Examensarbeten nr 38 • 2002 Densified Biomass Fuels in Sweden

Transcription

Institutionen för skogshushållning
Examensarbeten nr 38 • 2002
Densified Biomass Fuels in Sweden:
Country report for the EU/INDEBIF project
Pellets och briketter i Sverige:
Landsrapport för EU/INDEBIF-projektet
Jakob Hirsmark SKOGSVETARPROGRAMMET
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Department of Forest Management and Products
Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet
Uppsala
Examensarbeten nr 38, 2002
Densified Biomass Fuels in Sweden:
Country report for the EU/INDEBIF project
Pellets och briketter i Sverige:
Landsrapport för EU/INDEBIF-projektet
Final Thesis 20 p on level D in subject Bioenergy at the Department of Forest Management and Products
Examensarbete 20 p på D-nivå i ämnet Bioenergi vid Institutionen för Skogshushållning
Supervisor/Handledare: Dr Johan Vinterbäck
Preface
This thesis is the result of my work for the INDEBIF project within the EU. It is the end task
of my studies for Master of Science in Forestry at the Department of Forest Management and
Products at the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, and covers half a year of full
time studies. I have had the pleasure to present it in Graz, Austria in September 2001 and in
Uppsala, Sweden in March 2002
I would especially like to thank everyone at companies and institutions that have put time and
effort in giving me relevant information both in the questionnaire survey and in personal
communications. Most of all I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr Johan Vinterbäck, who
has supported and adviced me in the completion of this work.
I am grateful for the kind of insight in the Swedish densified biomass fuels business that this
work has given me. The choice of carrying this study out was never regretted...
Uppsala, March 2002
Jakob Hirsmark
Summary
Increased emissions of green house gases to the atmosphere during the last century as well as
the issue of national fuel delivery security has led to increased interest for carbon dioxide
neutral and renewable energy sources such as biofuels. In Sweden high taxes on fossil fuels
such as coal, oil and gas, has led to significant advantages for the bioenergy sector. This study
focuses on the Swedish densified biomass fuel (DBF) sector and the results will be used as a
part of the INDEBIF project (ALTENER Contract 4.1030/Z/99-520) within the EU.
The aim of the INDEBIF project is to stimulate increased usage of densified biofuels in
Europe. This will be done by developing a database on the Internet where relevant
information is available for each country. Companies and individuals who are considering an
investment in their heating system should be able to find up to date information about
producers, distributors and retailers and their prices on different assortments, as well as
information about taxes, emissions etc. The goal of this study was to map the Swedish DBF
industry and the whole situation as such in order to provide general information for the
Swedish part of the project. The gathering of information has been based on a questionnaire
survey to DBF producers, open sources and personal communications.
The modern development of the Swedish biofuels sector in general, and densified biofuels
sector in particular, has been successful and today Sweden is considered as one of the leading
biofuel using nations. There are about 30 larger production plants for densified biofuels in
Sweden and the national production of pellets in 2001 exceeded 700 000 tonnes. Three factors
seem to have contributed to this position; a good availability of wood raw material, a taxing
system that discriminates the use of fossil fuels, and well extended district heating systems.
A number of life cycle assessments have been made for DBFs. For large-scale incineration
facilities the use of DBFs leads to reduction of a variety of emissions, of which CO2 makes
the most difference, compared to fossil fuels. Emissions of CO are, however, relatively larger
for DBFs. The cost of producing pellets in a typical Swedish pellet plant is, according to the
Full Costing Method of VDI 2067, about 61 €/tonne. Half of this cost corresponds to the raw
material cost and about 20 % corresponds to the drying process.
The raw material used today consists mainly of sawmilling byproducts from spruce and pine.
Most producers look upon their raw material supply with satisfaction, but in some regions the
competition with the board industry, use for animal bedding and direct firing with unrefined
byproducts is very hard. The Swedish sawmilling industry gives a variety of byproducts
suitable for DBF production. A full utilisation of only the sawdust and dry chips would
correspond to some 1.5 million tonnes of pellets per year. A total utilisation of all bark,
sawdust, dry chips, raw chips, slabs and edgings from the Swedish sawmilling industry would
result in production of 6.9 million tonnes of pellets annually corresponding to 33 TWh..
There are good reasons to believe that the market for DBFs will increase in the long term.
This helps reaching the international agreements of lowering CO2 emissions, decreases the
national dependence on imported energy, creates domestic jobs in geographical areas where
jobs are scarce, gives a higher value to the national forests and is in line with the
recommendations of increasing the usage of biofuels by the EU and national authorities.
2
Sammanfattning
De ökade utsläppen av växthusgaser till atmosfären under det senaste århundradet och viljan
att minska beroendet av importerade bränslen, har lett till ett ökat intresse för
koldioxidneutrala och förnyelsebara energikällor som t ex biobränsle. I Sverige har höga
skatter på fossila bränslen, såsom kol, olja och gas, lett till betydande fördelar för
bioenergisektorn. Den här studien fokuserar på kompakterade biobränslen (d v s pellets och
briketter) i Sverige och resultaten kommer att användas som en del i projektet INDEBIF
(ALTENER Contract 4.1030/Z/99-520) inom EU.
Målet med INDEBIF-projektet är att stimulera en ökad användning av pellets och briketter i
Europa. Detta ska uppnås genom att utveckla en databas på internet där information om
pellets och briketter finns tillgänglig för olika europeiska länder. Företag och privatpersoner
som överväger en investering i ett uppvärmningssystem ska kunna hitta aktuell information
om
producenter,
distributörer
och
återförsäljare
av
såväl
bränsle
som
förbränningsanläggningar, samt t ex information om skatter, miljöpåverkan och priser på olika
sortiment. Målet med denna studie har varit att ta fram och sammanställa generell information
om den svenska industrin för pellets och briketter för att använda i den svenska delen av
INDEBIF-projektet. Insamlingen av information har baserats på en enkätundersökning till
svenska producenter av pellets och briketter, litteratur och andra öppna källor samt personlig
kommunikation.
Utvecklingen för den svenska bioenergisektorn i allmänhet och sektorn för förädlade
biobränslen i synnerhet, har varit framgångsrik och idag ses Sverige som ett av de ledande
bioenergianvändande länderna. Det finns omkring 30 större produktionsenheter för pellets och
briketter i Sverige och den inhemska produktionen av pellets under 2001 var mer än 700 000
ton. Framförallt tre faktorer verkar ha bidragit till dagens situation: en god tillgång på
råmaterial för produktionen, ett skattesystem som diskriminerar användandet av fossila
bränslen, samt väl utbyggda fjärrvärmenät.
Det har utförts ett flertal livscykelanalyser på pellets- och brikettillverkning. För storskaliga
förbränningsanläggningar innebär en övergång från fossila bränslen till pellets eller briketter,
att en mängd utsläpp minskar, särskilt koldioxidutsläppen. Utsläppen av kolmonoxid ökar
dock. Produktionskostnaden i en typisk svensk pelletsfabrik, enligt Fullkostnadsmetoden VDI
2067, är ca 61 €/ton och domineras av två typer av kostnader. Råmaterialet står för ca hälften
av kostnaden, medan torkningsprocessen står för ca 20 %.
Råvaran som används idag är framförallt spån och flis av gran och tall. De flesta
producenterna upplever råvarutillgången som god, men i vissa regioner råder hård konkurrens
om råvaran med spånskiveindustrin, strö till djurhållning och direkteldning i oförädlat
tillstånd. Från den i Sverige så omfattande sågverksindustrin faller en mängd biprodukter som
lämpar sig för tillverkning av pellets och briketter. Ett fullt utnyttjande av endast det sågspån
och den torrflis som faller ut motsvarar 1,5 miljoner ton pellets per år. Ett totalt utnyttjande av
all bark, sågspån, torrflis, råflis och bakar som faller ut från den svenska sågverksindustrin
skulle ge en årsproduktion av 6,9 miljoner ton pellets vilket motsvarar 33 TWh.
Det finns goda skäl att anta att marknaden för pellets och briketter även i framtiden kommer
att utvecklas positivt. Användningen av pellets och briketter är ett steg mot att nå målet att
sänka CO2-utsläppen, minska beroendet av importerad energi, ge arbetstillfällen i
glesbygdsområden samt öka avsättningsmöjligheterna för skogsprodukter.
3
Table of contents
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
2
3
4
5
5.1
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
5.1.4
5.1.5
5.1.6
5.2
5.3
5.3.1
5.3.2
5.3.3
5.3.4
5.3.5
5.3.6
5.3.7
5.3.8
5.4
5.4.1
5.4.2
5.5
5.5.1
5.5.2
5.5.3
6
6.1
6.2
6.2.1
6.2.2
6.2.3
6.2.4
6.2.5
6.2.6
6.2.7
6.2.8
6.2.9
4
Preface ...........................................................................................................................1
Summary .......................................................................................................................2
Sammanfattning............................................................................................................3
Table of contents ...........................................................................................................4
List of diagrams, figures and tables ............................................................................6
Diagrams.........................................................................................................................6
Figures ............................................................................................................................6
Tables..............................................................................................................................7
Introduction ..................................................................................................................8
Questionnaire ..............................................................................................................10
Definitions, standards and characteristics of DBFs ................................................11
Technical evaluation of DBFs....................................................................................13
Raw materials ...............................................................................................................13
Wood ............................................................................................................................13
Bark ..............................................................................................................................14
Short rotation coppice...................................................................................................14
Peat ...............................................................................................................................14
Other raw materials ......................................................................................................15
Additives.......................................................................................................................16
Raw material potentials ................................................................................................17
Manufacturing process .................................................................................................19
Introduction ..................................................................................................................19
Drying...........................................................................................................................20
Comminution ................................................................................................................20
Conditioning .................................................................................................................20
Pelletisation/Briquetting ...............................................................................................21
Cooling .........................................................................................................................22
Storage ..........................................................................................................................23
Production of bark pellets.............................................................................................24
Fuel logistics.................................................................................................................24
Current distribution techniques ....................................................................................24
Residential storage........................................................................................................25
Incineration facilities ....................................................................................................26
Small-scale systems (0-100 kW) ..................................................................................26
Medium-scale systems (100-1000 kW)........................................................................28
Large-scale systems (>1000 kW) .................................................................................29
Economical aspects .....................................................................................................31
Raw material prices ......................................................................................................31
Production costs............................................................................................................32
Introduction ..................................................................................................................32
Raw material.................................................................................................................33
Drying...........................................................................................................................33
Comminution ................................................................................................................34
Pelletisation ..................................................................................................................34
Cooling .........................................................................................................................35
Storage ..........................................................................................................................35
Peripheral equipment ....................................................................................................36
Personnel costs .............................................................................................................36
6.2.10
6.2.11
6.3
6.3.1
6.3.2
6.3.3
7
7.1
7.2
7.2.1
7.2.2
7.3
8
8.1
8.2
8.3
9
10
11
11.1
11.2
11.3
Construction costs........................................................................................................36
Overall evaluation........................................................................................................37
Comparison of end-user prices for different fuels.......................................................38
Introduction .................................................................................................................38
Industrial market..........................................................................................................38
Residential market .......................................................................................................39
Overview of the state of DBF production and use..................................................40
Swedish producers of DBFs ........................................................................................40
Swedish producers of appliances.................................................................................42
Burning appliances ......................................................................................................42
Fuel production appliances ..........................................................................................43
Quantity of DBFs produced.........................................................................................44
DBF trade flows of today ..........................................................................................45
Trade patterns ..............................................................................................................45
Imports.........................................................................................................................46
Exports.........................................................................................................................47
Environmental impact of DBFs................................................................................48
Discussion ...................................................................................................................54
References...................................................................................................................56
Articles/Books/Reports................................................................................................56
Personal communications ............................................................................................59
Webpages.....................................................................................................................60
Appendices .................................................................................................................60
1 = Swedish Standards for pellets
2 = Swedish Standards for briquettes
3 = Questionnaire to DBF producers
5
1 List of diagrams, figures and tables
1.1 Diagrams
Diagram 1. Storing capacity of DBF producers in relation to their
production capacity
Diagram 2. Wood-fuel prices 1993-2001, SEK/MWh [free consumer,
current prices]
Diagram 3. Actual industrial energy prices in Sweden 1970-1999, SEK/MWh
Diagram 4. Actual residential energy prices in Sweden 1970-1999, SEK/MWh
Diagram 5. Production of upgraded biofuels for commercial sale
in Sweden 1993-2000, TWh.
23
31
38
39
44
1.2 Figures
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
Figure 8.
Figure 9.
Figure 10.
Figure 11.
Figure 12.
Figure 13.
Figure 14.
Figure 15.
Figure 16.
Figure 17.
Figure 18.
Figure 19.
Figure 20.
Figure 21.
Figure 22.
Figure 23.
Figure 24.
Figure 25.
Figure 26.
Figure 27.
Figure 28.
6
Additive for pellet production
Rotary drum drier
Rotary drum drier
Ring die pelletiser
Ring die pelletiser
Briquetting: Mechanical piston press
Cooling tower for pellets
The cooling track of a briquette production plant
The cooling tracks of a briquette production plant
Pellet big bags of 500 kg for distribution to small-scale customers
Bulk truck for distribution of wood pellets
Pellet silo
Pellet storage
Built in pellet storage
Example of a storage room of a small-scale pellet user
Pellet burner mounted on former oil boiler
Pellet burner, 20 kW, mounted on pellet boiler
Pellet fired furnace opened for ash removal
Ash emptying of appliance with pellet burner
Special vacuum cleaner for ash
Pellet stove, PellX K6 (3-6 kW) in operation
Pellet furnace, Tx 350 kW
Pellet burner, C2 150-300 kW
T 1,5 (1.5 MW)
T 2,5 (2.5 MW)
Major Swedish producers of briquettes, pellets and wood powder
Production mix and capacities in the Swedish DBF industry
The process tree of a biomass energy transportation system based
on pellets with baled forestry residues as raw material
16
20
20
21
21
21
22
22
22
25
25
25
26
26
26
27
27
27
27
28
28
29
29
29
29
40
41
50
1.3 Tables
Table 1.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Table 5.
Table 6.
Table 7.
Table 8.
Table 9.
Table 10.
Table 11.
Table 12.
Table 13.
Table 14.
Table 15.
Table 16.
Table 17.
Table 18.
Table 19.
Table 20.
Table 21.
Table 22.
Table 23.
SS 18 71 20 – Classification of Fuel Pellets
11
SS 18 71 21 – Classification of Fuel Briquettes
12
Chemical composition of different raw materials suitable
for the production of DBFs
13
Raw material potential for DBFs in the Swedish sawmilling
industry, results calculated in tonnes of pellet equivalents
17
Maximum production potentials for wood pellets
made from by-products from the sawmilling industry
18
Raw material prices and potential for pellets in Sweden
18
General conditions for the pelletisation process
33
Full costing method for a drum dryer
33
Full costing method for raw material crushing using a hammer mill 34
Full costing method for a pellet mill
34
Full costing method for a counterflow cooler after a pellet mill
35
Full costing method for silo storage at the pellet producer
35
Full costing method for peripheral equipment of a pellet plant
36
Calculation of the full costs for the facilities for the entire
pelletisation plant
36
Total costs and cost/t for each step of the pelletizing process
37
List of Swedish producers of DBF combustion units
42
List of Swedish producers of appliances for production,
storage and distribution of DBFs
43
Imports of untaxed fuels (biofuels) to Sweden 1992, 1995 & 1997 46
Raw material and energy input required for the production of the
equivalent of 1 MWh of DBF.
48
Emissions to the air from transports
48
Mass balance for producing 1 MWh of electricity from pellets
with baled forestry residues as raw material
49
Total environmental impact per MJ of produced heat
in a heating plant
51
Total environmental impact per MJ of produced heat
in small-scale residential incineration facilities
52
7
2 Introduction
The traditional way to burn firewood in a stove may be simple and unproblematic in a small
scale, but is very labour consuming when used in a larger scale. Chipping and crushing
techniques give the possibility to mechanise the handling and automatise the combustion,
while further upgrading to briquettes or pellets solves some transportation and storage
problems and results in a fuel with a relatively high energy content (Marks, 1990).
The process of drying and compressing biomass fuels incurs an extra cost. The advantages of
this process however sometimes overweigh the disadvantages. Compared to unprocessed raw
materials some of the advantages are: the reduced amount of water to transport, simpler
combustion furnaces with less tending needed, the possibility of storing of fuels for longer
periods without the risk of decomposition and an energy density of up to about five times that
of unprocessed wood (Mared, 1998).
The production of briquetted fuels started with materials such as coal dust and peat. Later
charcoal fines and ground charcoal were used and since a few decades wood and peat are the
most common raw materials used for briquetting in Sweden. The fuel pellet technology is a
direct continuation of the industrial production of animal feed (MacMahon & Payne, 1982).
Another type of upgraded wood fuel is wood powder, which is very uniform and can be burnt
in a flame the same way as gas or oil (Marks, 1990).
The expansion of the Swedish DBF sector came as a result of insecure oil supply in the 1970s.
The two oil crises led to an increased interest for domestic fuels among politicians as well as
private actors. In 1980 the community of Mora decided to build a pellet plant with a capacity
of 40 000 tonnes per year at a cost of 20 million SEK1. The Swedish government stated their
position, in considering DBFs as a good alternative fuel, by providing Mora with a 10 million
SEK loan from the Oil substitution fund (Westholm, 1986).
The development of the Swedish biofuels sector in general, and densified biofuels sector in
particular, has been successful and Sweden is currently one of the leading users of modern
biofuel technology. There were in 2001 about 30 larger production plants for densified
biofuels in Sweden.
