Assessment Of The Emissions And Energy Impacts Of Biomass .
Assessment of the Emissions and EnergyImpacts of Biomass and Biogas Use inCaliforniaMarc Carreras-Sospedra, Donald DabdubDepartment of Mechanical & Aerospace EngineeringUniversity of California, IrvineRob WilliamsCalifornia Biomass CollaborativeUniversity of California, DavisARB Research SeminarsMarch 17, 2015
Outline Overview Biomass Resources Emissions Impacts of Biomass Use Air Quality Impacts of Biomass Use Conclusions and Future Work2/39
Outline Overview Biomass Resources Emissions Impacts of Biomass Use Air Quality Impacts of Biomass Use Conclusions and Future Work3/39
Use of Biomass What are the biomass resources?– Types of biomass available– Co-location of biomass installationswith power and fuel infrastructure How are biomass resources used?– Biopower production– Biofuel production: bio CNG, Ethanol What are the potential air qualityand greenhouse gas impacts?4/39
Biomass UsesBiomassBiopowerTransportation fuelBiomassuse impacts:h dro Contributes to energy sustainability Reduces greenhouse gas emissions Contributes to direct pollutant emissions, andsecondary air pollutants5/39en
MethodologyTechnology ScenariosBaselineEmissionsNEI, ARBPollutant EmissionsSparse MatrixOperator KernelEmissions(SMOKE) ModelAir Quality SimulationsCommunity Multi-scaleAir Quality (CMAQ)Model Dilution, transport and mixing Photochemical transformationSpatial SurrogatesActivity ProfilesEmissions of NOx overa 24 h period in 2005Meteorological FieldsChemical MechanismPM2.5 concentration overa 24 h period in 20056/39
Project OverviewBiomass scenarios3-D air quality modelDeterminespatial/temporalemissions1100 m100 Gas Species20 Aerosol Species300 Reactions670 m310 m150 m40 m0m80 CellsEach Cell: 5 x 5 km2Air quality impactsDetermine GHGco-benefits?Determinespatial/temporalAQ impacts7/39
Policy Drivers for Research Laws and Regulations– AB 32: Global Warming Solutions Act– SB X1-2: Renewable Portfolio Standard– AB 1900: Renewable Energy Resources:Biomethane– AB 118: California Alternative and RenewableFuel, Vehicle Technology, Clean Air, and CarbonReduction Act– AB 341: Mandatory Commercial Recycling8/39
Policy Drivers for Research Policies/Plans– Governor Brown’s Clean Energy Jobs Plans– Low Carbon Fuel Standard– Integrated Energy Policy Report– Sustainable Freight Transport Initiative9/39
Outline Overview Biomass Resources Emissions Impacts of Biomass Use Air Quality Impacts of Biomass Use Conclusions and Future Work10/39
Overview of California Biomass ResourcesAgricultural wasteMSW (municipal solid waste)(tons/acre)(tons)0.04-0.250.26-0.500.51-1 .001.01-1.501.51-194.46. .0 1-50,00050,001- 100,000 100,001-500,000 500,001 -1,000,000 1,000,001-2,074,479Forest wasteGrease(tons/acre)(tons)O.0S-0.25. 0.26-0.50. 0.51-1 .00. 1.01-1 .50.1.51-15.86D e 533-1 ,0001,001-2,5002,501- 5,0005,001 -1 0,00010,001-19,628 DD -DI!)D:IS50100., D Do DODDD .200California great biomassresources (CBC, 2011):– Biopower currentcapacity: 1200 MW– Potential additionalcapacity: 4,000 MW : Tittmann et al. 2008DB D11/39
Solid Residue Potential LocationSolid ResidueExisting Facilities (MW)D0.0 - 10.010.0- 20 .0TechnologyBubbling Fluidized BedNetCapacity(MW)125.5CHPCapacity(MW) 20 .0 - 30.0 30 .0 - 40.0 40 .0- 50 .0Potential in 2020 (MW)0.00.0 - 15.015.0 - 43.0Circulating Fluidized BedCombustion Steam CycleDowndraft er419.5242.0Total1112.1406.6Stoker - GrateSuspension Fired Boiler-43.0 - 75.0-75.0 - 123.0-123.0 - 183.0-183.0 - 267.012/39
Landfill Gas Potential LocationLandfill GasExisting Facilities (MW)Technology - PowerGas and Steam TurbinesGrossCapacity(MW)11.7o0.0 - 9.2e9.2 - 18.4 18.4 - 27.6 27.6- 36.8 36.8- 46.0Potential in 2020 (MW)0.0 - 9.09.0 - 24.0-24.0-60.0Gas Turbine116.2-60.0 - 121.0-121.0 - 156.0Microturbine12.0-156.0 - 412.0Reciprocating EngineSteam TurbineTotal173.458.0371.313/39
