It's no surprise that biomass energy is growing in popularity, as it satisfies two main needs of the modern generation&mdash;waste reduction, and sustainability. According to the International Energy Agency, biomass energy generation is forecast to expand as planned projects come online. The global installed capacity for biomass generation is expected to reach close to 140 gigawatts by 2026, which will be fueled primarily by expansion in Asia, using residues from food production and the forestry processing industry. Like most industrial assets, some elements of a biomass plant can be affected by corrosion. The fermentation and oxidation processes used by a biogas plant&rsquo;s anaerobic digesters, whether concrete or steel, create a perfect recipe for corrosion, both at the gas and liquid phase. Internally, steel digesters are typically protected by a glass lining. Sludge tanks face similar corrosion issues and maintenance challenges. Steel Digesters Glass-lined steel provides superior corrosion resistance to acids, alkalis, water and other chemical solutions (with the exception of hydrofluoric acid and hot concentrated phosphoric acid). As a result of this chemical resistance, glass lining can serve for many years in environments that would quickly render most metal vessels unserviceable. At higher temperatures, glass is not as effective against alkalis, where an increase by 10 degrees Celsius (18 degrees Fahrenheit) can double the rate of attack on glass. Of course, as a glass lining provides protection to the extremely aggressive environments, its costs are directly proportional. In addition, they are very susceptible to impact damage and the repairs can be very costly. Application errors and mechanical damage during installation can result in pinholes within the glass lining. Aggressive chemicals produced during the anaerobic digestion process then attack the steel, and corrosion can set in very quickly both at the liquid and gas phase. We see defects the size of 1 centimeter in diameter, which quickly go through-wall, leading to the escape of liquid digestate or methane. The biogas produced by a digester consists primarily of the combustible gases methane and carbon dioxide. At normal atmospheric conditions, the volume concentration of methane-in-air required to form an explosive mixture is between 5 lowest explosive limit and 15 percent upper explosive limit. This can be readily ignited by sparks from welding and maintenance operations, or even by static electricity discharge. Potentially explosive atmospheres mean that welding repairs are out of the question. In addition, welding could damage the internal glass lining leading to its disbondment. Therefore, solutions that are applied and cure at ambient temperatures need to be considered. One hundred percent epoxy-paste-grade grade systems can be used to patch repair defects in the glass lining on the inside, or to bond plates on the outside of the AD tanks to seal live leaks. Epoxies have long been known for their excellent adhesion to a variety of substrates, including both steel and the glass linings. The absence of solvent within the polymer matrix also makes them safe to use in confined spaces and prevents shrinkage during cure. Epoxy composites, such as Belzona 1111, are supplied as a two-part system with base and solidifier stored in separate modules. Once mixed, the hardening process starts and the material ultimately cures sealing leaks or preventing any defects from going through-wall. By their very nature, epoxies do not corrode and will protect the steel from any further corrosion attack. In terms of using epoxy adhesives to restore integrity of the assets, prefabricated composite patches are now being considered in place of metal plates. The benefits of using a completely nonmetallic solution ensure the repair is lightweight and has zero potential for corrosion. This application is becoming a preferred choice for water treatment sludge tanks, among others, and may be considered for anaerobic digester maintenance. Concrete Digesters In concrete anaerobic digesters, complications can arise for one of three reasons: a cold start, as a new digester can be prone to corrosion before the necessary bacteria and conditions become established; having been out a service&mdash;anaerobic conditions are lost with the introduction of oxygen when offline, upsetting the pH and kick-starting corrosion; and the presence of volatile acids that cannot be effectively digested lowering the pH. When these complications arise, the areas they impact the most are in the biogas phase, as well as at the surface of the effluent substrate. At both points, it is the presence of moisture reacting with contaminants, such as hydrogen sulphide (H2S) that generates highly corrosive sulphuric acid. This was the issue affecting a digester at a sewage treatment plant in in southern California. The facility was suffering from severe corrosion occurring in vapor space at the top of the tank on the walls and the underside of the roof. In addition, the internal pipework was being attacked by corrosion. The asset operator had looked at alternative coatings, previously selecting a coating system that lasted only two years. In search of something more permanent, they were introduced to Belzona 5811 (immersion grade), which has been implemented successfully in similar scenarios, with proven longevity. Since the installation of the coating in 2008, the vendor has periodically returned to inspect its performance. In 2012, the application was reported to be performing well and touch-ups to the coating have been carried out since to keep it in service until present day. &nbsp;Waste management industries are both expanding and aging around the globe. Assets like anaerobic digesters require corrosion management strategies that extend their lifetime, as well as maintenance-free periods. Nonmetallic solutions and high-performance coatings, in turn, are well-positioned to deliver benefits to the asset owners and operators. Authors: Marina Silva Marketing Supervisor, Belzona <a href="mailto:msilva@belzona.com" target="_blank">msilva@belzona.com</a> Tom Belli Marketing Executive, Belzona <a href="mailto:tbelli@belzona.com" target="_blank">tbelli@belzona.com</a>
CONTRIBUTION: The claims and statements made in this article belong exclusively to the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Biomass Magazine or its advertisers. All questions pertaining to this article should be directed to the author(s).

