Project to Commercialize Agricultural Biomass for Combustion Energy - Steering Committee Meeting #5 - October 27, 2010

Steering Committee Members participating in person or by teleconference*:

  • Lovleen Bassan (OPG) – Co-Chair
  • Ling Mark (OMAFRA) – Co-Chair
  • David Armitage (Ontario Federation of Agriculture)
  • John Kelly (Erie Innovation and Commercialization)
  • Aileen MacNeil (OMAFRA)
  • Garry McKeever (Ministry of Energy)*
  • Phil Reinert (OPG)
  • Khurshid Saharan (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada)

OPG and OMAFRA staff present:

  • Annette Anderson (OMAFRA)
  • Al Arnott (OPG)
  • David Cooper (OMAFRA)
  • Colleen Fitzgerald–Hubble (OMAFRA)
  • Helma Geerts (OMAFRA)
  • Linda Pim (OMAFRA)
  • Alex Rosenberg (OMAFRA)
  • Tammy Wong for Rob Lyng (OPG)

Regrets:

  • Dave Buttenham (Ontario Agri Business Association)
  • John Fitzgibbon (Ontario Farm Environmental Coalition)
  • Bryan Gilvesy (Norfolk ALUS Pilot Project)
  • Barry Hill (Ontario Soil and Crop Improvement Association)
  • Nathan Stevens (Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario)
  • Gord Surgeoner (Ontario Agri-Food Technologies)
  • Rene Van Acker and Bill Deen (University of Guelph)

Guests:

  • Charles Lalonde (CJ Agren Consulting Inc.)

Meeting Chair:

  • Ling Mark, OMAFRA

  1. Welcome

  • Round-table introductions

  1. Administrative Items

  • Review of Agenda: Approved
  • Approval of Minutes: Approved. Once minutes are approved, they are translated and posted on the Steering Committee website. The website is the best way to access minutes from previous meetings.
  • Review of Action Items from Minutes of June 14, 2010:
    1. Lovleen to present on torrefaction at next meeting – on today's agenda; Phil Reinert presenting.
    2. Once a draft of the BMPs is available, the farmers involved in the OSCIA field trials should be consulted – noted for future action.
    3. A Business Case Working Group will be formed to coordinate the economic feasibility analysis. The members will include John Kelly (Chair), Gord Surgeoner, Barry Hill, Lovleen Bassan, and representatives from OMAFRA, CFFO, different biomass markets, aggregators and producers. The working group will draft the business case with timelines over the summer, and report back to the Steering Committee at the next meeting – on today's agenda.
    4. A Technical Working Group will be formed to coordinate the analysis of technical feasibility (e.g. agronomy, fuel spec, LCA, infrastructure). The members will include Rene Van Acker, Barry Hill, Bryan Gilvesy, Bill Deen, Phil Reinert and OMAFRA (rep(s) to be confirmed). OMAFRA will assist by arranging the first meeting – on today's agenda.
    5. OMAFRA and OPG to discuss provision of staff support to the subcommittees. Secretariat support (logistical + technical) being provided to all working groups. Other needs to be discussed under Working Group Reports.
    6. a) The Business Case and Technical Working Groups will align their work plans with the OFA project and other working group(s) – on today's agenda; it appears that timelines for the first phase of OFA work align very well.
      b) Both the OPG ag residue and the U of G ag biomass availability study (funded by OMAFRA) are due to be completed this fall. While the focus of the studies is somewhat different, an effort will be made to coordinate the studies – information exchange to be scheduled.
    7. Opportunities to engage the larger group of stakeholders should be built into the work plans. For example, a workshop at year end with updates from OFA, OPG, OMAFRA, AAFC, and others on research completed or underway could be used to assess the state of knowledge at that time (e.g. on an annual basis) – on today's agenda.
    8. OMAFRA staff to check into tracking usage of the ag biomass webpages on OMAFRA's website to determine which components are of greatest interest. – on today's agenda.

