The industrial wood pellet industry is catching its breath after an astounding surge since the turn of the millennium. Global production of pellets totaled roughly 2 million metric tons (MT) in 2001, and roughly 28 million MT in 2015. As this market continues to evolve globally, it&rsquo;s a good time to step back and analyze other U.S. forest product exports by region and type. This data can tell us a lot about raw material utilization, and help uncover new opportunities for biomass and wood pellet growth in foreign markets. New demand for industrial wood pellets is on the horizon, as directives from the Paris climate agreement begin to take effect, and Asian markets&mdash;particularly the South Korean and Japanese markets&mdash;represent new opportunities for U.S. producers. Of the approximately 19 million MT of wood pellets, lumber, logs and wood chips exported from the continental U.S. in 2016, 7.9 million MT (41 percent) were logs (Fig. 1). In total, 5.8 million MT (74 percent) of logs were exported out of the West, 1.4 million MT out of the South, and 0.6 million MT out of the North, to other countries. However, most logs (7.4 of 7.9 million MT) exported out of the U.S. were destined for Asian markets. The majority were exported out of western ports due to the region&rsquo;s high-quality timber and closer proximity to Asia. On a volume basis, wood pellets were the next most significant wood product export from the U.S., totaling 4.7 million MT. Over 99 percent of this volume was shipped from the South and received into European ports. Of the 3.5 million MT of U.S. lumber exports, 2 million MT (57 percent) were shipped via South ports, 0.8 million MT (22 percent) were shipped from North ports and 0.7 million MT (21 percent) were shipped from West ports. Approximately 2.9 million MT of wood chips were exported from the U.S., of which 1.7 million MT (59 percent) were shipped via West ports, primarily to Japan. An additional 1.1 million MT (3 percent) were exported from South ports. Asian countries are important markets for U.S. wood product exports, especially logs and lumber shipped to China, Japan and Vietnam. For each of the three port regions, log and lumber exports represented the most significant exports to Asian countries in 2016 (Fig. 2). The only exception to this was wood chip exports to Japan out of the West. Most U.S. wood pellet exports are shipped to the EU, and more specifically, over 90 percent of all U.S. pellet exports are sent to the U.K. (Fig. 3). Virtually all (99.9 percent) of the 4.6 million MT of wood pellets exported from the continental U.S. are exported through South ports. Not surprisingly, most of the wood pellets exported from the U.S. to Asian countries pass through West Coast ports. While the volume is miniscule compared to South exports to the U.K., at least 309 MT of pellets were shipped to Asian countries in 2016, primarily out of West ports. According to United Nations data, the Asian wood pellet import market was approximately 1.7 million MT in 2015 (Fig. 4). By comparison, the U.K. imported 6.5 million MT of pellets during the same period. While the Asian regional market is roughly one-quarter of the size of the U.K. market, the market is young and on a bit of a learning curve. &bull; The largest Asian pellet importer in 2015 was South Korea, which imported approximately 1.5 million MT, or 85 percent of the Asian market for imported pellets. South Korea imported over 1.0 million MT (70 percent) of its pellets from Vietnam, and an additional 0.4 million MT (29 percent) were imported from Malaysia, Canada, Russia, Indonesia and Thailand. Approximately 18,800 MT of pellets were imported to South Korea from the U.S. &bull; Japan imported 232,400 MT of pellets in 2015, which represented roughly 13.5 percent of the Asian market. Approximately 146,200 MT (63 percent) were imported from Canada, 57,900 MT (25 percent) were imported from China and 27,400 MT (12 percent) from Vietnam. &bull; Together, other Asian countries imported approximately 24,600 MT of wood pellets in 2015, primarily from Malaysia (13,100 MT), Indonesia (6,200 MT) and China (2,400 MT). The Japanese government recently approved nearly 3.2 GW of biomass-fired capacity (approximately 500-plus MW are already commissioned), which represents a new opportunity for global wood pellet manufacturers. Asian biopower producers will require security of supply to ensure financing and ongoing operations and, as evidenced by Canada&rsquo;s significant exports to Japan, these markets are already receiving high-quality wood pellets from North America. With abundant and sustainable forests and a wood export infrastructure that is already in place as a result of other forest product exports, U.S. biomass and pellet producers are well positioned to capitalize on this increase in demand. Author: Stan Parton Bioenergy Practice Manager, Forest2Market stan.parton@forest2market.com www.forest2market.com Data Notes: &bull; All data have been converted from kilograms to metric tons. &bull; US export data include only vessel (seaborne) trade. In the U.S. export data, &ldquo;logs&rdquo; refers to HS code 4403; &ldquo;lumber&rdquo; to HS code 4407; &ldquo;wood chips&rdquo; to HS code 440121 and 440122; &ldquo;wood pellets&rdquo; to HS code 440131. &bull; Asian wood pellet import data use imports from the Comtrade database for HS code 440131. &bull; The U.N. Comtrade database reported 18,021 MT of wood pellet imports under the label &ldquo;Other Asia, nes.&rdquo; Because the FAOSTAT database reported the same volume associated with Taiwan, we have labeled it as such. &bull; The data years reported in the U.S. export and Asian import data are different, and, even in the same data year, import and export data may not align perfectly. As such, discrepancies between the export and import data are normal.

2017/03/Figure1-USWoodProductExports_149019345862_largethumb.jpg

2017/03/Figure1-USWoodProductExports_149019345862_thumb.jpg

2017/03/Figure1-USWoodProductExports_149019345862.jpg

2017/03/Figure2-Top5WoodProductEzports_14901934595106.jpg

2017/03/Figure3-USWoodPelletExports_14901934604991.jpg

2017/03/Figure4-AsianWoodPellet_14901934615.jpg

From the April issue of Biomass Magazine, this data-packed report from Forest2Market suggests existing North American infrastructure can light the way for biomass exporters.

