Processing Cost Analysis For Biomass Feedstocks

The receiving, handling, storing, and processing of woody biomass feedstocks is an overlooked component of biopower systems. The purpose of this study was twofold: (1) to identify and characterize all the receiving, handling, storing, and processing steps required to make woody biomass feedstocks suitable for use in direct combustion and gasification applications, including small modular biopower (SMB) systems, and (2) to estimate the capital and operating costs at each step. Since biopower applications can be varied, a number of conversion systems and feedstocks required evaluation. In addition to limiting this study to woody biomass feedstocks, the boundaries of this study were from the power plant gate to the feedstock entry point into the conversion device. Although some power plants are sited at a source of wood waste fuel, it was assumed for this study that all wood waste would be brought to the power plant site. This study was also confined to the following three feedstocks (1) forest residues, (2) industrial mill residues, and (3) urban wood residues. Additionally, the study was confined to grate, suspension, and fluidized bed direct combustion systems; gasification systems; and SMB conversion systems. Since scale can play an important role in types of equipment, operational requirements, and capital and operational costs, this study examined these factors for the following direct combustion and gasification system size ranges: 50, 20, 5, and 1 MWe. The scope of the study also included: Specific operational issues associated with specific feedstocks (e.g., bark and problems with bridging); Opportunities for reducing handling, storage, and processing costs; How environmental restrictions can affect handling and processing costs (e.g., noise, commingling of treated wood or non-wood materials, emissions, and runoff); and Feedstock quality issues and/or requirements (e.g., moisture, particle size, presence of non-wood materials). The study found that over the years the industry has shown a good deal of ingenuity and, as a result, has developed several cost effective methods of processing and handling wood. SMB systems usually cannot afford to perform much onsite processing and therefore usually purchase fuels processed to specification. Owners of larger systems try to minimize onsite processing to minimize processing costs. Whole truck dumpers are expensive, but allow for faster and easier unloading, which reduces labor costs and charges by the haulers. Storage costs are a major factor in overall costs, thus the amount of fuel reserve is an important consideration. Silos and bins are relatively expensive compared to open piles used for larger facilities, but may be required depending on space available, wood characteristics, and amount of wood to be stored. For larger systems, a front-end loader has a lot of flexibility in use and is an essential piece of equipment for moving material. Few opportunities appear to exist for improving the cost effectiveness of these systems.

The success of lignocellulosic biofuels and biochemical industries depends upon an economic and reliable supply of quality biomass. However, research and development efforts have historically focused on the utilization of agriculturally-derived, cellulosic feedstocks without consideration of their low energy density, high variations in physical and chemical characteristics and potential supply risks in terms of availability and affordability. This Research Topic will explore strategies that enable supply chain improvements in biomass quality and consistency through blending, preprocessing, diversity and landscape design for development of conversion-ready, lignocellulosic feedstocks for production of biofuels and bio-products. Biomass variability has proven a formidable challenge to the emerging biorefining industry, impeding continuous operation and reducing yields required for economical production of lignocellulosic biofuels at scale. Conventional supply systems lack the preprocessing capabilities necessary to ensure consistent biomass feedstocks with physical and chemical properties that are compatible with supply chain operations and conversion processes. Direct coupling of conventional feedstock supply systems with sophisticated conversion systems has reduced the operability of biorefining processes to less than 50%. As the bioeconomy grows, the inherent variability of biomass resources cannot be managed by passive means alone. As such, there is a need to fully recognize the magnitude of biomass variability and uncertainty, as well as the cost of failing to design feedstock supply systems that can mitigate biomass variability and uncertainty. A paradigm shift is needed, from biorefinery designs using raw, single-resource biomass, to advanced feedstock supply systems that harness diverse biomass resources to enable supply chain resilience and development of conversion-ready feedstocks. Blending and preprocessing (e.g., drying, sorting, sizing, fractionation, leaching, densification, etc.) can mitigate variable quality and performance in diverse resources when integrated with downstream conversion systems. Decoupling feedstock supply from biorefining provides an opportunity to manage supply risks and incorporate value-added upgrading to develop feedstocks with improved convertibility and/ or market fungibility. Conversion-ready feedstocks have undergone the required preprocessing to ensure compatibility with conversion and utilization prior to delivery at the biorefinery and represent lignocellulosic biomass with physical and chemical properties that are tailored to meet the requirements of industrially-relevant handling and conversion systems.