A biogas plantâ€™s anaerobic digesters (AD), whether concrete or steel, are susceptible to corrosion, via fermentation and oxidation processes.

2018/12/Contr-Biomass-Digester-0119_15454066659243_largethumb.jpg

2018/12/Contr-Biomass-Digester-0119_15454066659243_thumb.jpg

2018/12/Contr-Biomass-Digester-0119_15454066659243.jpg

This steel digester underwent a patch repair with Belzona (before and after) to seal a live leak.

2018/12/Contr-Biomass-Patch-0119_15454067259534.jpg

Corrosion Management of Anaerobic Digesters and Sludge Tanks

W ith increasing energy demands and heavy dependence on fossil fuels, renewable energy has been gaining attention, interest and viability. As a clean and environmentally friendly fuel, biomass currently accounts for 6 to 8 percent of the world&rsquo;s energy consumption, and is becoming an increasingly popular option. Companies investing in biomass as an effective alternative to traditional coal, petcoke or oil and gas should be aware they must incorporate changes in their refractory linings due to differences in fuel chemistry. History Biomass, mainly wood, was the primary energy source until coal emerged in the late 1800s. Coal was king until huge reserves of petroleum from the Middle East flooded the world with a lower-cost energy source in the 1950s, and reliance on petroleum has continued since then. Cost-effective energy is critical to industry. With low-cost petroleum, in many cases, biomass is not cost-effective, but if the source is a waste byproduct, it can be a very economical fuel source. There will always be a wide variety of biomass byproducts available, and many are underutilized. As our supply of nonrenewables decreases over the decades, biomass use will be vital to ensure we meet our ever-increasing energy demands. Petroleum, coal, and natural gas sources are consistent fuels, and their known impurities have been studied and understood for decades. With biomass, there are a wide variety of options, and each fuel source&rsquo;s impurities are unique in type and level. For boilers and heaters that use biomass as fuel, the impurities can have a negative effect on refractory lining. Chemistry Behind Corrosive Compounds, Slag During service, corrosive compounds can accumulate from biomass combustion, resulting in slag formation. Slag is created from ash residue of the combusted biomass. Biomass ash is composed of oxides such as silica (SiO2) and alumina (Al2O3) and fluxing elements such as alkalies (sodium, calcium, magnesium, etc.). The amount of these alkalies can vary widely with biomass type and source. At temperatures above 1,500 degrees Fahrenheit (815 degrees Celsius), these alkalies react with the silica and alumina to form a viscous slag.&nbsp; As temperatures reach 1,800 to 2,000-plus degrees F, these slags become less viscous, and thus increasingly reactive. Porosity levels in the refractory lining play a major role, as capillary suction from the pores can draw the slag into the refractory. Biomass typically needs higher combustion temperatures than coal or petroleum, so the slag penetration into the refractory, due to capillary action, is enhanced with the decreased slag viscosity. To help visualize this, picture a chemist mixing test tubes of a liquid acid and base, resulting in a foamy, oozing mass, or worse&mdash;an explosion. Refractories and slags have a less dramatic reaction, but in the end, it can be very destructive over time. Refractories, like all materials, have a chemistry that is acidic or basic in nature. Ideally, the refractory aggregate and slag pH should be similar to minimize corrosion.