Existing vs Technical PotentialTechnical Potential in 2020Animal ManureExisting Facilities in 2011Food ResidueSolid Fuel Technical Potential (MWe)Wastewater Treatment PlantsField & Seed,340Vegetable, 14Landfill GasOrchard &Vine, 436Solid Fuels010002000Capacity (MWe)30004000Forestry, 2860Source: California Biomass Collaborative, 201114/39
Outline Overview Biomass Resources Emissions Impacts of Biomass Use Air Quality Impacts of Biomass Use Conclusions and Future Work15/39
Emission Factors6.00ARB BACT forbiogasenginesNOX emission factor (lbs/MWh)5.00Average CAsolid ating Gas Turbines MicroturbinesEnginesBiogas from wastewater treatment plants,landfill gas, and animal manureFuel CellISolid FuelBoiler-GasificationSystem2008 ARBlimits for DG2013 ARBlimits for DG''Forest and other solid fuels16/39
Potential Emissions in CAAnimal ManureI Technical Potential in 2020 Existing Facilities in 2011Food ResidueWastewater Treatment PlantsLandfill GasSolid Fuels050100150NOX emissions (tons/day)200250Biopower total NOX emissions from in CA in 2011 10 tons/day (EPA)Total NOX emissions in CA in 2012 2105 tons/day (ARB)17/39
Collection and TransportSingle Function Equipment Include collection and transportationemissionsMulti-Function Equipment ff%'.1/Solid Residue Facilities (MW) 0.0 - 10.010.0 - 20.020 .0-30.0 30.0-40.0 40 .0 - 50.0Road Length (km)-0-88-1313 - 18-18-2323 - 28-28-3333-3818/39
Analysis of Full Cycle Emissions Following ARB’s Low Carbon Fuel StandardsPathways Using CA-GREET model emissions for well-totank processes0:Ju 0wctlw0U P ---------'19/39
Scenarios Increasing Capacity with Conventional Technology––––Current CapacityPolicy-Driven with SB1122Governor Brown’s Clean Energy Jobs PlanMaximum Technical Potential Technology Upgrade for Efficiency and Emissions Shift End Use from Electricity to Fuel– CNG for fuel– CNG for pipeline– Ethanol20/39
Increasing Capacity with ConventionalTechnology5000Biomass Mixed Biomass Urban4000 Biomass Agricultural Biomass Forest Biagas Animal manure3000 Biagas Digester gas Biagas Landfill gas uroC.rou200010000CurrentPolicy-drivenClean EnergyMaximum(SB1122)Jobs Planpotential21/39
Technology Upgrade for Efficiency andEmissions Solid Biomass:– Boiler Next Gen GasificationNOX:PM:CO2: 97% 88% 28% Biogas:– IC Engine Fuel CellNOX:PM:CO2: 99% 99% 35% 22/39
BiomassBiogasBiomassBiogasBiomassBiogasTechnology Upgrades Maximum PotentialCurrentEmissions from Biomass for 2eqPMNOXCO2eqPMNOXFeedstocksICollection and TransportIConversionISavingsI-II I-80IIII-4004080120Emissions, metric tonnes (10 3 Mg for CO2eq)16023/39
Shift End Use from Electricity to Fuel Biogas:– Clean-up, upgrade and compression to produce CNG– Potential: 2.4 million gasoline gallon equivalent (GGE) Biomass:– Renewable synthetic natural gas production (RSNG)– Potential: 6.5 million GGE of CNG or 3.4 million gallons ditioningSNGBiomassr0 xygen / SteamySolidsTars24/39
RSNG Productiongeneral processainstant SNG"Waste TypeForest residueBeech 43.7%50.0%48.0%SNGgaswoodgasifierH2, COCH 4 synthesis80% efficiencyC4three ca;s 100%EFgasifier0%60%175%75%Orblo'Wl'lCH4 tet al., 20062Thomas and Martin, 20123Bahor et al., 2008CFBgasifierCH4 35%CH 4 synthesis28%* 0 2-production equire-s considerabfe amounts of elec.tricity (not included in vafu e-s above )25/39
Biomass Biogas Biomass Biogas Biomass Biogas BiomassEthanolCNG for NGPipelineCNG for VehiclesMaximumPotentialEmissions from Biomass for qPMNOXCO2eqPMNOXCO2eqPMNOXIFeedstocks Collection and TransportConversionISavings III-80 .-III-4004080120Emissions, metric tonnes (10 3 Mg for CO2eq)16026/39
Spatial Allocation of Emissions2020 Technical Potential: NOX EmissionsFacilitiesCollection and Transport160.10.00140.8.75120.100. 7.506.25- --! ' . of .:.··. : .,., .':':'- · -;.i.-. - - : t-- t,,-.,f,:W-C)80. ,l,-- ·. -".-.- :"C"'.,.c,,.·: : . . .-!:";:-0:.\ '.:-" :60.5.003.75.r i:.:40.-o .2.50-o -.::,.20. .1.250.0.0027/39