Idaho National Laboratory (INL) supports the U.S. Department of Energy's bioenergy research program. As part of the research program INL investigates the feedstock logistics economics and sustainability of these fuels. A series of reports were published between 2000 and 2013 to demonstrate the feedstock logistics cost. Those reports were tailored to specific feedstock and conversion process. Although those reports are different in terms of conversion, some of the process in the feedstock logistic are same for each conversion process. As a result, each report has similar information. A single report can be designed that could bring all commonality occurred in the feedstock logistics process while discussing the feedstock logistics cost for different conversion process. Therefore, this report is designed in such a way that it can capture different feedstock logistics cost while eliminating the need of writing a conversion specific design report. Previous work established the current costs based on conventional equipment and processes. The 2012 programmatic target was to demonstrate a delivered biomass logistics cost of $55/dry ton for woody biomass delivered to fast pyrolysis conversion facility. The goal was achieved by applying field and process demonstration unit-scale data from harvest, collection, storage, preprocessing, handling, and transportation operations into INL's biomass logistics model. The goal of the 2017 Design Case is to enable expansion of biofuels production beyond highly productive resource areas by breaking the reliance of cost-competitive biofuel production on a single, low-cost feedstock. The 2017 programmatic target is to supply feedstock to the conversion facility that meets the in-feed conversion process quality specifications at a total logistics cost of $80/dry T. The $80/dry T. target encompasses total delivered feedstock cost, including both grower payment and logistics costs, while meeting all conversion in-feed quality targets. The 2012 $55/dry T. programmatic target included only logistics costs with a limited focus on biomass quantity, quality and did not include a grower payment. The 2017 Design Case explores two approaches to addressing the logistics challenge: one is an agronomic solution based on blending and integrated landscape management and the second is a logistics solution based on distributed biomass preprocessing depots. The concept behind blended feedstocks and integrated landscape management is to gain access to more regional feedstock at lower access fees (i.e., grower payment) and to reduce preprocessing costs by blending high quality feedstocks with marginal quality feedstocks. Blending has been used in the grain industry for a long time; however, the concept of blended feedstocks in the biofuel industry is a relatively new concept. The blended feedstock strategy relies on the availability of multiple feedstock sources that are blended using a least-cost formulation within an economical supply radius, which, in turn, decreases the grower payment by reducing the amount of any single biomass. This report will introduce the concepts of blending and integrated landscape management and justify their importance in meeting the 2017 programmatic goals.

Analytical Methods for Biomass Characterization and Conversion is a thorough resource for researchers, students and professors who investigate the use of biomass for fuels, chemicals and products. Advanced analytical chemistry methods and techniques can now provide detailed compositional and chemical measurements of biomass, biomass conversion process streams, intermediates and products. This volume from the Emerging Issues in Analytical Chemistry series brings together the current knowledge on each of these methods, including spectroscopic methods (Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy, Near-infrared Spectroscopy, Solid State Nuclear Magnetic Resonance), pyrolysis (Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry), Liquid Chromatography/High Performance Liquid Chromatography, Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry, and so on. Authors David C. Dayton and Thomas D. Foust show how these can be used for measuring biomass composition and for determining the composition of intermediates with regard to subsequent processing for biofuels, bio-chemicals and bio-based products. Covers the broad range of techniques and applications that have been developed and perfected in the last decade Highlights specific analyses required for understanding biomass conversion to select intermediates Provides references to seminal books, review articles and technical articles that go into greater depth, serving as a basis for further study

This report describes a set of procedures and assumptions used to estimate production and logistics costs of bioenergy feedstocks from herbaceous crops and agricultural residues. The engineering-economic analysis discussed here is based on methodologies developed by the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE) and the American Agricultural Economics Association (AAEA). An engineering-economic analysis approach was chosen due to lack of historical cost data for bioenergy feedstocks. Instead, costs are calculated using assumptions for equipment performance, input prices, and yield data derived from equipment manufacturers, research literature, and/or standards. Cost estimates account for fixed and variable costs. Several examples of this costing methodology used to estimate feedstock logistics costs are included at the end of this report.

"Woody biomass feedstock that is both high-quality and low-cost has become increasingly important for the bioenergy and bioproducts industries. Logging generates forest residues – low-quality feedstock – and4 additional operations that also incur additional cost, such as biomass sorting and treetops processing (BSTP),5 micro-chipping, and screening, are required to improve the feedstock’s quality. Considering recent6 developments in technologies and BSTP to generate high-quality feedstocks, economic models were7 developed in this study to estimate various forest residues logistics operational costs and analyze the8 economics of delivering feedstocks to near-woods Biomass Conversion Technology (BCT) sites or to9 faraway-located power plants in the form of chips, hog-fuel, and bales. The results show that the cost of10 BSTP can vary between 0 and2/Oven Dry Metric Ton (ODMT) based on the biomass sorting intensity.11 The most economical way to deliver forest residues was transporting processed stem-wood from landings12 to near-wood BCT sites and comminuting it into woodchips there [~0/ODMT, assuming a one-way13 (32-km) road-distance and no-cost of BSTP at landings]. Grinding slash at the landing and transporting14 ground-biomass (i.e., hog-fuel) to a plant (

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) are both strongly committed to expanding the role of biomass as an energy source. In particular, they support biomass fuels and products as a way to reduce the need for oil and gas imports; to support the growth of agriculture, forestry, and rural economies; and to foster major new domestic industries-- biorefineries--making a variety of fuels, chemicals, and other products. As part of this effort, the Biomass R AND D Technical Advisory Committee, a panel established by the Congress to guide the future direction of federally funded biomass R AND D, envisioned a 30 percent replacement of the current U.S. petroleum consumption with biofuels by 2030. Biomass--all plant and plant-derived materials including animal manure, not just starch, sugar, oil crops already used for food and energy--has great potential to provide renewable energy for America s future. Biomass recently surpassed hydropower as the largest domestic source of renewable energy and currently provides over 3 percent of the total energy consumption in the United States. In addition to the many benefits common to renewable energy, biomass is particularly attractive because it is the only current renewable source of liquid transportation fuel. This, of course, makes it invaluable in reducing oil imports--one of our most pressing energy needs. A key question, however, is how large a role could biomass play in responding to the nation's energy demands. Assuming that economic and financial policies and advances in conversion technologies make biomass fuels and products more economically viable, could the biorefinery industry be large enough to have a significant impact on energy supply and oil imports? Any and all contributions are certainly needed, but would the biomass potential be sufficiently large to justify the necessary capital replacements in the fuels and automobile sectors?