US Forest Product Exports to Asia

Providing misleading, inaccurate, and sometimes outright fiction as facts could be called propaganda.&nbsp; With overtones of Orwell&rsquo;s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, the term &ldquo;alternative facts&rdquo; has recently been coined.&nbsp; Either way, it is biased and misleading information that is used to promote a point of view. &nbsp;&nbsp; The recently released paper by the Chatham House is a study that contains many inaccurate statements about the use of wood for energy. Those statements are presented as facts, or as uncontested conclusions. This article will focus on the study&rsquo;s discussions that pertain to the sourcing of raw materials for industrial wood pellets.&nbsp; Throughout the study, there is frequent reference to what it claims is an important distinction regarding how trees are used after harvest. From that point of view, making lumber is okay, but using the wood to produce wood pellets for energy is not. The study also frequently states that the harvest of trees cuts short their ability to continue sequestering carbon.&nbsp; The following quote from page 24 of the Chatham House paper embodies both of those concepts. &ldquo;This argument implies that, once they have grown, what happens to trees later&mdash;whether they are left to grow further, or harvested and made into wood products, or harvested and burnt for energy&mdash;somehow makes no difference to carbon concentrations in the atmosphere. This is obviously not the case.&rdquo; That quote, which captures a logic presented in many other places in the Chatham House paper, presents a premise that is false and an &ldquo;obvious&rdquo; conclusion that is wrong, setting up a dichotomy that does not represent reality in order to justify inaccurate conclusions about the carbon impacts of using wood for energy. At the heart of the matter, it appears that the study does not understand how the forest products industry operates. In the U.S. and Canada, and many other countries, there are vast working forests whose purpose is to produce the raw materials for many industries. Those forests are valued assets to the landowners, tree farmers and the buyers. Sawmills, pulp mills, and many other wood products mills, including pellet mills, depend on a continuous daily input of wood to produce products that are used in one way or another by just about everyone, every day.&nbsp; To enable and ensure a continuous supply of raw material, the quantity of the logs and chips coming into the mills cannot exceed the growth rate of the surrounding managed forest. Otherwise, the mills, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, would have to close once they depleted the resource they depend on to operate. Sawmills, pulp mills, and pellet mills are sized to match the ability of the surrounding working forest to supply affordable wood, every day, for decades. Sawmill, pulp mill, and pellet mill business models require good forestry practices that yield a sustainable outcome. But beyond that, particularly for industrial wood pellets being exported from the U.S. and Canada into the U.K. and other nations, there are rigorous certification schemes that demand auditing to prove that the forests are not being depleted, and that the stock of carbon held in the forests is not being reduced. The millions of hectares of working forests in North America that supply the forest products industries are like the millions of hectares of cropland in North America. The trees, whether grown on large plantations in the southeast U.S. or in the immense managed hardwood and softwood stands in the northern states and Canada, are being grown to be harvested. These forests are dynamic systems that are in many stages of growth. There are mature trees that are ready to harvest, areas of new growth, and many plots that are in stages of growth between seedlings and mature trees. The purpose of tree farming is to supply wood fiber and its many byproducts to industry.&nbsp; Privately-owned forests in the U.S., which make up about 60 percent of all U.S. forestland, are managed to continuously produce the raw materials for making lumber, paper, pellets, and other products derived from wood, and hold billions of tons of carbon. The landowners of those private forests and the workers who manage and harvest trees get paid for growing and producing wood fiber, not for sequestering carbon. However, the inherent sustainability of the resource that accrues from good forest management practices means that the aggregate carbon stock held in private forests are not being depleted. In fact, quite the contrary.&nbsp; Figure 1 shows the annual carbon sequestered in U.S. forests. The larger the negative number, the more carbon that is being captured in U.S. forests, whose carbon sequestration has increased by 13.6 percent over the past 25 years. Figure 2 shows the total carbon held in privately owned U.S. forests by state, and the percentage of U.S. forests that are privately owned. Most privately owned forests are working forests growing trees for the forest products industries. Contrary to the either-or implications by the Chatham House study regarding harvesting trees versus carbon sequestration, a steady supply of raw materials for the forest products industries, including pellet production, does not mean reducing carbon stocks. But if the landowners stopped tree harvesting altogether? Would the Chatham House counterfactual be true?&nbsp; Would carbon stocks grow? &nbsp; Private owners of working forests are farmers who depend on the forest products industries for income. As long as there is demand for lumber, paper, chemicals derived from wood fiber, and other end products made from wood, forests will be grown to be harvested. Sustainable tree farming, i.e., continuously renewing forests, does not degrade the carbon sink function of working forests.&nbsp; For any forest, there are diminishing returns to carbon sequestration as trees in the forest age. For many years, the growth rates and carbon sequestration rates increase as the trees in each plot age. But all forests reach an inflection point, and then an equilibrium at which the growth rate and the mortality rate equalize and the stock of carbon held in the forest stabilizes.&nbsp; There is very little added carbon benefit after a plot in the Figure 3 model reaches about 35 years old. The model also illustrates why there is no net new carbon added to the atmosphere if the stock of new growth on the landscape equals the stock of the harvested plot (i.e., the harvest rate does not exceed the growth rate). Suppose the tree farmer has 35 plots across the landscape of her forest in different stages of growth. In Figure 3, the carbon sequestered by each of the younger plots equals the carbon held by plot 35. If all of plot 35 were made into pellets, which is highly unlikely, and the carbon was released from the combustion of the pellets made from that harvest, that carbon would be sequestered by plots 1 through 34 over the next year.&nbsp; In the real world, the harvest, conversion to pellets, and combustion of those pellets is continuous throughout the year, across many landscapes. The CO2 released in combustion is absorbed contemporaneously by the new growth in the many younger plots that match or exceed the removals from mature plots. Sustainable forestry practices, mandated by the sustainability criteria that qualifies wood pellets for use in U.K. power stations, assure that the biogenic carbon cycle continuously sequesters at least as much carbon as is released by the combustion of pellets. There is no such thing as a carbon debt if the stock of carbon held in the forest is not reduced.&nbsp; Further undermining the Chatham House study is another false premise. The study&rsquo;s author does not seem to understand that harvested trees have more than one purpose. For the most part, mature trees are not harvested just to make lumber or just to make wood pellets. The landowners, foresters, and loggers work together to maximize the value and productivity of the working forests. The study is correct in stating that the preferred raw material for wood pellet production is sawmill residuals (sawdust, chips and shavings). What was sawmill waste becomes a valued feedstock for pellet production. In many locations, sawmill residuals from structural lumber production are abundant, and they supply much of the raw material needed to produce wood pellets. In other locations, there are insufficient sawmill residuals. In those locations, the pellet mills, just like the pulp mills, use of the nonsawlog portions of the tree. Just as sawdust is a byproduct of sawmilling, pulp or pellet grade wood chips are a byproduct of growing and harvesting trees for lumber production.&nbsp; The highest value for tree farmers from a harvested tree is the sawlog. This is the lower portion of the tree that is large in diameter, and free from defects that would preclude producing lumber. The upper portion of the harvested tree is either too low in diameter, or is not straight and defect free, and therefore cannot be sawn into boards. That portion of the tree typically has been debarked and chipped for use in pulp and paper mills.&nbsp; Thinnings occur once or twice over the growth period of the mature trees.&nbsp; Imagine trying to grow food crops without managing how many stems per acre are planted. If the plants are too crowded, productivity would be very low. That same logic applies to working forests. Selective thinning improves the growth rate and health of the remaining trees. The stands are thinned to allow the remaining trees to grow straight and tall, in order to maximize the production of sawlog quality timber. The thinnings typically have stems that are too small in diameter or are not straight enough for sawlogs, but they are suitable for producing wood chips for the pulp and paper industry or for wood pellets. There is no black or white, mutually exclusive decision making to either use the wood for lumber or for pellets.&nbsp; The same tree provides both.&nbsp; The Chatham House study&rsquo;s thesis that there are two distinct alternatives for the use of harvested trees is wrong. Recognizing that error in their logic leads us to conclude that if they are okay with harvesting wood to make lumber, they should be okay with using the upper portion of the tree and the thinnings for making pellets. Some pellet plants, under specific circumstances during which there are no higher and better use for the wood, use whole logs from mature trees to make pellets. The Chatham House study mentions the Vyborgskaya pellet mill in Russia, and implies that there is a false labeling of the wood as &ldquo;waste.&rdquo;&nbsp; The study lumps Enviva, the largest wood pellet producer in the U.S., into the same accusation. If the reader only depends on the information in the report, he or she would have the impression that these pellet mills are sourcing wood that could have been used for lumber production, or worse, are using wood that was harvested with no regard for the health of the forests. The study presents incomplete information that allows the reader to make incorrect conclusions. The procurement of wood must be put into the context of the forest products industry in the region, and on the suitability of the logs used in that pellet mill for other purposes. About 80 percent of the whole logs going into the Vyborgskaya plant are aspen. Aspen is a relatively soft, nonconiferous tree that is not suitable for structural lumber, and thus has very limited demand for sawmilling. Using aspen for pellet production is helping to improve the health and future productivity of the forest, and is providing a paying market for an otherwise unwanted species. Regarding Enviva, several peer-reviewed studies examining areas from which Enviva pellet plants procure wood have shown that the wood procurement practices used by Enviva provide a valued end use to otherwise nonmerchantable trees. The studies show that providing a market for otherwise nonmerchantable wood allows private forests that have deteriorated into nonmerchantable states to be managed into plots that will sustainably yield valued timber in the future for their owners and provide better habitat for wildlife. The Chatham House study does not tell that side of the story. There is certainly a place for independent and critical oversight of the industrial wood pellet sector. There are some areas of the world where industrial wood pellets are produced from questionable feedstocks. There are some end users of industrial wood pellets who are less than rigorous in certifying the credentials of the producers. But the U.S. and Canada are not one of those places in the world, and the U.K.&rsquo;s end users do engage in rigorous certification (as do those in most other jurisdictions). The Chatham House study is misguided in its focus. Finally, the forest products industry in evolving. As the demand for paper declines, the opportunity for pellet mills to use the raw materials that would have otherwise gone to pulp and paper mills increases. In just one U.S. state, Maine, there have been six pulp mill closures in the past two and a half years. Those pulp mills used more than 2 million tons per year of biomass that could be made into pellets. The pellet industry will replace much of what is being lost. That is an alternative future that does not depend on alternative facts. Author: William Strauss President, FutureMetrics williamstrauss@futuremetrics.com 207 824-6702&nbsp;

2017/03/CarbonAbsorbed-USForests_14901923937207_largethumb.jpg

2017/03/CarbonAbsorbed-USForests_14901923937207_thumb.jpg

2017/03/CarbonAbsorbed-USForests_14901923937207.jpg

2017/03/CarbonSequstriation-TreeFarm_1490192394686.jpg

2017/03/StockCarbon-USForestsChart_14901923957123.jpg

Recent assertions of a new report on biomass energy are grossly inaccurate.

