Upload
becky-laplant
View
1.583
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Presented by Dr. Steve Bratkovich at the April 29 Forest Biomass Harvesting Stakeholder Forum, Eveleth, MN
Citation preview
Woody Biomass for Energy in Minnesota:
Consumption and Availability
April 29, 2008
Dr. Steve BratkovichDovetail Partners, Inc.www.dovetailinc.org
Woody Biomass for Energy in Minnesota:
Consumption and Availability
• Energy from biomass – exciting options for Minnesota
• Biomass availability – several studies• Current biomass consumption• A need for better information
Dovetail Partners: Who Are We?
Dovetail Partners’ mission is to provide authoritative information about the impacts and trade-offs
of environmental decisions, including consumption choices,
land use, and policy alternatives.
www.dovetailinc.org
Energy from Biomass: Exciting Opportunities for
Minnesota
Energy from Biomass: Exciting Opportunities for
Minnesota• Minnesota is currently one of the
nation’s leading producers of ethanol and biodiesel.
Energy from Biomass: Exciting Opportunities for
Minnesota• Minnesota is currently one of the
nation’s leading producers of ethanol and biodiesel. Current production is based on corn starch and soybean oil.
Ethanol Production and Consumption in Minnesota
1990-2007
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
Production Consumption
Source: Minnesota Department of Commerce (2008).
Net
exp
ort
s
Energy from Biomass: Exciting Opportunities for
Minnesota• Minnesota is currently one of the
nation’s leading producers of ethanol and biodiesel. Current production is based on corn starch and soybean oil.
• Technologies allowing production of ethanol, biodiesel, biobutanol, and other liquid fuels from woody biomass are under development.
Energy from Biomass: Exciting Opportunities for
Minnesota• Minnesota is currently one of the
nation’s leading producers of ethanol and biodiesel. Current production is based on corn starch and soybean oil.
• Technologies allowing production of ethanol, biodiesel, biobutanol, and other liquid fuels from woody biomass are under development. Forest biomass will soon be a preferred raw material.
Ethanol Production and Consumption in Minnesota
1990-2030
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Production Consumption
Source: Minnesota Department of Commerce (2008).
Million
Gallon
s
Biomass Availability in Minnesota – Results of
Several Studies
Availability of Biomass for Energy Production in Minnesota, Based on ONRL
1999 Study*
Resource
Quantity Available(000 dry tons/year)
Quantity Available Without Ag. Residues
(000 dry tons/year)
<$30/t <$40/t <$50/t <$30/t <$40/t <$50/t
Forest residues 468 682 875
468 682 875
Mill residues (wd) 71 916 1,121
71 916 1,121
Ag. residues 0 11,936 11,936
Energy crop pot. 0 427 5,783
0 427 5,783
Urban wd waste 1,533 1,533 1,533
1,533 1,533 1,533
Total 2,072 15,494 21,248
2,072 3,558 9,312*Walsh et al. 1999.
Current biomass prices in Minnesota are about $25 /green ton
($50/dry ton).
Availability of Biomass for Energy Production in Minnesota, Based on ONRL
1999 Study*
Resource
Quantity Available(000 dry tons/year)
Quantity Available Without Ag. Residues
(000 dry tons/year)
<$30/t <$40/t <$50/t <$30/t <$40/t <$50/t
Forest residues 468 682 875
468 682 875
Mill residues (wd) 71 916 1,121
71 916 1,121
Ag. residues 0 11,936 11,936
Energy crop pot. 0 427 5,783
0 427 5,783
Urban wd waste 1,533 1,533 1,533
1,533 1,533 1,533
Total 2,072 15,494 21,248
2,072 3,558 9,312*Walsh et al. 1999.
Biomass Resources in Minnesota by Three Studies
Source of Biomass
Biomass in Resources from ORNL database (tons/year
at < $50/ton)
Biomass Resources from NREL GIS Group (tons/year)
Biomass Resource est. from
1997 Institute for Local Self-Reliance
(tons/year)
Forest residue
874,900 - -
Mill residue 1,121,000 1,017,688 571,960
Agricultural residue
11,935,896
40,709,527
22,040,438
Energy crops
5,783,002 - -
Urban wood waste
1,532,529
-
-
Total 21,247,327 41,727,215 22,612,398
Source: NREL (2005)
Biomass Source
Current
Near-Term Achievable
Future Potential
NotesDry tons/yr. Dry tons/yr. Dry tons/yr.
Roundwood 0 1,495,000 1,495,000 Current 3.7 m cord harvest; future 5.5m
Harvest Residues
750,000 1,155,000 1,155,000 Residues from specified harvest level
Red Pine Thinning
184,000 310,500 409,400 50% of volume in 1st thinning assumed fuelwood
Aspen Thinning 0 0 1,000,000 100,000 ac. @ 10 tons/ac.
Brushlands 0 400,000 400,000
Energy Crops 0 0 5,600,000 3.5 tons/ac/yr yield, 1.6 million acres
Total 934,000 3,360,500 10,059,400Berguson, NRRI 2007.
NRRI Study of Minnesota Forest-based Biomass Availability for Energy
Production
Oak Ridge National Laboratory Study: 3,558,000 9,312,000
$40/ton $50/ton
Biomass Source
Current
Near-Term Achievable
Future Potential
NotesDry tons/yr. Dry tons/yr. Dry tons/yr.
