Biomass Thermal Energy Council

[boilermanjr]

Hey all of you boiler geeks out there, there is a new trade group called the Biomass Thermal Energy Council. We have formed to fill a void in representation for those of us who think that one of the highest uses of our biomass resource is for thermal applications. There has been a lot of policy focus on chip burning for electric power plants and on cellulosic ethanol mainly for transportation fuels. Are these the most efficient uses for a limited renewable resource? Did you know that our National Renewable Energy Lab has a goal to produce enough cellulosic ethanol by 2022 that it alone will consume 1/2 of all estimated sustainable biomass (from wood to grass to waste crops) available in this country each year? Should we focus on technologies that yield a 30% efficient use of the resource or an 80-90% efficient use of the resource? BTEC will endeavor to teach our policy makers, educators, and others about how biomass used in thermal applications can help to provide a solution to our dependence on foreign oil and other expensive, CO2 contributing energy sources.

This posting is not targeted at the home owner. However, if you know someone in the biomass thermal business, for instance a large landowner, owner of a logging or forestry company, owner of industry (John Deere for instance), a politician, educator- or so on, please let them know about BTEC. Ask the people you bought your boiler from whether or not they belong! The website is www.biomassthermal.org . In the North Country about 75% of our residential energy use is thermal. About 1/2 of our residential carbon emissions can be attributed to home heating. Why isn't our governtment talking more about this? Biomass is the king of current alternative renewable energy sources by usage because it is understood and relatively inexpensive. Please help us to teach others about the benefits of biomass thermal energy.

Thanks for your help.

 

[cguida]

Why isn't our governtment talking more about this? Biomass is the king of current alternative renewable energy sources by usage because it is understood and relatively inexpensive.
Thanks for your help.

Very good point!
It's amazing to me how people will spend a fortune in public money on counter-productive boondogles like Ethanol; or expensive electricity from windmills and such, complete with rube-goldberg "Renewable Energy Credits," Green tags, Carbon Cap-and-trade offsets, etc etc. And then never even acknowledge that the major source of carbon-neutral oil displacement is just burning wood.

Why is this? Is it because burning wood is just too prosaic -- too common -- too accessible to the average guy? Is it because just burning wood doesn't leave that much of a role for lobbyists and special interests? Do they figure that burning wood is its own reward -- the money you save by not buying oil ? How come there is no carbon off-set credit for burning wood?

Makes me mad to think about it.

(How's that for a rant?)

 

[WoodNotOil]

It is really much simplier than all that. There are politicians, lobbyists, and industry. They all do what is best for themselves but call it what is best for us. Sometimes we even get to be part of the process. We pay our taxes and if we are really lucky we can get a tax credit for spending money the way our government says we should.

We are much better off taking care of ourselves...

(You're not the only one who can rant!)

 

[JustWood]

One of the reasons biomass is not looked at more seriously is because of the availability of cheap coal. Most coal burning power plants are situated near and serviced by rail directly from a coal mine. This makes for VERY cheap coal and transportation. Also coal to energy infrastructure is already in place.
Biomass is also very regional due to transportation costs unless sited near a railroad.
Tree huggers and NIMBYism play a part in the permitting of biomass to energy plant proposals.
A few years ago a coal burning power plant near me wanted to upgrade the facility to burn a 50/50 mix of coal/wood but local NIMBY's voted it down because of the excesive smoke they envisioned it wood create. Another project at a lumber mill was also shot down for the same reason. They were going to burn their own waste to generate electric/steam to dry their lumber. Excess electric wood be sold to the grid but once again NIMBY's shot it down.

 

[tom in maine]

The other issue is the fact that you can generate your own home heating energy most efficiently with a gasifier.
Any additional steps (like ethanol or wood to electric) wastes energy and allows someone to "Process" that stick wood
energy and sell it to you at a profit (their profit!).

Seems like an erosion of an ancient right, cutting a tree and using it to keep your home warm.
Coupled with high efficiency wood stoves or boilers, it is the best bang for the buck.

Here in Maine there is a lot of talk about heat pumps for home heating, since they are clean and efficient--and you
get married to the utilities forever unless you have a stupidly expensive investment in photovoltaics.

Biomass Thermal is an important issue that could become a contentious one in the future.

 

[pybyr]

One of the reasons biomass is not looked at more seriously is because of the availability of cheap coal. Most coal burning power plants are situated near and serviced by rail directly from a coal mine. This makes for VERY cheap coal and transportation. Also coal to energy infrastructure is already in place.
Biomass is also very regional due to transportation costs unless sited near a railroad.
Tree huggers and NIMBYism play a part in the permitting of biomass to energy plant proposals.
A few years ago a coal burning power plant near me wanted to upgrade the facility to burn a 50/50 mix of coal/wood but local NIMBY's voted it down because of the excesive smoke they envisioned it wood create. Another project at a lumber mill was also shot down for the same reason. They were going to burn their own waste to generate electric/steam to dry their lumber. Excess electric wood be sold to the grid but once again NIMBY's shot it down.

NIMBYism really _is_ a big problem, especially here in VT, where it most often seems to be manifested by folks who move from somewhere else and then think that they have a deity-granted right to force everyone else to maintain their idealized notion of a status quo. Too often, it's not about real environmental issues, but, rather, selfishness dressed-in-drag with pseudo-enviro-jargon. Note- I originally come from somewhere else, too, so this is not a "native vs flatlander" thing. Nor am I anything less than sincerely concerned about the environment- I was recycling regularly long before it was cool or convenient. NIMBY is about the distinction in world view between people that think that activism is accomplishing something by doing something vs people that think that activism is about perpetually, reactively, selfishly, crapping on what someone else is doing or considering doing.

 

[Hansson]

Maybe you can find som info here
(broken link removed)

 

[boilermanjr]

Good link. Much appreciated.

 

[Hansson]

Good link. Much appreciated.

The guys at ÄFAB now what they talking about