Addressing Biomass Energy  'Alternative Facts' 

Biomass is recognized as an efficient and an environmentally friendly alternative to fossil fuels. Densification of biomass is an important element in trading and handling biomass, as densified fuel offers logistical advantages, and becomes a commodity ensuring high energy content and homogenous quality. Within densification, pellets are best known, but briquetting offers many alternative advantages. Traditionally, briquetting technology was established for developing countries to produce briquettes of local residues, for use in household cooking stoves and restaurants. Later, as the capacities of the machines increased, briquettes were used in industrial boilers to create heat, steam and power for industry and power plants. Within the past 20 years, briquetting has also found its way to households in industrialized countries as consumer logs for wood-burning stoves and fireplaces. In recent years, as the focus on renewable energy has grown, the applications for briquettes have grown concurrently, as have different technologies and new applications. Briquetting Technologies Briquetting technologies include mechanical briquetting presses, hydraulic briquetting presses and screw presses; it is important that customers select the best technology for their applications. Mechanical Presses The mechanical briquetting press is built like an eccentric press, and has a very simple design. A constantly rotating eccentric, connected to a piston, presses the raw material through a conical die system, where the briquettes are being formed. Large flywheels secure a very quiet and balanced operation. The press operates with 270 strokes per minute. The briquettes are cooled and hardened in a cooling line, which also serves as transportation of the briquettes. The presses work fully automatic, resulting in a smooth operation with very little maintenance and service. The robust design ensures a long life span and the presses can operate up to 7,000 to 8,000 hours per year. C.F. Nielsen has more than 70 years&rsquo; experience with briquetting machines and, over the years, has developed new equipment and increased capacities, so that the range is now from 200 kilograms per hour (kg/h) up to 5.000 kg/h per machine. The briquettes can be produced in sizes from a diameter of 50 millimeters (mm) to 120 mm, and in square form from 55 mm by 55 mm to 100 mm by 100 mm. Other shapes can also be produced. The main advantage of a mechanical briquetting press is that the press can be used both for consumer logs and industrial briquettes for boilers. Industrial briquettes can either be made as short pucks, at random lengths or cut to a defined length. Further advantages are high capacity, low production costs, and multiple densities. Hydraulic Presses&nbsp; In a hydraulic press, the raw material is pressed into a precompression chamber by a dosing screw. In the chamber, the exact amount of material is precompressed. The main piston transfers the raw material into the die that forms the briquette into its final state and required density. The compression process of a hydraulic press is relatively slow. The compression cycle can be between six and 25 cycles per minute, depending on the amount loaded or the density of the briquettes. Hydraulic briquetting presses were traditionally small, with capacities from 50 kg/h up to 200 kg/h. Briquettes were round, with a diameter of 50 mm to 75 mm. However, today, hydraulic briquettes can be made in primarily rectangular forms with a capacity up to 1.5 tons per hour. The traditional size is 150 by 60&nbsp; mm, but bigger briquettes can be made. C.F. Nielsen&rsquo;s BPH-Quattro briquetting press, a hydraulic press has a capacity of up to 600 kg/h. The briquetting press is a self-contained unit, with a small dosing bin, PLC control panel and the briquetting press. The press can produce briquettes with a high density due to a large main motor and cylinder. The rectangular briquette is a uniform-sized briquette that is easy to store. The briquettes have a lower density slightly below 1, which gives a shorter burn. The press can produce good briquettes from mixed materials of larger particles, and is very compact. The briquettes are typically used as consumer briquettes for fireplaces and wood-burning stoves. Screw Presses In an extruder briquetting press, the raw material is fed into a chamber by a feeding screw. The raw material is compressed by a compression screw into the conical die and extension die. The compression screws are conical in shape. The screw operates with approximately 800 revolutions per minute, and during the process high heat&mdash;up to 300 degrees Celsius&mdash;is being generated in a combination of friction and heating of the die system. The BP Shimada Screw Press has capacities up to 500 kg/h.&nbsp; The press is a self-contained unit with a small bin, PLC control panel, smoke hood and saw. The screw press is a machine for high-quality briquettes with a very high density. The machine is a more delicate press, requiring very homogenous raw material with very fine particles (between 2 and 6 mm) and the moisture content between 6 and 8 percent. If these requirements are met, the machine will produce state-of-the-art briquettes that will burn longer than all other alternatives. The briquettes are typically used as consumer briquettes or logs for fireplaces and wood-burning stoves. &nbsp; Recent Trends, Projects Today, briquetting is obtaining renewed attention. A briquetting machine is more simple and easier to operate, which opens new possibilities in new markets such as Africa, Asia and Latin America. Furthermore, briquetting presses can handle a larger range of raw material such larger particles, waste with higher ash content and special raw materials. Some examples of these applications include the following. &bull; The world&rsquo;s largest plant for consumer logs. One of the largest producers of pallets wanted to produce more than 100,000 tons of briquettes per year, with exact weight of each package at 10 kg.&nbsp; A line of 12 BP6500 briquetting presses, automatic saws with check weighing systems was delivered. &bull; Reducing deforestation. In Kenya, 65 percent of energy comes from wood from forests causing deforestation. At the same time, agricultural residues are burned in the field. Waste from pineapple fields are now being briquetted on four BP6510 briquetting presses with a total capacity of 6 tons per hour, improving sustainability. &bull; Creating value from waste. In New Zealand, a company was looking to find a solution for the dust byproducts from their MDF production. The dust produced during the manufacturing process needed careful and costly disposal. The dust was converted to briquettes and sold to a greenhouse, turning the waste into a considerable profit maker. &bull; Getting the best of demolition wood. A German company had a trucking business collecting different types of waste. The best raw material, including old pallets, is now being used for consumer logs. The company has three&nbsp; BP65100 briquetting presses with a total capacity of 3.5 to 4 tons per hour. &bull; Low cost for production of torrefied wood. Torrefied wood is a difficult raw material with high friction and very little binding in the raw material. Briquetting has a considerable lower power consumption and a general lower consumption. Several presses have been sold for laboratory testing and production lines. &bull; Increasing gas production in anerobic digesters. Normally, wheat straw cannot be utilized in biogas plants, as straw cannot absorb water. When straw is being briquetted, the process creates small steam explosions, which together with high heat and mechanical treatment, changes the structure of the straw. Adding 10 percent briquettes to animal slurry can increase biogas production by 150 percent. &bull; Turning refuse-derived fuel (RDF) and solid recovered fuel (SRF) into a profit maker. In many countries, RDF/SRF is a waste that costs high tipping fees to dispose of. When the raw material is converted into briquettes, it becomes a fuel that can be sold for energy. &bull; Briquettes for cooking stoves. In Africa, charcoal is being used for cooking stoves. A &ldquo;village concept&rdquo; has been created, enabling small villages to convert agricultural waste and other types of waste to small briquettes for cooking. Contact: Esben Mikkel Vestergaard Area Sales Manager, C.F. Nielsen 45-60437733 emv@cfnielsen.com

The world's largest plant for consumer briquette logs, at German wood processor HIT HolzIndustrie Torgau, has a capacity of 100,000 tons per year and deploys a line of 12 BP6500 HD briquette presses manufactured by C.F. Nielsen A/S. 

2017/03/BriquettePlant-HIT-HoizindustieTorgau_149019362546_largethumb.jpg

2017/03/BriquettePlant-HIT-HoizindustieTorgau_149019362546_thumb.jpg

2017/03/BriquettePlant-HIT-HoizindustieTorgau_149019362546.jpg

In recent years, as the focus on renewable energy has grown, the applications for briquettes have grown concurrently, as have different technologies and new applications.