The total Swedish energy input in 1999 was some 475 TWh, excluding an extra 140 TWh in
transmission losses in the nuclear power stations. The largest share came from oil products
with some 200 TWh, followed by bioenergy (including peat) with 93 TWh, nuclear power
with 73 TWh and waterpower with 71 TWh. The large share of biofuels came almost entirely
from the by-products of the forestry-, sawmilling- and pulping industries, in which 51 TWh of
bioenergy were used internally (Swedish National Energy Administration, 2000). The
Swedish production of DBFs in 2000 accounted for 3.5 TWh (Hogfors, 2001).
According to the Swedish National Energy Administration (1998) the total Swedish
consumption of wood-fuels in 1997 was approximately 47 TWh. The growth rate for woodfuel use during the last decade has been close to 15 % per year. For heat production a baseload of fossil fuels is currently not competitive because of the high taxes on these. In this case
wood-fuels compete with other biofuels like peat.
1
SEK = 0.109 Euro, as of 2002-01-15.
8
District heating is a large-scale underground pipe network supplying hot water for heating to
buildings in an area. The district heating sector has played an important role in Swedish
experience in a wood-fuel market for large-scale users over a period of 20 years. In 2000 the
Swedish district-heating sector used 14.7 TWh of biofuels, of which 3.2 TWh were upgraded
wood-fuels (Hogfors, 2001).
Some 80 companies supplied 230 medium- and large-scale community and industrial heating
plants, block centrals etc. with 21 TWh of wood-fuels in 1997 (sawmill boilers not included)
(Vinterbäck & Hillring, 2000). In 2000 the same customers used 19.1 TWh of wood-fuels, of
which 4.4 TWh were upgraded (Hogfors, 2001).
Preparations for changes towards a common energy policy have started in the European
Union. This is stated in the White Paper (European Commission, 1997) and the mission is to
increase the use of renewable energy sources at the expense of fossil fuels. The overall target
is to double the share of renewables in the EU energy supply up to 12 % by the year 2010.
Biofuel utilisation is one feasible means in reaching this target.
In 1997 the aggregate EU bioenergy use was 522 TWh. The total national energy demand in
some European countries, e.g. Sweden, Finland and Austria, is covered up to 17 % of woodfuels (European Commission, 1997).
The aim of the INDEBIF project is to increase the usage of densified biofuels in Europe. This
will be done by developing a database on the Internet where relevant information is available
for each country. Companies and individuals who are considering an investment in their
heating system should be able to find up to date information about producers, distributors and
retailers and their prices on different assortments, as well as information about taxes,
emissions etc.
The gathering of information has been based on literature, questionnaire surveys to DBF
producers (see Appendix 3), other open sources and personal communications.
9
3 Questionnaire
To gather relevant information about the current situation among the producers of densified
biomass fuels a questionnaire survey (Appendix 3) was sent out to 28 Swedish DBF
production plants and to the head offices of three larger DBF production concerns. In 41
points questions were asked about e.g. products, production, company history, raw materials
and markets. The questionnaires were sent out in June 2001 and they were followed up by
telephone contacts, company visits and a renewed mailing to non-respondents.
18 questionnaires were answered which gives a total response frequency of 58 %. The
response frequency has been affected by the fact that the three larger concerns also received a
questionnaire at their head offices. In one case answers were received from the production
plants and not from the company head office. In a second case answers were received in
aggregated form from the head office only. In a third case answers were received from both
the head office and all of the production plants except for one.
In the following, this questionnaire will be referred to as Hirsmark (2001).
10
4 Definitions, standards and characteristics of DBFs
Densification of biomass fuels usually means drying and forming of biomass raw material
under high pressure. The raw materials used comprise sawdust, shavings, chippings,
byproducts from a wide array of forestry or agricultural operations or any other biobased fuel
materials (SS 18 71 20 & SS 18 71 21).
The densified biomass fuels can, based on dimensions, be divided into two categories, pellets
and briquettes. Pellets are cylindrical pieces of compressed biomass, with a maximum
diameter of 25 mm (SS 18 71 20). Briquettes can be cylindrical or rectangular or of any other
form as long as their length does not exceed five times their diameter, which is larger than 25
mm (SS 18 71 21), see Tables 1 and 2.
According to the Swedish standards, pellets (Table 1 and Appendix 1) and briquettes (Table 2
and Appendix 2) are classified into three groups, where the first one is of the highest quality
corresponding to the demands of small-scale users.
Table 1. SS 18 71 20 – Classification of Fuel Pellets
Property
Dimensions:
diameter
and
length
in
producer’s store
Bulk density
Durability
in
producer’s store
Test Method
Unit
By measuring at least mm
10 randomly selected
fuel pellets
SS 18 71 78
SS 18 71 80
Net
calorific SS-ISO 1928
value
(as delivered)
Ash content
SS 18 71 71
Total moisture SS 18 71 70
content
(as delivered)
Total
sulphur SS 18 71 77
content
Content
of
additives
Chlorides
SS 18 71 85
Ash dissolution
Source: SS 18 71 20
Group 1
Group 2
Group 3
To be stated as To be stated as To be stated as
max 4 times ∅ max 5 times ∅ max 5 times ∅
kg/m3
> 600
Weight of < 0.8
fines
< 3 mm, %
MJ/kg
> 16.9
> 500
< 1.5
> 500
> 1.5
> 16.9
> 15.1
kWh/kg
> 4.7
% w/w of < 0.7
DM
% w/w
< 10
> 4.7
< 1.5
> 4.2
> 1.5
< 10
< 12
% w/w of < 0.08
< 0.08
To be stated.
DM
% w/w of
Content and type to be stated.
DM
% w/w of < 0.03
< 0.03
To be stated.
DM
SS 18 71 65 / ISO 540 0C
Initial temperature (IT) to be stated.
11
Table 2. SS 18 71 21 – Classification of Fuel Briquettes
Property
Diameter
in
producer’s store
Length
in
producer’s store
Bulk density
Durability
in
producers store
Test Method
Dimension in the press
By measuring at least
fuel briquettes
SS 18 71 78
SS 18 71 80
Net
value
(as delivered)
Ash content
SS 18 71 71
content
(as delivered)
Total
sulphur SS 18 71 77
content
Content
of
additives
Chlorides
SS 18 71 85
Ash dissolution
Source: SS 18 71 21
12
SS-ISO 540
Unit
mm
Group 1
To be stated,
min 25 mm
mm
> ½ ∅, but max
300 mm
kg/m3
> 550
Weight % < 8
of fines
< 15 mm
MJ/kg
>16.2
Group 2
To be stated,
min 25 mm,
min 10 mm,
max 100 mm
> 450
< 10
Group 3
To be stated,
min 25 mm
> 450
> 10
>16.2
To be stated
kWh/kg
> 4.5
% w/w of < 1.5
DM
% w/w
< 12
> 4.5
< 1.5
To be stated
To be stated
< 12
< 15
% w/w of < 0.08
< 0.08
To be stated.
DM
% w/w of
DM
% w/w of < 0.03
< 0.03
To be stated.
DM
0
C
5 Technical evaluation of DBFs
5.1 Raw materials
5.1.1 Wood
The wood species used for densification into pellets and briquettes in Sweden are almost
entirely Norway spruce (Picea abies) and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris), which are the most
common species in the country (National Board of Forestry, 2000, p. 56). Birch is also a
nationally widespread species and has the potential to become an alternative raw material in
the future. The difference in energy content between birch and the two main species used is
marginal (Table 3). At present the major part of the harvested birch is used for pulping, which
gives little by-products for densification processes. One DBF producer is currently testing
production with birch sawdust as raw material.
Table 3. Chemical composition of different raw materials suitable for the production of DBFs
GJ/tonne
percentage of weight
Energy Lignin Extractives Ash content
Cl
K
N
S
Beech
stw
bark
19.7k
24.8c
1.2c
Birch
stw
bark
19.6-20.3k
22.0c
3.2c
0.4f / 1.7b
2.2f
Pine
stw
i.b.
o.b.
20.2-20.5k
27.7c
29.2d
47.6d
3.5c
4.5d
3.4d
0.4f
1.5b / 2.6f
<0.01j 0.023-0.031j
0.00063j 0.05b
j
j
b
0.01-0.02
0.196
0.3 0.00420j 0.2-0.3b
Spruce stw
bark
20.2-20.3k
27.4c
35.9d
1.7c
3.8d
0.6f
3.2f / 3.8b
<0.01j 0.024-0.031j 0.05b 0.0006j 0.01-0.02b
0.01-0.02j
0.219j
0.50b 0.0020j 0.20-0.30b
Salix
16.7-17.6k
0.01e
0.20e
0.40e
0.092i
0.03e
Straw
14.4a
0.31g
0.99g
0.50g
0.11g
0.08g
Reed
canary
grass
Notes:
Sources:
14.4a
0.09h
0.27h
0.88h
0.02h
0.09h
stw
0.085j
0.210j
Na
<0.005j
0.024j
0.053j
0.139j
0.008j
0.011j
0.05b 0.00058j
0.40b 0.0014j
stw=stemwood; i.b.=inner bark; o.b.=outer bark.
Forsberg, 1995; bHadders & Forsberg, 1996; cSjöström, 1993; dHakkila, 1989; eHadders &
Olsson, 1996; fLehtikangas, 1998; gNilsson et.al., 1998; hBurvall & Hedman, 1994; iNilsson,
1996; jBodlund & Herland, 1991; kGärdenäs, 1986.
a
Beech and oak grows naturally in the southern part of Sweden and are used for various
purposes like e.g. furniture, flooring and other ennobled products (Drakenberg, 1994). The
production processes used for these products give large shares of by-products. For example,
the process of making parquet flooring results in a by-product share of 80 % (Rosander,
2001). Beech residues are very suitable for DBF production whereas on the other hand oak is
often not considered since it has a high content of chlorides. Chlorides could lead to increased
corrosion in the combustion appliances.
13
5.1.2 Bark
Bark is a very cheap and abundant raw material in Sweden that is common to use as a fuel in
large-scale applications, especially in the forest industry. Bark is then burned in its raw
condition in special bark boilers. Bark from coniferous trees has a higher content of nearly all
of the critical (from a combustion point of view) elements, compared to wood from the same
trees (Table 3). Bark pellets thus gets higher ash content than wood pellets. Also the air
emissions from bark combustion contain relatively higher levels of pollutants. As an example,
sulphur from the raw material (Table 3) binds to air oxygen, resulting in a release of
pollutants such as S02 .
These facts make bark pellets unsuitable for use in small-scale heating plants where there is
no exhaust cleaning and where there is a need or wish for less ash removal and less tending of
the appliance. Large-scale plants, however, are better suited for combustion of bark pellets.
5.1.3 Short rotation coppice
Wood from SRC (short rotation coppice), in Sweden mainly Salix sp., is at present not used
for pellet production in Sweden. The reason for this is the relatively good availability of less
expensive and better suited raw materials, such as sawdust and planer shavings. Although
Salix pellets, according to preliminary tests at SLU, will have net calorific values that comply
with the SS 18 71 20, the energy loss during transports and pellet production, mainly in the
form of volatile organic compounds, today make the production of Salix pellets too costly for
Swedish conditions.
Salix contains a comparatively high percentage of VOCs (Volatile Organic Compounds), that
can not be taken care of today. 10-20 % of the dry matter will vapour when Salix wood is
dried by forced drying. These VOCs (e.g. terpenes), have very high energy contents, and can
be utilised when unrefined Salix is burnt. Some heating plants use chips from SRC where the
species used are Salix.
The total Swedish consumption of short rotation coppice in 1999 was 0.1 TWh (Swedish
National Energy Administration, 2000).
5.1.4 Peat
Peat is an organic substratum that builds up from biomass that do not decompose in the
anaerobic environment of a swamp or bog. Every growth season a new generation of plant
residues fall into the moist ground where it decomposes very slowly or not at all. This is why
the peat layer of a bog grows a little bit thicker every year. Sweden, like many other countries
in the taiga region, is to a large extent covered with a mosaic of forests, lakes and peat bogs.
The opinions divide when it comes to classifying peat as a biofuel or not. It has been argued
that as long as less peat is harvested than is reproduced every year, it is to be considered as a
biofuel. This line of argument is based upon the fact that in this case the bogs collectively
bind more CO2 than what is released to the atmosphere when peat is burned. This leads to the
conclusion that peat harvesting does not cause a net contribution of CO2 to the atmosphere
from the bogs.
14
Another line of argument supports itself on the similarities between the reproduction of peat
and that of coal or even oil. They are all formed from organic matter that has not been fully
decomposed. This leads to the conclusion that peat is a fossil fuel and that the main difference
between these three fuels is the time needed for their reproduction.
Härjedalens Mineral AB (HMAB), the largest briquette producer in Sweden currently uses
about 50 % peat and 50 % sawdust in its briquette production. The plant has a production
capacity of 300 000 tonnes of briquettes per year, corresponding to 1.5 TWh of heat.
HMAB´s briquette production started in 1989 with the help from the Swedish government by
an investment subsidy of 20 %. The company employs 100 persons full time and another 100
persons during the peat harvesting period of the summer. All of the finished goods are stored
in containers that are distributed by rail to the customers, who are large-scale heating plants
(Hirsmark, 2001).
The production has varied between 163 000 tonnes and 270 000 tonnes annually during the
last ten years. These fluctuations come with the dependence on the weather during the
summer, which is the peat harvesting period. A sunny summer with sparse rain is the ideal
condition for the peat to dry out and for a good peat harvest. The total Swedish consumption
of peat in 1999 was 2.8 TWh (Swedish National Energy Administration, 2000).
Since peat contains quite much sulphur there is a sulphur tax of 40 SEK/tonne imposed on
burning it. This is equivalent to about 15 SEK/MWh (Swedish National Energy
Administration, 2000).
5.1.5 Other raw materials
Other raw materials possible for densification would be, e.g., forestry residues, recycled
wood, agricultural by-products and energy crops (e.g. Reed canary grass). These agricultural
materials are not as energy rich and have lower ash melting points compared to wood and
would hence cause problems in meeting the Swedish standards for pellets, see Table 1.
Mixing of wood and agricultural raw materials might be one solution to this problem.
Agricultural by-products are, e.g., straw and residuals from grain production. The water
contents of these raw materials rarely exceed 20 %, which makes drying unnecessary.
Since 1990 at least one pellet mill in Sweden, SL Energi, has been using agricultural byproducts as raw material. SL Energi is situated in Malmö (Figure 26) in southern Sweden and
is owned by the farmers association Svenska Lantmännen. The plant uses residues from the
grain production and has a production capacity of 8 000 tonnes of pellets annually. In the year
2000 the production reached 6 000 tonnes which was all burnt in a medium-scale heating
plant owned by the same association. The internal use of the pellets makes production
according to the Swedish standard less important.
The relatively new segment of recycled wood is the least expensive alternative (Swedish
National Energy Administration, 2001). Processing recycled wood to DBFs, however,
involves costs and problems with, e.g., contaminations, which makes the somewhat more
expensive segment of industrial by-products a more reasonable choice. This will be the case
15
until there is a cost efficient technology to clean the recycled wood, or to guarantee its
cleanliness in some other way.
The by-products from forestry operations in Sweden are today utilised to some extent. These
forestry residues have a theoretical potential of 70 TWh/year of tops, branches and needles
provided the standard Scandinavian silvicultural techniques of today. This theoretical
potential can not be fully utilised, as it is limited by environmental, technical and economical
concerns (Cederberg et al., 2001). When using forestry residues as raw material for DBF
production the problem of contaminations with soil particles arises. These ground particles
could lead to a more intensive wear of the densification equipment.
5.1.6 Additives
To increase the abrasion resistance of the fuel and to reduce the wear in the production
equipment it is possible to use binding agents or additives (Figure 1). This is allowed
according to both the Swedish standards for pellets (SS 18 71 20 – Appendix 1 and Table 1)
and for briquettes (SS 18 71 21 – Appendix 2 and Table 2). Some additives increase the
content of, e.g., sulphur, which means the limiting value for sulphur content also acts as a
limiting value for these additives.
Figure 1. Additive for pellet production
Photo: J. Vinterbäck.
At least two of the pellet plants currently in operation use additives in their production. They
both use lignosulphonates (“Wafolin”), which, however also increases the sulphur content of
the pellets. One plant also uses potato starch as a binding agent. Other noteworthy similarities
between the two lignosulphonate using plants, are that they both use >90 % planer shavings;
they do not use any conditioning unit for adding steam before the pelletisation; and they have
both experienced interferences in the pelletising unit, according to the questionnaire survey of
this project (Hirsmark, 2001). The use of additives in Sweden seem to have decreased during
16
the last five years when comparing to a survey to pellet retailers by Hillring & Vinterbäck
(1998).
5.2 Raw material potentials
Some 28.9 million ha or 70 % of Sweden is covered with forests. These produce an annual
growth of about 100 million m3 of solid stemwood and bark, of which the forestry industry
annually harvests about 75 million m3 (Ek, 2001). Roughly half of this amount goes to the
sawmilling industry and the other half to the pulping industry (Nilsson & Lönner, 1999).
Especially the sawmilling industry generates large quantities of by-products suitable for
densified biomass fuel production. Also the raw wood chips would be excellent for DBF
production but these have traditionally commanded a higher price when sold to pulp mills
(Table 6). The prices for raw chips have, however, decreased during the last years, making
this assortment more and more interesting for the DBF producers.
Table 4.
