HomeMy WebLinkAboutYakutat Biomass Feas. & District HeatingLoop Pre -feasibility Analysis 2010 REF Grant 2195424Biomass Feedstock Supply
required for
1.2 MW Combined Heat and Power System
Pre -feasibility Analysis
Prepared for:
The City and Borough of Yakutat, Alaska
Yak -tat Kwaan Inc.
September 7, 2010
Prepared by:
Bionera Resources Inc.
„�bionera
�h0 prt energy crop solutions
For further information, please contact John Kitchen, Bionera Resources Inc., (604) 250-1484 or
john.kitchen @bionera.com
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7, 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
Executive Summary
The City and Borough of Yakutat (Yakutat) and Yak -tat Kwaan Inc. (Kwaan) require 10,000 to 20,000
tons of biomass per year as combustion feedstock to generate energy with a combined heat and power
plant. Bionera Resources Inc. (Bionera) was engaged by the Kwaan to conduct a three day site visit in
July 2010 and consider options for biomass supply. This included a cursory review of the land base
with respect to overall size, climate, topography, soils, vegetation, history and community culture, and
ecological values. The Yakutat Salmon Board provided an overview of the fisheries resource, which is
a fundamental aspect of Yakutat, Alaska and is its primary economic driver.
Bionera was then engaged to determine volume and cost of sustainable biomass sources and the
viability of an energy crop. By combining systems that share some of the equipment, and selecting
equipment options in scale with available volume, a cost of $52 per ton can be achieved for a supply of
10,000 tons per year. The addition of energy crops could lift the potential to 20,000 tons per year
provided that future testing indicates a sufficient growth rate. The requirement to clear land for
agriculture and an anticipated slow growth rate contribute to a high cost per ton for energy crops, at
around $61 per ton. This increases the overall average cost for the 20,000 ton option to an average of
$56 per ton. Summary results follow:
Yakutat Biomass Supply
Blend at sources; +/- 25%; green tons
Biomass Sources
Tons
Cost/ton
Total
Remarks
Waste material
356
24
$8,393
sustainable indefinite-
Forestthinnin s
5,414
46
249,212
harvest known volume over 20 ears; supplement with re -growth and thinning contracts
152
acres per vear
Loggingdebris la and
500
$50
$25000
available for 5-10 years
Logging debris cutblocks
250
$60
$15 000
Available far 20 years, except on areas established with energy crops
Roadside willow and alder
1,467
$58
$85,370
sustainable indefinite)
In -black willow and alder
1,467
$58
$85,370
sustainable indefinitely, except on areas established with energy crops
Energy crops
1,046
$75
$78,415
sustainable indefinite)
523
acres
Sums and Averages
10,000
$52
$521,762
Energy crops
11,046
$61
1 $678,472
Isustainable indefinite)
5523
acres
Sums and Averages
20,000
$56
$1,113,425
Bionera was also asked to estimate the cost to address a diligent range of issues and questions that
should be covered before proceeding with a biomass feedstock program of this size. The total cost to
achieve comfort with sustainable biomass volume and delivered cost is $179,000 including all due
diligence aspects identified to date. This includes $73,000 for equipment and testing of logging debris
and stump harvest along with a second energy crop trial plot. The total also includes $67,000 that can
be deferred until results from prior due diligence are available.
An alternate first stage option is included in Appendix A for your consideration. The goal of this part
of the investigation was to assess whether or not a 1,000 ton system could provide an adequate
financial return, useful productivity data, and also fit into the larger overall project.
Page 2bianera
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
Disclaimers and Limitations
Disclaimer
The material published in this report is for information purposes only and is subject to change without
notice. Bionera Resources Inc. ('Bionera") makes no representation about the suitability of the
information provided for any purpose and is not responsible for inaccuracies or typographical errors.
All informations is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, whether express or implied. Bionera
expressly disclaims any implied warranties including, without limitation, any implied warranties of
merchantability, durability and fitness for a particular purpose.
Limitation of Liability
In no event shall Bionera be liable for any special, incidental, indirect, punitive or consequential
damages, including but not limited to, loss of profits, loss of use, loss of data or information, business
interruption, or any other damages whether based on contract, negligence or other tort, based upon or
arising out of or in connection with the use, reliance upon or inability to use any information contained
in this report. In no event shall Bionera's total liability for claims, damages and causes of action,
howsoever arising, whether in contract, tort or otherwise, exceed the amount paid by you, if any, for
the preparation of this report or the investigations or other costs to do so.
