Main Menu
| 2011 Annual Vermont School Woodchip and Pellet Users Conference |
 |
 |
 Held on January 17, 2011Elm Hill Elementary School, Springfield, Vermont On a cold January morning, nearly 70 biomass users, suppliers, equipment manufacturers, and supporting service providers gathered at the Elm Hill Elementary School in Springfield, Vermont to hear about current and future woodchip and pellet industry trends and learn from one another’s experience in the operation and maintenance of school wood-fired heating systems. The conference, which has been held annually since 1996, is a source of information for those both currently operating a school woodchip or pellet system and considering such an installation at their facility. The event was organized by the Vermont Department of Forests, Parks & Recreation; the Vermont Superintendents Association’s School Energy Management Program (SEMP); the Vermont Department of Public Service; and the Biomass Energy Resource Center (BERC). During the first hour, conference participants arrived and networked with other attendees over the morning’s refreshments of coffee and pastry. Wood Utilization Forester Paul Frederick of the Vermont Department of Forests, Parks & Recreation then opened the program agenda by welcoming everyone, inviting participants to introduce themselves, and introducing the first of seven speakers. Dave Lamont, director of the Planning and Energy Division of the Vermont Department of Public Service, began his presentation by discussing Vermont’s energy supply and consumption, citing an increasing demand and the need to consider efficiencies in bringing down this demand. In light of uncertainties, especially the fluctuations of oil prices, he described the advantages of wood in offsetting the use of foreign oil, its lower and more stable cost, and its local sourcing using a renewable energy option that can help address the issue of climate change. Lamont pointed out that globally there are 1.5 billion people who desire to improve their standard of living, and that this will result in even more of a demand for energy going forward, something that will surely have an effect on Vermont’s energy supply in the future. While the eastern United States has reserves of natural gas, procuring it from underground can be an expensive and dangerous process. By employing efficiency measures first, the resulting fuel savings can help save on capital costs involved in converting to systems that utilize locally sourced wood energy. [view Powerpoint presentation in PDF format] Paul Frederick, Wood Utilization Forester from the Vermont Department of Forests, Parks & Recreation, then presented on Woodchip and Pellet Supply and Trends in the Market, beginning with an overview of current user categories in Vermont and the percentage of wood fuel being used by each. Using 2009-10 heating season numbers, he noted total wood fuel use in Vermont at 1,507,897 green tons—an overall decline of 46,000 tons from the previous year that he attributed to a relatively mild winter. He did a quantitative summary of users and suppliers both in and serving Vermont, noting that school woodchip use for the 2009-10 heating season totaled 23,271 green tons, a small portion of the overall use in Vermont. Of the 15 chip sellers in the state, just three of them supplied the majority of schools. Vermont schools paid, on average, $56 per green ton for woodchips, a slight drop from the previous year due to lower diesel fuel costs and competition. Fuel oil would need to be $1.14 per gallon for it to be lower than the equivalent in woodchips.  Discussing market supply and price trends for 2011 and beyond, Frederick noted the growing use of bole chips, which currently make up more than 80 percent of the fuel used by schools. Regionally, hardwood lumber production is down due to continued weakness in the housing sector. As a result, mill chip production is well below capacity. Of the reported bole chips, 53 percent had been screened (two woodchip suppliers, Bruce Limlaw and Jim Lathrop, are screening bole chips and one supplier is debarking and screening). Locally, oil prices last year reduced demand for firewood; sawmills continue to operate at less than capacity; good winter logging conditions are resulting in good log supplies; and lower log prices are causing private landowners to hold on to their timber. In terms of pellets, North American production increased 380 percent between 2003 and 2008, and if all proposed pellet production plants are completed, this could increase an additional 150 percent from 2008 levels. Roughly 20 percent of US production was exported, mostly to Europe. From Woodpelletprice.com, Frederick cited retail prices for bagged pellets ranging $220 to $290 per ton. Personal contacts with local bulk pellet suppliers revealed bulk prices at plus or minus $195, not including delivery. New developments included changes to the Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP), which was ‘nearly zero funded’ by Congress at the end of 2010. Early indications are that woodchips used in schools are not likely to be eligible under the program’s recently released final rules. The ME/VT Interstate Truck Weight Pilot Project, which temporarily increased interstate weigh limits, expired on December 16 of