     

  1. Working Group Updates

  • Agri-Sustainability Working Group (Tammy Wong)
    • Tammy noted that she undertook a global scan of BMP programs and found that the Environmental Farm Plan (EFP) program was the most comprehensive and user-friendly. Many other certification programs are extremely onerous and perhaps not suitable for ag biomass.
    • OPG has drafted sustainability criteria for the fuel spec that requires biomass to 1) meet UNFCCC definition of "renewable"; 2) be from "well managed farms," as demonstrated by having peer-reviewed EFPs and implementing their action plans; and 3) have #2 verified by a 3rd party.
    • A question was raised about whether there would be a cost to producers, but at this early stage, OPG notes that the issue is somewhat premature.
    • Helma Geerts reported that a BMP-EFP task team was formed under OMAFRA's leadership, with the involvement of AAFC, OFEC and a biomass producer. The Task Team, reporting to the Agri-Sustainability Working Group, is looking at the EFP and other tools, including OMAFRA's BMP booklets, to assess how well ag biomass is covered and whether there is a need for changes/additions. Development of BMPs for ag biomass will be a work in progress as we continue to learn about biomass grown under Ontario conditions. Likely, BMPs will be general at first, with refinements over time as more becomes known. Timelines will be adapted to meet the Steering Committee's requirements.
  • Business Case Working Group (John Kelly)
    • John reported that the working group met on Oct. 6, 2010. They supported the Terms of Reference which committed to delivering a business case analysis from production through to combustion by the end of 2011.
    • An effort will be made to add working group members with expertise in financing and transportation.
    • There is an immediate need to look at existing business case models for possible adaptation to Ontario. The model must enable consideration of "what if" scenarios.
    • John confirmed there is a need for resources beyond administrative and an RFP may need to be developed.
    • Bimonthly working group meetings have been set for the next 6 months.
    • The Steering Committee discussed the government's growing concern about electricity prices. It will be necessary to compare the cost of biomass to the cost of other renewable energy sources.
    • John confirmed that the working group will look at all potential sources of biomass including ag residues like wheat shorts as well as annual and perennial energy crops.
  • Technical Working Group (Phil Reinert for Rene Van Acker)
    • Phil reported that the working group met on Oct. 4, 2010 and agreed that the technical expertise on the working group was appropriate to cover its objectives. The working group agreed that there was a need for staff or consulting resources to collate information on what is already known, what is not known/what are the gaps. A researcher is required with advanced understanding of agriculture and biomass to extract/collect the information from team members and to organize/document the information in an appropriate report format in a reasonable timeframe. The working group will address the entire value chain from production through to the needs and challenges of customers as specified in its mandate.
  • Working Groups (All)
    • Ling Mark noted that while there are no dedicated funds for Steering Committee activities, OPG and OMAFRA would be investigating ways to make resources available to support the working groups.
    • Ling encouraged working group chairs to convene conference calls as needed.

Actions:

  1. Working group & task team chairs are to define their resource needs as specifically as possible.
  2. In the spirit of openness and transparency, the Terms of Reference for the Working Groups will be posted on the Steering Committee website along with the lists of members.

  1. Discussion on Need for Ag Biomass Research/Business Forum

  • Helma Geerts proposed that the Steering Committee consider whether there is a need for ag biomass research/business forums to bring together Ontario researchers and business leaders to share the latest information on ag biomass. These forums would enable the Steering Committee and working groups to identify the state of the science in ag biomass and the gaps they need to work towards filling. The forums would also provide an opportunity for the Steering Committee to extend its reach by transferring knowledge to a broad group of interested stakeholders across the province – a commitment made when the Steering Committee was formed and a need that continues to be raised.
  • The forums could be in-person, via webEX or videoconferencing through the internet and through Ontario government field offices across the province.
  • In terms of timing, the forums should occur ASAP to enable the working groups to proceed with their work plans.
  • A numbers of ideas were raised, e.g. holding during the World Congress on Industrial Biotechnology or the Growing the Margins conference, and including taxation sessions such as those provided by Clarence Haverson, OMAFRA, presenting a "Research to Receptor" -type series (road show) where some of the presenters are local, and engaging with Life Sciences Ontario.