Governing Law
This report has been prepared by Bionera from its offices in British Columbia, Canada. The use of this
report shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of British
Columbia, without giving effect to any principles of conflicts of law.
By using this report, you agree to the terms, restrictions, disclaimers and limitations contained herein.
�uv bionera
Page 3 'i/e„a e•e, .=,„Me
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
Background
Electricity in Yakutat is currently provided by diesel fired generators. Much of the Kwaan's land base
has been logged sporadically over the last 60 years and left to natural regeneration, with variable
results. Much of the land is not regenerated to forest. The community desires a lower cost source of
energy, provided that this can be done without risk to the fisheries resource or the ecological recovery
of the land base generally.
On approximately 3,000 acres, forest regeneration is dense.
Thinning is underway to improve forest health and wildlife
habitat.
Yakutat sought information about alternative energy and
subsequently formed a subgroup on alternative energy, including
the Kwaan. The two groups are working cooperatively toward a
sustainable energy alternative.
Bionera is engaged in energy crop establishment, and is a wholly owned subsidiary of Pacific
Regeneration Technologies Inc. (PRT), which operates 12 seedling nurseries in North America, and
has been engaged in Short Rotation Intensive Culture (SRIC) of woody species since 1999.
Sources used for this document
In the interest of time and cost, citations are not included in this document. References can be found in
the working papers. Citations and a bibliography can be added upon request.
Working papers accompanying this report:
Pre -feasibility analysis 2010-09-14.xls
Yakutat Visit Summary 2010-08-02.pdf
Pa e4 bionera
g
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
Biomass Sources, Volume and Cost
A variety of biomass options were considered and calculations were performed based on available
information, including tests performed to date and various independent sources of information.
Summary results follow:
Yakutat Biomass Supply
Blend of sources; +/- 25%; green tons
Biomass Sources
Term
Yrs
First 3 years
Year 4 - 20
Year 21+
Tons
Cost/ton
Total
Tons
Cost/ton
Total
Tons
Cost/ton
Total
Waste material
99
356
$24
$8,393
356
$24
$8,393
356
$24
$8,393
Forest thinnings
99
5,414
$46
$249,212
5,414
$46
$249,212
5,414
$46
$249,212
152
acres per year
152
acres per year
152
acres per year
Logging debris (logyard)
5
500
$50
$25,000
Logging debris (cutblocks)
20
250
$60
$15,000
250
$60
$15,000
Roadside willow and alder
99
1,467
$58
$85,370
1,467
$58
$85,370
1,467
$58
$85,370
In -block willow and alder
99
1,467
$58
$85,370
1,467
$58
$85,370
Energy crops
99
1,046
$75
$78,415
2,763
$70
$193,397
523
acres
1,381
acres
Sums and Averages
9,454
$50
$468,347
10,000
$52
$521,762
110,1521
$52
1 $527,979
Energy crops
99
11,046
$61
1 $678,472
12,763
$61
$783,956
5,523
acres
1
6,381
acres
Sums and Averages
20,000
$56
1 $1,113,425
20,000
$56
$1,118,538
Numbers in blue/bold are entered directly in this table, and are not substantiated by sampling or feasibility calculations
At $52 per ton & 10,000 tons / yr $521,762 per year
At $56 per ton. & 20,000 tons / yr $1,113,425 per year
Pa e s -bionera
g
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
Biomass Source Discussion
Municipal Solid Waste
Combustible municipal waste is assumed to include only wood, paper, cardboard and yard trimmings,
yielding 30 tons per month. It is assumed that this can be comminuted in one half -day per month by the
same equipment used for other sources of biomass. Volumes are based on national data for generation
of municipal solid waste per capita.
Forest Thinnings
The cost of collecting, comminuting and hauling forest thinning material was calculated based on the
average of six methods. Considerable information was available both from test work done in Yakutat,
and because of a wide range of slash reduction work underway in the western US to reduce forest fuel
loads. The Yakutat project is unrelated to fire risk reduction, however similar productivity can be
achieved. This work could be performed over a period of 20 years to achieve a productive level of
equipment utilization.
The most cost-effective option explored includes the Fecon
Bio-Harvester and estimates suggest a cost range of $36 to
$51 per ton. If a lower capital cost option is needed, the work
could be performed by contractors required to thin and
forward the material to roadside. In this case, grinding and
hauling equipment would be purchased and operated locally
to deliver the biomass. A variety of sources were used to
assess this option, suggesting a range of $43 to $56 per ton.