&nbsp; Nature does not favor acids or bases, but prefers that surfaces be neutral. An acid slag, such as a high-silica slag, will try to neutralize basic oxide refractory components as it penetrates into the refractory lining. Many refractories in boilers use acidic/neutral aggregates (silica, alumino-silicate and alumina are typical aggregate components). These aggregates are most commonly bonded with calcium aluminate cements. These cements are composed of either three primary oxides: Al2O3-SiO2-CaO, or two oxides: Al2O3-CaO. Calcia (CaO) is the active phase in these cements and is basic. A silica slag will react with CaO in a refractory and form a corrosion layer of glass. In a well-operated boiler, slag formation is minimal, but if there are large variations in biomass source and combustion temperatures, slag corrosion may accelerate. The original refractory castables, now called conventional types, used large amounts of cement (20-plus percent), thus there were high amounts of basic CaO present. In the 1980s, low cement technology created castable materials with greatly reduced amounts of CaO. These materials also utilized water reducers, reactive fine aluminas and fume silicas to create much denser packing. This denser packing creates a lower porosity material that is less permeable with reduced amount of CaO, creating a more slag- and alkali-resistant structure. Further advancement in ultralow cement and no-cement castable options utilize even lower cement amounts or alternate, noncement binders. Reactions with cement are not the only cause of failure when alkalis come into contact with refractory linings.&nbsp; The standard phase in which alumina exists in refractory material, a-alumina, can convert into b-alumina in the presence of alkai liquids and gases. This transformation results in significant volume expansion, and is one of the common causes of alkali-related failure of refractory linings in biomass boilers. Replacement of pure alumina with other raw materials can extend the life of such linings. Alkali Cup Testing Refractory performance in alkali-rich slag applications can be predicted with laboratory alkali cup testing. This testing is performed with 2&rdquo; by 2&rdquo; by 2&rdquo; refractory cube samples with a center core drilled out. The core is filled with an alkali salt or salt combination. In such a test shown in the top right image, a number of standard refractory options were compared to predict performance. In this example, the alkali testing was performed on a series of castables made with a synthetic mullite aggregate. Binders varied in CaO content from high levels (conventional castable) to no CaO (no cement castable). As the CaO is reduced (from left to right), the alkali reaction depth, the grey area, is decreased, with the no cement castable experiencing very little reaction and no cracking (alkali bursting) on the exterior cast surface of the cube. Minimize Changes in Your Refractory Life Biomass boilers are gaining in popularity due to their economics and renewable energy status. Changing the fuel source in some cases can have a negative effect on refractory linings. Using the correct refractory material can help to preserve the integrity of the refractory lining. Biomass boilers utilize solid waste for fuel, which can contain a wide and variable amount of impurities as combustion ash. The ash chemistry typically includes silica and high levels of alkali. Biomass combusts at higher temperatures than petroleum, which can lead to the formation of alkali-rich silica slags. These slags are corrosive to standard refractories. In addition to the corrosion issues, alkali-related failure can be caused by phase transformations resulting from contact with alkali liquids and gases. In some applications, alternate refractory materials are needed. An alkali cup test is a good gauge for material selection. In alkali testing of synthetic mullite aggregates with various binders, reducing cement content improved alkali reaction and corrosion. Experience refractory experts can help determine the best refractory products to meet your specific biomass boiler requirements. Author: Justin Teiken Vice President of Sourcing and Product Development, Plibrico Co. LLC <a href="mailto:jteiken@plibrico" target="_blank">jteiken@plibrico</a> <a href="http://www.plibrico.com" target="_blank">www.plibrico.com </a>
CONTRIBUTION: The claims and statements made in this article belong exclusively to the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Biomass Magazine or its advertisers. All questions pertaining to this article should be directed to the author(s).