this year. Chip vans with overweight permits for state highways can no longer use the interstates legally. US Senators Leahy (VT) and Collins (ME) are working to make the increased limits permanent, or at least extend the trial period for another year. Several new biomass-fired facilities have been proposed, including one new cogeneration project in a Federal facility and two power plants with co-located pellet plants. A Vermont legislative study committee, charged with enhancing the growth of the biomass industry while protecting forest health, is in its second year of its three-year charge. The Bio-E Committee’s interim report recommends voluntary harvesting guidelines, and notes that the committee will address procurement guidelines in 2011. The committee’s work also resulted in a basic update of the 2007 Vermont Wood Fuel Supply Study. It estimates net available low-grade wood, above and beyond current use, at nearly 900,000 green tons. Woodchip supply and market predictions included an overall stable chip demand over the next few years; continued short supply of  sawmill residues; a stable number of suppliers producing chips of improved quality; and chip prices that will continue to be influenced by diesel fuel prices and competition. Pellet supply and market predictions included continued global pellet demand which will be driven by non-market forces; less available incentives that may slow new installations of pellet systems, but that availability of bulk pellets in the Northeast will continue to improve; and if oil prices remain high, pellet supplies will likely tighten and increase in price. [view Powerpoint presentation in PDF format]John Hinckley from RSG, Inc. in White River Junction, Vermont, a consultant services group for the management of business, transportation, and natural resources, presented an update on wood-fired boiler emissions and EPA’s proposed changes in the Boiler maximum achievable control technology Rule (aka “Boiler MACT Rule”). He began by noting some key facts: the same rule applies to all boiler sizes, there is no minimum size specified, and it focuses on two specific pollutants: particulate matter and carbon monoxide. Proposed on June 4, 2010 and originally slated to be finalized in December 2010, then in January 2011, EPA received court approval to re-propose the rule instead, requesting 1.5 years to properly address the 4,500 comments it received and congressional pressure. Hinckley then reviewed the RSG/BERC report on emissions controls that was completed in May of 2010, where the study evaluated 24 stack emission test reports for both woodchips and pellets. It focused on particulate matter emissions and researched the cost effectiveness of various control technologies (cyclones, baghouses, electrostatic precipitators, etc.) and developed a list of best management practices. He noted that fuel quality is imperative, and by removing bark from woodchips could result in reducing particulate emissions by 10 to 30 percent. Most installations (the EPA rule will apply only to new installations, not existing ones) with cyclone technology would not meet the particulate matter limit, but that electrostatic precipitators and fabric filter technology would enable all the installations reviewed to meet it. [view Powerpoint presentation in PDF format] Chris Recchia, deputy secretary of the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (and former executive director of BERC), continued the discussion on the EPA rule for which BERC had submitted comments in August 2010. Despite the delays, he expects that the final rule will likely come out by Spring 2011, due to pressure from a variety of sources.  Adam Sherman, BERC fuel supply program director (and the organization’s interim director), presented an overview of carbon impacts from school wood heating systems. He noted that the historical assumption that burning biomass is 100 percent carbon neutral is an over simplification, yet recent rhetoric that it “spews” carbon is wrong. He began by giving an overview of how the forests emit and absorb carbon. In a life-cycle approach (similar to cradle to grave concept) all the associated carbon gross emissions are accounted for including the emissions from chain saws, feller bunchers, skidders, loaders, trucks, and chippers. The extent to which these gross emissions net out to zero depend completely on what happens in the forest. Obviously, if the woodchips come from land clearing, the carbon neutrality claim does not hold up because that footprint will not re-sequester carbon as the forest regrows. Referring to a slide illustrating biomass harvesting, transport, and boiler combustion emissions, he noted that they were gross emission figures and that the net emissions depend largely on the amount of time required to re-absorb the emitted carbon. The forest is not a homogenous system that is easily quantified in generic terms; the supply of woodchips varies from day to day, week to week, and month to month, and each harvest job is as unique as the forest parcels themselves. To measure the carbon impacts, many variables need to be considered, including 1) the amount of carbon emitted in harvesting, processing, and transporting the wood; 2) if the wood was sourced from land clearing for development; 3) the