Available residues were estimated at 42 tons per acre with
85% of the material recoverable.
There are currently 3,300 acres of forest that can be thinned, with a total of at least 110,000 tons of
recoverable woody biomass. By utilizing this fuel over 20 years (-5,500 tons per year), skills
development and employment will be more stable, and there will be time for under -story forest growth
in other areas to provide a long term sustainable harvest. Biomass project operations can include
thinning work on lands under the jurisdiction of other agencies, thereby supplementing total volume
and long term sustainability.
Logging Debris and Stumps
Logging debris in the abandoned logyard, along with logging debris from cutblocks being converted to
energy crops can be harvested for biomass. An estimate of $50 to $60 per ton is used for the time
being. In order to get more accurate costs, small scale yarding and splitting tests will be required.
Pa e 6bionera
g
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
One study was reviewed to estimate the cost of stump utilization. This study provided valuable
information on recoverable stump volume, however productivity figures were derived from an ideal
and high cost set of equipment being utilized year-round in a second -growth harvested stand. At 2.5
times the costs achieved, this study suggests a delivered cost of $63 per ton. Recovery and costs can be
assessed for Yakutat as part of the small scale yarding and splitting tests described above.
Utilization of in -block material has the potential to significantly reduce energy crop establishment
costs. Debris logs and stumps will need to be removed to establish the energy crop, so if this source
can be used to cost-effectively deliver biomass feedstock as part of that task, energy crop economics
will be improved.
Roadside and in -block willow and alder
Costs presented assume that roadside and in -block
willow and alder will be harvested with the same
equipment set (Fecon Bio-Harvester, high dump wagon
and chip truck) as will be used for thinning. Volume is
based on samples collected from roadside re -growth
and the assumption that in -block willow and alder can
contribute a similar amount. This estimate also includes
an allowance for enhancement of the in -block areas
with seeding and cuttings to increase the area occupied
by Sitka alder, cottonwood and willow over time.
More ground will need to be covered with this option
than for thinning, however the chip van can be located closer to the material, so costs are expected to
be the same as the cost for the thinning operation. Most of the cost is associated with grinding the
biomass. Roadside and in -block willow and alder is smaller in diameter than forest tbinnings, requiring
less input energy to process.
Energy crops
Energy crops of some kind will be required to increase yield beyond 13,500 tons per year. Three
alternatives appear worthy of consideration: native Sitka alder, willow and/or cottonwood row crop,
hybrid willow row crop, and enhancement of in -block biomass by increasing the area occupied by
Sitka alder.
The first two options require land clearing to enable agricultural row -crop production, raising the cost
as compared to a crop grown on cleared but otherwise under-utilized land.
Energy crop yield can not be estimated within an acceptable range. For the purpose of this report, it is
assumed that a growth rate of 4 tons per acre can be achieved, for the following two reasons.
Page 7 0bla.o.mOnera.,��,,, o�„�
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
A useful baseline estimate of growth rate for Yakutat would be the mean annual increment for Sitka
spruce. We have not yet been able to obtain an estimate of annual growth rate in the Yakutat area,
however the accepted minimum for commercial forestry in Southeast Alaska is 50 cubic feet per acre
per year, which is roughly equivalent to 1.4 tons per acre per year. This figure would not include tops
and branches or below ground biomass, so although the growth rate is likely slower in Yakutat, the full
utilization of biomass would offset this to some degree. Sampling of roadside Sitka alder conducted in
August, 2010 suggested 1.5 tons per acre per year. It is safe to say that we would not invest in an
energy crop option unless we can demonstrate a growth rate substantially higher. Two to three times
this amount is a reasonable objective.
Based on two energy crop economic models, yields of 4 tons per acre per year were needed to achieve
costs approaching $60 per ton. Therefore, we have little choice but to demonstrate that this can be
done.
The local Sitka alder may prove to be a viable energy
crop option. If the crop can be established by direct
seeding, savings of $8 to $10 per ton are possible.
Sitka alder is not a commercial species in any system,
so there is little information available to substantiate
estimates. Seeding success is reliant on mineral soil
exposure which could be enhanced by land clearing or
other treatments which are part of the overall biomass
supply system.
A blended approach using silvicultural techniques is
worthy of consideration. This would include
enhancement of the in -block areas to increase the area occupied by Sitka alder. Red alder also coppices
reasonably well, so this is another option. There is no experience with this approach that we've been
able to find, however if these species can be established at high density over a wider area, they are well
adapted to the climatic conditions of the Yakutat area and would be likely to thrive and deliver a
predictable volume of biomass feedstock.