Raw material potential for DBFs in the Swedish sawmilling industry, results calculated
in tonnes of pellet equivalents
Bark
(mc=60 % on w.b.)B
Sawdust
(mc=57 % on w.b.)B
Raw chips
(mc=57 % on w.b.)B
Slabs & Edgings
(mc=57 % on w.b.)B
Dry chips
(mc=23 % on w.b.)B
Sawmills >5 000 m3sw/yrA
8 200 000 m3s bark
3 280 000 tonnes bark
1 312 000 tonnes dry matter
1 458 000 tonnes pellets
2 800 000 m3f
2 398 000 tonnes sawdust
9 460 000 m3f
8 102 000 tonnes raw chips
32 000 m3f
27 000 tonnes s & e
12 000 tonnes dry matter
13 000 tonnes pellets
901 000 m3f
429 000 tonnes dry chips
C
Shavings
(mc=15 % on w.b.)B
Notes:
Sources:
Sawmills >1 000 m3sw/yrA
8 280 000 m3s bark
3 312 000 tonnes bark
2 846 000 m3f
2 438 000 tonnes sawdust
9 570 000 m3f
8 196 000 tonnes raw chips
45 000 m3f
38 000 tonnes s & e
911 000 m3f
434 000 tonnes dry chips
1 192 000 m3f
515 000 tonnes shavings
A: The unit m3sw/yr means cubic meters of sawn wood per year, and refers to the production of
the sawmills.
B: Moisture content on wet basis.
C: Information missing because of lack of source material.
Conversions based on Forsberg (1995). Quantities based on Hamilton (1986) & Warensjö
(1997).
17
In table 4 the contributions of the sawmilling industry has been calculated for different sizes
of sawmills to illustrate the relatively minor importance of by-products from smaller sawmills
(production capacities 1 000-5 000 m3sw/yr)2 in the large perspective. The by-product
assortments that are used for DBF production today, are as well converted into pellet
equivalents. Raw chips represent the absolutely largest potential with 3.9 million tonnes of
pellet equivalents, while bark and sawdust represent the second and third largest potentials
with close to 1.5 and 1.2 million tonnes of pellets respectively if totally utilised. However
total utilisation of, in particular raw chips and bark, is not feasible. Bark is needed to cover the
large internal energy need when drying the sawn products, and raw chips are currently sold to
pulp mills for pulping. If the price of raw chips however does not increase from its currently
low position, sawmills might regionally just as well in the future sign delivery contracts with
DBF producers instead of pulp mills.
Table 5.
Maximum production potentials for wood pellets made from by-products from the
sawmilling industry
BarkA
SawdustB
Raw chipsB
Slabs & EdgingsB
Dry chipsB
ShavingsB
Sum
Notes:
Sources:
Sawmills >5 000 m3sw/yr
Sawmills >1 000 m3sw/yr
tonnes of pellets
TWh
tonnes of pellets
TWh
1 458 000
7 .290
1 472 000
7 .360
1 146 000
5 .501
1 165 000
5 .592
3 871 000
18 .581
3 916 000
18 .797
13 000
0 .062
18 000
0 .086
367 000
1 .762
371 000
1 .781
See comment in Table 4.
486 000
2 .333
6 855 000
33 .196
7 428 000
35 .949
A: Net calorific value of 5.0 MWh/tonne.
B: Net calorific value of 4.8 MWh/tonne.
Values from Table 4.
In a previous study of DBFs (Ohlsson, 1997) the total energy potential of different raw
materials was calculated. When using the net calorific value of 4.8 kWh/kg (SS 18 71 20), the
conversion of the quantity of sawdust in Table 5 into potential energy, results in 5.5-5.6 TWh.
This corresponds well to the energy potential of 5-6 TWh for sawdust given by Ohlsson
(1997) (Table 6). The potential of bark in the latter study however differs significantly, with
13 TWh in Table 6 and 7.3-7.4 TWh in Table 5. The reason for this is that Ohlsson probably
included bark from the pulp mills as well. For bark a net calorific value of 5 kWh/kg is used
(Södra Skogsenergi, 1999).
Table 6.
Raw material prices and potential for pellets in Sweden
Raw material
Sawdust
Dry chips
Raw chips
Bark
Refuse derived
Forestry residues
SRC
Price for dried material
[SEK/tonne]
350
520
790
140
340
260
230
Energy content
[MWh/raw tonne]
1.9
4.1
2.1
1.6
3.9
2.5
2.3
Source: Ohlsson (1997)
2
The unit m3sw/yr means cubic meters of sawn wood per year.
18
Potential
[TWh]
5-6
1.2
13
4
176
0.5
In Table 6 the segment "Refuse derived" incorporates recycled wood, wood from packaging
and construction refuse. This material is often contaminated and using it as raw material for
DBF production could lead to a faster wear of the production equipment and highly increased
amounts of ash, which does not suit the small-scale customers.
The largest potential in Table 5 comes from raw chips with 18.6-18.8 TWh if totally
converted into pellets. Ohlsson (1997) did not calculate on the energy potential of raw chips
(see Table 6), probably due to the price of raw chips, which at that time was not competitive
with other raw materials. The largest raw material potential in Table 6 is found in forestry
residues with 176 TWh. A large share of this segment consists of dead and living trees that
have no commercial use in forestry today. Since these trees often contribute to the
biodiversity of forests a large share of them should be left as a means of environmental
concern (Cederberg et.al., 2001). Hektor et. al. (1995) have calculated the total potential of
forestry residues for year 2020. The gross potential will be 72-89 TWh per year, but
ecological restrictions will reduce the potential to 66-81 TWh per year. According to Hektor
et. al. (1995) the total amount of available wood fuel will be about 130 TWh per year. The
Swedish production of forestry residues for year 2000 was about 9 TWh (Hogfors, 2001).
A possible development is that the supply of imported DBFs decreases as a result of increased
demand in the exporting countries. This would lead to an increased demand for domestic
DBFs in Sweden, which would push the prices up. It would then be more interesting to use
harvesting residues such as branches and tops for densification.
Today these residues are not used for DBF production because of the higher costs involved
due to e.g. higher moisture content and the wearing down of the production facilities (see
chapter 5.1.5). In some regions it is common to chip forestry residues in the regeneration
fellings for incineration in large- and medium-scale heating plants.
5.3 Manufacturing process
5.3.1 Introduction
The production of DBFs can be divided into five basic steps. First of all the moisture content
and the particle size (oversized or large pieces like chips need to be comminuted before
drying or separated from the raw material stream) of the incoming raw material is of crucial
importance. Often the raw material needs to be dried by forced drying before densification.
Secondly, the raw material particles should not exceed a certain size, and therefore
comminution is needed for most raw materials. Thirdly, it is possible to make the wood fibres
more soft and flexible by adding steam to the raw material by so called conditioning.
Fourthly, the densification takes place either by pelletisation, or by briquetting. And finally, to
decrease the vapour pressure in the pellets or briquettes some sort of cooling device is needed
to take down the high temperatures generated during the densification process. After these
five steps of production follows one or more of the steps storage, separation of fine particles,
bagging and distribution. The different production steps will now be looked into in some more
detail.
19
5.3.2 Drying
From my questionnaire survey to DBF producers (Hirsmark, 2001; Appendix 3) it was noted
that 69 % of the responding pellet producers, and 33 % of the responding briquette producers
had some kind of dryer installed (Figures 2 & 3). This indicates that the briquette producers
more often than the pellet producers use a dry raw material.
Figures 2 & 3. Rotary drum driers.
Source: www.svebio.se, 2002.
The most common drying equipment in Sweden is directly heated rotary drums. The flue
gases from the combustion of the drying fuel are blown through the dryer and thereby directly
heating up the raw material. The fuels used for drying heat generation range from DBFs over
wood powder or bark to oil or industrial surplus heat. Worth noting is that at least two DBF
plants in Sweden deliver surplus heat from their drying equipment to the district heating grids
of their respective communities (BioNorr AB in Härnösand and SBE Svensk BrikettEnergi
AB in Norberg respectively). Another pellet plant is currently planning to connect to the
community district heating grid, SBE Svensk BrikettEnergi in Ulricehamn.
5.3.3 Comminution
All of the DBF production plants that had answered to the questionnaire survey used a milling
unit (Hirsmark, 2001). The comminuting equipment most commonly used are hammer mills.
In general the raw material particle size requirement of the pellet press is a diameter of mmdimension and of the briquettor a diameter of cm-dimension (Vinterbäck, 2001 b).
5.3.4 Conditioning
Conditioning means applying superheated steam to the raw material in order to soften the
wood fibres prior to densification. About 50 % of the pellet producers and 33 % of the
briquette producers use conditioners in their respective production (Hirsmark, 2001).
20
5.3.5 Pelletisation/Briquetting
There are two main types of pelletisers for wood and bark: flat die pelletisers and ring die
pelletisers (MacMahon & Payne, 1982). Nowadays mainly ring die pelletisers (Figures 4 & 5)
are used in Sweden (Vinterbäck, 2001 b). The exceptions are PI Träenergi AB in Edsbyn and
Sydpellets AB in Traryd. In a ring die pelletiser the die is cylindrical and the pellets are, with
common technology of today, pressed from the inside and out through the die by rollers.
There are no Swedish producers of pelletising equipment. Common machine types are SproutMatador, California Pellet Mill and Bühler.
Figures 4 & 5. Ring die pelletisers
For briquetting the mechanical piston press technology is dominating (Figure 6). With a
piston press the raw material is fed through a narrowing press cone, by a mechanically or,
sometimes, hydraulically driven piston, and thereby being compressed and heated by the
friction between the wood particles. The most common brand is BOGMA, which is produced
in Ulricehamn, Sweden by BOGMA AB.
Figure 6. Briquetting: Mechanical piston press
Source: www.bogma.com, 2001.
21
5.3.6 Cooling
During the pelletising and briquetting processes heat is generated by friction when
compressing the raw material particles. The relatively small amount of water in the raw
material therefore exercises vapour pressure when transforming from liquid to gaseous phase.
To prevent this pressure from breaking up the newly formed pellets or briquettes, or to
prevent that the fuel is “sweating”, it is usually necessary to cool down the DBFs directly after
the compression (Figure 7).
Figure 7. Cooling tower for pellets
Photo: J. Vinterbäck
Of the responding pellet producers, 100 % use coolers to increase the product durability. The
most common types of pellet coolers are the counterflow coolers. In these coolers the newly
pressed pellets are transported through a "tunnel" on a conveyor belt while cold air is blown
towards them. This results in a soft cooling while the hottest pellets closest to the press meet
the air that has already taken up some heat from the pellets that have passed.
Figures 8 & 9. Cooling tracks of a briquette production plant
Source: www.bogma.com, 2001
Of the responding briquette producers 83 % state that they use some kind of cooling device.
Cooling of briquettes is often performed by letting the DBF come out of the piston press and
then slide up to 40 m on a cooling track, before cutting or breaking it up in smaller lengths
22
(Figures 8 & 9). This means that cooling is done under pressure, a combination that
considerably increases the internal bonding of the briquette.
5.3.7 Storage
Because of the seasonally shifting demand for fuels in Sweden, storage of DBFs is a necessity
for the producers in order to have a maximum machine use. As seen in Diagram 1 the storing
capacity of the responding DBF producers vary from 1 to 40 % of their respective production
capacity.
Diagram 1.
Storing capacity of DBF producers in relation to their production capacity
45
Storing capacity [%]
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Production capacity [1000 ton]
Based on: Hirsmark, 2001.
For plants with a production capacity of less than 75 000 tonnes per year the storage capacity
varies from 1 to 39 %, with an average of 21 %. The corresponding interval for plants with a
production capacity exceeding 75 000 tonnes per year is 21 to 40 %, with an average of 30 %.
It should be noted that in Diagram 1 there are two production plants with a total production
capacity of 36 000 tonnes and a storage capacity of 39 %. The producer with the largest
production capacity is the briquette producer HMAB Härjedalens Mineral AB, while the
second largest is the pellet and briquette producer SBE Svensk Brikettenergi and the third
largest is the pellet producer SCA Norrbränslen. The two latter incorporate several production
plants.
Of the respondents in the questionnaire survey (Hirsmark, 2001) 94 % stored parts or all of
their production in warehouses while the remaining 6 % (one briquette producer) stored all of
its production in containers, that were later transported to large-scale customers by train.
Another 61 % also used a combination of warehouses and silos for storing while one pellet
producer stored some of its products outside under roof. One producer of pellets and
23
briquettes stored some of its pellets outside in small plastic bags for further distribution to
small-scale customers (Hirsmark, 2001).
5.3.8 Production of bark pellets
There is currently only one plant that produces pellets from bark in Sweden. It is situated in
Mönsterås and has been running since 1997 (Ljungblom, 1998). The owner SÖDRA also runs
a sawmill and a pulp mill at the same location. The raw materials used in the pellet mill are
by-products from the other two industries on the site. The plant is situated by the coast, and
the main part of the production goes by boat to either of the two heating plants Hässelby in
Stockholm or Helsingborg in the south of Sweden. These large-scale users have both
converted from coal to pellets and can handle the relatively higher ash content of bark pellets.
For small-scale users, the frequent emptying of the ash box that comes from the 3.5 % ash
content of these bark pellets could be relatively troublesome.
The bark pellets of SÖDRA contain about 90 % bark and 10 % wood. They have a bulk
density of about 750 kg/m3 and a net calorific value of some 5 MWh/tonne (Södra
Skogsenergi, 1999). The plant uses two Sprout-Matador ring die pelletisers, which gives it a
maximum annual production capacity of 50 000 tonnes of pellets. Crushing of bark can
sometimes be problematic and therefore cutting mills are usually preferred for the
comminution step. In this case, however, a hammer mill is used, which reduces 90 % of the
particles to a size less than 1 mm. The rollers of the pelletiser seem to wear down more
rapidly than what would be the case if using pure wood as a raw material. (Ljungblom, 1998).
5.4 Fuel logistics
5.4.1 Current distribution techniques
The current distribution techniques used by Swedish DBF producers are of many sorts, but the
main way of distributing the products is in bulk. All of the respondents in the questionnaire
survey to Swedish DBF producers transport at least some of their production in bulk. About
60 % of the pellet producers and 70 % of the briquette producers sell their products to largescale heating plants, to which the fuels are transported in bulk by ship, train or truck. Half
(47 %) of the DBF producers export some of their production with both small-scale and largescale users as target segments (Hirsmark, 2001; Appendix 3).
24
Figure 10. Pellet big bags of 500 kg for distribution to small-scale customers.
Pellets for small-scale users are packed and distributed in small bags of 16-25 kg, big bags of
500-1000 kg (Figure 10) or distributed in bulk by special trucks, see Figure 11. These trucks
unload the fuel by blowing (pneumatically) the pellets through a hose into the storage room or
silo (Figure 12) with high air pressure. The technology comes from the distribution system of
the fodder industry and to some extent resembles the distribution system of fuel oil.
Figure 11. Bulk truck for distribution of wood pellets.
Figure 12. Pellet silo.
Source: www.ecotec.net, 2001.
Another way of distributing pellets and briquettes is by using containers that can be put
vertically by a special truck. This way the container acts as a silo itself, and can easily be
changed to another container when emptied. This technology is developed and used by SBE
Svensk Brikettenergi AB, and is designed for small- or medium scale industrial users,
schools, public buildings etc.
5.4.2 Residential storage
Storing of pellets by the small- and medium-scale customers can be solved by e.g. using a silo
or storage room (Figures 13 & 14). For smooth running of the
25
Figure 13. Pellet storage.
Figure 14. Built in pellet storage.
Note: The pipes on the storage are for bulk filling. The pellet truck connects the hose to the left pipe and the
excess air passes out through the other two pipes to which dust filters are connected. The pellets are fed by screw
feeding from the bottom of the storage through a pipe.
appliance the pellets can be screwed or blown in pipes from the silo or storage room to the
appliance (Figure 15). Small-scale users often build their own storage room to keep the costs
down, but components and whole storage solutions are available in the market.
Figure 15. Example of a storage room of a small-scale pellet user
Source: www.pellx.nu, 2001.
5.5 Incineration facilities
5.5.1 Small-scale systems (0-100 kW)
The sale of small-scale heaters are experiencing a great increase. In year 2000 about 6 000
small-scale heaters were sold in Sweden and the sales for 2001 were estimated to reach
12 000 units (Samuelsson, 2000).
Of the responding pellet producers 86 %, and of the responding briquette producers 83 %, had
customers with small-scale incineration facilities with a nominal boiler capacity of less than
100 kW (Hirsmark, 2001). In the beginning of the 1990s the pellet market almost entirely
consisted of large-scale consumers, but today the small-scale market is growing rapidly
(Vinterbäck, 2001 b).
26
Figure 16 (left). Pellet burner mounted on former oil boiler
Figure 17 (right). Pellet burner, 20 kW, mounted on pellet boiler
One common low cost solution when changing from heating oil to pellets in small houses in
Sweden, is retrofitting the old oil fired furnace with a new burner designed for pellets, see
Figures 16 & 17. Oil furnaces, however, are not designed for fuels that leave some amounts of
bottom ash like pellets of wood or even of bark. Therefore a frequent emptying of ash is
necessary to prevent from decreasing the efficiency or even filling the combustion chamber
with ash. This can be taken care of with simple equipment with intervals depending on the
season and what kind of pellets that are used, see Figures 18 & 19.
Figure 18 (left). Pellet fired furnace opened for ash removal
Figure 19 (right). Ash emptying of appliance with pellet burner
For a more smooth and clean ash removal special vacuum cleaners for ash can be used. It
works the same way as an ordinary vacuum cleaner (Figure 20). Another popular solution is
to connect an ash catcher to a standard vacuum cleaner.