A crew works on a massive refractory build-out. For boilers and heaters that use biomass as fuel, the impurities can have a negative effect on refractory lining. 

2018/12/Cont-Biomass-Boiler-0119_15454070297601_largethumb.jpg

2018/12/Cont-Biomass-Boiler-0119_15454070297601_thumb.jpg

2018/12/Cont-Biomass-Boiler-0119_15454070297601.jpg

Pictured are mullite castables with alkali corrosion at 1090 degrees Celsius. 

2018/12/Cont-Biomass-Alkali-0119_15454070277603.jpg

A cross-section of slag penetration into a refractory section 

2018/12/Cont-Biomass-Slag-0119_15454070307753.jpg

The Effect of Biomass Fuel on Boiler Refractories

It&rsquo;s been five years since Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos appeared on the CBS TV program &ldquo;60 Minutes&rdquo; to tell the world how the retail giant planned to use drones for package delivery. Amazon still hasn&rsquo;t solved all the technical challenges needed to satisfy the Federal Aviation Administration, but that doesn&rsquo;t mean the unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and robotics industries haven&rsquo;t found many other commercial applications for the technologies, some of which could change the very nature of everyday operations in the biomass and waste-to-energy industries. Drones, robots, machine learning, automation, artificial intelligence, sensors, autonomous operations, big data, data analytics&mdash;these are terms becoming common in the energy industry lexicon because of recent technological advancements. Is the biomass energy industry ready to take advantage of the coming changes? Thus far, it appears the U.S. biomass industry has been slow to adapt. In England, Drax began an innovative pilot project in the fall, at its biomass power station in North Yorkshire. The company is testing robotic process automation to help manage the booking-in of millions of metric tons of fuel delivered to the plant each year. In the U.S. oil and gas industry, a group of companies under the GE umbrella is actively working on the concept of using swarms of drones to autonomously inspect everything from deep sea drilling rigs to pipelines to onshore production facilities and refineries. Through machine learning and artificial intelligence, the drones become smarter and better able to predict trends and spot problems every time they fly. Advanced data links and powerful computer workstations in the field and on desktops in offices enable massive quantities of data to be quickly processed and analyzed to provide timely answers. Some of the experts in companies at the forefront of developing and commercializing this technology say it has direct applications to biomass energy, especially for plant inspections using crawling robots and small drones to inspect the inside of boilers. They believe what works well for a fossil energy power plant can, in most cases, work just as well for a biomass plant. Robots On The Walls Founded in 2013 and based in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, <a href="https://www.geckorobotics.com/">Gecko Robotics Inc.</a> is a pioneer in using crawling robots that resemble something straight out of a Terminator movie to perform highly detailed inspections of power plant facilities. Their services are used by some of the biggest energy providers in the U.S., Asia and South America, but they have yet to work for a biomass energy company, says cofounder and CEO Jake Loosararian, even though there&rsquo;s no reason they couldn&rsquo;t. &ldquo;There are a lot of similarities,&rdquo; he explains. &ldquo;They have very similar types of assets. They have tanks, silos, piping and boilers. Those are all things we&rsquo;re able to climb on with our robots and do inspections today.&rdquo; As a college student, Loosararian got his start in robotics by designing a robot that could crawl up a boiler wall and use sensors to identify problem areas. His first effort saved a 15-MW power plant from a $2 million forced shutdown. &ldquo;It opened my eyes up to the possibilities that robots had in helping industry,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;I made robot after robot until I could solve a lot of problems. It took close to $10 million in funding to reach a point in 2016 where we could launch a full-fledged service company. Now we&rsquo;re doing services internationally for big companies. We keep finding ways to help clients who operate in dangerous environments and need quick inspections with a high degree of accuracy. We&rsquo;ve been helping to solve a lot of issues and prevent forced outages.