The yield potential for these systems can only be assessed by growing a variety of potential test crops
for an absolute minimum of two growing seasons. Three to five growing seasons could provide a very
reliable estimate, along with selection information for best varieties with respect to yield and disease
resistance. Further experience with weed management will also prove invaluable.
Equipment access for establishment, tending and harvesting will be a challenge. Estimates are based on
tracked equipment, although it is difficult to estimate how much maintenance costs will rise due to
tracks rather than wheels. Generally this is a significant difference. If wide flotation tires work out,
then at least this challenge could be addressed as a one-time cost.
Page 8 zs bionera
,ao,o,
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
There are many positive indicators for energy crop success in Yakutat. Topography, ample
precipitation and mild winter temperatures lend themselves well to energy crop success. The extensive
road system improves harvesting access and contributes favorably to the costs.
The current trial will be expanded to include hybrid willow, Red and Sitka alder seedlings, along with
a second site to test a higher piece of ground. The cost of this work is included in the estimates
provided later in the report.
Biomass Feedstock Specification and Storage
Equipment selections were based on the following fuel delivery specifications.
• Size of fuel: 3" minus (if conversion equipment requires a tighter limit, costs can be adjusted
upward for the additional fuel and grinding time)
• Fines: less than 15% under 1/8"
• Moisture content: 25% to 60% wet basis
• Occasional nails, rocks and other inorganic debris under 3" in longest dimension
• Free of frozen lumps >3"
• Less than 3% inorganic
It should be noted that the Fecon harvester is based on a hybrid grind -chip system and has had
problems with stringiness in the past. The manufacturer suggests that they have made excellent
progress and by the time a unit is purchased for Yakutat, this problem will be entirely solved.
The secondary biomass sources are based on use of a wood grinder, which will also produce a small
quantity of longer pieces that can be troublesome in the biomass feed system. These challenges can be
solved by elements in the feed system which could include, e.g., a scalper to remove long pieces and
direct this material to re -grind or disposal.
We recommend that the biomass energy conversion system be designed to efficiently use biomass at
40 — 50% MC (w.b.)
Requirements for three forms of feedstock storage are presented below, based on seasonal limitations
and reserve requirements to cover maintenance downtime and unexpected stoppages:
• Five days supply in automated wood bin
• Two week's supply on -site, covered to ensure that fuel delivered to the bunker is free of frozen
lumps during winter operation
• Three month's supply with year-round access. It is not necessary for this to be onsite or fully
processed but efficiency is likely to be better if it is
• A separate bunker and metering system for dry MSW could also be considered
Page 9 1fJ1C7Y12Ya
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock Sentember 7 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
Storage Needs
Used for harvest season compatibility; should not be relied upon for plant design
Small
I Medium
I Large
reen tons
Annual consumption
1,221
10,000
20,000
Average weekly consumption
231
1921
384
Average daily consumption
31
271
55
Automated wood bin at maximum heating surge level and five da 's supply:
26
215
430
On -site stora eat maximum heatingsurge level and two week's supply:
74
602
1,204
Seasonal storage, three month's supply
479
3,925
7,850
Storage needs are calculated based on heating need during the coldest month; heating degree days for the coldest
month are 57% higher than the average heating degree days. Electrical consumption varied less than heating.
The harvesting systems selected (grinders) will produce more fines than the ideal level for long term
storage. Consistent cool temperatures will reduce decomposition during storage, however the fines in
the biomass feedstock will increase the likelihood of losing energy content and could increase ash
disposal from a combustor. Therefore utilization will need to be managed to maximize energy recovery
by consuming older stock first.
Equipment for Biomass Harvesting, Comminution and Delivery
Based only on the sustainable supply of forest thinnings and native plant re -growth on roadsides and
within old cutblocks, an annual supply of 8,300 tons per year can be delivered. This is the simplest and
most cost-effective option.
• Chip truck: tractor and 40' live floor trailer
• Fecon Bio-harvester FTX440 & H600
• 8-ton high -dump wagon, with modifications including wide, puncture -resistant flotation tires
• Pickup and ash spreader
Fecon, in partnership with Awhi in Germany, has six to eight machines operating in Europe. None
have been sold in the United States as yet, however their latest machine is currently operating in
Arizona, so there could be an opportunity to get a look at it. The machine weight is 27 tons (a sturdy
machine) so it may not be possible to test it in Yakutat, although the company may be willing if the
freight is paid (—$25,000 to $30,000 return). Due to the weight of the machine, we added a mounted
winch to the capital cost, for the day that it gets stuck. Fecon advised that they have not found a high -
dump wagon that has worked satisfactorily yet. We based our costing on a conventional high dump
agricultural forage wagon, modified with wide footprint puncture resistant tires.
ra
Page 10—bione
n egyyora
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7, 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
In order to go beyond 9,300 tons, we would need to add
logging debris, stumps, and combustible municipal waste.
