]

World Renewable Energy Congress 2009 -Asia RegionDate: 19th – 22nd May 2009Venue: BITEC Exhibition Center,

Bangkok, ThailandWebsite: www.thaiexhibition.com/

wrec2009asia/default.asp

Waste-Tech 2009Date: 2nd June – 5th June 2009Venue: International Exhibition Center,

Crocus Expo, Moscow, RussiaContact: Dr. Sergey Malygin,

Waste Tech Team,PO Box 105, Moscow 105062Russia

Tel/Fax: +7 495 225 5986Email: [email protected]: www.waste-tech.ru

Diary of Events

Farewell fromThermalNet!

Compiled by Emily Wakefield, Aston University, UK

42

This is the final issue of the ThermalNet newsletter. We hope that you have enjoyed thispublication and thank you for your contributions and comments.

We are sorry to announce that the proposal to continue the ThermalNet project for a furtherthree years has not been approved for funding by the EC.

PyNe will continue until the end of 2008 and hopefully beyond as an IEA Bioenergy Task.

Gasification and Combustion will continue in IEA Tasks 32 and 33.

Previous issues of the newsletter will still be available on the ThermalNet websitewww.thermalnet.co.uk. If you would like a hard copy of any past issues of ThermalNet orPyNe newsletters please contact Emily Wakefield (see inside front cover for contact details).

Final reports from each of the Work Packages within ThermalNet will be compiled andpublished- further details will be available on the ThermalNet website in due course.

Thank you to all project partners and experts who have contributed to the ThermalNetproject and to the EC Intelligent Energy Europe Programme managed by the Executive Agencyfor Competitiveness and Innovation (EACI) and to IEA Bioenergy for their support.

43

Documents

ThermalNet Work Package Leaders ISSUE06 - European … · By Jennifer Holmgre na, Richard Marinangelia, Terry Marke ra, Michael McCalla*, John Petria, Stefan Czernikb, Douglas Elliot