Biomass CHP

1
Biomass CHP best practiceConclusions and
recommendations

• Anders Evald, Janet Witt, Kati Veijonen
• Harrie Knoef, Johan Vinterbäck, Elvira Lutter
• Vienna 9 March 2006

2
Project aims

• Promote biomass CHP in Europe and highlight
  plants with the best operation
• Provide e.g. authorities and future plant owners
  with information about typical plant performance
  and about best available technologies.
• Enable benchmarking, identify the improvement
  potential of the existing European CHP plants
• Replicate best practices
• Challenge collect reliable data

3
Different technolgies covered

• 19 biogas and landfill gas plants
• 4 gasification plants
• 10 CFB (circulating fluidized bed) plants
• 11 BFB (bubbling fluidized bed) plants
• 15 grate-fired steam boiler plants using
  uncontaminated biomass
• 8 grate-fired steam boiler plants using municipal
  solid
• waste (MSW) as a fuel
• 1 dust fired steam boiler plant

4
Fuels covered

• Solid biomass
• Forest fuels
• Forest industry by-products such as bark, sawdust
  etc.
• Wood pellets
• Agricultural residues such as straw, husk etc.
• Municipal solid waste
• Landfill gas
• Manure etc. for biogas plants
• Fossil fuels
• Heavy fuel oil
• Natural gas
• Coal

5
Key performance indicators

• availability
• utilisation period
• total efficiency
• fuel input biofuels vs. fossil fuels
• nominal efficiency vs. operational efficiency
• own power consumption
• total efficiency on monthly basis

6
Gasification plantsUtilization factor the
extent, to which installed power is
utilisedAvailability factor the extent, to
which the plant is available for operation
7
(No Transcript)
8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10
Gratefired boiler plants
11
(No Transcript)
12
Ranked to increasing capacity
13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
Cross technology comparison
16
Plant size
17
Electric efficiency
18
Total efficiency
19
Utilization
20
Availability
21
Conclusions and recommendations

• Bigger is better
• Higher efficicency
• Lower own consumption
• Better availability
• Lower specific investment
• But constrained by heat marked, and not
  necessarily true for biogas plants

22
Capacity and utilization

• Plants are bigger than simply justified by the
  heat market
• High electricity price
• Optimizing tariff income
• Heat accumulator
• Plants built for the future
• Plant nominal capacity is too optimistic very
  few plant perform anywhere near their anticipated
  (nominal) efficiency in practical operation
• Economic optimization
• Not too small
• Not too big
• Low utilization poor payback on invested
  capital

23
CHP or not CHP

• Many plants are not 100 dependent on heat market
  (combined heat and power only as a fraction)
• German biogas plants produce very little heat,
  and they dont meassure it
• Premium price for electricity not allways require
  full combined production
• Incentive for RE, but not for the most efficient
  RE
• Large plants (MSW) cannot connect enough heat
  demand

24
Balancing heat and power

• Energy efficiency electricity is the premium
  product heat is a by-product
• Valid also money-wise
• But not allways nordic heat markets show high
  value for heat
• Industrial facilities might see steam as the main
  product and electricity as a byproduct

25
Choosing the right technology

• Large difference in electric efficiency
• Low electric efficiency is compensated by more
  heat
• Heat market set the framework
• Steam cycles go for high steam data
• Retrofitting old equipment to improve efficiency
  and reduce own consumption

26
Industrial systems

• A more fragile heat market
• Industries change
• Operated according to steam demand less power
  and low utilization

27
Reducing own consumption

• Big difference depending on choice of technology
• Option for improvement in old plants
• Low efficiency lead to high own concumption

28
Operational problems

• New challenges for plant operators
• Fuel quality problems (feed systems, moisture
  content, flue gas fans etc.)
• Sintering bed material
• Fouling heat transfer surfaces
• Decrease efficiency and high temperature
  corrosion
• Result lower efficiencies, higher maintenance
• Exchange experience!

29
Some concluding remarks 1

• Technology implemented must be mature
• Proven prototype models
• Long-term duration tests
• Adequate infrastructure
• Local manufacturing capacity
• After-sale service
• Training facilities
• Sustainable feedstock supply
• Motivated skilled labor
• Operators, Management
• Incentives

30
Some concluding remarks 2

• Information knowledge exchange
• Performance, limitations, opportunities
• Evaluation with competing options
• Set-up monitoring program of successes in India,
  China
• Clear regulations
• Permitting procedures
• Emission according to ALARP
• Health, Safety Environment
• Sale of electricity and heat
• Any legal obstacle should be removed
• Long-term fixed price is prerequisite

31
Some concluding remarks 3

• Product quality must meet client specifications
• Technical performance
• Financial/economic performance
• Operational performance
• Gaining confidence
• Certification
• stimulation
• product must meet defined quality standards
• Scale-up, demonstration, replication,
  optimization
• Economy of numbers (instead of economy of scale)
• Reduced capital costs
• Improvement from learning by doing

32
Some concluding remarks 4

• Do not repeat the mistakes from the past
• learning by doing and not by a scientific
  approach (cooperation is prefered)
• too optimistic approach of the economics,
  efficiency and availability, projections 7000
  hrs of operation in 1st year
• no optimal cooperation of the ownership-consortium
  and conflicting interests (who is responsible
  for what).
• Manufacturer versus plant owner
• Plant owner/technology supplier versus permitting
  authority

33
Health, Safety Environment
www.gasification-guide.eu
34
Success stories CHP gasifiers 1

• More than 5 installed systems
• Bioneer district heating
• Co-firing at power stations
• Biomass engineering, UK
• Eqtec, Spain
• Xylowatt, BE
• Mothermik, DE
• Pyroforce, CH
• Güssing concept, AT
• Volund (DK, DE, Japan, Italy))
• India, China (thousands, but unfavourable
  emissions)

35
Success stories 2
36
Success stories 3
37
Thank you for your attention!

Harrie Knoef BTG biomass technology group
BV www.btgworld.com Knoef_at_btgworld.com Ph
31-53-4861190