This option would allow for an additional 5,200 tons (13,500
in total), assuming that half the stump volume can be
economically harvested over a 20-year period.
Horizontal Wood Grinder, 225-35011P
Excavator (20-25 ton), add winch, stump shear, log
splitter and grapple
Some manufacturers offer grinders that can be converted to chipping. As long as fuel is relatively clean
(e.g. forest thinnings) chipping would produce biomass with longer shelf life and lower fuel
consumption for comminution.
We could lower the total capital cost by utilizing a tub grinder, however these machines tend to have
lower productivity because material is fed by gravity. Grinding of municipal waste would take extra
care and probably could not be done at the plant because tub grinders can throw material quite far. The
horizontal grinder used for the cost estimates specified is expected to be generally safer to operate and
should achieve higher overall productivity. That said, there is a Morbark 950 tub grinder in Sitka,
Alaska so there may be an opportunity to give it a try in our conditions. The style of grinder planned
for the project is capable of much more grinding than needed, but it is a rugged and reliable choice
which should provide years of reliable grinding and tolerate a wide range of biomass.
Purpose -grown energy crops yielding 4 tons per acre per year on 2,500 acres would add an additional
10,000 tons (23,500 in total).
• Main tractor 100 - 200 PTO HP on tracks or very wide flotation tires
• 2nd smaller tractor
• Various agricultural implements (e.g. disc, row -crop cultivator, sprayers, fertilizing equipment)
• Harvesting can be done by the same Fecon unit, or with a separate dedicated harvester
depending on volume required
• 2"d high dump wagon
• 2"d chip trailer
Equipment alternatives discarded:
Bundling is an option that can extend shelf life of the biomass. However, the bundling concept is most
effective when final comminution is performed at the conversion plant using electric powered
equipment. In addition, the equipment is extremely expensive and delicate, requiring year-round and
long term use to achieve cost-effectiveness. This equipment is primarily designed for collecting debris
after clear cut logging.
Page 11bionera
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
The bio-baler equipment would provide better shelf life since material is stored unchipped. The
manufacturer is working on a tracked option but this will not be ready for at least a year. This
equipment can be operated cost-effectively for the roadside biomass, but has not proved cost-effective
for energy crop harvesting as yet.
Feller -chipper -forwarder systems are available for forest thinning (e.g. Bruks, 7enz), but would not be
useful for managed in -block or roadside biomass, nor for the energy crop harvesting. I expect to get
useful productivity information later this year after a test program currently underway in Oregon is
completed. Due to high capital cost and maintenance requirements, this type of equipment can
generally be justified only when year-round utilization is possible.
There are many other equipment options, along with smaller scale innovative methods. Most large
scale options are geared toward utilizing debris arising from logging. Smaller scale options are in use
by fire risk reduction contractors and tend to be locally opportunistic, often sharing equipment with
other projects.
Treatment of Carbon Values
There is much debate over utilization of forest thinnings and downed forest debris with respect to
carbon mitigation. Energy crops definitely reduce carbon dioxide emissions due to the shorter rotation,
and municipal waste utilization also offers more apparent carbon emissions reduction. Carbon values
were only considered for energy crops and not for other sources in the estimates. Furthermore, a
conservative value per ton of carbon dioxide avoided has been used, i.e. five dollars per tCOze. Future
values have not been increased in any multi -year model, providing some upside potential.
�bionera
Page 12
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
Further Testing Required
Described here are three key areas that require an adequate testing plan to ensure viability of these
options. Following this description are tables including a detailed breakdown of due diligence items
and the estimates to complete the work.