The Art and Advantages of Briquetting

The combined export value of wood pellets, ethanol and biodiesel for U.S. producers has flirted with $3 billion since 2012, and depending upon how the final numbers shake out for last year, 2016 may very well be the year this milestone is surpassed. For both wood pellets and fuel ethanol, export numbers have never been higher than they are right now, and all three sectors are eyeing foreign markets as a means to significantly grow their businesses. An analysis of the same data reveals key and informative differences. While foreign markets are an important part of the overall market picture for fuel ethanol and biodiesel producers, exports account for less than 10 percent&nbsp; of annual production while, from a volumetric perspective, wood pellet production in the U.S. is heavily reliant on foreign markets. Now, the looming question is, what impact will a Trump administration, which campaigned on a promise to revisit the nation&rsquo;s trade agreements, have on the export opportunities for each of these industries? Global Market Leaders In both the fuel ethanol and wood pellet categories, the U.S. can boast the largest production capacity and the largest share of the global export market. In both cases, U.S. exports outstrip the closest competitor by a wide margin. Wood pellet export volumes for U.S. producers were well over 4 million tons, while Canada has yet to surpass 2 million tons of exports. Brazil is the world&rsquo;s second leading producer of fuel ethanol, and while production and export volumes there vary from year to year, in 2015, its export volumes were about half of what U.S. producers achieved. Additionally, Brazil is a prominent market for U.S. ethanol producers taking over 100 million gallons in 2015. The wood pellet industry differs from the fuel ethanol industry in that there are far more global producers of significance, and there is much more parity among them in terms of their size and share of the global market. Estimates place the global market for wood pellets, whether or heat or power production, at roughly 28 million metric tons, the largest demand center being the European Union. As the world&rsquo;s largest producer, the U.S. satisfies perhaps one-fifth of the total annual demand. Countries including Sweden, Austria and Germany&mdash;while less significant in the global marketplace&mdash;produce and consume significant quantities of wood pellets. Sweden alone produces nearly 2 million tons each year but consumes the vast majority of that volume domestically. The fuel ethanol industry is dominated by U.S. producers. Production capacity in the U.S. is double that of Brazil, its closest competitor, and together these two represent 85 percent of installed production capacity worldwide. U.S. fuel ethanol producers can produce 4 billion more gallons than the rest of the world combined. In 2015, the single largest exporter of fuel ethanol after the U.S. and Brazil was France, which exported just over 200 million gallons, compared to nearly 500 million and over 800 million gallons of exports for Brazil and the U.S., respectively. U.S. biodiesel producers are facing much stiffer global competition than their wood pellet and fuel ethanol counterparts. In 2015, the U.S. trailed the Netherlands, Germany, Argentina, Spain and Indonesia in exported volumes. The Netherlands and Germany both do robust export business in biodiesel, and each of them surpassed $1 billion in revenues from biodiesel in 2015. U.S. producers exported nearly 90 million gallons in 2015, worth more than $250 million dollars. Economic Dependence An examination of where wood pellet, fuel ethanol and biodiesel exports go also reveals some key differences between the categories. Exports for both wood pellets and biodiesel are largely dependent on one buyer&mdash;the U.K. for wood pellets, and Canada for biodiesel. In 2015, shipments of wood pellets to the U.K. generated 85 percent of the total export value, while Canada represented over 90 percent of the export value for biodiesel producers. The fuel ethanol export market is far more distributed, with the largest foreign buyer, Canada, representing just 25 percent of U.S. exports, according to data from the Renewable Fuels Association. Over 50 different countries received fuel ethanol exports from the U.S., and Brazil and China both closely followed Canada. In its 2017 industry outlook, however, the RFA noted that China has recently raised import duties on U.S. ethanol, and the association expected that this would &ldquo;sharply curtail exports to that nation.&rdquo; The wood pellet export market is different from both biodiesel and fuel ethanol, in that not only is the export market quite reliant on one country, it is also largely dependent upon one facility inside of that country. For now, the overwhelming majority of wood pellets delivered to the ports in the U.K. will be burned at the Drax Power Station. The power station, initially designed to burn exclusively coal, is capable of producing nearly 4,000 MW of power. Three of Drax&rsquo;s units have been converted to burn wood pellets only, and the annual demand from those boilers surpasses 6 million tons of wood pellets. The growth of the global pellet market, as well as U.S. wood pellet exports, tightly correlate with each of Drax&rsquo;s converted boilers coming online. This rapid conversion sparked investment in both production capacity in North America, and port infrastructure in the U.S. and the U.K. Drax will soon be joined by another facility in the U.K., as the efforts to convert the Lynemouth power station are underway. While significantly smaller than Drax, Lynemouth will still require more than 1.5 million tons of wood pellets annually, likely cementing the U.K. as the largest importer of wood pellets well into the foreseeable future. Prior to a strengthening dollar in 2015, U.S. producers were eyeing and winning pellet export opportunities on the spot market. Italy, Europe&rsquo;s largest importer of wood pellets for residential heating, bought over $40 million worth of U.S. pellets between 2012 and 2014, but sales plummeted to below $500,000 in as the dollar strengthened against the euro. Race for Second For now, the U.S. and Canada occupy the top two spots in global wood pellet exports. Export data from 2015 suggests, however, that strong competition continues to emerge, particularly from Baltic nations like Latvia and Estonia. In 2015, Latvia nearly surpassed Canada in exported volumes with 1.6 million tons exported. Latvia has posted strong export growth since 2012, when its export volumes had not yet exceeded 1 million tons. Since then, Latvia has added about 250,000 tons to its export total each year. Similarly, Estonia has doubled it pellet export business since 2012, and with Latvia, has firmly cemented the Baltics as a formidable presence in the European marketplace. In the U.K. alone, Latvia and Estonia have grown their pellet business nearly 10-fold since 2012 when they exported just over 80,000 tons to the country. In 2015, their combined volumes exceeded 650,000 tons. Russian export volumes fell immediately between Latvia and Estonia in 2015, just missing the million ton threshold. Home to the world&rsquo;s largest inventory of wood fiber, Russia has the feedstock available to compete with both Canada and the U.S., but its wood pellet industry is constrained by the country&rsquo;s vastness and limited infrastructure. Pellets produced in Siberia are thousands of miles from ports near St. Petersburg. Additionally, some pellet-buying countries have shown a reluctance to do business with Russian producers,&nbsp; and in 2015, the U.K., the world&rsquo;s largest single buyer, took just 12,000 tons of pellets from Russia, barely enough to fill a handy-sized cargo vessel. The largest buyers of Russian pellets in 2015 were Denmark and Sweden, taking 380,000 and 150,000 tons, respectively. Finally, Vietnam has elbowed its way onto the global scene, and has been very disruptive in South Korea, a market Canadian producers have been eyeing for years. Pellet export volumes out of Vietnam and into South Korea ballooned in 2014 to nearly 600,000 tons from just 130,000 in 2013. Volumes in 2015 were down slightly, but remained above 500,000 tons for the year. For now, South Korean buyers are unwilling to enter into long-term pellet offtake contracts, and instead are utilizing tenders. This approach has essentially limited involvement in the South Korean market to ultralow-cost producers in Vietnam. The industry inside that country is dominated by small producers who convert residuals from furniture manufacturing into volumes that are then aggregated by brokers, who fill empty containers bound for return to South Korea. Tenders are often filled at per-ton prices that are lower than the cost of production for Canadian and U.S. producers. Canadian exports to South Korea reached their peak in 2014 at 150,000 tons. The following year, volumes fell to just 50,000 tons, and 2016 appears to have finished at about the same volume. All Eyes on Asia North American pellet, fuel ethanol and biodiesel producers alike all covet the promise of incredible market growth offered by the huge populations and rapidly expanding economies across Asia. In some instances, the growing standard of living alone creates a demand opportunity. In other instances, countries with aggressive climate goals like Japan offer opportunity. China is already an important trade partner for U.S. ethanol producers, who watched volumes balloon to 176 million gallons in 2016. However, industry forecasters anticipate dramatically lower volumes in 2017, as a consequence of China&rsquo;s increased import tariffs for ethanol. For wood pellet producers in Canada, 2016 offered hope that the beginnings of a strong and growing Japanese market may finally have arrived. In 2012, pellet volumes from Canada to Japan exceeded 100,000 tons, but retreated to well-below 100,000 until last year, when the country shipped nearly 275,000 tons. There is hope that a period of sustained growth will follow. For now, U.S. producers are on the outside looking in, with regard to Japan delivering just a couple of hundred tons, likely specialty barbeque pellets, into the country. While Asia offers great promise, the region also has existing and potential competitors in every category. Canadian producers know all too well how a regional competitor can turn a promising new market into disappointment almost overnight. For now, though, Japanese buyers have shown a preference for Canadian pellets, and producers there are hopeful it will continue to grow, and ultimately resemble the market they once thought South Korea would provide. Finally, underpinning many of the foreign opportunities for these renewable fuel commodities are the energy and environmental policies of foreign governments or the trade agreements those countries have in place in the U.S. For example, it is very unlikely that China will import anywhere near the gallons of fuel ethanol that they did last year, all because of trade posturing and tariff hikes. The fuel ethanol industry is positioned to weather that in two ways. First, the export market represented just 7 percent of total shipments for ethanol producers. Second, ethanol shipments are well-distributed globally. The other side of that same coin is the export market for U.S. wood pellet producers. Not only is the industrial market completely reliant on exports, for now, it is nearly total reliant on demand from one country, and one real buyer within that country. The consequences of a retreat from the U.K. decarbonization policies that created the industrial pellet industry in the U.S. would be dramatic. It comes as no surprise then that the trade associations charged with protecting and growing the markets for wood pellets, fuel ethanol and biodiesel continue to press forward into new markets, hoping to establish and grow new opportunities for their producers. For products with robust domestic markets like fuel ethanol, export opportunities are simply the icing on the cake, and the best chance at incremental growth. Other industries like industrial wood pellets were built solely to satisfy foreign demand, and its continuation, growth and expansion is vital to the long-term viability of the industry. Author: Tim Portz Executive Editor, Biomass Magazine tportz@bbiinternational.com 701-738-4969