27
Figure 20. Special vacuum cleaner for ash
In the 1970s, when electricity prices in Sweden were low, it was popular to install electric
radiators when building or restoring houses. Therefore many Swedish single houses lack
central heating systems for distributing room heat. This problemizes the conversion away
from expensive electric heating. One good alternative here is the pellet stove, which only
requires a chimney for the exhausts, see Figure 21. The pellet stove is placed in one of the
rooms, preferably rather central in the apartment to allow for the heat to spread efficiently.
Very often this source of heat is not enough in winter time, why the radiators usually are kept
installed for support as a secondary heating source. A pellet stove might replace 50-75% of
the electricity needed for heating.
Figure 21. Pellet stove, PellX K6, (3-6 kW) in operation
Briquettes are used as an alternative or complement to traditional wood fuel in the small scale
systems. They can either be used in a fire-place or in a boiler furnace built for wood logs. The
advantages of using briquettes instead of wood logs are, e.g., their higher energy density and
cleanliness.
5.5.2 Medium-scale systems (100-1000 kW)
Svenska Pelletvärmegruppen (SPG), as a subsection of the Swedish Heating Boilers and
Burners Association (SBBA), represents producers and distributors of pellet heating
28
equipment of up to 500 kW in Sweden. In a market survey SPG found that in 1998 there were
about 1 500 pellet stoves in use in Sweden, consuming some 5 000 tonnes of pellets annually.
There were also about 8 500 pellet burners of less than 40 kW and about 300 pellet burners of
40-500 kW, consuming 60 000 tonnes and 25 000 tonnes respectively per year, making a total
consumption of some 90 000 tonnes per year (Danielsson, 1999). The sales of burners, from
the official market introduction in 1994 until 1998, had an average yearly increase of
100 % (Danielsson, 1999).
Figure 22. Pellet furnace, Tx 350 kW
Figure 23. Pellet burner, C2 150-300 kW
Source: www.teembioenergi.se, 2001.
According to my producer questionnaire (Hirsmark, 2001), 50 % of the briquette producers
and 64 % of the pellet producers had customers with a medium-scale nominal boiler capacity
of between 100 and 1000 kW. Medium-scale furnaces (Figures 22 & 23) are predominantly
found in multi family houses, smaller industries, schools and other public buildings.
5.5.3 Large-scale systems (>1000 kW)
Of the Swedish briquette producers, 67 % have customers with large-scale boilers with a
nominal boiler capacity of more than 1 MW, according to my producer questionnaire. The
corresponding share for pellet producers is 64 % (see Figures 24 & 25).
Figure 24. T 1,5 (1.5 MW)
Figure 25. T 2,5 (2.5 MW)
Source: www.teembioenergi.se, 2001.
District heating is a large-scale underground pipe network supplying hot water for heating to
buildings in an area. The district-heating sector has played a vital role in the development of
the Swedish wood-fuel market for large-scale users during the last 20 years.
29
In Hässelby, outside of Stockholm, there is a major pellet fired plant that produces heat for
district heating of the northwestern suburbs of Stockholm. It is a combined heat and power
plant which means that it can produce both electricity and district heating. It was built in 1959
and during the first decades the plant was fuelled with oil, but between 1983 and 1993 coal
was used. 1994 the plant was converted to biofuels, burning mainly wood pellets and olive
grains.
Today
the
plant
is
run
solely
on
pellets
(www.energy.rochester.edu/se/stockholm/heatsupply.htm, 2001).
The conversion of the Hässelby plant also positively affected the Swedish market for pellets,
since such a large fuel consumer indirectly guarantees a steady and substantial demand. In
Härnösand, north of Stockholm, the owner Stockholm Energi has built a wood pellet
production plant together with regional sawmill industries in order to secure the fuel supply
(www.energy.rochester.edu/se/stockholm/heatsupply.htm, 2001) for Hässelby. The total
operation was thus a good example of vertical integration. The share of the pellet plant in
Härnösand owned by Stockholm Energi is now sold to the Swedish forestry company SCA.
Also bark pellets from SÖDRA Mönsterås are used in Hässelby. These pellets are shipped
directly from the production plant to the heating plant (Ljungblom, 1998). The consumption
of pellets in Hässelby for the heating season of 1995-96 was about 150 000 tonnes of pellets
(Vinterbäck, 2000 a).
30
6 Economical aspects
6.1 Raw material prices
In Diagram 2 the development of the prices for DBFs and their raw materials and competing
biofuels from 1993 to 2001 are presented. The relatively new segment of recycled wood is the
least expensive alternative. Processing recycled wood to DBFs, however, involves costs and
problems with e.g. contaminations (see Chapter 5.1.5), which makes the somewhat more
expensive segment of industrial by-products a more reasonable choice.
Diagram 2.
Wood-fuel prices 1993-2001, SEK/MWh [free consumer, current prices]
180
DBF: Heating plant
160
140
Forestry residues:
Industry
120
Forestry Residues:
Heating plant
100
80
Industrial byproducts:
Industry
60
Industrial byproducts:
Heating plant
40
Recycled wood:
Heating plant
20
2001*
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
0
Note: * The values for 2001 incorporate only the three first quarters of the year.
Source: Swedish National Energy Administration, 1995-2001.
31
6.2 Production costs
6.2.1 Introduction
In a recently finished report (Zakrisson, 2002) an international comparison of production costs
in pellet production in Austria, North America, Sweden and the Baltic States was carried out.
The aim was to clarify how typical investment- and production costs influence the
international trade of wood pellets and to examine the effect of movements in exchange rates
for the concerned regions. The background was the growing market for pellets in especially
Sweden and Denmark which has resulted in the development of international pellet trading.
The calculations for Sweden and Austria were performed conforming to the Full Costing
Method according to VDI 2067. The framework for VDI 2067 is developed by the german
engineering association Verein Deutscher Ingeneure and can be explained as follows:
The costs involved in the production are separated in four groups according to the guidelines
in VDI 2067.These groups are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Costs based on capital (capital and maintenance costs).
Usage-based costs
Costs based on operation
Other costs
In group 1 the capital costs are calculated through the calculated service lives of the
equipments used and the interest rate. The capital costs are equal to the investment costs
multiplied by the capital recovery factor (CRF). The maintenance costs are percentages of the
investment costs and are calculated on the basis of guideline values.
CRF =
(1 + i )n × i
(1 + i )n − 1
Explanations: CRF = capital recovery factor, i = calculated
interest rate in %, n = service life in years.
In group 2 the usage-based costs include all costs in connection with the manufacturing
process. In group 3 the costs based on operation include all costs involved in operating the
plant as e.g. personnel costs. In group 4 the other costs include costs like e.g. insurance rates,
taxes and administration. For this group a guideline value of 0.5 % of the investment costs per
year is used (Obernberger & Thek, 2001).
In this chapter we will take a closer look at the costs involved in Swedish pellet production.
All costs have been calculated in euro at the exchange rate of 9.2010 EUR/SEK as of June
2001.
The calculations according to the Full Costing Method have been performed for five steps of
the pelletisation process (drying, comminution, pelletisation, cooling and storing) and for
construction and peripheral equipment. Personnel- and construction costs have been
calculated as a total value for the whole plant. The general conditions for the pelletisation
process are gathered in Table 7. In this specific example the production is continuing 24 hours
per day, seven days per week. This implies 8 000 hours of operation per year and the
32
throughput of 10 tonnes per hour therefore gives a yearly production of 80 000 tonnes. The
electricity price bears reference to the Swedish price for industry electricity of year 1999.
Table 7.
General conditions for the pelletisation process
Parameter
Value
Shifts per day
3a
Working days per week
7a
Availability of equipment
91 a
Operating hours per year
7 972
Throughput of pellets
10,0
Electricity price
27,10b
Service life, construction
50 a
Service- and maintenance costs,
1,0 a
construction
Service life, office and computer
5a
equipment
Service- and maintenance costs,
0,5 a
office and computer equipment
Service life, marketing
10 a
Interest rate
7,0 a
Other costs
0,5 a
Unit
%
h/year
t/h
€/MWh
year
% per year
year
% per year
Notes: aBased on enquieries and interviews by Zakrisson, bEnergimyndigheten (2001a)
Source: Based on Zakrisson (2002)
year
% per year
% per year
6.2.2 Raw material
The raw material used in this plant is raw sawdust with a moisture content of 57 % and a bulk
density of 350 kg/m3 . The price is 5.1 €/m3 , which corresponds to 7.7 €/MWh. The total raw
material cost per year amounts to 2 494 000 €, which corresponds to 31.3 €/tonne of produced
pellets.
6.2.3 Drying
The drying equipment used is a rotary drum dryer with flue gas condensation. This
equipment, which has a service life of 10 years, needs 350 kW of electric power and demands
Table 8.
Full costing method for a drum dryer
Investment costs
exclusive of
construction and
personnel costs
Capital
costs
Maintenance
costs
Usage-based
costs
Other
costs
Overall
costs
Specific
costs per
tonne of
pellets
€
€ / year
€ / year
€ / year
€ / year
€ / year
€/t
Dryer
Electricity
costs
Heat costs
Other costs
2 400 000a
342 000
60 000
402 000
5,0
64 000
0,8
7,0
0,2
Overall costs
2 400 000a
555 000
12 000
1 033
000
64 000
555 000
12 000
342 000
60 000
619 000
12 000
13,0
Source: Zakrisson (2002)
33
861 kWh/tonne of water vaporised. The equipment will vaporise 11.4 tonnes of water per
hour, which gives it a heat demand of 78.21 GWh/year and a specific heat cost of 17.9
€/MWh. In Table 8 the Full Costing Method for the drying step is shown.
6.2.4 Comminution
The hammer mill which is used in this plant has an electric power need of 250 kW, which
gives it an electricity consumption of 1.694 GWh/year. It has a service life of about 10 years
and its costs are shown in Table 9.
Table 9.
Full costing method for raw material crushing using a hammer mill
Investment costs
exclusive of
construction and
personnel costs
€
Hammer mill
360 000a
Electricity
costs
Other costs
Overall costs
360 000a
Capital
costs
Maintenanc
e costs
Usage-based
costs
Other
costs
€ / year
51 000
€ / year
65 000
€ / year
€ / year
46 000
51 000
65 000
46 000
2 000
2 000
Overall Specific
costs costs per
tonne of
pellets
€ / year
116 000
€/t
1,5
46 000
0,6
2 000
164 000
0,0
2,1
6.2.5 Pelletisation
The pellet mill used is a ring die pelletiser. It has a service life of 10 years and needs 500 kW
of electric power, which gives it a consumption of 3.4 GWh/year. The specific cost for steam
in the conditioning unit reaches 11 €/ tonne of steam produced. The Full Costing Method for
the pellet mill is shown in Table 10.
Table 10.
Full costing method for a pellet mill
Investment costs
exclusive of
construction and
personnel costs
€
Pellet mill
600 000a
Electricity costs
Costs for
conditioning
Other costs
Overall costs
600 000a
34
Capital
costs
Maintenanc
e costs
Usage-based
costs
Other
costs
€ / year
85 000
€ / year
78 000
€ / year
€ / year
85 000
78 000
Overall Specific
costs costs per
tonne of
pellets
92 000
€ / year
163 000
92 000
€/t
2,1
1,2
22 000
22 000
0,3
3 000
280 000
0,0
3,6
114 000
3 000
3 000
6.2.6 Cooling
This plant uses a counterflow cooler with an electric power need of 50 kW, corresponding to
an electricity consumption of 339 MWh/year, and a service life of 15 years. The Full Costing
Method for this unit is shown in Table 11.
Table 11.
Full costing method for a counterflow cooler after a pellet mill
Investment costs
exclusive of
construction and
personnel costs
€
Counterflow
240 000a
cooler
Electricity costs
Other costs
Overall costs
240 000a
Capital
costs
Maintenance
costs
Usagebased costs
Other
costs
€ / year
€ / year
€ / year
€ / year
26 000
5 000
9 000
26 000
5 000
9 000
1 000
1 000
Overall Specific
costs
costs
per
tonne of
pellets
€ / year
€/t
31 000
0,4
9 000
1 000
41 000
0,1
0,0
0,5
6.2.7 Storage
This plant has a storage capacity or 29 000 tonnes, which covers 36 % of the total production
potential, which is a mean value for Swedish DBF producers (Hirsmark, 2001).The interest
(Table 12) is calculated in a way which values the stored pellets to the retail price of 143.5 €/
tonne. The service life of the storage facilities is 50 years.
Table 12.
Full costing method for silo storage at the pellet producer
Investment costs
exclusive of
construction and
personnel costs
€
Conveying
system, dust
870 000a
separation
Interest for
pellets in storage
Other costs
Overall costs
870 000a
Capital
costs
Maintenance
costs
Usage-based
costs
€ / year
€ / year
€ / year
63 000
22 000
Other
costs
€ / year € / year
€/t
85 000
1,1
144 000
1,8
4 000
233 000
0,1
3,0
144 000
63 000
22 000
144 000
Overall Specific
costs costs per
tonne of
pellets
4 000
4 000
35
6.2.8 Peripheral equipment
Examples of peripheral equipment used are e.g. motors for screw feeders, pellet sieves, fans
and tools.This equipment is estimated to have a service life of 50 years. The Full Costing
Method for peripheral equipment is shown in Table 13.
Table 13.
Full costing method for peripheral equipment of a pellet plant
Investment
costs
€
Periferal
435 000a
equipment
Electricity
costs
Other costs
Overall
435 000a
costs
Capital
costs
Maintenance
costs
Usage-based
costs
Other costs
Overall
costs
Specific
costs per
tonne of
pellets
€ / year
€ / year
€ / year
€ / year
€ / year
€/t
41 000
7 000
48 000
0,6
18 000
0,2
2 000
2 000
0,1
2 000
68 000
0,9
18 000
41 000
7 000
18 000
6.2.9 Personnel costs
In this plant on average 2.3 employees are working per shift. This gives a total working time
of 21 000 hours per year. Calculated with an average personnel cost per person of 15.7 €/hour,
the cost per year arrives at 330 000 €. An extra 110 000 €/year is added for personnel in
administration and marketing. The total personnel cost per year therefore arrives at 440 000 €,
which corresponds to a personnel cost of 5.5 €/tonne of pellets produced.
6.2.10 Construction costs
In Table 14 the Full Costing Method is used for the construction costs of building this plant,
for office and computer equipment, and for marketing. The service life of the plant is 50 years
and costs for service- and maintenance are estimated to 1 % of the total investment.
Table 14.
Calculation of the full costs for the facilities of the entire pelletisation plant
Investment
costs
Capital
costs
Maintenance
costs
Usage-based
costs
Other
costs
Overall
costs
Specific
costs per
tonne of
pellets
€
Total
construction
870 000a
costs
Office and
computer
100 000a
equipment
Marketing
59 000a
Overall costs
1 029 000a
€ / year
€ / year
€ / year
€ / year
€ / year
€/t
63 000
9 000
4 000
76 000
1,0
24 000
500
500
25 000
0,3
8 000
95 000
2 000
11 500
300
4 800
10 000
111 000
0,1
1,4
36
6.2.11 Overall evaluation
About 610 kWh of energy per tonne of produced pellets is needed in this plant. Some 17 % of
this energy is electricity and 83 % is heat. The absolutely most energy consuming step in the
process is the drying, followed by the pelletisation.
The production costs that have been calculated conforming to the Full Costing Method
according to VDI 2067 are gathered in Table 15 for a better overview. The total overall
production costs of 4 909 000 € correspond to 61 €/tonne of produced pellets.
Table 15.
Total costs and cost/t for each step of the pelletizing process
Production step / Cost unit
Raw material
Drying
Comminution
Pelletisation
Cooling
Storage
Peripheral equipment
Personnel
Construction
Overall costs
Total cost (€)
2 494 000
1 033 000
164 000
280 000
41 000
233 000
68 000
440 000
111 000
4 909 000
€/tonne
31,3
13,0
2,1
3,6
0,5
3,0
0,9
5,5
1,4
61,0
Source: Based on Zakrisson (2002)
37
6.3 Comparison of end-user prices for different fuels
6.3.1 Introduction
The heat generation costs consist of both fixed and variable costs. The fixed costs depend
mainly on the investment in the appliance needed for the fuel used, the expected lifetime of
the appliance and the interest rate of the investment. The variable costs are dominated by the
fuel price. Diagrams 3 and 4 present comparisons of the prices of different energy carriers for
industrial and residential use respectively. All prices include all taxes involved and show the
actual price per MWh for the specific energy carriers from 1970 to 1999.
6.3.2 Industrial market
The four least expensive energy carriers in the industrial market are all solid fuels, of which
the three least expensive are biofuels (Diagram 3). The incineration facilities, fuel storages,
transports etc. for solid fuels are generally more complicated than those for liquid or gaseous
fuels, leading to relatively higher investment costs. In short, the smoother the heating
operation for the customer is, the more expensive the energy carrier is.
Actual industrial energy prices in Sweden 1970-1999, SEK/MWh
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1970
SEK/MWh
Diagram 3.
Year
Medium-Heavy Fuel Oil, Eo4
Coal
Sod Peat
Densified Biomass Fuels
Forest Fuels
Industrial electricity
Sources: Swedish National Energy Administration, 2000; Swedish National Energy Administration 1995-2000.