Actions:

  1. OMAFRA staff to prepare an outline of the forum concept for Steering Committee input.

  1. Update of OFA's "A Transformative Project to Generate Energy for Ontario by Developing an Innovative Agricultural Biomass Value Chain Sector" (David Armitage, Charlie Lalonde)

  • Recruitment of farmer/co-operators for field-scale purpose-grown crop plantings:
    • First call involved contracts with 15 producers already with crops in the ground, for about 300 acres (20 acres per trial on average), focused on north shore of Lake Erie. No data yet.
    • Second call for co-operators to plant 600 acres across the province – some will be same co-operators as first group, but most will need to start planting energy crops. Most growers are interested in Miscanthus; will need to address need for diversity of crops to be grown. Responses due by the end of this month, with selection of co-operators by December. Co-operators need to commit to being involved through to the end of the project. They also need to secure their own markets for the biomass.
    • Bill Deen is providing agronomic advice for the OSCIA portion of the project.
  • In the first phase of the project, OFA has issued 3 RFPs (circulated to Steering Committee):
      1. Literature review of agronomic practices; review of optimization of biomass harvesting, densification properties and processes; and transportation applicable to different end uses.
      2. Economic impact assessment of commercially grown biomass in Ontario and market potentials.
      3. Optimization processes to extract plant nutrients for recycling to soils and the removal of undesirable inorganic materials from biomass prior to processing. This project will be supported by lab testing of materials and processes.
  • Contracts with consultants are in process. Announcements to be made shortly.

Action:

  1. OFA project update will be a standing item on Steering Committee agenda. The objective is to ensure information is shared between Steering Committee, Working Groups and OFA; possible meetings offline with working group chairs & OFA.
  2. OFA to work with Annette Anderson on minor use issues.

  1. Overview of Conversion to Wood-Fibre Biomass at Atikokan (Al Arnott, OPG)

  • See presentation on OPG's website
  • Al explained that electricity demand has changed, enabling the closure of two coal units at Lambton and two at Nanticoke; so has electricity supply in Ontario (in 2002, 24.9% coal vs. 6.6% coal in 2009).
  • Garry McKeever noted that that province is developing a new long-term energy plan, with overview document by the end of 2010 that will identify the new energy mix for Ontario. Consultation on this by Ministry of Energy is underway. Then the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) will develop a detailed supply plan. The government looks at the Atikokan conversion as a learning experience; cost issues will be key (e.g. storage and fuel handling for biomass are more costly).
  • Al reported that the Town of Atikokan was instrumental in this project moving forward in order to preserve jobs. The generating station is 25 years old; can get another 20 years' service out of it before significant investment is required; good fit with Ontario's forestry sector; conversion less costly than a new gas-fired plant; provides flexibility to ramp up or down; more dust and lower combustion threshold than coal; emissions from biomass are lower than coal. Safety of biomass use at the plant is a key issue (e.g. biomass is more dusty and more volatile than coal, requiring more precautions).
  • Design in 2011; construction in 2012 with completion in 2013; in service fall 2013; power output will be reduced from the current 740 gigawatts/year to 140 GW/year; plant will require 10 tonnes/day of woody biomass; equivalent to <1% of annual Ontario harvest; 10-year supply contracts.