&rdquo; There are compelling reasons to use Gecko&rsquo;s robots, including safety and cost savings of up to $7 million for some customers. &ldquo;The exciting thing about our inspections is that we can typically go 10 to 20 times faster than a human inspection,&rdquo; Loosararian elaborates. &ldquo;We can also gather 1,000 to 10,000 times more information with the robots. Our ability to help with preventative maintenance provides huge savings. With safety being an important subject, we&rsquo;re also able to mitigate a lot of risks for our customers.&rdquo; Loosararian says that about 80 percent of the work Gecko Robotics does is driven by the demand for ultrasonic thickness inspections. The robot&rsquo;s primary payload is eight transducers. Water pumped to the robot is used for coupling with the boiler wall surface, enabling precise, highly accurate measurements. High-definition cameras on the robots also conduct visual inspections as they crawl along. &ldquo;We process the information on the robot, interpolate it and create heat maps to show exactly where the problem areas are,&rdquo; Loosararian explains. &ldquo;The colors we use are red, yellow and green with variations based on the thickness level. Red indicates that the thickness is below a certain threshold of tolerance. Yellow shows an area you need to watch out for, but isn&rsquo;t yet critical. If it&rsquo;s green, you&rsquo;re looking good from a thickness standpoint.&rdquo; Using this map, a customer can either replace damaged areas in the boiler or apply overlays to reinforce them. &ldquo;Our customers don&rsquo;t have to guess or be surprised by forced outages,&rdquo; Loosararian states. &ldquo;Instead, they can be preventative and predictive. Software developed for this purpose helps keep the customer ahead of the curve and provides a competitive advantage over those who aren&rsquo;t using this technology. We can provide information about what the data is saying in terms of operational efficiencies or preventative maintenance plans.&rdquo; Typically, a boiler inspection can be completed in one or two days without the need for expensive scaffolding or the cost of setting it up and taking it down. Anywhere from one to five of Gecko Robotics&rsquo; 60 robots are used. &ldquo;Our turnaround is 24 hours for deliverables after the inspection&rsquo;s done,&rdquo; Loosararian says. &ldquo;Customers get a full heat map and access to our portal where their information is stored and organized for future reference.&rdquo; Indoor Drone Inspections Christian Smith is president of Interactive Aerial, a company located in Traverse City, Michigan, that specializes in using drones to inspect the inside of boilers. It has developed hardware and software specifically for this job, enabling drones to safely operate in what&rsquo;s often a dangerous, enclosed environment. Because the FAA is mostly concerned with UAS flying in the same airspace as manned aircraft, Interactive Aerial doesn&rsquo;t need the agency&rsquo;s approval to operate indoors. Smith says that while he&rsquo;s had discussions with biomass energy companies about conducting inspections, Interactive Aerial has yet to perform any for the industry. He believes one reason is that some biomass facilities have smaller boilers, making internal drone inspections less practical. &ldquo;Most of what the drone industry has done thus far has really focused on outdoor and external inspections,&rdquo; Smith notes. &ldquo;It a natural assumption that a lot of the R&amp;D money is being spent there. But I think in the past few years, people are really starting to see a transition to including internal drone inspections. It&rsquo;s a natural fit for a lot of companies. I think it&rsquo;s going to grow in the future as people become more aware of how many valuable assets can be flown with a drone.&rdquo; For example, Smith says when Interactive Aerial recently inspected the assets of a power plant, he was surprised to learn that some parts of the plant had never been inspected because it was too expensive to do it manually with traditional methods. &ldquo;Half the time, we were flying inside things that people hadn&rsquo;t seen since they were built, which is crazy to me,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;We flew a handful of assets at that power plant where not only had they never flown a drone, but they&rsquo;d not routinely inspected it. Period.&rdquo; With no pun intended, Smith says Interactive Aerial is taking asset management above and beyond what been possible in the past because inspections are now much easier to conduct and can be done at a sensible price point. &ldquo;Some companies are doing things they&rsquo;ve never done before,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;That, in and of itself, is a big celebration for drones in general, but specifically for flying drones inside.