38
6.3.3 Residential market
The absolutely most expensive energy carrier in the residential market is electric heating
(Diagram 4). The electricity price has had a drastically rising development and between 1988
and 1998 the actual price rose from 352 to 752 SEK/MWh, which corresponds to an increase
of 114 %. This was partly caused by the doubling of the energy tax rate on electricity from
20.4 to 40.2 % during the same period. District heating is the second most expensive
alternative, followed closely by natural gas.
Diagram 4.
Actual residential energy prices in Sweden 1970-1999, SEK/MWh
800
700
SEK/MWh
600
500
400
300
200
100
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
1970
0
Year
Electric Heating
Gas Oil, Eo1
Sources:
District Heating
Pellets
Natural Gas
Swedish National Energy Administration, 2000; Swedish National Energy Administration 19952000; Vinterbäck, 2000 b.
It is worth noting that the price increase of oil and the price decrease of pellets in 2000 again
made pellet heating a preferred choice in the residential sector.
39
7 Overview of the state of DBF production and use
7.1 Swedish producers of DBFs
In Figure 26 the major Swedish DBF producers are mapped out, and in Figure 27 their
respective production capacities and product mixes are shown. There is an obvious
concentration of production capacity to the county of Småland in the south and to the coast of
northern Sweden. This corresponds well to the location of the Swedish sawmilling industry.
The production of wood powder is concentrated to the southern part with three production
plants in Småland, one in Västergötland and one in Norberg.
Figure 26. Major Swedish producers of briquettes, pellets and wood powder
Source: Bergström et al. (2002)
40
Figure 27. Production mix and capacities in the Swedish DBF industry
Source: Bergström et al. (2002)
41
7.2 Swedish producers of appliances
7.2.1 Burning appliances
In Sweden the average lifetime of small-scale furnaces or boilers are several decades. The
medium change-out time for Swedish furnaces is 28 years (Vinterbäck, 2001 b). Therefore
investments in new pellet furnaces do not occur very often. Instead it is usual to retrofit the
Table 16. List of Swedish producers of DBF combustion units
Company
Altbergs Plåt AB
Ardeo Janfire
BAXI AB
CP Energi AB
Energiteknik AB
Focus Värme AB
Place
Edsbyn
Åmål
Falköping
Örnsköldsvik
Skelleftehamn
Partille
HOTAB Eldningsteknik
IWABO Naturenergi AB
Järnforsen Energi System
AB
NIBE AB
NT Energi
Pelletsbrännaren Junsele
AB
Halmstad
Kilafors
Pellet boilers
From pellet burners 100kW
to heating centrals 15 MW
Combustion equipment
Halmstad
Markaryd
Mullsjö
Burners, stoves and boilers
Pellet burners
Junsele
Petrokraft AB
ROTURO AB
Ruby Tech
Göteborg
Rimbo
Harmånger
Pellet burners
Conversion of existing oil furnaces,
Delivers complete plants
Sahlins EcoTec AB
Skene
Scand-Pellet AB
Sonnys Maskiner AB
Stensbro Flis HB
Kalmar
Grästorp
Huaröd
Stocksbroverken AB
Svemo Elektronik AB
Svenska Neuero
Swebo Flis & Energi AB
Teem Bioenergi AB
Tellus Rör, Svets & Smide
AB
Thermia Värme AB
VEÅ AB
Zander & Ingeström
Värmeteknik AB
Stora Skedvi
Falun
Kävlinge
Boden
Ulricehamn
Source: Vinterbäck, 2001 a.
42
Oskarshamn
Arvika
Sävsjö
Solna
Products
Pellet burners
Pellet burners
Pellet heaters, Pellet burners 15-40kW
Pellet furnaces
Burners 15, 20, 25 30-50, 60-75, 80-140,
150-300kW, Stove 7kW
Burner10-20 & 25-50kW,
Pellet stove 3-6kW
Combi heater for pellets & sun 20kW,
EP-burner 22kW
Pellet furnaces
Pellet heaters 15, 25 & 45 kW,
Stoves 8 & 9 kW
Pellet burners
old oil furnace with a new pellet burner when converting from fossil fuels to DBFs. This way,
the size of the investment is kept down.
There are about 30 Swedish companies involved in the production of combustion units
designed for DBFs (Table 16). Often these companies have started out as small welding
companies that have put a focus on combustion equipment. Larger companies in the burning
appliances sector have later bought up some of the innovative producers of DBF combustion
equipment, and thereby stepped into the market segment of biofuels or DBFs. Their products
are e.g. pellet stoves, pellet burners, pellet furnaces and complete large-scale heating plants
for biofuels.
7.2.2 Fuel production appliances
In Table 17 companies that produce DBF production appliances in Sweden are listed. They
produce e.g. briquette presses, screw feeders and storage silos.
Table 17. List of Swedish producers of appliances for production, storage and distribution of DBFs
Producers of production appliances.
BOGMA AB
Maskin System AB
RL Värme
Place
Ulricehamn
Tenhult
Karlstad
Producers of storage- & distribution
appliances
Alf Bjurenwall AB
Bissy Försäljnings AB
KLM Energi & Mekanik
KMW Energi
Mafa i Ängelholm AB
Saxlund International AB
Ånga Värme & Stokers i Halmstad AB
Place
Kolbäck
Piteå
Norrtälje
Norrtälje
Ängelholm
Västerhaninge
Halmstad
Source: Vinterbäck, 2001 a.
Sellbergs have developed a Swedish system for pelletising municipal solid waste
(http://www.sellbergs.se/brini/brinisvensk/svenskindex.html, 2002). The producers of pellet
mills generally have the animal fodder industry as their main market segment.
43
7.3 Quantity of DBFs produced
The Swedish production of upgraded biofuels, i.e. DBFs and wood powder, started in a first
wave in the beginning of the 1980s. The drastic fall of international oil prices in 1986 meant
that most producers went out of the market. A second wave came in the beginning of the
1990s and Sweden has had an almost linear increasing trend during the last eight years as seen
in Diagram 5. This trend, however, was broken by an eight percent decrease in year 2000.
One contributing reason for this is that 2000 had a warmer than average temperature
(www.smhi.se, 2002). Another possible reason is that imports of DBFs might have increased
in relation to domestic production. The 4.2 TWh of DBFs produced in year 2000 consisted of
2.6 TWh of pellets, 0.9 TWh of briquettes and 0.7 TWh of wood powder (Hogfors, 2001).
Diagram 5.
Production of upgraded biofuels for commercial sale in Sweden 1993-2000, TWh
5
4
3
TWh
2
1
0
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
year
Source: Hogfors, 2001.
Most of the major Swedish pellet producers are members of the Swedish Pellet Producers
Association (PiR). In year 2001 these members had a total production of 714 000 tonnes of
pellets (Lagergren, 2002). Therefore the total Swedish production of pellets in 2001 can be
estimated to about 800 000 tonnes (Vinterbäck, 2002).
According to Vinterbäck (2001 b) the most serious threat to domestic DBF production in later
years has been the increasing low cost imports, but also the latent interest of the government
in putting a fiscal tax on biofuels that from now and then manifests itself in official
government reports.
44
8 DBF trade flows of today
8.1 Trade patterns
In 2000 approximately one third of the pellet consumption in Sweden originated from foreign
countries according to industry representatives. Already in 1997, wood pellets represented the
second most traded biofuel assortment with 1.2 TWh or 18 % of the total import of biofuels
The European population is concentrated to the central, south and western parts while the
largest forest resources can be found in the north. This situation has resulted in flows of wood
and wood-based products from the north to the central/south/west. The latter part,
consequently, produces most of the recycled material.
Germany is a leading nation in material recycling. It has an estimated annual flow of recycled
wood fibre of 15 million tonnes (55.6 TWh) (Lang, 1998). Besides wood-fuels such as bark,
green chips, dry chips, forestry residues and densified biomass fuels there are also a wide
range of other materials competing on the same market. Municipal waste and fuel mixtures
from wood and various recycled waste materials are examples of fuel materials of low costs.
Many densely populated countries, e.g. Germany and the Netherlands, have on a national
level problems getting rid of materials that can not be recycled, because of the scarcity of
suitable land for landfilling sites.The lowest qualities of e.g. recycled wood-fuels like railway
sleepers and demolition wood are not suitable for recycling in, e.g., the board industry.
Therefore the recycling industry must either pay landfill fees or incineration fees to get rid of
these low quality materials in the country. The option of exporting these materials becomes
interesting as, e.g., the Swedish market has incineration capacity for these types of fuels and
also a functioning fuel market for these fuel qualities with higher energy prices and therefore
is open for imports of these competitive fuels (Vinterbäck & Hillring, 2000).
Preparations for changes towards a common energy policy have started in the European
Union. This is stated in the White Paper (European Commission, 1997) and the aim is to
increase the use of renewable energy sources at the expense of fossil fuels. The overall target
is to double the share of renewables in the EU energy supply up to 12 % by the year 2010.
Biofuels utilisation is one feasible means in reaching this target.
In 1997 the aggregate EU bioenergy use was 522 TWh. The total national energy demand in
some European countries, e.g. Sweden, Finland and Austria, is covered up to 17 % of woodfuels (European Commission, 1997). The large-scale use of wood-fuels in these countries
depends on the relatively higher end prices of other energy carriers such as coal and oil. One
way for the authorities to obtain a higher national demand for biofuels is to impose a CO2-tax
on fossil fuels (see also Swedish National Energy Agency, 1995-2001).
Most of the Swedish imports of DBFs and other wood-fuels are transported in bulk by marine
vessels, often in return-cargo systems, which allow transports over long distances at low
prices. Some heating plants are situated by the coast and have their own harbours whilst
others need trans-shipping by trucks for road transportation. This logistic dependence on
marine freights will give split national markets: coastal markets and inland markets (Roos et
al., 2000).
45
According to EU regulations (EEG No 259/93), waste is classified into three different
categories depending on degree of purity and toxicity: green, yellow and red. Green is for
pure wood-, paper- or plastic waste, yellow is for treated or mixed waste and red is for toxic
waste contaminated with e.g. mercury or PCB. About 50 000 tonnes of demolition wood
classified as yellow was imported to Sweden in 1997 (Swedish Environmental Protection
Agency, 1999).
According to the Swedish National Energy Agency (1998) the total Swedish consumption of
wood-fuels in 1997 was approximately 47 TWh. About 14 TWh of biofuels were used in the
district heating sector. The growth rate for wood-fuels during the last decade has been close to
15 % per year. For heat production in district heating a base-load of fossil fuels is currently
not competitive because of the high taxes on these. On the other hand on the same market
wood-fuels compete with other biofuels like peat. In 2000 the Swedish district-heating sector
used 14.7 TWh of biofuels, of which 3.2 TWh were upgraded wood-fuels (DBFs and wood
powder) (Hogfors, 2001).
Some 80 companies supplied 230 medium- and large-scale community and industrial heating
plants, block centrals etc. with 21 TWh of wood-fuels in 1997 (sawmill boilers not included)
(Vinterbäck & Hillring, 2000). In 2000 the same customers used 4.4 TWh of upgraded woodfuels (Hogfors, 2001).
8.2 Imports
In a questionnaire survey to 51 members of the Swedish District Heating Association, that
each consumed more than 100 GWh of untaxed biofuels per year, the following results were
gathered with a response frequency of 78 % (Vinterbäck & Hillring, 2000). In the year of
1997, 42 % of the consumers imported biofuels by themselves, whilst another 15 % imported
biofuels through agents. It was also found that 85 % of the fuel dealing companies were
importers. These imports came in decreasing order from the Baltic States, Germany, the
Netherlands, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Canada, England and Scotland. This situation has
come about as a result of control measures on waste and energy. Fuel imports are,e.g., used by
the large heating plants as a strategic means to keep local biofuel prices down (Vinterbäck &
Hillring, 2000).
Table 18.
Imports of untaxed fuels (biofuels) to Sweden 1992, 1995 & 1997
Year
Biofuels (TWh)
Approximate share of
wood-fuels (%)
1992a
0.6-1.1
20
(estimated figure)
1995b
3,1-4,2
33-45
1997c
5,6-8,9
44-62
Sources: aNUTEK (1993), Statistics Sweden (1998); bVinterbäck (1996); cVinterbäck & Hillring (2000).
Biofuel imports to Sweden have grown steadily during the 1990s as can be seen in Table 18.
Also the share of wood-fuels in the imports has been rising. New burning capacities for solid
biofuels are under way in the major exporting countries and this may cause the development
to level out over the coming years. (Vinterbäck & Hillring, 2000)
In 1997 tall oil represented the largest imported assortment with about 2.4 TWh. Tall oil is a
residual product from the distillation of crude tall oil at sulphate pulp mills. Tall oils can
without expensive retrofit of burners be substitutes for heavy furnace oil.
46
Wood pellets represented the second largest imported assortment with about 1.2 TWh.
Contrary to other solid biofuel materials, wood pellet trade is intercontinental. The main
countries involved in exporting DBFs to Sweden are Canada, the USA, Chile, the
Netherlands, Finland, Norway, Estonia, Latvia and Poland.
Helsingborg Energi, who owns a major CHP plant in southern Sweden has invested in a wood
pellet production plant in Nova Scotia, Canada. About 100 000 tonnes of pellets per year are
shipped in loose bulk to Helsingborg. The considerably lower raw material price in Canada
was the reason for this investment (Vinterbäck & Hillring, 2000). Another company, SBE –
which is a major Swedish producer of upgraded biofuels (see Figure 26) – has invested in
production facilities in Estonia and Latvia, primarily for exports. Also in Finland the
production plants for pellets are up to now focused on exports, primarily to Denmark and
Sweden. The Nordic Sea/Baltic Sea has turned into an integrated market for wood pellet fuel
(Vinterbäck & Hillring, 2000).
Multinational oil companies have started to show interest in the densified wood-fuels sector.
Norwegian Statoil is marketing wood pellets in Sweden and has decided to invest in briquette
production in Norway and possibly even wood pellet production in Russia. Shell International
owns a Danish wood pellet plant (Vinterbäck & Hillring, 2000).
8.3 Exports
Today Swedish pellets are exported to Denmark, but also Austria has previously imported
Swedish pellets (Vinterbäck & Hillring, 2000) and in the autumn of 2001, American
companies have made inquiries of the possibilities of pellet imports from Sweden
According to Bengtsson (2001), there are plans for the heating plant of Amager in
Copenhagen in Denmark to convert from coal to pellets. This would mean an extra demand of
about 200 000 tonnes of pellets. Bengtsson also states that there are discussions about the
possibility of the new plant of Avedöre to use pellets instead of natural gas. This would mean
an extra 400 000 tonnes. An increased Danish pellet demand will affect the trade flows and
possibly result in an increased pellet export from Sweden.
47
9 Environmental impact of DBFs
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a tool developed for analysing an activity or a product from
an environmental point of view over a whole life cycle. This method is technically oriented
and all emissions are quantified in relation to a common base, called a functional unit, which
should describe the product. In the case of heat production this functional unit often is 1 MWh
of delivered heat (Forsberg, 1999a).
A number of LCAs have been made on densified biomass fuels in Sweden (e.g. Forsberg,
1999b & Arvidsson, 1997). A new LCA for wood pellets is currently being made by the forest
research institute Skogforsk in Uppsala and is planned to be finished in 2002.
Arvidsson (1997) has performed an LCA on company-level for the Swedish DBF producer
SBE (Svensk Brikettenergi) a company that has seven production plants in Sweden and one in
Latvia and produces all three fuel assortments pellets, briquettes and wood powder. This LCA
incorporates one resource analysis and one emissions analysis. The resource analysis shows
how much raw material and energy that is needed for the fuel production. In Table 19 the
amounts of input needed for the production of 1 MWh of densified biomass fuels are shown.
In this case the fuel for the dryer (see Table 19) is a biofuel, which results in a non-bioenergy
input of just 3.8 % of the total energy input. According to Arvidsson (1997), the transport
item incorporates both transports of fuel for the dryer and raw material to the plant as well as
transport of finished goods to the customer.
Table 19.
Raw material and energy input required for the production of the equivalent of 1 MWh
of DBF
Amount [kWh]
1 010
110
21
16
5.0
2.3
0.06
1 163
Raw material
Fuel for the dryer
Electricity
Transports
Binding agents
Fuel for loaders
Waste oil
Sum:
Source: Arvidsson (1997)
In the emissions analysis the emissions of CO, CO2, HC, NOX, SO2 and particles from
combustion of fuel for the dryer and from the transports were studied (see Table 20).
Table 20.
Emissions to the air from transports
Compound
CO2
NOX
CO
HC
particles
SO2
Source: Arvidsson (1997)
48
g/MWh of finished DBF
3 800
45
13.6
2.7
1.3
0.6
Some ashes are discharged to the sewage water, but these have not been considered in this
LCA. Difficulties in determining, e.g., the moisture content of the fuel for the dryer, the
transport distances, the fuel consumption of a truck and the change of quantity of stored
material during the test period might have influenced the results of the LCA, according to
Arvidsson (1997). Arvidsson furthermore states that this gives a maximum possible
divergence from the results presented above of 2-3 %.
Another LCA made by Forsberg (1999b) deals with electricity production from pellets, with
forestry residues packed in bales as the raw material (Figure 28). This method was introduced
some years ago, but the four baling machines that were in use are today taken out of
production. This system did not prove economical in forestry operations, but is today used in
packaging of waste materials instead. There is, however, a similar system in use, called
bundling, in which forestry residues are packed in log-like packages for further transport with
common timber trucks. These "logs" have a length of about three meters with a diameter of
0.75 meters and a weight of 400-600 kg. They carry an energy content of somewhat more
than 1 MWh each (Davner, 2002). Results from the above mentioned LCA are presented in
Table 21.
Table 21.