pre-harvest forest conditions; 4) what was harvested, how much, and what other markets the timber went to; 5) how it was harvested and the post harvest conditions; 6) how the carbon impacts are measured (fixed or variable time period); 7) whether the assessment is looking only at the stand-level impacts or the landscape level; and 8) how the wood is being used (woodchips? pellets? heating and cooling? electric power?). Sherman explained that all wood products eventually return that carbon back to the atmosphere. Some cycle that carbon rapidly while others store the carbon for 50 or 100 years before it eventually decomposes or is burned, and noted that it is important to understand that many “durable” wood products store only a fraction of the starting carbon. Another critical factor is the amount of forestland on which the impacts are being examined, and that if only the impacts of a harvested parcel are examined, build up of sequestered forest carbon and the removal of carbon during harvests over time are more pronounced. When examined over a larger forestland area, however, the impacts are less pronounced because as a larger system, the harvested volumes are very small when compared to the unharvested land that continues to sequester carbon, often in excess of the wood harvested. Sherman noted a recent study done by the Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences that has caused some controversy, with different people saying the study concluded different things. The study focused specifically on Massachusetts, on electricity production, and assumed greater harvest intensity on the same harvested footprint as business as usual. The forest carbon impacts were measured on the stand level rather than at the landscape level. What the study did say, he explained, was that when compared with business as usual, there is an initial carbon "deficit" when burning biomass and that this deficit is “paid off” slowly over time as forests re-grow and sequester carbon from the atmosphere. At a certain point, the carbon deficit changes to a carbon "dividend." The study also said that thermal energy pays back its deficit far quicker than electric generation. In summary,  Sherman reiterated that wood energy mimics the natural cycling carbon between the forests and the atmosphere, while fossil fuels release carbon that was removed from the carbon cycle a very long time ago (millions of years). All wood and wood products eventually release carbon back into the atmosphere—it is only a matter of time. There are many variables that need to be considered when evaluating carbon emissions from wood, including harvest sustainability, processing requirements, transport mode and distance, and end use (and what that wood was replacing). No two schools will have the same carbon emissions, and the real carbon benefits of using wood versus fossil fuels pays off over a longer time frame. [view Powerpoint presentation in PDF format] Norm Etkind, director of the Vermont Superintendents Association’s School Energy Management Program (SEMP), began with an overview of services offered by SEMP for schools considering the installation of a biomass energy system. He noted that over the past five years, he has made site visits to 345 school buildings. In a recent evaluation of 10 of the schools visited, 75 percent of the recommended measures were implemented, and average sized schools saw about a 17 percent energy savings, mostly from improved operations. He thanked those who completed and returned the wood fuel use surveys, noting that they provide critical information on the performance of the systems that allow for a quality analysis of costs and benefits. Vermont leads the country in the use of school-sized biomass systems. Basic survey results for the 2009-10 heating season included a total of 43 K-12 schools in Vermont using woodchips as their major heat source, together comprising 5,627,676 square feet and serving 27,343 students. This is about 35 percent of the square footage and 30 percent of the total number of students. A total of 23,271 tons of chips were used last year, displacing the equivalent of 1,425,948 gallons of oil. Etkind noted that it should be kept in mind that the 2009-10 heating season was about nine percent warmer than usual; hence savings would be greater for an average year. In aggregate, these schools saved $1,746,164 on their fuel bills or about 46 percent of their fuel cost, with savings ranging from 13-65 percent (the large disparity due primarily to the range in fuel costs). The average prices were: oil at $2.33 per gallon; propane at $1.89 per gallon; natural gas at $1.16 per therm; and the average chip price was $56.42 per ton. In terms of operating the systems, on average, operators spent a little under an hour a day  maintaining the system during the heating season; the average number of days the systems were in operation was 187 and for new systems, 196. The range was from 106-266 days, and overall satisfaction with the systems ranged from 4 to 10 with an average of 8.9. For new systems, the average was 9.4 with a range from 8-10. Schools with pellet systems are People’s Academy in Morrisville, which has been operating since the mid 1980s; Twinfield Union High School in Marshfield, which converted in 2009; Craftsbury