&rdquo; Black &amp; Veatch, an international engineering, consulting and construction company headquartered in Overland Park, Kansas, is active in developing alternative energy and using unmanned aircraft systems to inspect power plant facilities and linear infrastructure, such as transmission lines and pipelines. In November, B&amp;V made news in the aviation world by partnering with Collins Aerospace to fly a 60-mile drone inspection of Ameren Corp. transmission lines in southern Illinois. Under current FAA regulations, small UAS are limited to flying within the pilot&rsquo;s line of sight. However, in this case, the FAA granted authorization to test the command and control communications system for operations beyond the pilot&rsquo;s sight&mdash;a major advancement for commercial UAS operations. As with Gecko Robotics, B&amp;V hasn&rsquo;t put its UAS expertise to work for the biomass energy industry. Jamare Bates, who&rsquo;s led UAS operations at B&amp;V for two years, also leads a project in the company&rsquo;s growth accelerator, which seeks new markets for innovative technologies with growth potential. He believes one reason some businesses have been reluctant to jump on the UAS technology bandwagon is that early on, many new companies overpromised what they could deliver. Only the Beginning &ldquo;We try to remind people that this technology is in its early stages,&rdquo; Bates notes. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s like the early 1900s when cars were just coming into the market. Nobody really understood how it was all going to work and many thought it never would. We&rsquo;re saying the same thing today. This is the beginning of something that&mdash;years from now&mdash;we&rsquo;re going to look back on and think, &lsquo;What took so long for us to get this?&rsquo;&rdquo; Part of fulfilling the promise of UAS technology is in providing customers with information they can use to make smart, timely decisions based on accurate data analysis. &ldquo;One of the important things we&rsquo;re working on is using our engineering expertise to manage, analyze and use data for decision making,&rdquo; he explains. &ldquo;If you take a thousand pictures of a transmission line and hand them to a customer, it doesn&rsquo;t really do anything for them. If you say they have 300 broken insulators at a location, show the insulators at high-risk of breaking and the ones at low-risk, now you&rsquo;ve changed the customer&rsquo;s ability to be proactive rather than reactive. That&rsquo;s a really important part of what Black &amp; Veatch is working on. It&rsquo;s taking all this data and using it for smart decision making.&rdquo; Beyond using UAS for inspections, Bates sees potential applications of the technology that could now be used by the biomass energy industry. For example, flying drones commercially to make volumetric measurements is an application currently in wide use by many industries because current FAA regulations allow it. Plus, it&rsquo;s much faster and more accurate than making surveying estimates. &ldquo;We can do this at plants that have stockpiles of coal, rock, soil, biomass, wood pellets&mdash;whatever is stored at a location,&rdquo; Bates says. &ldquo;We fly over those stockpiles, take images, turn them into a 3D model and then accurately determine the volume of the stockpile. You fly over tomorrow, check the difference and you know how much fuel was burned. Now, all of a sudden, you have efficiency calculations.&rdquo; In addition, Bates knows from B&amp;V&rsquo;s experience of flying drones over transmission lines to spot plant growth encroachment into the right-of-way that the hyperspectral sensors are good at identifying types of vegetation and discerning plant health.&nbsp; He sees a day when drones are used to spot sources of vegetation that could be harvested as biomass fuel. &ldquo;One of the things we talk about with drones is leveraging the flight,&rdquo; Bates says. &ldquo;When you&rsquo;re flying and looking down with a hyperspectral camera, you&rsquo;re looking for transmission line problems. But you could also be finding vegetation for biomass fuel. It&rsquo;s one flight, two opportunities.&rdquo; What&rsquo;s become clear over the past five years is that the days of companies being involved in their own do-it-yourself UAS and robotics R&amp;D projects has mostly ended. Instead, they look to third parties with the technology, expertise and resources to do the dull, dirty and dangerous jobs for which drones and robots are ideally suited. As one UAS industry expert put it, &ldquo;Nobody cares what kind of drone you fly as long as you give them good answers.&rdquo; Author: Patrick C. Miller Staff Writer, Biomass Magazine <a href="mailto:pmiller@bbiinternational.com" target="_blank">pmiller@bbiinternational.com</a> 701-738-4923