Mass balance for producing 1 MWh of electricity from pellets with baled forestry
residues as raw material
Operation
Forwarding forestry residues
Storing in pile
Baling of residues
Forwarding of bales
Storage at roadside
Loading truck
Truck transport
Terminal storage
Crushing
Milling
Drying
Pelletisation
Tractor handling and loading
Shipping pellets
Storing pellets
Combustion of pellets
Ash transportation
Efficiency
0.98
0.85
0.98
1
0.98
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.38a
mass [tonnes]
(mc=10%)
0.563
mass [tonnes]
(dry matter)
0.634
0.621
0.528
0.517
0.517
0.507
0.507
0.507
0.507
0.507
0.507
0.507
0.507
0.507
0.507
0.507
Notes: a) Electrical efficiency only
Source: Forsberg (1999b)
In Table 21 each elementary operation in the process has a certain efficiency factor describing
the loss in each link of the chain. In the second last operation we see that 563 kg of pellets
with a moisture content of 10 %, corresponding to 507 kg of dry matter, is needed for the
production of 1 MWh of electricity (Forsberg, 1999b). Going back along the chain of
operations we see that this amount corresponds to 634 kg of dry matter, which equals 1 153
kg of forestry residues, with a moisture content of 45 %, in the forest.
49
Figure 28. The process tree of a biomass energy transportation system based on pellets
with baled forestry residues as raw material
Forest
Fuel
Emissions
Harvesting
Logging residues
Fuel
Timber, pulpwood
Forwarding
Storing off road
Fuel
Baling
Storing off road
Fuel
Forwarding
Storing at roadside
Fuel
Road transportation
Terminal storage
Crushing
Electricity
Energy
Grinding
Drying
Electricity
Fuel
Pelletising
Tractor
Ship loading
Fuel
Shipping
Unloading
Storing
Combustion
Electricity
Ash storage
Ash recirculation
50
Heat
Source: Forsberg (1999b)
In Table 22 the total environmental impact of different possible fuels that can be used in a
heating plant of 50-300 MW, with flue gas cleaning equipment corresponding to the Swedish
average, can be compared. The whole lifecycle - from raw material extraction to combustion is taken into account. Also the estimated efficiencies and prices per produced MJ are shown.
These data are based on different LCAs performed in seven different studies between 1995
and 1998 (Uppenberg et al., 1999).
Since the incineration facilities for natural gas and solid fuels (except for coal) are assumed to
use flue gas condensation equipment, their efficiencies exceed 100 %. This sort of equipment
can be used when burning fuels with high moisture content, as e.g. peat, waste and wood
fuels, or high hydrogen content, as e.g. natural gas. During combustion the moisture and
hydrogen form vapourised water which contains heat energy. This heat energy can be utilised
by condensating the flue gas, which means that it is possible to increase the heat delivery of
the heating plant without increasing the amount of fuel used and thereby increasing the
efficiency. The investment costs for different fuels vary and they are not taken into account
here (Uppenberg et al., 1999).
According to Uppenberg et al. (1999) there are some differences in system boundaries for the
LCA on DBFs used in Table 22 compared to the other fuels, which result in some
underestimations in the data for DBFs.
Table 22. Total environmental impact per MJ of produced heat in a heating plant
Natural
Forestry
Coal
Fuel oil LPG
gas
Peat
Waste
Salix Residues DBFs
Energy used [MJ]
Emissions to air [mg]:
0.05
0.05
0.02
-
0.01
0.05
0.04
-
NOX
78
130
92
64
83
56
80
93
62
SOX
CO
NMVOC
79
46
2.3
210
19
47
18
13
35
0.22
12
2.8
144
94
9.4
56
28
1.5
40
290
21
40
300
23
40
290
19
2 800
420
CO2
N2O
106 000 87 000 75 000 58 000 98 000
23 000 3 100
13
0.58
0.55
0.53
9.3
3.8
4.7
4.7
4.7
CH4
Particles
1 200
29
2.9
0.40
2.3
1.1
2.8
0.02
-170
-
1.2
4.7
2.5
4.7
3.7
5.2
0.94
NH3
Residues [mg]
Efficiency
Prices [SEK/MJ]:
Fuel price
Tax
Total price
1.9
0.89
0.66
12
0.91
0
0.91
0
20
1.04
1.1
1.06
2.4
1 600
1.06
2.4
1.06
0.016
0.057
0.073
0.038
0.056
0.094
0.055
0.030
0.085
0.031
0.008
0.039
0.027
0.004
0.031
0.030
0
0.030
0.043
0
0.043
2.8
3.0
14 000 1 600
1.06
1.06
*
*
*
-
"-" means that information is missing.
"*" means that a market price does not exist.
Source: Uppenberg et al. (1999)
51
The total environmental impact of heat production in small-scale residential incineration
facilities is shown in Table 23. These data are based on different LCAs performed by three
different parts between 1995 and 1998. The whole lifecycle is considered and the efficiencies
are average values for new small-scale heaters (Uppenberg et al., 1999).
Table 23.
Total environmental impact per MJ of produced heat in small-scale residential
incineration facilities
Gas oil, Eo1
Natural gas
Wood fuel
DBFs
0.06
0.02
0.05
-
NOX
106
29
180
150
SOX
45
0.23
53
57
CO
38
13
2 500
2700A
NMVOC
54
3.0
1 300
1300A
CO2
92 000
62 000
3 800
590
N2O
0.62
0.57
1.3
1.3
CH4
3.7
3.0
190
200A
Particles
0.42
0.02
4.9
1.3
NH3
0.12
0
2.5
2.7
Efficiency
0.85
0.98
0.8
0.75
Fuel price
6.4
6.3
4.4
10.8
Tax
7.3
4.9
0
0
13.7
11.2
4.4
10.8
Energy used [MJ]
Emissions to air [mg]:
Prices [SEK/MJ]:
Total price
Note: A :
Source:
The emissions data for DBFs are taken from wood burning. Combustion of DBF leads to
significantly lower emissions of CO, NMVOC and CH4, possibly less than half of the amount
accounted for here. This is due to a more complete combustion in comparison with wood.
"-" means that information is missing.
Uppenberg et al. (1999)
Many of the nutrients that have been harvested in the forest are to be found in the ashes of
DBFs. These nutrients would eventually have ended up in the ground through decomposition.
Therefore, to minimise the negative environmental effects of DBF use, these ashes should be
brought back to the forest. To make the ashes less reactive it is important to harden them to
granules that take several years to dissolve on the forest floor. This is positive for the
ecosystem, which could otherwise be shocked by suddenly changed chemical conditions in
the ground (Cederberg et al., 2001).
The ashes can be contaminated with heavy metals, which could be the case when co-burning
pure wood with e.g. recycled wood, waste or coal. Short rotation coppice tend to take up zinc
and cadmium from the ground, and when incinerated these heavy metals become accumulated
in the ashes. Such heavy metal rich ashes should not be spread in the forest (Uppenberg et al.,
2001).
52
According to Cederberg et al. (2001) methods for refinement of ashes are today being
developed. This means that, e.g. the contents of cadmium and lead are decreased in
connection with hardening the ashes. If these methods prove to be economical, there is reason
to expect that larger proportions of ashes can be recycled in the future.
As a result of the nuclear accident in Tjernobyl in 1986, the ashes from wood harvested in
parts of the counties of Uppland and Gästrikland and also the middle part of northern Sweden
contain an accumulation of cesium 137. This leads to an area of about six to seven percent of
the Swedish forests that could give ashes with a Cs-activity exceeding 5 000 Bq/kg ashes,
which is the upper limit for ash recycling (Cederberg et al., 2001).
53
10 Discussion
The Swedish consumption of refined biofuels in 1999 reached 4.9 TWh, but the potential in
domestic by-products from the wood processing industry, raw chips and bark excluded,
reached 9.7 TWh. In the future even other assortments such as trees from thinnings, forestry
residues, bark, raw chips or recycled wood might become profitable to use as raw material,
either because of increased prices or because of improved separation technology.
Today the raw material used in Sweden is totally dominated by spruce and pine, but in the
future mainly birch seems to be a realistic complement because of its relatively good
availability and high energy content. In southern Sweden beech and oak can become
complements.
Although straw and Reed Canary Grass have low energy contents, they seem to be good
alternatives to planting spruce on agricultural land taken out of use, especially in southern
Sweden, partly because they do not change the view of the landscape.
Bark contains a larger proportion of many of the chemical elements that are found in biomass,
compared to pure wood. Therefore it is preferred that bark is burnt in large heating plants,
while these usually have better flue gas cleaning. The ash content of bark is also relatively
higher, which gives reason to more disturbances in small-scale heaters, where reliability is
one of the most important factors.
In the small-scale target market segment, the two densified biomass fuels - pellets and
briquettes - do not cannibalise on each other. In fact they gain market shares from different
segments of the heating market. Pellets are preferred by customers used to heating with oil as
fuel. Smooth running of the appliance then has a high priority. Briquettes on the other hand
are more labour intensive compared to oil, but less labour intensive compared to wood logs.
No conversion is needed from wood log burning to briquette burning. This implies that
briquettes compete mostly with other biofuels and not to the same extent with fossil fuels in
the residential market.
It might seem odd that there is no third part control of pellet- and briquette producers that are
producing within the standards set by the Swedish Standards Association. The hope is set to
that the market itself may act as a smooth and cost efficient means of controlling the product
quality. Problems might arise when it comes to the fine fraction share, because there is at this
time no consistent testing method in use.
The development of the Swedish biofuels sector in general, and densified biofuels sector in
particular, has been successful and today Sweden is considered as one of the leading biofuel
using nations. There are about 30 larger production plants for densified biofuels in Sweden
and the national consumption in 1999 reached approximately 4.9 TWh. Three factors seem to
have contributed to this position: a good availability of wood raw material, a taxing system
which discriminates fossil fuels, and well extended district heating.
While the Swedish fossil fuel taxes have pushed the fossil fuel prices up, the real prices for
densified biofuels, which are tax exempted, have been stagnant for the last five years. The
strongly increased demand for biofuels has been met by a likewise strongly increased supply.
This comes mainly from large quantities of imported pellets from especially Finland, the
Baltic States and Canada. In fact approximately every third consumed pellet in Sweden was at
54
one stage an imported one. According to industrial representatives the imports decreased
significantly during 2001.
Let us assume that in the long term the domestic demand for biofuels in Canada, Finland and
the Baltic States will increase and that their exports to Sweden therefore diminishes. Let us
also assume that in the long term the fossil fuel taxes increase in Sweden as a means for the
government to lower the emissions of carbon dioxide. Then we have a situation where the
increasing demand will push the prices for DBFs upwards and where new technologies might
develop and new sources of raw material might be profitable to use. It would then be more
interesting to use harvesting residues such as branches and tops, or perhaps even wood from
thinnings, for pelletisation or briquetting. This increased supply could thereby stabilise the
price level at a higher level than today, but still competitive to fossil fuels.
There are good reasons to believe that the market for biofuels will increase in the long term.
Even in the political perspective the use of biofuels seems efficient:
• It helps reaching the international agreements of lowering carbon dioxide emissions
• It decreases the national dependence on imported energy sources
• It creates domestic jobs, often in geographical areas where jobs are scarce
• In the end it gives a higher value to the national forests
• It is in line with the recommendations of increasing the usage of biofuels by the EU
and national authorities
There has been a clear trend of linear increase of the production of densified biofuels in
Sweden. It remains to be detected whether the decrease of DBF production in 2000 was a
coincidence. During 2000, the heating plant of Västerås, i.e. one of the two major remaining
coal consuming heating plants in Sweden, started converting to pellets. This should affect the
pellet market in the future and the production statistics (Vinterbäck, 2001b). The trend for the
sales of small-scale pellet appliances currently seems to be exponential. This should also
contribute to an increased DBF demand.
55
11 References
11.1 Articles/Books/Reports
Arvidsson, A. M. 1997. Bioenergins material- och energibalans. Cited in Bioenergi no. 1.
Stockholm: SVEBIO (in Swedish)
Bengtsson, S. 2001. Pellets på frammarsch. Energimagasinet nr 1, 2001. (in Swedish)
Bergström, A., Boberg, J. & Dyberg, Å. 2002. Lokalisering av producenter av träbriketter,
träpellets och vedpulver i Sverige. Projektarbete GIS-kurs. Uppsala: SLU, Institutionen för
skogshushållning. (in Swedish) Mimeo
Bodlund, B & Herland, E. 1991. Alkali och klor i biomassa – ett problem vid elgenerering,
1991/40. Vattenfall Bioenergi & LRF. Älvkarleby: Dokumentationscentralen Vattenfall. (in
Swedish)
Burvall, J. & Hedman, B. 1994. Bränslekaraktärisering av rörflen – resultat från första och
andra års vallar. Rapport 5. Umeå: SLU, Institutionen för Norrländsk jordbruksvetenskap.
(in Swedish)
Cederberg, B., Dahlberg, A., Egnell, G., Ehnström, B., Hallingbäck, T., Ingelög, T., Kjellin,
P., Lennartsson, T., Lönnell, N., Schroeder, M., Thor, G., Thuresson, T., Tjernberg, M.,
Weslien, J. & Westling, O. 2001. Skogsbränsle, hot eller möjlighet? – vägledning till
miljövänligt skogsbränsleuttag. Jönköping: Skogsstyrelsens förlag (in Swedish)
Danielsson, B. 1999. En marknadsgenomgång från SPG. Folder 10 in Pellets 99. SVEBIO. (in
Swedish)
Davner, L. 2002. Buntning på reträtt. Skogen, no. 1. Stockholm: Danagårds Grafiska. (in
Swedish)
Drakenberg, B. 1994. Trä och trädbiologi. Saltsjö-Boo. SLU, Institutionen för Skoglig
Vegetationsekologi. (in Swedish)
Ek, B. 2001. Ingen virkesbrist. Skogen, no. 8. Stockholm: Danagårds Grafiska. (in Swedish)
European Commission. 1997. Communication from the commission. Energy for the future:
Renewable sources of energy. White paper for a Community Strategy and Action plan. Com
(97) 599 final (26/11/1997).
Forsberg, G. 1995. Bioenergitillgångar i Värmland. Länsstyrelsens rapport nr 3. Karlstad:
Regionalekonomiska enheten. (in Swedish)
Forsberg, G. 1999a. Assessment of Bioenergy Systems, an integrating study of two methods.
Doctoral thesis. Silvestria. Uppsala: SLU.
Forsberg, G. 1999b. Bioenergy Transport Systems, Life Cycle Assessment of Selected
Bioenergy Systems. Report No 5. SLU, Department of Forest Management and Products.
Uppsala.
56
Gärdenäs, S. 1986. Eldning av lagrade bränslen på rörlig snedrost: hyggesrester, ekflis.
Uppsala.
Hadders, G. & Forsberg, G. 1996. Pelletspärmen. Uppsala: Swedish Institute of Agricultural
Engineering.
Hadders, G. & Olsson, R. 1996. European Energy Crops Overview – Country Report for
Sweden. Uppsala: European Commission – Directorate General XII – Science, Research and
Development – Agro Industrial Research (FAIR). JTI. SLU.
Hakkila, P. 1989. Utilization of Residual Forest biomass. Berlin, Heidelberg.
Hamilton, H. (ed.) 1986. Praktisk skogshandbok, 12 ed. p.349. Djursholm: Sveriges
skogsvårdsförbund.
Hektor, B., Lönner, G. & Parikka, M. 1995. Trädbränslepotential i Sverige på 2000-talet - Ett
uppdrag för Energikommissionen. SLU, Inst. för skog-industri-marknad studier (SIMS).
Utredning 17. Uppsala.
Hillring, B. & Vinterbäck J. 1998. Wood pellets in the Swedish residential market. Forest
Products Journal, Vol. 48, no:5.
Hirsmark, J. 2001. Results from questionnaire survey to Swedish DBF producers: Mimeo.
Uppsala: SLU; Department of Forest Management and Products.
Hogfors, S. 2001. Sammanställning av produktion och utleveranser av svenskt trädbränsle
2000, GWh. Swedish Wood Fuel Producers Association. Stockholm. Mimeo.
Lagergren, F. 2002. Production statistics for members of the Swedish Pellet Producers
Association (PiR). SVEBIO: Stockholm. Mimeo.
Lang, A. 1998. Legislation and its Effects on Wood Recycling and Energy – Some Aspects of
the German Situation. In: Biomass Energy: Data, Analysis and Trends. IEA Workshop
Proceedings. 3-6 November 1998. UN/ECE, Timber Committee. Ministry of Forestry,
Istanbul, Turkey. pp. 45-52.
Lehtikangas, P. 1998. Lagringshandbok för Trädbränslen. Uppsala: SLU, Institutionen för
Virkeslära, (in Swedish).
Ljungblom, L. 1998. Södra Mönsterås i stark utveckling. Bioenergi, no. 3. Stockholm:
Novator/SveBio (in Swedish)
MacMahon, M. J. & Payne J. D. 1982. Holmens pelleteringshandbok. Holmen Chemicals
Limited.
Mared, J.1998. Förädlade trädbränslen – briketter, pellets och pulver – ett sammandrag. (From
a speech in Falun, in Swedish).
57
Marks, J. 1990. Wood Powder - An upgraded wood fuel. SLU, Department of Operational
Efficiency, Research Notes No. 182. Garpenberg.
National Board of Forestry. 2000. Skogsstatistisk årsbok 2000. The annual Statistical
Yearbook of Forestry. Jönköping.
Nilsson, C. et. al. 1998. Att elda med halm, Aktuellt från Lantbruksuniversitetet 364. Teknik.