Loading Up: Pellets manufactured in British Columbia are loaded onto a vessel bound for the Drax Power Station. Canadian producers compete with U.S. producers for market share with the world's largest pellet buyer. 

2017/03/SizingThemUp-BMM17_14901947268036_largethumb.jpg

2017/03/SizingThemUp-BMM17_14901947268036_thumb.jpg

2017/03/SizingThemUp-BMM17_14901947268036.jpg

2017/03/ExportsByCountry-2015_14901944034304.jpg

Share of Total Exports Held by Largest Destination (2015 U.S. Production)

2017/03/Exports-LgDestination-2015US_14901944044293.jpg

Exports as Share of Total Production Volume (2016 U.S. Production)

2017/03/ExportsProductionVol-2016US_14901944054615.jpg

2017/03/UKPelletImports-BMM17_14901944064905.jpg

2017/03/Value-of-Ethanol-BMM17_14901944075.jpg

A close look at export data for wood pellets, fuel ethanol and biodiesel reveals a varying reliance on export markets for U.S. producers.  

Sizing Them Up

ONE OF MANY: This vessel docked in Argentina Feb. 24 and was expected to deliver a load of soy-based biodiesel to the Houston area sometime in the last week of March, according to Genscape Inc.

2017/03/Bw-Raven-BMM17_14901950580714_largethumb.jpg

2017/03/Bw-Raven-BMM17_14901950580714_thumb.jpg

2017/03/Bw-Raven-BMM17_14901950580714.jpg

2017/03/EIA-biodiesel-Production_14901950590454.jpg

2017/03/BiodieselImports-Countries_14901950571577.jpg

2017/03/EIA-ImportsofBiodiesel-renewable_14901950600183.jpg

U.S. imports of biomass-based diesel hit extreme heights in 2016, fulfilling a third of the consumption market, driving the domestic biodiesel industry to more actively seek counteracting measures to protect its own investments.  

The Imports Cometh

2017/03/SustainingMainesLegacy-BMM17_14901958184819_largethumb.jpg

2017/03/SustainingMainesLegacy-BMM17_14901958184819_thumb.jpg

2017/03/SustainingMainesLegacy-BMM17_14901958184819.jpg

Deck and Hold Deployment: This rendering by Player Design shows the layout of Phyto-Charterâ€™s shipboard wood chip heat-treating system. 

2017/03/phyto-charter_14901958174238.jpg

SETTING SAIL FROM SEARSPORT: Maine Woods Biomass Exports plans to utilize  Maine's Port of Searsport to export heat-treated wood chips to European combined-heat-and-power plants.

2017/03/PortofSearsport-BMM17_149019590968.jpg

Efforts to reinvigorate the state's biomass industry—including two fiber export projects in development—are focused on saving and generating jobs while boosting Maine's economy.