Energy crop test plots
• Continue testing alder direct seeding, along with willow and poplar cuttings
• First test plot will require weeding and will test well for frost damage
• Add a second test plot; choose a high site around 40 acres; initially clear just enough space for
a trial site - 1 or 2 acres — retain as much soil as possible by removing timber and stumps with
excavator (equivalent to overall biomass feedstock plan)
• First test plot cost $30,000; therefore estimating $20,000 after improvement from experience
• Summer student $12,000 for two summers — plant, supervise, collect data, weeding
• Total: $32,000
Test splitting of logyard and in -block forest debris biomass, including stumps
$20,000 for tree shear for city -owned Cat 320L - test ability to break down logs and stumps to a
size that an affordable grinder could handle (i.e. less than —20")
Test activities and supervision ($15,000)
Test yarding of forest thinnings to roadside
• This can be done as a time study during upcoming thinning projects ($6,000)
Other work is described in the tables below.
The consultants I would subcontract to are people with decades of experience in various aspects of
silviculture and wood recovery. Some examples include:
Neil Hughes, Ecotrust.ca
Bruce Blackwell, Blackwell & Associates
Bruce McCallum, Ensight Consulting
Cees Van Oosten, SilviConsult Woody Crops Technology
These sources have extensive experience in silviculture generally, and also great experience in areas
highly relevant for the Yakutat biomass project:
• Alder in Coastal Washington, Oregon, and BC (Hughes)
• Short -rotation intensive culture (Van Oosten)
• Biomass removal, grinding, hauling (Blackwell or McCallum)
-A bionera
Page 13
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7, 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
We could look more for appropriate local consultants as well. These are listed because they are people
we have worked with in the past and they are known as people with broad knowledge and practical
solutions.
Testing Estimate Summary
Verify availability of all options under consideration, including refinement of costs and volume to +/-
15% at the 20,000 ton level: $39,000.
Further energy crop trial work required to be sure of establishment costs and growth rate: $32,000
Test splitting of logging debris to <20", acquire data on yarding of thinnings: $41,000
Other due diligence that can be initiated later: $67,000
Total listed: $179,000
Page 14bionera
Y
co
°s
vai3
�^'mvadya o.a�b
v N O
E E
o
b"m T o° v b w.vc v w o,a
5°
v N
a t2 a y._
v`asqq
V 0
N«
v N C
C E:� Y T
'A=
'�
= p N m N
Ecy'-o.�-'a
o-E E
E
yE
a`vi
o 00ro
E a=
E«
m
m.a 2 o o w m o
3 =vm a=tiP 3
ca Z3
iO m xw wo �'awmm
'aU
mac
'�.cmE°i-Onyx
om�v
viv a`�ia
cN c m v'c'i
° U
w m
m m'3 o m a E o m o E o
;";n 3 a v E m
ry
0 E 0> m�
mo
cUm
wE=cm`°v�=nm
m v,�v m.�vi
E 3
E a
o m
m y o'- `
T aa
o-
N o£
m m m 5 v E« a
=ES
O11
n>�n�r
�a p¢>vEm no
Ev;
y.0
.=°c—a
�cm vim` E`m
n
r E
S n o
¢ a `o v
(7 > E E v E a m c Eno E
0
0
ui
0
m
0
r
0
0
�6
0
°
m
E
v
m
3
o
g
O
`m
w
Y
Y
E
N
2
>
0
15
E
3'vE
m
v�"m
3
r>
m m m
H
nr o
n nm
a
N N
E U Y C O
° -_ -
U
i V b
O w v� d
OTI'C O
O �
T
aoM om
n'^
c
.Nv,
a
rn o O0 2 -
c r m m o ro a
o m
�O
E
E
E N
TL
3 � �
m
O
T O N
v
o
E
o
'mom
?
n'�'2�3y�nb
.mcm
UNN
mono2
ON�nN
oc
Dl�ys30
m'bN
Nn9
a
oc
obv'oc
°� a
N m
o>
NZ
om
E °�N-wEa
v
o�
m sm
of
ao
a
Ri
E c m'« a >'
`m o
.2
0 E
�mbn
n w w-, ¢
'N
�.
= `o
�r
Eo
N�
o
a
Emai ._ o E
_
@mo
mS
?Ooa»v�o.p
°
m
v avio
o�
>c
vcpO�
o
T
n v
m
Y m
oaE
3m
0
m
EI'dI
nm'
E
0o=E
E
v w
°
N 2r W r
>
W 3 a
-D5
E
0
U
N
`h
m
a
0
m
O
ro
O
o E
v
rm
v a
3°
UL
ND
-N09
v
nm«nra
°
m
m o.o
oas
`o
m>
-mE
o+
� E t
v
« m 3
O
Z
'M
2m y'Z
a a A
a
ro ro
ro
d
° N
a ro
O
m
O
O N ri'
t°i >
2
m m 2
'c -°
U Lp °
t
N
°bwv"a
3
E
nE'�
¢aio
N
mrtE
m
c
O
E
o._
a >
>
N
E
p
N
mm�
n
v
E
E `m
a
m
N
Nm
n�V
m-O7
O
m
=NO
ro2m
N-2
N E
U N N
U N
v
E-va-.