Uppsala:SLU.
Nilsson, K. 1996. Sammanställning av bränsledata för salix och skogsbränslen.
Nilsson, P-O. & Lönner, G. 1999. Energi från skogen. SLU Kontakt 9. Uppsala.
NUTEK. 1993. Forecast for biofuel trade in Europe – The Swedish market in 2000. B
1993:10. Stockholm: Swedish National Board for Industrial and Technical Development.
Obernberger, I. & Thek, G., 2001. An Integrated European Market for Densified Biomass
Fuels (INDEBIF). ALTENER PROJECT AL/98/520. Country Report Austria (Draft Report Confidential). Institute of Chemical Engineering, Fundamentals and Plant Engineering,
University of Graz.
Ohlsson, C. 1997. Förädlade trädbränslen - sortiment och produktionskostnader.
SLU:SESAM-uppsats inom tema 7. Uppsala.
Roos, A., Bohlin, F., Hektor, B., Hillring, B., & Parikka, M.: 2000. A Geographical Analysis
of the Swedish Woodfuel Market. Scand. J. of For. Res. Vol. 15, No 1, pp. 112-118.
Samuelsson, S. 2000. Den ultimata guiden till Din rätta pelletsvärme. Bioenergi 5/2000.
Stockholm: Bioenergi Förlags AB.
Sjöström, E. 1993. Wood chemistry – Fundamentals and Applications, 2nd edition. San Diego:
Academic Press, Inc.
SS 18 71 20. Swedish Standards Institution, STG. 1998. Biofuels and peat – Fuel pellets –
Classification. Stockholm.
SS 18 71 21. Swedish Standards Institution, STG. 1998. Biofuels and peat – Fuel briquettes –
Classification. Stockholm.
Statistics Sweden. 1998. Peat 1996-Resources, Use and Environmental Impact, Na 25 SM
9801. (in Swedish with summary in English)
Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Imports of waste products to Sweden in
1997. Stockholm. (in Swedish)
Swedish National Energy Administration. 1995-2001. Prisblad för biobränslen, torv m.m., No
1/1995 – 4/2001. Stockholm and Eskilstuna.
Swedish National Energy Administration. 1998. Energy in Sweden. Facts and Figures 1998
ET 27:1998. Eskilstuna.
58
Swedish National Energy Administration. 1999. Energy in Sweden.
Swedish National Energy Administration. 2000. Energy in Sweden, Facts and Figures 2000.
Södra Skogsenergi. 1999. Träpellets för ett friskare Sverige. Ronneby. (in Swedish)
Uppenberg, S., Almemark, M., Brandel, M., Lindfors, L-G., Marcus, H-O., Stripple, H.,
Wachtmeister, A., Zetterberg, L. 2001. Miljöfaktabok för bränslen, Del 2.
Bakgrundsinformation och Teknisk bilaga. IVL Rapport, Stockholm. (in Swedish)
Uppenberg, S., Brandel, M., Lindfors, L-G., Marcus, H-O., Wachtmeister, A., Zetterberg, L.
1999. Miljöfaktabok för bränslen, Del 1. Huvudrapport - Resursförbrukning och emissioner
från hela livscykeln. IVL Rapport, Stockholm. (in Swedish)
Vinterbäck, J. 1996. Imports of biofuels to Sweden in 1995. Uppsala. SLU, Dept. of ForestIndustry-Market Studies. Mimeo. (in Swedish)
Vinterbäck, J. 2000a. Densification of Wood and Bark for Fuel Production - a Story of 150
Years. In: Wood Pellet Use in Sweden: a systems approach to the residential sector. Doctoral
thesis. Silvestria 152. Uppsala: SLU, Department of Forest Management and Products.
Vinterbäck, J. 2000b. Wood Pellet Use in Sweden, A systems approach to the residential
sector, Doctoral thesis. Silvestria 152. Uppsala: SLU, Department of Forest Management and
Products.
Vinterbäck, J. 2001a. Lista över svenska producenter av förbränningsanläggningar,
distributions- och lagringsutrustning samt produktionsutrustning. Uppsala: SLU, Department
of Forest Management and Products. Mimeo. (in Swedish)
Vinterbäck, J. & Hillring, B. 2000. Development of European Wood-Fuel Trade.
Holzforschung & Holzverwertung – Vol. 52, No. 6. pp. 114-118.
Warensjö, M. 1997. Såg 95, del 1, - (The sawmilling industry 1995, Part 1 – Production and
timber requirement). Uppsala: Department of Forest Products. Report no 521.
Westholm, E. 1986. Förädling av biobränslen - En fallstudie av hur ny energiteknik etableras.
DFR-rapport 1986:11. Dalarnas forskningsråd.
Zakrisson, M. 2002. Internationell jämförelse av produktionskostnader vid pelletstillverkning.
Uppsala: SLU; Department of Forest Management and Products.
11.2 Personal communications
Rosander, L. 2001. Staff manager. AB Gustaf Kähr.
Vinterbäck, J. 2002. Researcher. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences: Department of
Forest Management and Products.
59
Vinterbäck, J. 2002. Researcher. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences: Department of
Forest Management and Products.
11.3 Webpages
www.bogma.com .2001-12-19.Bogma AB.
www.cpenergi.se .2001-08-30. CP Energi AB.
www.ecotec.net .2001-08-30. Sahlins Ecotec AB.
www.emmaboda.se/ENERGI/nya.htm .2001-09-03. Emmaboda Energi AB.
www.energy.rochester.edu/se/stockholm/heatsupply.htm .2001-09-03. District Energy,
World-Wide Guide.
www.pellx.nu .2001-08-30. Scand-Pellet AB.
www.smhi.se .2002-01-10. Sveriges Meteorologiska och Hydrologiska Institut, SMHI.
www.sellbergs.se/brini/brinisvensk/svenskindex.html . 2002-03-24. SITA Sverige AB.
www.svebio.se .2002-08-30. Svenska Bioenergiföreningen, SVEBIO.
www.teembioenergi.se .2001-08-30. Tx Teem Bioenergi AB.
Appendices
1 = Swedish Standards for pellets
2 = Swedish Standards for briquettes
3 = Questionnaire to DBF producers
60
Appendix 1
BIOFUELS AND PEAT
Swedish Standard SS 18 71 20
SS 18 71 20
Fuel Pellets - Classification
Contents
-
Background
1. Scope
2. References
3. Specifications
4. Literature
Background
Fuel pellets are usually produced by milling and pressing slurry (logging residues,
clear-cutting residues), by-products from forestry and timber industries, straw, paper
etc. Fuel pellets consist of pressed finely-textured dry material and have a maximum
diameter of 25 mm.
1 Scope
This Standard describes three classes of fuel pellets. These differ primarily in size and
ash content.
2 References
SS 18 71 70 Biofuels and Peat - Determination of Total Moisture Content (Issue 3)
SS 18 71 71 Biofuels - Determination of Ash Content (Issue 1)
SS-ISO 540 Solid Fuels - Mineral Fuels - Determination of Ash Dissolution - Tube
Furnace Method (Issue 1)
SS 18 71 77 Solid Fuels - Determination of Total Sulphur Using a High Temperature
Tube Furnace Combustion Method
SS 18 71 78 Biofuels and Peat - Determination of Green Bulk Density and
Calculation of Basic Bulk Density (as in Glossary)
SS 18 71 80 Biofuels and Peat - Determination of Mechanical Strength of Pellets
(Issue 1)
SS-ISO 1928 Solid Fuels - Determination of Gross Calorific Value by Bomb
Calorimeter and Calculation of Net Calorific Value (Issue 1)
SS 18 71 85 Solid Fuels - Determination of Total Chlorine in Solid Fuel and in Solid
Waste Products using a Bomb Method (Issue 1)
3 Specifications
Specifications for properties and test methods for classification of pellets are given in
Appendix A. All values given in the Appendix are binding.
4 Literature
SS 18 71 06 Biofuels and Peat - Glossary (Issue 2)
SS 18 71 13 Biofuels and Peat - Sampling (Issue 1)
SS 18 71 14 Biofuels and Peat - Sample Preparation (Issue 1)
SS 18 71 76 Solid Fuels - Determination of Total Sulphur with Eschka and
Bomb Washing Method (Issue 1)
SS 18 71 84 Biofuels and Peat - Determination of Moisture Content in the Analysis
Sample (Issue 1)
Appendix A Classification of Fuel Pellets
Property
Dimensions:
diameter
and
length
in
producer’s store
Bulk density
Durability
in
producer’s store
Test Method
Unit
By measuring at least mm
fuel pellets
SS 18 71 78
SS 18 71 80
Net
value
(as delivered)
Ash content
SS 18 71 71
content
(as delivered)
Total
sulphur SS 18 71 77
content
Content
of
additives
Chlorides
SS 18 71 85
Ash dissolution
Group 1
Group 2
Group 3
To be stated as To be stated as To be stated as
max 4 times ∅ max 5 times ∅ max 5 times ∅
kg/m3
> 600
Weight of < 0.8
fines
< 3 mm, %
MJ/kg
> 16.9
> 500
< 1.5
> 500
> 1.5
> 16.9
> 15.1
kWh/kg
> 4.7
% w/w of < 0.7
DM
% w/w
< 10
> 4.7
< 1.5
> 4.2
> 1.5
< 10
< 12
% w/w of < 0.08
< 0.08
To be stated.
DM
% w/w of
DM
% w/w of < 0.03
< 0.03
To be stated.
DM
SS 18 71 65 / ISO 540 0C
Appendix 2
BIOFUELS AND PEAT
Swedish Standard SS 18 71 21
SS 18 71 21
Fuel Briquettes - Classification
Contents
-
Background
1. Scope
2. References
3. Specifications
4. Literature
Appendix A (binding) Classification of fuel briquettes
Background
Fuel briquettes consist of peat, sawdust, chippings and shavings which are the byproduct of sawmill industries, of products from forestry e.g. slurry or shredded
thinnings and of agricultural and other biobased fuel materials. The raw material is
dried and formed in high pressure briquette presses.
1 Scope
This Standard describes two classes of wood fuel briquettes, one group for private
consumers (Group 1) and the other for use in large plants with automatic feed (Group
2). A third group based on raw materials other than wood fuel and for any end-user is
also described (Group 3).
2 References
SS 18 71 70 Biofuels and Peat - Determination of Total Moisture Content (Issue 3)
SS 18 71 71 Biofuels - Determination of Ash Content (Issue 1)
SS-ISO 540 Solid Fuels - Mineral Fuels - Determination of Ash Dissolution - Tube
Furnace Method (Issue 1)
SS 18 71 77 Solid Fuels - Determination of Total Sulphur Using a High
Temperature Tube Furnace Combustion Method - IR-detector (Issue 1)
SS 18 71 78 Biofuels and Peat - Determination of Green Bulk Density and
Calculation of Basic Bulk Density in loose material (Issue 1)
SS 18 71 80 Biofuels and Peat - Determination of Mechanical Strength in Pellets
(Issue 1)
SS-ISO 1928 Solid Fuels - Determination of Gross Calorific Value by Bomb
Calorimeter and Calculation of Net Calorific Value (Issue 1)
SS 18 71 85 Solid Fuels - Determination of Total Chlorine in Solid Fuel and in
Solid Waste Products using a Bomb Method (Issue 1)
3 Specifications
Specifications for properties and test methods for classification of fuel briquettes are
given in Appendix A. All values given in the Appendix are binding and in addition
there is a requirement that the briquettes be stored in rain-proof conditions.
4 Literature
SS 18 71 06
Biofuels and Peat - Glossary (Issue 2)
SS 18 71 13
Biofuels and Peat - Sampling (Issue 1)
SS 18 71 14
Biofuels and Peat - Sample Preparation (Issue 1)
SS 18 71 76
Solid Fuels - Determination of Total Sulphur with Eschka and
Bomb Washing Method (Issue 1)
SS 18 71 84
Biofuels and Peat - Determination of Moisture Content in the Analysis
Sample (Issue 1)
Appendix A Classification of Fuel Briquettes (Binding)
Property
Diameter
in
producer’s store
Length
in
producer’s store
Bulk density
Durability
in
producers store
Test Method
Dimension in the press
By measuring at least
fuel briquettes
SS 18 71 78
SS 18 71 80
Net
value
(as delivered)
Ash content
SS 18 71 71
content
(as delivered)
Total
sulphur SS 18 71 77
content
Content
of
additives
Chlorides
SS 18 71 85
Ash dissolution
SS-ISO 540
Unit
mm
Group 1
To be stated,
min 25 mm
mm
> ½ ∅, but max
300 mm
kg/m3
> 550
Weight % < 8
of fines
< 15 mm
MJ/kg
>16.2
Group 2
To be stated,
min 25 mm,
min 10 mm,
max 100 mm
> 450
< 10
Group 3
To be stated,
min 25 mm
> 450
> 10
>16.2
To be stated
kWh/kg
> 4.5
% w/w of < 1.5
DM
% w/w
< 12
> 4.5
< 1.5
To be stated
To be stated
< 12
< 15
% w/w of < 0.08
< 0.08
To be stated.
DM
% w/w of
DM
% w/w of < 0.03
< 0.03
To be stated.
DM
0
C
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
Appendix 3.
QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY TO SWEDISH PRODUCERS OF
BRIQUETTES AND PELLETS FROM BIOMASS
Company info
1. Name of company:
..........................................................................................................................................
2. Company postal address:
..........................................................................................................................................
3. Company visiting address:
..........................................................................................................................................
4. Company telephone number:
..........................................................................................................................................
5. Company fax number:
..........................................................................................................................................
6. Company e-mail address:
..........................................................................................................................................
7. Company Internet address:
www.................................................................................................................................
8. Will it be possible for us to visit your factory for an interview?
Yes
No
No. of Responses (= NoR)
16
0
1
Percentage (= P)
100 %
0%
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
Products
9. Which are your main products (one or several alternatives)?
Pellets
NoR
16
Briquettes
6
Wood powder 1
Other
2
P
89 %
33 %
6%
11 %
NoR
P
diameter:
6 mm
6
38%
8 mm
13
81%
……mm 4
25%
diameter: ______ mm
length: ______ mm
Comment:
Of the respondents 89 % state that they produce pellets, of which 38 % produce
pellets with a diameter of 6 mm, 81 % with a diameter of 8 mm and 25 % with
diameters of 5, 10 or 12 mm. 33 %, or six of the respondents, produce briquettes.
Four of them state their diameter as 75 mm, while one state the length as 240 mm and
one as 60 mm. One respondent also produces wood powder, while one respondent
states heat as another product and another respondent states sawdust, bark and chips
as additional products.
10. Do you produce the fuels conforming to a standard? Which one?
(In case of a more rigorous internal standard please submit this standard or the most
important parameters.)
Produce according to standard
Produce according to no standard
NoR
12
1
P
92
8
Comment:
Of the 13 producers that answered this question, 12 (=92 %) stated that they do
produce conforming to a standard and 1(=8 %) did not. Of those who produce
according to a standard 92 % produce according to the Swedish Standard and 8 %
state that they produce according to ISO 9000.
11. Do you produce different qualities of Densified Biomass Fuels? Please give a
short explanation, why or why not.
Yes
No
NoR
7
7
P
50 %
50 %
Comment:
Of the 50 % that did produce different qualities, some of the explanations were:
• Pellets for both group 1 & 2 according to the SS 18 71 20.
• Larger pellet consumers want different qualities.
• Pellets from 100 % sawdust and pellets from 50 % sawdust + 50 % peat.
2
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
•
•
Briquettes with different mixtures of wood and peat as raw material.
Briquettes with diameters of 60 and 75 mm.
Of the 50 % that did not produce different qualities, some of the explanations were:
• Focusing on one quality gives advantages in both storing and distribution.
• The aim is trying to keep one smooth quality.
12. Will it be possible for us to obtain product samples for analyses?
NoR
P
Yes
14
78 %
No
0
0%
We have already analysed our products and submit a test protocol
8
44 %
Comment:
This question received a response frequency of 100 %. 78 % of the respondents chose
to fill in "Yes", while 44 % sent a test protocol of their products as an attachment to
the questionnaire.
Production
13. What quantity of pellets did you produce in the year 2000?
Maximum: 200 000
Minimum: 800
Mean:
38 500
Median:
23 000
Number of responses:
Percentage:
14
88 %
Comment:
The total sum of pellets produced by the respondents in the year 2000 is 538 400
tonnes. One pellet producer had started its production in the year 2000, why no
figures from this producer are included.
14. What quantity of briquettes did you produce in the year 2000?
Maximum: 196 500
Minimum: 400
Mean:
41 900
Median:
4 500
Percentage:
5
83 %
3
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
Comment:
The total sum of briquettes produced by the respondents in the year 2000 is 209 400
tonnes.
15. What is your maximum production capacity for pellets?
Maximum: 240 000
Minimum: 8 000
Mean:
60 000
Median:
33 000
Percentage:
16
100 %
Comment:
The total sum of production capacities stated by the respondents for the year 2000 is
961 000 tonnes.
16. What is your maximum production capacity for briquettes?
Maximum: 300 000
Minimum: 3 000
Mean:
75 700
Median:
8 000
Percentage:
6
100 %
Comment:
The total sum of production capacities stated by the respondents for the year 2000 is
454 000 tonnes.
17. What is the price of your pellets? (Please also submit a price list)
Summer, small consumers:
____________
Summer, industrial consumers: ____________
Winter, small consumers:
____________
Winter, industrial consumers: ____________
Comment:
Of the 6 respondents, no one uses differentiated prices during the seasons of the year.