Sustaining Maine's Legacy 

Niziolek joins Morbark senior management team Morbark, manufacturer of equipment used in forestry, recycling, tree care, landscaping, sawmill and biomass markets, has appointed Walt Niziolek as the new vice president of operations and supply chain. Niziolek joins Morbark at a time of continued business growth to take charge of supply chain and site operational requirements, which include managing local, U.S. and overseas vendors and suppliers, all warehouse and distribution activities, quality initiatives and liaising with business unit engineering support. Niziolek&rsquo;s extensive expertise includes holding many previous senior leadership roles in manufacturing with companies such as CPG Building Products and Pride Mobility Products, where he specialized in deploying standardized work and other lean initiatives to improve safety, quality, delivery, supply chain management and cost. Prior to his 20-plus years in manufacturing operations, Niziolek served as a captain in the U.S. Army, where he held multiple leadership and staff positions, both in peacetime and periods of conflict. Mid-South opens New England office&nbsp; Mid-South Engineering Co., an Arkansas-based, full service consulting engineering firm, announced the opening of its fourth office located in Orono, Maine.&nbsp; The new office, led by Walter Goodine, director of operations, allows Mid-South to better respond to its clients&rsquo; engineering needs in New England and Maritime Provinces. Orono, the home of the University of Maine, is just north of Bangor.&nbsp; &ldquo;The addition of this location supports our firm&rsquo;s commitment to build on the success we have seen in the New England area,&rdquo; stated Jeff Stephens, Mid-South president. &ldquo;The new office location is convenient to the building products, paper and bio-energy markets we serve and provides ready access to the professional talent to grow our staff.&rdquo; Alliance promotes Slager Alliance BioEnergy Plus Inc. has elevated Vice President of Business Development Benjamin Slager&nbsp; to the position of chief technology officer. Slager&rsquo;s new responsibilities include working with the development team at Ek Laboratories on implementing the CTS process at company-owned plants as well as licensees; identifying and exploring ancillary product pathways for the CTS process, and ensuring that the company is making the best use of its intellectual properties and processes. Slager joined the company in August 2016 as a consultant, eventually became a board member, has vast experience in technology development, deployment and commercialization. Valmet introduces online analyzer for wood chip, bark moisture Valmet recently introduced the Valmet Chip 'n' Bark Moisture Analyzer, which offers pulp mills a new tool to advance productivity and efficiency. Continuously measuring wood chip moisture provides the means to accurately control cooking liquor-to-chip mass ratio for improved digester operation. When applied to monitor biomass moisture, better boiler efficiency is enabled by the continuous indication of heating value to optimize fuel feeding control and supplementary fuel use. Valmet CBA replaces oven dry laboratory measurements by utilizing microwave technology to continuously measure chip, bark, forest residue biomass or recycled wood moisture. A sample flow is taken from the conveyer chute, pushed through the unobstructed measurement chamber and then returned to the chute. Disturbances that affect conveyor-mounted instruments have been eliminated with the innovative design and measurement concept. EnviTech optimizes thermal pressure hydrolysis&nbsp; An optimized thermal pressure hydrolysis (TDH) process from the research and development division of EnviTec Biogas utilizes high pressures and temperatures to digest biomass even more effectively. Apart from a long-term increase in gas yield, which can range from 10 percent to over 60 percent when renewable raw materials are used, the process also facilitates the use of substrates that have to date been unsuitable for use in biogas plants. &nbsp;&ldquo;Previously, thermal pressure hydrolysis was used with the input materials&mdash;i.e., the matter,&rdquo; explained J&uuml;rgen Tenbrink, CTO of EnviTech. &ldquo;This is a hugely involved process, however, since the additional mashing means additional heating or cooling is required, depending on the type of hydrolyzed material.&rdquo; Handling unwanted materials adds to the effort, but EnviTec&rsquo;s method skips this step, as the process targets only the difficult-to-degrade raw fiber from the biogas process. Since the technique doesn&rsquo;t involve any input mashing, heating requirements are reduced. Other advantages include the exclusion of unwanted material, as well as lower throughput. &ldquo;Operators can make considerable savings thanks to the more cost-effective use of difficult-to-digest inputs like solid manure,&rdquo; Tenbrink added. Depending on the project, input costs can be cut by as much as 35 percent or more, according to EnviTech. Advanced Cyclone Systems makes first North American biomass installation Advanced Cyclone Systems S.A. designed and supplied a Hurricane Cyclone System for KMW Energy, an engineering consulting company and equipment manufacturer of biomass energy solutions from Ontario, Canada. The system, ACS&rsquo;s first biomass boiler installation in North America, was installed at Produtis Forestiers D.G.&rsquo;s softwood lumber processing plant in Quebec, Canada. The current emission legislation in Quebec, Canada made it mandatory for biomass boilers less than 3 MW to curb emissions below 150 milligrams (mg) per dry cubed meter at 7 percent O2. Until recent, most of the smaller biomass boilers were able to meet emission limits with just multicyclones. The new emissions limit value left a lot of end users in need of a compact, efficient and economical system to reach the new mandatory values. ACS was contacted by KMW Energy to design a system for Produits Forestiers D.G.&rsquo;s bark biomass boiler to meet emissions limits. Consulair, an emission testing company from Quebec, Canada, confirmed that all test results ensure PM emission compliance for the DG plant with an ACS cyclone system. TTcogen hires Gray to lead biofuel CHP effort TTcogen LLC, a 50/50 joint venture of combined heat and power (CHP) company Tecogen Inc.&nbsp; and TEDOM a.s., announced the hiring of Walter Gray III to lead the development of biofuel-powered CHP projects as director of business development. He has more than 14 years of international project development, business development and environmental finance experience in the utility-scale renewable and distributed generation markets. Most recently the CEO and Founder of Enthalpic Capital, Gray was focused on developing a portfolio of waste heat, biogas, biomass and cogeneration projects in the U.S. and Mexico. Prior to founding Enthalpic Capital, Gray led project development initiatives at Neoen in Jamaica, and E.ON Climate and Renewables in Singapore. He also has experience in environmental finance, having served as country director of Thailand for EcoSecurities, where he led origination activities for emission reduction purchase agreements under the Kyoto Protocol, while also leading project development for biogas projects in Southeast Asia. QED announces Landtec Biogas 3000 fixed gas analyzer QED Environmental Systems has announced the new Landtech Biogas 3000, a next-generation, fixed-gas analyzer that offers optimal continuous monitoring of the complete gas production process. Building on field-proven gas analysis technology, the compact, self-contained Biogas 3000 system offers cost-effective online monitoring that is ideal for anaerobic digestion, biogas monitoring, and landfill gas monitoring applications. The Biogas 3000 can use up to four sample ports to monitor methane, carbon dioxide, and oxygen, with optional monitoring of hydrogen sulfide, hydrogen and carbon monoxide levels&mdash;operators can choose up to five gases to monitor. The device features easy self-installation and maintenance. In addition, QED provides a temporary replacement unit, resulting in zero operational downtime for servicing. The Biogas 3000 offers simple user calibration and an easy-to-operate system. It is calibrated to ISO/IEC 17025 standards for optimum accuracy. Eggersmann Group acquires biological drying technology The trademarked Bio-Dry, a well-established biological drying technology of Convaero, is being integrated via an asset deal into the portfolio of the Eggersmann Group with immediate effect. The contracts on the future cooperation were signed March 2. The Eggersmann Group, located in Marienfeld, Germany, is known for its decades-long experience in the field of mechanical-biological waste treatment. Labelled with the brands Kompoferm and Bekon, the quickly expanding plant constructor has developed and successfully established numerous dry fermentation waste treatment sites. &ldquo;The Bio-Dry technology now allows us to enter new markets in countries with limited financial strength, but where waste volumes and energy demand are growing substantially,&rdquo; said Karlg&uuml;nter Eggersmann, CEO of Eggersmann Group. &ldquo;For such market conditions the Bio-Dry system of Convaero provides the optimal solution, namely the biological drying of municipal solid waste for the production of alternative fuel.&rdquo; Roeslein Alternative Energy opens Missouri project office Roeslein Alternative Energy is proud to announce the opening of a project office in Milan, Missouri. This office will be the home of RAE for the next 12 months as it works with residents in northern Missouri to expand its hog waste-to-renewable natural gas project (RNG). This office will be a resource for RAE employees and will allow area residents to interact with the RAE team. RAE representatives will be accepting appointments and walk-ins from landowners and residents who may have questions or concerns about the expansion of their current project. In 2014, Roeslein Alternative Energy partnered with Smithfield Hog Production of Missouri, placing impermeable covers over their hog manure lagoons to create and capture methane gas using a process called anaerobic digestion. The captured methane is dried and cleaned and then injected into the national pipeline, where it is sold to customers throughout the U.S. Drax picks Quintiq for supply chain optimization Power station operator Drax has implemented Quintiq&rsquo;s supply chain planning and optimization system to handle transport and storage of some 7.5 million tons of biomass every year. Drax operates the largest power station in the United Kingdom and supplies up to 8 percent of the country&rsquo;s electricity needs. It converted from burning all coal into a predominantly biomass-fueled electricity generator. Prior to Quintiq, Drax handled the transport and storage of 7.5 million tons of biomass annually through spreadsheets. This planning method was unable to support Drax&rsquo;s business goals as it sought to diversify and grow its operations. Drax required a solution that would not only handle its current supply chain puzzle, but also have the flexibility to scale up as the company grew in both scope and complexity. Together with consultancy Crimson &amp; Co., Drax searched for a solution that would facilitate the cost-effective purchase, storage and management of the biomass and coal needed for the operation of its power station. A stringent selection exercise was conducted encompassing case studies, reviews of live supply chain planning solutions, site visits and data analysis and scenario testing to compare systems and solution providers. Within three months of signing the deal in January 2016, Quintiq had developed a prototype that showcased a 95 percent working system for ports. After a smooth implementation process, the full solution went live in September 2016. Crossley receives NSF Early Career Award Steven Crossley, professor at University of Oklahoma Gallogly College of Engineering, is the recipient of a five-year, National Science Foundation Early Career Award in the amount of $548,829 for research that can be used to understand catalysts that are important for a broad range of chemical reactions ranging from the production of renewable fuels and chemicals for natural gas processing. The research will be integrated with educational and outreach programs intended for American Indian students, emphasizing the importance of sustainable energy. "The NSF CAREER award is partly in recognition of the important work that Steve has already done in the field of catalysis,&rdquo; said Brian Grady, director of the OU School of Chemical, Biological and Materials Engineering. &ldquo;It is one of the highest honors a young faculty member can receive. We look forward to him doing great things in the future.&rdquo; Crossley, an assistant professor in the OU School of Chemical, Biological and Materials Engineering, is also a faculty mentor for the American Indian Science and Engineering Society. The project will provide a detailed understanding of active sites and atom transfer processes involved in catalytic conversion of bio-oil molecules derived from biomass.&nbsp; Biotech Energy partners with Clinton Community College In January, Biotech Energy Inc. and Clinton Community College were accepted into the Start-Up New York program.&nbsp; As participants in the program, Biotech and Clinton Community College have entered into a new strategic partnership arrangement that will focus on developing new curriculum and programs at the college to enhance the educational opportunities for its students, and to support the growing biomass energy industry. The strategic move is in response to the growth and development of Biotech's business within the Northeast U.S. The new corporate office, located on the college campus, is ideally situated to manage and support the growth of Biotech&rsquo;s exclusive distributors, authorized dealers and biomass projects throughout the Northeast, while engaging students in hands-on, interactive learning activities in an actual business environment. Biotech plans to assume occupancy of its new office beginning in April.