Interactive Aerial, based in Traverse City, Michigan, has developed specialized hardware and software that enable drones to inspect the inside of industrial boilers. The company believes the technology could benefit the biomass and waste-to-energy in

2018/12/Feat2-Biomass-L1-Boiler-0119_15454074065829_largethumb.jpg

2018/12/Feat2-Biomass-L1-Boiler-0119_15454074065829_thumb.jpg

2018/12/Feat2-Biomass-L1-Boiler-0119_15454074065829.jpg

A Gecko Robotics robot climbs the side of a boiler to create a heat map showing where walls are becoming too thin from erosion and corrosion. The company says it saves its customers millions of dollars by avoiding forced outages for repairs.

2018/12/Feat2-Biomass-GR-DSC-0119_15454074055935.jpg

Flying drones inside power generation and industrial assets allows companies to perform inspections previously considered unsafe or too expensive. 

2018/12/Feat2-Biomass-L1-Pilot-0119_1545407407677.jpg

FROM THE JANUARY/FEBRUARY ISSUE: Drones and robots are seeing increasing use in the energy industry, but this technical revolution hasn't yet caught on in the biomass energy industry.

High-Tech Inspections

When the 109th U.S. Congress and President George W. Bush passed the Energy Policy Act of 2005, it authorized the Renewable Fuel Standard, a program aimed at reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, expanding the nation&rsquo;s renewable fuels industry, and reducing dependence on foreign oil. The RFS, expanded under the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, requires an increasing volume of renewable fuel to replace oil-based transportation, heating or jet fuel. Each year, the U.S. EPA sets renewable volume obligations (RVOs) for the following year, including quantities of cellulosic biofuel, biomass-based diesel, advanced biofuel and total renewable fuel. Each fuel falls under a renewable identification number (RIN) pool, from D3 to D7, based on the feedstock used, fuel produced, energy inputs and GHG reduction thresholds, among other requirements. Producers generate RINs by submitting detailed feedstock and process information, and receiving pathway or process approval by the EPA. Cellulosic biofuel is assigned as D3, or D7 for cellulosic diesel; biomass-based diesel is assigned D4; advanced biofuel is assigned D5; and first-generation renewable fuel such as ethanol earn D6 RINs, as well as grandfathered fuels. When a producer manufacturer makes a gallon of fuel, RINs are generated, and can be traded or sold to obligated parties to demonstrate compliance. The vast complexities of the RFS extend far beyond these components, but a much lesser-known provision is beginning to attract attention&mdash;the role of renewable electricity in the program, and it&rsquo;s abilities to fuel electric vehicles (EVs). This provision is one that was embedded in the 2007 statute, but to date, has not been acted on, says Bob Cleaves, president of the Biomass Power Association. &ldquo;The topic is a complicated one,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;To really understand the genesis of this, you really have to look back to 2010, when EPA adopted a final rule. The rule stated something very important that really dictated almost the entire cellulosic biofuel category since then&mdash;that nonliquid fuels, mainly renewable electricity from biomass or renewable natural gas (RNG), could be deemed as transportation fuels, provided it can be demonstrated they&rsquo;re being used as such.&rdquo; The principals under that rule posed legal and practical challenges&mdash;for example, how the producer of the renewable electricity or RNG will demonstrate a specific volume was placed into a transmission system or commercial pipeline, that energy withdrawn from that pipeline or facility is matched with its ultimate use, and how to prevent fraud. A few years later, EPA approved renewable electricity produced from biogas via landfills, wastewater treatment sludge and animal manure, as a cellulosic biofuel, and addressed some features of the rule, including how electricity will be tracked and how producers should document it. But as for solid fuel biomass, &ldquo;they said in 2014 that it qualifies for renewable electricity under the RFS, but essentially, that they would leave it for another day,&rdquo; Cleaves says. And as for progress since 2014, EPA has received many biogas electricity registration applications, but not one has been approved, a failure to act that Cleaves says is &ldquo;part political and part legal, and also partly because of resource constraints within the agency.