Dividing the year in summer and winter is therefore not an issue in this case. The
prices for industrial customers were stated to be individual but one respondent stated
approximately 850 SEK/tonne depending on the transport distance, and another
stated 800 - 900 SEK/tonne excluding VAT but including delivery. The prices for
small customers were stated by 4 respondents. One stated 1 000 SEK/tonne, another
stated 1 550 SEK/tonne including VAT, and a third stated 1 450 SEK/tonne including
VAT and delivery. A fourth producer stated the following prices (all including VAT):
4
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
Pellets delivered by bulk truck 1 310 - 1 450 SEK/tonne depending on the quantity,
pellets delivered in small bags (16 kg/bag) on pallets 1 800 - 2 500 SEK/tonne
depending on the quantity, loose bulk pellets without delivery 1 370 SEK/tonne, big
bags (700 kg) without delivery 1 430 SEK/tonne, small bags (16 kg) without delivery
1 650 - 2 070 SEK/tonne depending on quantity.
18.
What is the price of your briquettes? (Please also submit a price list)
Summer, small consumers:
____________
Summer, industrial consumers: ____________
Winter, small consumers:
____________
Winter, industrial consumers: ____________
Comment:
Of the 3 respondents no one uses differentiated prices during the seasons of the year.
Dividing the year in summer and winter is therefore not an issue in this case. One
producer stated that all prices were individual, another producer stated that the price
for small customers was 1 000 SEK/tonne, and a third producer stated that the price
for small customers was 720 SEK/tonne excluding VAT, and the price for industrial
customers was 450 - 600 SEK/tonne excluding VAT.
19.
What is your storage capacity for finished goods?
Maximum: 120 000
Minimum: 200
Mean:
23 600
Median:
10 000
Percentage:
18
100 %
Comment:
One of the producers did not give an absolute number of tonnes, but stated that it has
an almost unlimited storing capacity because it can pack its products in plastic bags
which are stored outside.
20.
What is the total number of employees engaged in production, handling and
administration of briquettes and pellets within the company?
Maximum: 150
Minimum: 1
Mean:
23
Median:
9
Percentage:
17
94 %
5
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
Comment:
The total sum of employees is 390 persons. The figure of 150 employees as the
maximum comes from 100 full year employees and 100 seasonally employed persons.
One of the respondents stated that its pellet production is integrated with sawmilling
production, why administrative personnel is not included. Another producer stated
that its employees also work with heat production.
21. How do your employees work?
Pelletisation:
_____ shifts per day
_____ days per week
Briquetting:
_____ days per week
Other fuel products: _______________
_____ days per week
Pellet producers
Shift per day
3
3
2
No. of responses:
Percentage:
Days per week
7
5
5
15
94 %
Percentage
33 %
27 %
20 %
Comment:
13 % only stated that their employees work three shifts per day and 7 % only stated
that their employees work five days per week.
Briquette producers
Shift per day
3
3
2
1
No. of responses:
Percentage:
Days per week
7
5
5
4
5
83 %
Percentage
20 %
20 %
20 %
20 %
Comment:
One briquette produce only stated that its employees work five days per week.
6
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
22. Which equipment do you use?
No. of responses
Percentage
dryer
11
69 %
milling device
16
100 %
conditioning unit
8
50 %
pellet mill
16
100 %
cooler
16
100 %
………………
1
6%
No. of responses
2
Percentage
33 %
milling device
6
100 %
conditioning unit
2
33 %
briquetting press
6
100 %
cooling track
6
100 %
………………
0
0%
for pelletisation:
for briquetting:
dryer
[pellet sieve]
Comment:
One pellet producer also stated to use a briquetting press. This, however, has not
been taken into account here, since this pellet producer did not state any briquette
production for the year 2000.
23. Do you have bagging equipment?
No
Yes, semi-automatic bagging equipment
Yes, fully automatic bagging equipment
NoR
6
9
4
Percentage
33 %
50 %
22 %
Comment:
This question received a response frequency of 100 %. One of the respondents stated
to use semi-automatic bagging equipment for big bags and fully automatic bagging
equipment for small bags. Another respondent stated that a fully automatic bagging
machine was under construction and would be in use before year 2002.
7
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
24. How is your production packaged?
No. or responses
14
14
16
4
Small bags
Big bags
Bulk
Other: ….........
Percentage
78 %
78 %
89 %
22 %
Comment:
The response frequency for this question was 100 Two producers stated that some of
their products go straight on a truck for delivery, another stated that the majority of
its products goes straight on a boat for delivery and yet another stated that all of its
products are packed in containers for further distribution.
25. How are your finished goods stored?
No. or responses
17
11
1
3
Warehouse
Silo
Outside under roof
Other: ………………
Percentage
94 %
61 %
6%
17 %
Comment:
The response frequency for this question was 100 %. 17 % store their finished goods
in containers, in sacks or in plastic small bags.
Company history
26. Which year did your company start producing densified biomass fuels?
Starting year
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
Mean value:
Median value:
No of responses:
Percentage:
No of responses
1
Starting year
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
1
1
1
1993
1994
18
100 %
8
No of responses
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
3
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
27. Was your plant investment subsidised in any way? If yes, please state the
percentage of total investment costs.
National funds
__________ %
EU funds
__________ %
No investment subsidies
Total:
NoR
5
0
11
16
Percentage
31 %
0%
69 %
100 %
Comment:
The response frequency for this question was 89 %. For those who had received
national funds, the subsidy had covered a share ranging from 2,5 to 30 % with an
average of 14,3 % and a median value of 10 %.
28. Is your fuel production subsidised? If yes, please state the percentage of total
production costs.
National subsidies __________ %
EU subsidies
__________ %
No production subsidies
NoR
0
0
16
Percentage
0%
0%
100 %
Comment:
The response frequency for this question was 89 %.
29. Please indicate your total historical production data during the last years (in
tonnes).
Pellets:
1990………….. t
1991………….. t
1992………….. t
1993………….. t
1994………….. t
1995………….. t
1996………….. t
1997………….. t
1998………….. t
1999………….. t
2000………….. t
Briquettes:
1990………….. t
1991………….. t
1992………….. t
1993………….. t
1994………….. t
1995………….. t
1996………….. t
1997………….. t
1998………….. t
1999………….. t
2000………….. t
Others:
1990………….. t
1991………….. t
1992………….. t
1993………….. t
1994………….. t
1995………….. t
1996………….. t
1997………….. t
1998………….. t
1999………….. t
2000………….. t
Comment:
This question received a response frequency of 78 %. 10 pellet producers and 1
briquette producer gave historical figures for their production, while the figures
from questions 13 and 14 were used for the quantities for the year 2000. No
respondent stated any figures for other production than pellets and briquettes.
9
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
2002-07-31
Here follows a summary of the answers. For each year the number of respondents,
the total sum of their production that year and an average production for that
specific year, is shown.
Pellets:
1992………….. t
1993………….. t
1994………….. t
1995………….. t
1996………….. t
1997………….. t
1998………….. t
1999………….. t
2000………….. t
NoR
1
2
2
4
4
6
7
10
14
Total sum
300
12 700
21 500
28 700
51 600
143 300
184 700
302 000
538 000
Average
300
6 400
10 800
7 200
12 900
23 900
26 400
30 200
38 500
For the responding pellet producers the trend has been a continually increasing
average production, with the year 1994 as an exception.
Briquettes:
1990………….. t
1991………….. t
1992………….. t
1993………….. t
1994………….. t
1995………….. t
1996………….. t
1997………….. t
1998………….. t
1999………….. t
2000………….. t
NoR
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
Total sum
202 000
243 000
259 000
200 000
248 000
270 000
221 500
236 400
163 100
217 500
209 400
Average
41 900
30. Has your company registered any trademarks?
Number of companies with registered trademarks:
Number of companies without registered trademarks:
Total no responses:
Response frequency:
4
2
6
33 %
Comment:
Two of the respondents with registered trademarks are production units within the
same concern and therefore share the same trademark - "HOUSE Pellets". The other
two stated their company names as registered trademarks - "BioNorr" and
"Norrbränsle".
10
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
2002-07-31
31. Does your company hold any patents for densified biomass fuels? If yes, which
patent (brief description)
Number of companies with registered patents:
Number of companies without registered patents:
Total no responses:
Response frequency:
2
3
5
28 %
Comment:
One pellet producer stated that some of its production facilities are patented, and
another pellet producer stated that the company has a patented "mill-drying process".
Raw materials
32. Do you buy raw materials or do you use raw materials from your own production
plant (in case of both, please specify the share of each).
NoR
________% 5
________% 14
own raw material
bought raw material
Percentage:
Percentage
31 %
88 %
16
89 %
Comment:
The share of own raw material used ranged from 10 to 100 %, with an average of 65
% own raw material used. The share of bought raw material used ranged from 20 to
100 %, with an average of 88 % bought raw material used. Of all the respondents, 63
% stated to use only bought raw material. One briquette producer stated to use 50 %
bought sawdust and 50 % own peat.
33. Which wood species do you mainly use for fuel production?
……………………………
……………………………
……………………………
Tree species
________%
Spruce
________%
Pine
________%
Birch
Percentage:
Average use
54,5 %
45,5 %
0%
15
83 %
Comment:
All of the respondents stated to use both spruce (Picea abies) and pine (Pinus
sylvestris), except for one briquette producer who did not know the tree species used
by its raw material suppliers. The share of spruce used ranges from 5 to 99 %, with
an average of 54.5 %. The share of pine used ranges from 1 to 95 %, with an average
of 45.5 %. One of the respondents stated that it uses sawdust from birch (Betula
11
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
2002-07-31
pendula or B. pubescens) as a raw material test. Another respondent stated that it
considers using peat as raw material for a new product.
34. Is there sufficient raw material available for your fuel production?
NoR
12
5
Yes
No, please give some comments:
Percentage:
Percentage
71 %
29 %
17
94 %
Comment:
Of those respondents who did not see the raw material available as sufficient, two
stated that they compete with the sawmills internal burning of sawdust and one stated
that there is competition with farmers, who use dry byproducts from the sawmilling
industry to a larger extent during the winter.
35. Which are the main raw materials for your production of briquettes or pellets
(one or several alternatives)?
Green sawdust
Planer shavings
Dry wood chips
Dry sawdust/sanderdust
Bark
Green forestry residues
Recycled wood
Paper waste
Agricultural residues (what?)
Other (what?)
Percentage:
...........%
...........%
...........%
...........%
...........%
...........%
...........%
...........%
...........%
...........%
NoR
13
13
1
4
0
0
0
0
1
2
Percentage
72 %
72 %
6%
22 %
6%
11 %
18
100 %
Comment:
Green sawdust as raw material covers 10 to 100 % of the respondents raw material
usage, with an average of 72 %, planer shavings as raw material covers 1 to 100 %,
with an average of 60 %, dry sawdust/sanderdust as raw material covers 4 to 10 % of
their usage, with an average of 6 %. One of the respondents uses 10 % dry wood
chips in its production, another respondent uses 100 % residues from grain
production as raw material and two respondents use peat to cover the raw material
need with 50 % and less than 1 % respectively.
12
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
2002-07-31
36. Do you use additives?
NoR
3
15
Yes (What type?)
No
Percentage:
Percentage
17 %
83 %
18
100 %
Comment:
One of the respondents that use additives stated steam as its additive, another stated
lignin as its additive and a third stated that it uses wafolin as a binding agent for
pellets for small-scale users.
Markets
37. Which are your major market segments?
Residential
Small businesses
Industrial size users
Community plants
Export
Percentage:
___________ %
___________ %
___________ %
___________ %
___________ %
NoR
13
7
5
13
8
Percentage
76 %
41 %
29 %
76 %
47 %
17
94 %
Comment:
The DBF producers that sell to residential users sell on average 30 % of their
production to residential users. The corresponding figure for small businesses is 5 %,
for industrial size users 10 %, for community plants 78 % and for export 20 %. One of
the respondents only produces pellets for its own heating plant.
38. In which plants are your densified biomass fuels used?
Pellets:
small-scale (< 100 kW)
___________ %
medium-scale (100 - 1,000 kW) ___________ %
large-scale (> 1,000 kW)
___________ %
NoR
12
8
8
P
86%
57%
57%
Briquettes:
small-scale (< 100 kW)
___________ %
medium-scale (100 - 1,000 kW) ___________ %
NoR
5
4
P
71%
57%
13
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
2002-07-31
large-scale (> 1,000 kW)
Percentage:
___________ %
5
71%
16
89 %
Comment:
The responding pellet producers that sell to small-scale users on average sell 39 % of
their pellets to this segment. The corresponding figure for medium-scale users is 48 %
and for large-scale users it is 79 %. The responding briquette producers that sell to
small-scale users on average sell 38 % of their production to this segment. The
corresponding figure for medium-scale users is 40 % and for large-scale users it is
90 %.
Miscellaneous
39. Which are the main causes to possible production problems, with decreased
production as a result, at your plant?
NoR
7
4
4
2
10
2
2
1
Raw material deficit
Raw material of poor quality
Dryer failure
Failure in milling unit
Pelletiser/briquettor failure
Cooler failure
Conveyor system failure
Other (what?)
Percentage:
Percentage
44 %
25 %
25 %
13 %
63 %
13 %
13 %
6%
16
89 %
Comment:
One pellet and briquette producer stated that lack of cheap enough raw material is
one possible problem and one briquette producer, who uses 50 % peat, stated that
rainy summers can lead to a raw material deficit because of the difficulties in peat
harvesting. One briquette producer stated that lack of storing capacity for finished
goods is one of the main causes to production problems.
14
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
2002-07-31
40. What does the ownership of your company look like?
Percentage:
17
94 %
Comment:
The kind of ownership of the production plants differs significantly. Some of the more
noteworthy information is shown here.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Two of the responding pellet plants are owned together by 120 sawmills in
southern Sweden.
One pellet and briquette production plant is fully owned by a Swedish forest
owners association, Mellanskog, and one pellet production plant is owned to
50 % by Mellanskog, 25 % by the company Hedlunda Trävaru AB and 25 %
by Orsa Jordägande Socknemän.
One pellet plant is fully owned and two pellet plants are partially owned by
the Swedish forest company SCA. One of these plants is owned together with
the forest company Scaninge and Sågverkens Träprodukter AB, and the other
is owned together with the energy company Luleå Energi.
Two other energy companies, Uppsala Energi and Härjedalens Energi,
together own the major Swedish briquette producer.
The Norwegian oil company Statoil is the major owner of one of the
responding pellet producers together with the Swedish company
Vänerbränsle.
One pellet plant is owned by a company, which in turn is fully owned by the
Finnish company Vapo OY.
Five of the responding production plants are owned by private investors.
Two of the pellet plants are owned by economic associations.
41. Which are the main incentives and disincentives for the use of pellets according
to you?
Percentage:
12
67 %
Comment:
The following incentives and disincentives were mentioned by the respondents:
Incentives:
• Development of knowledge and technology about the use of pellets in smalland medium-scale combustion systems.
• Competitive in environmental and economical perspectives and high technical
competitiveness.
• We use national renewable bioenergy, which supports the local labour-market
and reduces emissions of greenhouse gases.
15
Jakob Hirsmark/SLU
INDEBIF Phase 2
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2002-07-31
The increasing oil price (also increasing electricity price), the abundance of
raw material and the installation of new burners for DBFs.
Environmental thinking, environmental fees, etc.
Increasing oil- and electricity prices, people who are tired of wood log
burning, the environment, satisfied customers who make great savings
compared to oil and electricity.
The oil price and environmental impacts.
Decreased dependence on oil and electricity.
The price and the environment.
Pellets is a cheap, comfortable and environmentally friendly fuel.
Cheap and environmentally friendly.
Disincentives:
• Taxes and fees.
• The authorities slow positioning in their attitude towards peat; whether it is to
be considered as a renewable biofuel, and the uncertainty about CO2-tax.
• Energy tax.
• Fear for taxing, high prices for combustion equipment compared to oil
burners, problematic combustion equipment.
• Fear of tax, and pellets involves more work than what oil does.
• Too little knowledge by the people, and the distribution systems and logistics
are not fully developed.
Your name:
..........................................................................................................................................
Your position:
..........................................................................................................................................
Date:
..........................................................................................................................................
NoR
Company brochure submitted
6
Test protocol from laboratory analyses of products submitted
8
Price list submitted
1
Product samples submitted (number of different samples: ______) 2
Company logo(s) submitted
3
Densified biomass fuels logo(s) submitted
1
16
P
33 %
44 %
6%
11 %
17 %
6%
INSTITUTIONEN FÖR SKOGSHUSHÅLLNING arbetar med forskning,
utbildning och information om skogens produktion och nyttjande för kommersiella
och andra ändamål i kedjan skog-förädling-marknad, inom ramen för en hållbar
utveckling.
Distribution
Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet
Department of Forest Management and Products
Box 7060
SE-750 07 UPPSALA
Sverige
Tel. +46 (0) 18 67 10 00
Fax: +46 (0) 18 67 38 00
E-post: [email protected]
Ansvarig utgivare
Publisher
Dekanus Jan-Erik Hällgren
Examensarbeten nr 38/2002 © Institutionen för skogshushållning och Jakob Hirsmark

Examensarbeten nr 38 • 2002 Densified Biomass Fuels in Sweden

Transcription

Similar documents

Pellets: Opportunities for West Virginia

Manufacturer of Kedel

Barnablick (Martin Broby).

Pellet Airgun - ActionSportGames

Wood Pellet Stoves

Development and promotion of a transparent European pellets market

ACCENTRA Pellet INSeRt