2017/03/advanced-cyclone-systems_14901963938623.jpg

2017/03/Drax-BusinessBriefs_14901963948198.jpg

2017/03/QED-BMM17_14901963957929.jpg

2017/03/Steven-Crossley_14901963966919.jpg

2017/03/Valmet-BMM17_14901963977373.jpg

2017/03/Walt-Niziolek-Morbark_14901964825607.jpg

Business Briefs

&nbsp;&ldquo;They would not listen; they did not know how. Perhaps they&rsquo;ll listen now&hellip;&rdquo; (Starry Starry Night, Don McLean, 1971) As previously outlined in this column, last year&rsquo;s closure of a number of Maine&rsquo;s paper mills and biomass electric facilities has given rise to a number of initiatives designed to stem, and then reverse the tide. These initiatives are now being placed on the table. Which will succeed? First&mdash;what about homeowners? The nonprofit Northern Forest Center, serving northern New England and upstate New York, now acknowledges that there have been &ldquo;significant investments in the modern wood heat economy, but consumer demand hasn&rsquo;t yet responded in kind.&rdquo; The center is therefore undertaking &ldquo;a collective marketing effort&rdquo; to generate such demand. Branding and creative materials are being developed to feed homeowners into a persuasive and informative website. Communities with favorable demographics (affluent and older folks) will be especially targeted with appeals to environmental and &ldquo;heat local&rdquo; considerations. Perhaps even more helpful will be the recent study&mdash;commissioned by the NFC but coauthored by John Gunn, who, at times, is a sharp critic of biomass energy&mdash;that points out that heating with pellets from northern New England&rsquo;s mills will immediately cut greenhouse gas emissions by over 50 percent when compared to heating with oil or natural gas. The NFC is working with environmental groups, particularly local chapters of the Nature Conservancy, to counteract generalist attacks on biomass energy such as the recent Chatham House &ldquo;study.&rdquo; While converting homeowners to modern wood heat is one of the most important components to expansion of our Maine pellet fuels industry, it is also proving a very elusive target. Two years ago, the $5,000 Efficiency Maine incentive, supporting installation of a residential pellet boiler, was producing an average of one installation a day. This winter, despite the fact that the per-Btu price of heating oil now exceeds that of wood pellets, there are very few takers. In fact, the number of homeowners using the $500 incentive for installation of a pellet stove exceeds the pellet boiler installs. Focus has shifted to larger-scale biomass heating projects. Key Maine legislators have joined in sponsorship of a $25 million biomass bond issue. Two-thirds of the amount would&nbsp; promote combined-heat-and-power (CHP) biomass generation, with only a third of this amount to go toward thermal biomass boilers, and these would be in public buildings and commercial facilities. The top priority of Maine Biomass Study Commission, whose recommendations are currently being drafted into proposed legislation, is establishment of a renewable energy credit for thermal biomass, which, in neighboring New Hampshire, is benefiting larger users, not homeowners. The work of Maine&rsquo;s Wood Energy Team, established with a U.S. Forest Service grant administered by the Maine Forest Service, will be directed toward converting schools and other public buildings, not residences, to modern wood heat. Again, this follows the example set by New Hampshire, where the NH Wood Energy Council notes that recent wood heat projects in schools, hospitals, and businesses generated $35 million in economic benefits to the state&rsquo;s citizens and communities in 2015. Maine&rsquo;s shift in emphasis from homes to larger projects is, in part, a reflection of home economics versus capital investment. The concept of &ldquo;eat local,&rdquo; driving a boom in restaurants in Vermont and Maine, which source food from nearby farmers, works well with folks making a $40 dinner decision. When deciding on a $20,000 home heating system, &ldquo;heat local&rdquo; is a weightier undertaking. Homeowners are far more inclined to muddle through with an aging oil burner, hoping for another mild winter, than are schools, hospitals, and businesses taking a longer outlook. The real driving force, however, is the need to maintain the infrastructure of Maine&rsquo;s currently struggling forest economy. Loggers desperately need ongoing work. Sawmills need outlets for over 500,000 annual tons of chips and sawdust previously sold to the paper mills and biomass electric facilities that have closed their doors. CHP projects, or at least many large buildings, converting to biomass heating will have a far greater impact on the forest industry&mdash;Maine&rsquo;s No. 2 economic driver, after tourism&mdash;than homeowners converting. The proof of this shift is found not just among planners and politicians, but where it really counts: in the marketplace. Maine Energy Systems, generally recognized in Maine as the leader in residential pellet heating systems, is about to introduce&nbsp; into New England a CHP system of its own, the OkeFEN cogen pellet boiler, which will provide electricity and heat to larger buildings. Author: Bill Bell &nbsp;Executive Director, Maine Pellet Fuels Association&nbsp; billb@mepfa.org www.mainepelletheat.com

2017/03/Bill-Bell_1490196551408_largethumb.jpg

2017/03/Bill-Bell_1490196551408_thumb.jpg

2017/03/Bill-Bell_1490196551408.jpg

Last year's closure of a number of Maine's paper mills and biomass electric facilities has given rise to a number of initiatives designed to stem, and then reverse the tide. These initiatives are now being placed on the table. Which will succeed? 

Expanding Wood Heat in New England

&nbsp;&ldquo;A definition is the enclosing a wilderness of idea within a wall of words.&rdquo;&nbsp; Samuel Butler, 19th Century English author and poet. Accomplished writers seem to cast a negative, narrow view on labeling terms with precise definitions. I respectfully disagree with that perspective, especially considering Oxford Dictionaries&rsquo; recently named &ldquo;post-truth,&rdquo; the 2016 word of the year. Definition of industry terminology matters in our sustainable biomass and bioenergy industries. Allow me to explain. I work for the Coalition for Renewable Natural Gas, representing the interests of the renewable natural gas (RNG) industry in North America. Having said that, whether you realize it or not, your understanding of what you just read (who I work for) may very well differ from another reader of this article on the other side of the country or across an ocean, or even from your fellow industry colleague in the office next door to you. I have listened to speakers and watched presenters haphazardly substitute one industry term for another, as they move from one presentation slide to the next, leaving behind a bewildered audience. I have been in the middle of conversations with a new industry contact for up to half an hour before we realized that we were essentially speaking separate languages by using different industry terms to convey similar ideas. I know I&rsquo;m not alone in this; colleagues have recounted similar stories. Definitions matter. They provide clarity. Accurate communication and understanding result in effective conversations and facilitate efficient business dealings, especially in what is considered a post-truth era.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; This is evidently even more relevant to those of us working in growing, niche industries, as we frequently battle to overcome misunderstanding. For example, meetings with regulatory agencies and with offices on Capitol Hill have not infrequently required rabbit trails to correct misunderstandings. &ldquo;Don&rsquo;t bioenergy, biogas and renewable natural gas refer to the same thing?&rdquo; To prevent future confusion, to save you future time and perhaps even future profits, the RNG Coalition and the American Biogas Council have collaborated in recent months in order to bring clarity to those working in North America whose roles cross over into the biogas and RNG industries (and any biomass, waste to energy, or connected policy and regulatory position). We have drafted, vetted and come together to put forth the following agreed upon definitions. &bull; Biogas is &ldquo;a mixture of carbon dioxide (CO2) and hydrocarbons, primarily methane (CH4) gas, from the biological decomposition of organic materials.&rdquo; &bull; Syngas is &ldquo;a gas mixture composed primarily of hydrogen (H2) and carbon monoxide (CO), along with hydrocarbons from the thermochemical decomposition of organic or inorganic materials.&rdquo; &bull; Conditioned biogas is &ldquo;medium-Btu biogas that is stripped of some trace contaminants and water, but maintains the relative mix of CO2 and CH4.&rdquo;&nbsp; &bull; Biomethane is &ldquo;biogas-derived, high-Btu gas that is predominately methane after the biogas is upgraded to remove most of the contaminants and a majority of the CO2 and nitrogen (N2) found in biogas.&rdquo; &bull; RNG is &ldquo;biomethane that is upgraded to natural gas pipeline quality standards such that it may blend with, or substitute for, geologic natural gas.&rdquo; * &bull; Renewable compressed natural gas (R-CNG) is &ldquo;RNG that is compressed to a high pressure, often for use as a transportation fuel.&rdquo; &bull; Renewable liquefied natural gas (R-LNG) is &ldquo;RNG that is converted to liquid form, often for use as a transportation fuel.&rdquo; The distinctions in these definitions are important for regulatory bodies and policymakers to understand, especially as biogas, including landfill gas, is increasingly upgraded to biomethane for injection into natural gas pipelines as RNG, and eventually used as a transportation fuel in the form of R-CNG or R-LNG. While some natural gas pipelines have received RNG for decades, a number of pipelines are exploring, for the first time, how to make these interconnections feasible. The language used in pipeline interconnection agreements and pipeline gas specifications is critical. Studies on, or testing of, a raw biogas will show much different results as to constituent makeup and characteristics of biomethane, which has been cleaned and conditioned by natural gas treatment technologies. Imprecise or incorrect use of one term in place of another can thus prevent sustainable gas from a landfill or anaerobic digestion facility from meeting a prescribed specification and reaching its highest and best use. Providing precise definitions of terms can have positive impact beyond ensuring a clearly understood conversation or a well-educated audience. Using the same terminologies to enable the same comprehension of industry definitions in legal contracts, regulatory documents, and in drafting policy language could prevent legal issues and be critical in preserving the company&rsquo;s bottom line.
 Socrates is credited with saying that, &ldquo;The beginning of wisdom is the definition of terms.&rdquo; As an industry, we should further adopt this wisdom by standardizing and embracing these definitions. Author: Marcus Gillette Director of Public &amp; Government Affairs, Coalition for Renewable Natural Gas 916.588.3033 x3 marcus@rngcoalition.com *The American Biogas Council adds &ldquo;including odorization.&rdquo;

2017/03/Marcus-Gillette_14901966659987_largethumb.jpg

2017/03/Marcus-Gillette_14901966659987_thumb.jpg

2017/03/Marcus-Gillette_14901966659987.jpg

Imprecise or incorrect use of one term in place of another can thus prevent sustainable gas from a landfill or anaerobic digestion facility from meeting a prescribed specification and reaching its highest and best use.