5
v
t7 E
F E m
3 m �
�
0
O
m
O
m
O_
f°
100
W
0
On
0
O
o
O
O
O
o
O
O
0
In
O
N
E
E
E
d
E
E
E
E
`v
E
'^
m
3
m
L
2
m
.2
U
U
12
m
n
m
a
m
m
_
a
o
v
v
v
`
� E
°
E
E
m
=�
z
W
F-
v
6
m
m¢��
>,
of
}
E
Emmc
«romvm`m
m°o'
.ym
H�oro
-Q8
M
om
-ocoo
�Efm
o0 W.oa.E.
oE
roE
N
mEmcm
mo
tmo
wE
v
-'oEmodN�nawwmro
.
¢
�e
E«:E°a
°
.vca
.-t
o�
E ncE�
yo,o
E
E
0 E
`6 °
y
� h
E E
E
cmov
om
vU.5ocm
UN4.N
-omm"cm3cmmE
a0e
v,m3
°ro
timrov�
`-n000E
E
o
2
2
.goc2ai
``
mrov>
r
co
mo
`-°mn'aoiemmtl
smsvm
mVo
:E_v
v
Evro
�mm
pv
�yoO
>r
76
2
o
coo-Em-�m>Ov
s6
Low5v
F
�
tm-`c
v
pv`m=may�E
`mooEonm
m>c
Karoo
vv
m`m
n�
8
ytro_m�'.m�N
ar«
am$
>y
v'c
om"mEn
oy
'c
�m
v E
«
v°'EO m�°'dy01
v.��
m
_«oNvzNvm
umi
N
E
'a
E v
U¢
w `t
am
o
m
m 2"
? E«
._
m
0
0
w
Oza$O
m0
a
a`
w aroi m m va
Ei>>w
nu
w>a
>w
N o<
w c
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7, 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
Conclusion
Forestry thinning and available roadside and in -block biomass can deliver a sustained yield of 8,300
tons or biomass annually at an expected cost of $52 per ton or less. By adding a horizontal grinder, the
volume will increase to 9,400 to 13,500 tons, depending on the range of stumps that can be
economically recovered. To go beyond this volume, purpose -grown energy crops will also be required.
Further testing is required before we can rely on the required yield of 4 tons per acre per year. With
woody energy crops included a yield of 20,000 to 25,000 tons per year can be achieved at an average
cost of $56 per ton.
Working papers are included with the report, and remain the property of Bionera per our standard
terms. We request that these be shared on a "need to know" basis with people who are working directly
on this project and as required by funding agencies. These files have not been formatted for printing. I
suggest that we go through the files together, and welcome feedback or suggestions that could improve
the value of our work for you.
Thank you for the opportunity to investigate biomass feedstock options on your behalf. It has been a
pleasure working with the group in Yakutat and we trust that this information will be useful for your
project.
�bionera
Page 17 �R o„a,�bti
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
Appendix A — District Heating, 1,000 ton option
Although not originally requested, we also developed
a smaller stage entry level project for biomass
utilization, described below. Our objective was to
estimate whether or not a 1,000 ton heating project
could make sense for Yakutat.
The following project would be compatible with the
future larger project, including provision of hot water
as part of a larger loop or directly to other conversion
technology and power generation. This project can be
running in 12 months.
8 million Btu Biomass Fired Hot Water Heating System; 1,200 green tons biomass per year
High efficiency low emission gasifier/combustor, hot water boiler and electrostatic precipitator, $1 to
$1.5 million to set up, including:
• combustor/boiler $500-$600k
• wood handling components $100k
• electrostatic precipitator $100-$200k
• Building and wood room $200-300k
• connection and fixtures $100-300k
All this equipment is proven and simple to operate. Operators will improve efficiency as they learn the
systems. All of this can be purchased under contract, with specifications and performance guarantees.
This system would be used to heat/chill a combination of buildings that directly or indirectly consume
$250,000 (62,500 gals) of diesel fuel. For example, this might include YSB/Courthouse, and Mallott's
including chillers, and some others. The complex of buildings which include the ranger station might
also be suitable.
Biomass collection and handling equipment: capable of handling logging debris and forest thinnings
up to 250 feet from roads, and deliver 25 tons with less than 2 worker -days, $300,000 to $600,000.