Academy, which is just coming on line; and Elm Hill Elementary School in Springfield (where the chip conference was being held). The average price paid for pellets was $225 per ton. Etkind described graphs illustrating comparative costs based on net dollars per million Btu among various fuel sources as well as fuel energy content/cost. In terms of real savings, actual fuel use at these schools is the equivalent of .32 gallons of oil per square foot, and average Vermont schools use about .44 gallons per square foot. This is 19 percent less fuel (after correcting for degree days). What accounts for this additional savings? This is unclear, but Etkind noted some possibilities: 1) when new systems are installed, improvements are made to controls and main distribution as well; 2) increased operator involvement and attention to proper operation and performance of the systems; and 3) the annual efficiency may be better than 70 percent. Etkind concluded by listing the benefits of using wood fuel, including reduction in fuel costs, increased local employment in the woods, in fuel transportation, and in constructing and maintaining the systems; increased tax revenue; reduction in greenhouse gases; reduced dependence on foreign sources of fuel, use of a renewable resource, and creating markets for unmerchantable biomass. [view Powerpoint presentation in PDF format] Deborah Barney, P.E., BERC project manager, gave an overview of community-scale pellet heating systems, stating that the biggest differences between woodchip and pellet systems are fuel storage and the systems that convey the fuel to the boiler. She discussed the system configuration of a pellet system, noting both single and two-stage combustion, and reviewed—for both woodchip and pellet systems—the likely system sizes, fuel types, system types, and storage facilities required based on the square footage of any given building. Explaining wood pellet characteristics, she noted that they were made from forestry residues and wood waste materials, using no glues or additives. They are of a uniform shape and size and have a higher energy density per ton than chips. Typically, 4-6 percent moisture content by weight, pellets come in four grades: super premium, premium, standard, and industrial/utility. The higher grade the pellet, the less ash is produced during combustion. The advantages to using pellets is that they can be used at a residential scale (for stoves and central heating) as well as in smaller commercial facilities (less than 2 MMBtu per hour). Because of their lower moisture content, pellets have a higher heating value and operate at 80-90 percent efficiency. They are suitable for locations with limited space, including retrofits, and their higher energy density means a smaller fuel storage area. Pellet systems have much lower capital costs for equipment and installations as well as lower operation and maintenance (O&M) costs, and require less operator attention, have fewer mechanical jams, and produce less ash as compared to woodchip systems. Disadvantages include the fact that pellets production requires more energy than woodchips, the cost of pellet fuel is more volatile than woodchips, and fuel costs are more economically feasible on a smaller scale. Bulk pellet delivery is not widely commercially available and additional delivery costs are directly related to the distance from the pellet distribution center to the facility (fewer than 50 miles is preferable). Lastly, a typical pellet system requires mechanical means to fill the pellet storage silo. [view Powerpoint presentation in PDF format] After a question and answer session, the conference participants broke for lunch after which they toured the Elm Street Elementary School’s wood pellet system, followed by a tour of the woodchip system at Springfield High School. Vermont School Woodchip and Fuel Use Surveys* 2009-10 Heating Season: All Schools* 2009-10 Heating Season: Breakout of Systems Installed Since 2000 * 2008-09 Heating Season: All Schools * 2008-09 Heating Season: Breakout of Systems Installed Since 2000 * 2007-08 Heating Season: All Schools * 2007-08 Heating Season: Breakout of Systems Installed Since 2000 * 2006-07 Heating Season: All Schools * 2006-07 Heating Season: Breakout of Systems Installed Since 2000 Image captions (from top to bottom):Attendees of the 2011 Annual Vermont School Woodchip Users Conference had the opportunity to network and share experiences with others involved with chip and pellet heating in schools .Dave Lamont, director of the Planning and Energy Division of the Vermont Department of Public Service, made a presentation on, among other things, Vermont's energy supply and consumption. Paul Frederick, Wood Utilization Forester from the Vermont Department of Forests, Parks & Recreation, updated the conference participants on woodchip and pellet supply and trends in the market. The pellet boiler at Elm Hill Elementary School. The flexible auger can be seen in the top foreground, which delivers pellets to the combustion chamber. Jim Lathrop (at left), a wood fuel supplier to many of Vermont's wood-heated schools, discusses his business's shift to screened, higher-quality chips with another attendee. Woodchips being conveyed to the boiler at Springfield High School's biomass system. |
