William A. Lee Chippewa Valley Ethanol Company University of

Transcription

William A. Lee
Chippewa Valley Ethanol Company
University of Minnesota – Morris
November 15, 2007 Little Falls, MN
Our goals are to:

Integrate biomass gasification systems to
displace
p
>90% of our natural g
gas energy
gy inputs
p
Work with other stakeholders to develop
feedstock systems that are Reliable,
Economical and Sustainable

p ((approx.
pp
Phase One Gasifier – 50 to 75 tpd
25% natural
gas displacement)
Robust BFB configuration
Design for pressure operation – 0 to 50 psig
Flexible Fuel Capabilities
Multi fuel burner retro-fit
Multi-fuel
retro fit for steam generation
Phase Two – additional gas cleaning unit
Phase Three – upgrading the P1 system or installation
of a second unit for full-plant capacity

Mechanical – 80%
Electrical – 65%
Controls – 50%
Multi fuel burner
Multi-fuel
installing in Sep
System commissioning
starts in December
Controls validation in
January
G ifi ti start-up
Gasification
t t
–
late February
CATCH THE ENERGY
release the potential

Natural Gas costs and future expectations

Add value to our members farm operations
p

Probability
y of Carbon Monetization in US

Participate in ownership of technology with
both thermal and product applications (via
thermo-chemical routes)
In 2007, the
h Minnesota Biomass Stakeholder
k h ld Group
convened to begin addressing the issues of biomass
harvesting and supply logistics
This group includes the University of Minnesota, AURI,
Great Plains Institute
Institute, ARS and NRCS Soils
Laboratories, CVEC and CVEC farmer members,
CMEC and other MN ethanol producers
Our Gasifier is designed to be Fuel Flexible capable of utilizing:

Wood chips, sawdust, clean wood waste
Corn stover, soybean stubble, wheat straw
Prairie grasses
DDGS and other grain processing co-products

2006 Field Trials – Hettenhaus + CVEC farmers

2007 – MN Biomass Stakeholders Group - grant apps

Research and analysis at U of MN and AURI

Densification, pyroloysis, torrefaction strategies

2007 Corn Cob Trials

Th emerging
The
i “Minnesota
“Mi
Biomass
Bi
M
Market”
k ”

Wood

Limited commercial availability
Emissions better understood
Corn Cobs

Potential to modify combine to segregate at harvest
Suitability for bulk storage
Higher
g
bulk density
y that other ag
g residues
Relatively low ash content
Material handling properties
C b removall
Cob

No consensus at present on definition of “sustainable”
sustainable

To
To
To
To
To
a Soil Scientists it’s about Soil Carbon Index, SOM
a Conservationist it’s about Soil Erosion
a Farmer it’s about maintaining crop yields
an Ecologist it’s about bio-diversity
a Social Scientist it’s about protecting small farmers
Tools
T
l in
i development
d
l
t – Rusle,
R l CQESTR
CQESTR, COMET,
COMET SCI
Impact of new hybrids and corn-on-corn
Need to develop a user-friendly decision making tool