• 40' walking floor trailer, $65,000 new ($25,000 used)
• Tractor for this trailer, equipped with long reach grapple and winch $100,000 (or $60,000 used)
• Horizontal Wood Grinder, preferably including a grapple, 250HP $225,000, (or $60,000 used,
plus $40,000 full re -build = $100,000)
• The city -owned 320L excavator with the addition of a stump shear and/or screw type log
splitter for breaking large logging debris down to size for the grinder $20,000 (or $6,000 used
with $4,000 rebuild)
• Transport trailer for excavator, if not currently available $20,000 (or $10,000 used)
• $540,000 new + contingency = $600,000; $220,000 used + contingency = $300,000
bionera
Page 18 �u _^.°•�=.=a•�^���•
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
Total for hot water system and wood handling equipment: $1,300,000 to $2,100,000
Salmon will barely feel a feather drop, and importantly we will buy time to do the environmental and
ecological tests needed to be sure that our footprint is modest enough for the larger project.
Absorption chillers would be owned by the user. Hot water purchases at same cost as for heat, i.e.
much less than electricity on a per -kWh basis, so that the customer's investment in conversion
equipment would meet their capital return expectation.
Operations: collect fuel (1-2 worker -days per week), operate boiler (1-2 hrs / day inspection and
cleanup, 1-2 visits per day), routine maintenance (10 days per year), ash disposal (17 days per year),
processing municipal waste wood, paper and cardboard (1/2 day per week), and records (1 hr per day).
2 people, 1/2 time $60,000, O&M $23,500, Excavator bare rental $9,600, Capital reserve $10,000;
Overhead $10,000; contingency $10,000 = $122,000 (—$100 per ton)
Fuel @ $4 / gallon replaced by 1,200 tons biomass = 62,500 gals diesel = $250,000
The return on this project is too low as is, and will require more effort to refine the heating system
estimate. Less expensive grinding options are available, however our intent was to base the system on
equipment that is fully compatible with the larger project.
Of equal importance, we will:
• develop the local biomass handling skills needed for the larger project
• get accurate yield and environmental data
• gain local experience with district heating, and provide part of the loop heating for the larger
eventual project
• make good use of forest thinnings and logging debris
• get a project on the ground fast
The system will consume a range of 15 tons to as much as 50+ tons of biomass per week, and will
deliver 180' to 200' water.
At low use, we'll need one truckload (20-25 tons) every two weeks. During winter, we'll likely need
two truckloads per week. At 22 tons average (one load per week) = 1,150 tons per year, each ton
delivering —6.6 million Btu or 1.9 MWh of useable heat, combusted at 50% moisture content.
A ton of biomass costs us a lot at this small scale: $100/ton... but... it replaces 51 gallons of diesel
worth $205 (at $4 / gal or $166 at $3.25).
Page 19--bionera
Yakutat Biomass Feedstock September 7, 2010
Pre feasibility Analysis
Modem biomass combustors are high tech and clean, but do
have a chimney. You will not see or smell smoke when the
burner is running at design demand. The chimney will be tall.
The key to clean burning is to have a large and variable speed
induced draft fan; state-of-the-art and simple to operate process
controls; multiple oxygen sensing points and a low -draw
electrostatic precipitator.
Smoke may occur for up to 30 minutes after startup or while
shutting down as the burner drops down below its idle
programming. If fuel moisture exceeds 60%, there will be a risk
of smoke and the combustor will be difficult to operate. With
wet fuel at 45%, there will be steam at times. However, we will
most often be running extremely clean, and burning fuel at 35-
45% moisture.
Ash is spread on the growing biomass, returning most of the
mineral nutrients taken off the site by the biomass removal. This will be done well away from riparian
buffers. For the most part, the nitrogen can be replenished by increasing the amount of alder and taking
advantage of its symbiotic relationship with nitrogen converting organisms that attach to their roots —
an elegant closed -loop.
Two dedicated local people can be trained in everything needed, and will continuously improve the
system. Give them some space for drying and they'll make this system a lot better. The system requires
scheduled checks and people to respond to occasional alarms, but runs automatically and unattended,
with a shutdown sequence automatically initiated in the event of unattended malfunctions.
We will need access to a heavy duty mechanic with 1-2 day's notice. If we don't have that, then it may
be better for a local contractor to own the equipment.
We can pencil it out this fall, build it next summer, and have it running by September.
Pa e 20 I bionera
g,aaw�,oti