  1. OPG's Interest in Torrefaction (Phil Reinert)

  • See presentation on OPG's website
  • Torrefaction means "to roast"; it is conducted in an oxygen-starved environment so as not to burn the material; torrefaction occurs further along the heating/temperature gradient than pelletizing raw biomass and just short of the heating/temperature gradient for carbonizing raw material; the gases given-off during the torrefaction process provide the energy to self-sustain the process. Depending on the "recipe" being followed by the torrefier, generally get a 30% moisture reduction (volume loss) with a 10% energy loss. This 90%/70% ratio provides the energy densification of 1.3 times or 30% increase in energy density per unit of volume.
  • Versatile process used in a number of industries commercially (e.g. pressure-treating lumber, coffee roasting, etc.).
  • Raw biomass has to be stored covered; torrefied biomass is expected to be hydrophobic but is yet to be proven on a commercial scale; early results are promising; torrefaction is typically undertaken before pelletizing (the heated torrefied product is more easily pelletized); economics of the industry suggest the torrefaction plant should be as close to supply of raw biomass feedstock as possible to reduce transportation costs (i.e. not paying to transport large quantities of water great distances).
  • There are a number of claimed benefits of torrefaction which are yet to be proven at the commercial scale, although not all are required to make torrefied biomass preferred over raw biomass. Benefits include: no off-gassing, no biological decomposition, hydrophobic (minimal moisture absorption when it gets wet), low moisture content, higher calorific value, non-hygroscopic (doesn't attract moisture from the air), dramatically reduced dusting, etc.
  • Few commercial scale biomass torrefaction plants in-service in the world; one in the Netherlands supplying a large converted coal power plant; a number of others in commissioning stage in Europe including one in Belgium and a second one in the Netherlands.
  • Six broad categories of torrefaction reactor technologies used for torrefying biomass including rotary drying drum, screw conveyor, multiple hearth, toroidal flow, compact moving bed, and belt dryer. Most technology suppliers have process variants based on one of these six technologies. Simplest is the belt dryer and most complex is the toroidal flow. The in-service plant in the Netherlands is a belt dryer design. The plants closest to completing commissioning are of the toroidal flow and belt dryer designs. No commercial scale plants yet in North America, only prototypes.
  • Rough equipment cost estimates provided by technology suppliers are in the ~$5 million range for the torrefaction reactor but must add-on a number of additional costs to have an operating plant that are site specific including: land acquisition, regulatory approvals, infrastructure costs, site preparation, etc – best to discuss with torrefaction equipment suppliers.
  • Remasco is gasifying biomass now with a process that could be relatively quickly converted to produce torrefied biomass with a relatively small equipment modification.
  • Energex in Quebec is pelletizing first, then torrefying. One of the few doing it in that order.
  • Pelletizing after torrefying is undertaken for savings in transportation and handling costs. The extent pelletizing is undertaken is based on satisfying particular customer needs. In OPG's plants, the torrefied product must be in a powder form in order to be blown into the boiler. Therefore, it must be pelletized as the powder would be difficult to store outdoors and difficult to reclaim and transport to the boiler.
  • OPG and other fuel combustors pay for a fuel's energy density commonly measured in gigajoules. This is how it is today for coal; not all coal has the same energy content and chemical attributes and therefore there are different coal prices. Torrefied fuel has ~30% greater energy density (torrefection increases the BTU/pound value compared to raw biomass). All other factors being equal (chemistry issues, etc.), the per ton price of torrefied biomass should be higher than the per ton price for raw biomass.
  • It was clarified that OPG is not an R&D company so would not fund a pilot torrefaction plant.
  • OPG is proceeding with work equally on both raw biomass and torrefied biomass because torrefaction is not yet a sufficiently proven technology in North America. OPG can not yet say that torrefied biomass is the leading form of biomass.

  1. Other Business

  • Update on Website Usage: Helma Geerts reported that website usage stats are monitored on a monthly basis. Roughly 1,000 page views are made per month, with the most popular being the research projects, MEI presentation, OPA presentation, overview of biomass and the funding chart.
  • Round Table Updates: Aileen MacNeil reported that there was considerable interest from producers in energy crops at the Outdoor Farm Show. Some producers are talking about forming a biomass producers association. John Kelly noted that the Life Sciences Ontario conference was being held on Nov. 10.

  1. Next Steering Committee Meeting

  • The next meeting date will be held at the end of January or beginning of February 2011.

  1. Adjournment

  • The meeting was adjourned at approximately 12:30 p.m.

For more information:
Toll Free: 1-877-424-1300
Local: (519) 826-4047
E-mail: ag.info.omafra@ontario.ca
Author: OMAFRA Staff
Creation Date: 10 December 2010
Last Reviewed: 01 June 2011