Providing Clarity of Industry Terminology

As noted in this column previously, and widely documented in California, the Golden State forests are in a state of emergency. More than 100 million trees across California, many located in the federally managed Sierra, Stanislaus and Sequoia National Forests, are dead, owing to a years-long drought and a nasty bark beetle infestation. As many as 90,000 acres in the state qualify as high-hazard zones, with trees ready to topple over or catch fire, posing significant risk to residents, tourists, homes and infrastructure. Some of the hardest-hit areas have as many as 14,000 dead trees per square mile. On top of that, the U.S. Forest Service budget that could contribute to clearing out lands in the highest risk areas is increasingly consumed with fighting fires. More than half its 2016 budget&mdash;well over $1 billion&mdash;went toward fire suppression. The forest service projected in 2015 that, through 2025, its budget for fire suppression would rise to an average of $1.8 billion annually. The urgency and frequency of fighting fires has created a difficult cycle for the forest service, in which resources that could go toward management and prevention must be used for emergency purposes, thus reducing the ability of the agency to prevent the costly emergency to begin with. On the other hand, the fleet of nearly 30 California biomass facilities is facing its own challenges. Natural gas prices continue to stay attractively low for utilities, at a time when many biomass facilities are seeing their PURPA contracts and federal production tax credits come to an end. Some of these facilities are located close to the high-hazard zones and are well positioned to take on the hazardous fuel cleared from the forests. Some of them are even obligated, through the state&rsquo;s BioRAM program, to use forestry residues as a significant portion of their fuel. As with the other types of fuel they use, these biomass facilities expect to pay for fuel removed from federal lands, or at the very least, chip in for transportation costs. The Biomass Power Association is working with the U.S. Forest Service to develop a detailed plan that we can present to Congress to involve biomass in solving some of the forestry problems in California and other areas. Our plan will include some of the following elements: &bull; Fully fund the U.S. Forest Service. For too long, the agency&rsquo;s budget has been dedicated to fire suppression rather than management, and there must be an alternative budget for natural disasters like wildfires. &bull; Allow the U.S. Forest Service to value hazardous fuel in a way that enables the agency to &ldquo;sell&rdquo; it at a low or no cost. Current regulations state that timber produced from federal lands must be sold at market value. There should be a way to work around that when it comes to removing hazardous fuels. &bull; Put systems in place to manage forests for prevention, rather than suppression in the future. Setting aside the urgent tree mortality crisis in California at the moment, federal lands will continue to require management and biomass facilities can take on residues from tree and timber removal. California forests have a clear problem (millions of dead trees that need to be removed) and a solution (biomass facilities that can take on hazardous fuel for a productive use, and share in the expense). The obstacle is, as usual, funding. It&rsquo;s expensive to cut down dead trees, chip them up, and haul them out of the forests to biomass facilities that are located dozens or hundreds of miles away. It&rsquo;s never easy to secure additional funding for a federal agency. Even in the friendliest political climate&mdash;far from the dividedness we are experiencing in 2017&mdash;it&rsquo;s a long, arduous process that involves many committees, constituencies and competing priorities. However, we believe there&rsquo;s a sensible and workable solution and that the biomass industry should play a vital role in forest management. Author: Bob Cleaves President, Biomass Power Association bob@usabiomass.org www.usabiomass.org

2017/03/Bob-Cleaves_14901967585546_largethumb.jpg

2017/03/Bob-Cleaves_14901967585546_thumb.jpg

2017/03/Bob-Cleaves_14901967585546.jpg

The Biomass Power Association is working with the U.S. Forest Service to develop a detailed plan that we can present to Congress to involve biomass in solving some of the forestry problems in California and other areas.

US Forest Service and Biomass: A Symbiotic Partnership

This issue of Biomass Magazine, the companion issue for the International Biomass Conference &amp; Expo, offers a data-rich and comprehensive assessment of the role that imports and exports play in the broader biomass-to-energy segment. Together, the stories make it clear that each sector is similar to the next, in that they covet foreign markets as a means of industry growth. Yet, the most compelling discoveries our team made while producing this issue are the ways in which the import/export realities of the sectors differ from one another. Senior Editor Ron Kotrba&rsquo;s page-36 feature, &ldquo;The Imports Cometh,&rdquo; is a case study in the law of unintended consequences when well-intentioned domestic policies meet the global marketplace. Last year, the U.S. imported more than twice as much biodiesel as domestic producers made in 2010. Argentina alone shipped nearly a half a billion gallons of biodiesel into the U.S. last year, while U.S. producers shipped less than 100 million gallons to all foreign markets combined. Had U.S. producers been running at full tilt to satisfy domestic demand, this fact would not likely generate the rancor that it does, but Kotrba points out in his piece that U.S. producers are only operating at about 70 percent of full throttle. This simple fact makes it clear why the National Biodiesel Board continues to push for changing the tax credit from one awarded to blenders of biodiesel, regardless of where it originates, to one that is awarded to domestic producers. That situation couldn&rsquo;t be more different for the relatively new class of wood pellet producers in the U.S. While this country does have a domestic market for wood pellets, it has little to no impact on the emergence and continued growth of the industrial pellet capacity in the Southeast. The stark contrast between the two made an impression on me, and I dedicated the bulk of my page-44 feature, &ldquo;Sizing Them Up,&rdquo; to a side-by-side comparison of three U.S. renewable energy commodities, and the size, proportion and diversity of the export opportunities that each enjoys. They really couldn&rsquo;t be more different from one another. Both U.S. ethanol and wood pellet producers are the world&rsquo;s largest producers, but U.S. ethanol is largely consumed in domestic markets, while U.S. pellet exports outstrip domestic usage three or four times over. The tie that binds them all is the complexity of the web of foreign and domestic policies that support these markets, and the constant effort to ensure these policies introduce at least as much opportunity for U.S. interests as they do for a growing roster of foreign competitors. Author: Tim Portz Vice President of Content &amp; Executive Editor tportz@bbiinternational.com

2017/03/Tim-Portz_14901968429704_largethumb.jpg

2017/03/Tim-Portz_14901968429704_thumb.jpg

2017/03/Tim-Portz_14901968429704.jpg

The April issue of Biomass Magazine, the companion issue for the International Biomass Conference & Expo, offers a data-rich and comprehensive assessment of the role that imports and exports play in the broader biomass-to-energy segment.

April 2017

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Columns

Expanding Wood Heat in New England

Providing Clarity of Industry Terminology

US Forest Service and Biomass: A Symbiotic Partnership

What Tangled Webs

Featured

Sizing Them Up

The Imports Cometh

Sustaining Maine's Legacy

Contributions

US Forest Product Exports to Asia

Addressing Biomass Energy 'Alternative Facts'

The Art and Advantages of Briquetting

April 2017.css-7jxktu{position:absolute;bottom:0px;left:0px;right:0px;height:3px;border-radius:3px;background-color:var(--chakra-colors-brandBlack);}

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Columns

Expanding Wood Heat in New England

Providing Clarity of Industry Terminology

US Forest Service and Biomass: A Symbiotic Partnership

What Tangled Webs

Featured

Sizing Them Up

The Imports Cometh

Sustaining Maine's Legacy

Contributions

US Forest Product Exports to Asia

Addressing Biomass Energy 'Alternative Facts'

The Art and Advantages of Briquetting

April 2017