Roundwood 0 1,495,000 1,495,000 Current 3.7 m cord harvest; future 5.5m
Harvest Residues
750,000 1,155,000 1,155,000 Residues from specified harvest level
Red Pine Thinning
184,000 310,500 409,400 50% of volume in 1st thinning assumed fuelwood
Aspen Thinning 0 0 1,000,000 100,000 ac. @ 10 tons/ac.
Brushlands 0 400,000 400,000
Energy Crops 0 0 5,600,000 3.5 tons/ac/yr yield, 1.6 million acres
Total 934,000 3,360,500 10,059,400Berguson, NRRI 2007.
NRRI Study of Minnesota Forest-based Biomass Availability for Energy
Production
Note the large assumed contribution of energy crops (plantations) to future woody biomass supply. This will require planning, investment. Without energy crops, future availability is only 3.4 million dry tons annually.
Current Consumption of Biomass in Minnesota
Biomass consumption data courtesy of:
Mimi Barzen, MN Dept of Natural
Resources, Grand Rapids, and Calder Hibbard, University of
Minnesota, St. Paul.
Consumption figures presented for four regions:
• St Paul/Rosemount/Sartell/Little Falls/Benson/ Collegeville.
• Grand Rapids/Mountain Iron/Virginia/Hibbing/ /Hoyt Lakes/Marcell/Deer River/Bemidji.
• Duluth/Superior/Cloquet/Ashland/Park Falls.
• International Falls/Fort Francis/Grand Marais/ Thunder Bay
Biomass consumption estimates from Mimi Barzen, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Grand Rapids, and Calder Hibbard, University of
Minnesota, St. Paul.
1,270,000 - 1,320,000 gt/yr.
Current Woody Biomass Consumption in and near Minnesota
769,000 gt/yr.
520,000 –gt/yr.
320,000 – 380,000 gt/yr.
Biomass consumption estimates from Mimi Barzen, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Grand Rapids, and Calder Hibbard, University of
Minnesota, St. Paul.
Current Woody Biomass Consumption in and Near Minnesota
3,000,000 – 3,120,000 gt/yr.
1.5 – 1.6 million dry tons/yr.
Biomass consumption estimates from Mimi Barzen, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Grand Rapids, and Calder Hibbard, University of
Minnesota, St. Paul.
Current Woody Biomass Consumption in Minnesota
If considering consumption within the
borders of Minnesota only, then this number becomes
2,000,000 – 2,050,000 gt/yr.
1.0 – 1.1 million dry tons/yr.
Biomass consumption estimates from Mimi Barzen, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Grand Rapids, and Calder Hibbard, University of
Minnesota, St. Paul.
1,300,000 - 1,350,000 gt/yr.
Current and Announced Woody Biomass Consumption in and near
Minnesota1,519,000 gt/yr.
910,000 –gt/yr.
579,000 – 879,000 gt/yr.
Biomass consumption estimates from Mimi Barzen, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Grand Rapids, and Calder Hibbard, University of
Minnesota, St. Paul.
Current and Announced Woody Biomass Consumption in and Near
Minnesota
4,600,000 – 4,650,000 gt/yr.
2.3 million dry tons/yr.
Biomass consumption estimates from Mimi Barzen, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Grand Rapids, and Calder Hibbard, University of
Minnesota, St. Paul.
Current and Announced Woody Biomass Consumption in Minnesota
Again, if considering consumption within the
borders of Minnesota only, then this number becomes
2,800,000 gt/yr.
1.4 million dry tons/yr.
A comparison of current consumption of woody biomass
for energy production with estimates of biomass availability suggests considerable potential
for expansion.
Compare current Minnesota consumption (1.0 mdt/yr.) and current
plus developing consumption (1.4 mdt/yr.) with the following estimates
that do not include volumes from energy crops or plantations:
3.1 mdt/yr – NREL ($40/ton)
3.5 mdt/yr – NREL ($50/ton)
3.4 mdt/yr – Berguson near termPotential exists for about 2.5X expansion if all estimates are correct, and all volumes
identified are realistically available.
Also, compare current Minnesota consumption (1.0 mdt/yr.) and current
plus developing consumption (1.4 mdt/yr.) with the following estimates that do include volumes from energy
crops or plantations:
3.6 mdt/yr – NREL ($40/ton)
9.3 mdt/yr – NREL ($50/ton)
10.1 mdt/yr – Berguson future
In this case a 6 to 7-fold expansion might be possible.
Conclusions:
• It would appear, based on various estimates of biomass availability and recent estimates of consumption, that there is room for significant expansion of biomass consumption for energy production. The greatest expansion potential is linked to plantation development.
Conclusions:
• If full biomass energy potential from woody biomass is to be realized, planning and investment in dedicated tree plantations for energy development will be needed. It is not too early to embark on this process.
Conclusions:
• In areas where significant volumes of woody biomass and agricultural residues both exist, development of facilities capable of handling both types of biomass should be considered; this possibility significantly increases the potential for biomass energy development in some regions.
Conclusions:
• All current use and announced expansions involve production of electricity or fuel pellets.
• In the future, and perhaps soon, liquid biofuels and biochemicals will emerge as options for use of woody biomass, posing a new source of competition for this resource.
Conclusions:
• Biomass availability estimates are highly variable and none (with perhaps the exception of Berguson) consider what volume is realistically available.• Biomass consumption and availability within Minnesota is not being monitored by any state agency or institution. It should be.
For additional information:
www.dovetailinc.org
www.blandinfoundation.org/html/public_vital_conf_Bio_07a.cfm