Typical Episodic Air Quality Simulation2020 Baseline Air QualityOzoneParticulate Matter (PM2.5)100.056.87.548.75.0C"')\ ii 40.62.5E(II.g u50.032.'§37.524.25.016.12.58.0.0l.0.Air quality model:Baseline Emissions:Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model, v. 4.7.1EPA’s 2005 National Emissions Inventory projected to 2020based California Air Resources Board estimatesMeteorological fields: Weather Research Forecast (WRF) model, for July andDecember, 200528/39
Outline Overview Biomass Resources Emissions Impacts of Biomass Use Air Quality Impacts of Biomass Use Conclusions and Future Work29/39
Effect of Current BiopowerNo Biopower vs Current Biopower0 MWvs1,264 MWDifference in 24-hour average PM2.5Difference in Max 1-hour Ozone6.02.04.51.53.01.0.,1.5J:.cC.C.0.5. "'E II.C)0.0.0 . 0.0·e-1.5-0.5-3.0-1.0-4.5-1.5-6.0-2.030/39
Maximum Biopower Potential: SummerMaximum Biopower vs Current Biopower4,660 MWvs1,264 MWDifference in 24-hour average PM2.5Difference in Max 1-hour 0.0C)0.0 J·e-1 .5-0.5-3.0-1.0-4.5-1.5-6.0-2.031/39
Maximum Biopower Potential: WinterMaximum Biopower vs Current Biopower4,660 MWvs1,264 MWDifference in 24-hour average PM2.5Difference in Max 1-hour 00.00.0"'.E-1 .5-0.5-3.0-1.0-4.5-1.5-6.0-2.032/39
Primary vs. Secondary PM – Summer Primary PM2.5: Contribution form collection and transportSecondary PM2.5: Mostly ammonium nitratePrimary PM2.5Secondary PM2.54.04.03.03.02.0 -2.0(")(")i i Erni i E1.0rnE.«l.0Cl.I"E.0.!:!«lCl0.0.!:!E0.0E-1.0 1.0-1.0-2.0-2.0 ,c, 'c, S-3.0.}-3.0\,-4.0-4.033/39
Effect of Technology UpgradesTechnology Upgrade vs Current Biopower4,660 MWvs1,264 MWDifference in 24-hour average PM2.5Difference in Max 1-hour )0.0.,.0·s-1.5-0.5-3.0-1 .0-4.5-1 .5-6.0-2.034/39
Effect of CNG vehiclesMaximum CNG vs Current Biopower0 MWvs1,264 MWDifference in 24-hour average PM2.5Difference in Max 1-hour Cl0.50.0·e-1.5-0.5-3.0-1 .0-4.5-1 .5-6.0-2.035/39
Outline Overview Biomass Resources Emissions Impacts of Biomass Use Air Quality Impacts of Biomass Use Conclusions and Future Work36/39
Summary and Conclusions Technically recoverable biomass resources:– 4.66 GW of biopower or 8.89 million GGE The impacts of biomass depend on:– Emission controls, technology, products Technology upgrades would obtain the lowest netemissions of criteria pollutants Conversion of biomass to CNG for vehicles wouldachieve the lowest emissions of GHG Conversion of biomass to CNG for vehicles achievedthe overall lowest impacts on air quality and GHG37/39
Future Work Emissions and air quality assessment of ARB’s LCFSscenarios for 2020 Analysis of RNSG production from solid biomass Analysis of CNG alternatives: hydrogen, bioalcohols Analysis of Biofuels for Sustainable FreightTransport Analysis of management of solid waste to maximizerecycling, and minimize disposal at landfills38/39
AcknowledgmentsCalifornia Air Resources Board (#11-307)Ralph Propper, Program Manager39/39
Biomass Biogas Biomass Biogas Biomass Technology Upgrades Maximum Potential Current. Emissions, metric tonnes (10. 3 . Mg for CO2eq) Feedstocks Collection and Transport Conversion Savings-80 -40 0 40 80 120 160. NOX PM CO2eq NOX PM CO2eq NOX PM CO2eq NOX PM CO2eq NOX PM CO2eq NOX PM CO2eq. Biogas Biomass Biogas Biomass Biogas Biomass Technology .
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được
Food outlets which focused on food quality, Service quality, environment and price factors, are thè valuable factors for food outlets to increase thè satisfaction level of customers and it will create a positive impact through word ofmouth. Keyword : Customer satisfaction, food quality, Service quality, physical environment off ood outlets .
More than words-extreme You send me flying -amy winehouse Weather with you -crowded house Moving on and getting over- john mayer Something got me started . Uptown funk-bruno mars Here comes thé sun-the beatles The long And winding road .