&rdquo; Fast-forward two years beyond that 2014 ruling, and proposed is the Renewables Enhancement and Growth Support Rule, aimed at enhancements to the RFS and other related fuel regulations to support market growth of ethanol and other renewable fuels. Through this rule, the EPA sought comment on a variety of other issues impacting renewable fuels, including RIN generation from renewable electricity used as a transportation fuel. Yet again, however, the road has led nowhere. After the initial, 60-day public comment period post-publishing in the Federal Register was extended, no action has been taken. &ldquo;Congress has adopted appropriations language to encourage EPA to act on these registrations, and we have done a pretty thorough legal analysis and concluded that renewable electricity is well-grounded in the 2007 statute,&rdquo; Cleaves says. &ldquo;It has been approved by EPA through a rulemaking, so it&rsquo;s really time for the agency to implement the program.&rdquo; As far as the market outlook for EVs goes and the biomass-based electricity industry&rsquo;s role in helping fulfill cellulosic biofuel&rsquo;s RVO, the future looks bright. Market Outlook EVs are expected to jump from 1.1 million sales worldwide in 2017 to 11 million in 2025 and 30 million by 2030, as they become cheaper to make than internal combustion engine cars, according to Bloomberg&rsquo;s Electric Vehicle Outlook 2018. And by 2040, over half of new car sales and 33 percent of vehicles worldwide will be EVs, and electric buses and cars will displace a combined 7.3 million barrels per day of transportation fuel. So how would biomass-based electricity affect the D3 market? Randy Lack, chief marketing officer at Element Markets, says there are still obstacles, but with the expected 481 million gallons of cellulosic biofuel to be produced in 2019, about 27 percent of that RVO pool could be made up from renewable biomass, based on the amount of qualifying power being generated today. &ldquo;In 2017, the expectation was 5.5 billion gallons of cellulosic biofuel, but it was actually closer to about 227 million gallons,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;So the good news is there is plenty of headroom, but the bad news is that this market is dramatically underperforming. It&rsquo;s a tier that needs additional supply, and renewable [biomass] electricity helps meet that.&rdquo; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Further breaking the numbers down, about 2.3 million megawatt-hours of electricity currently go to fuel EVs, or about six percent of the generation of renewable biomass power being generated, Lack says. &ldquo;So that means about 15 times more is being generated than consumed in EVs alone,&rdquo; he explains. &ldquo;The economics are flipped with RNG&mdash;in this industry, also the cellulosic biofuels pool, there is about 15 times the amount of supply than sources of consumption, which flips the economics. In the RNG industry, the majority of the value is actually retained by producers or groups injecting into the pipeline.&rdquo; Presently, about 104 million RINs could be generated from on-road EVs and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), according to Lack, a $219 million market at 9 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh). This doesn&rsquo;t take into account municipal fleets, which could account for an additional 300 million-plus kWh, and 13.3 million more D3 RINs valued at nearly $28 million, or $2.10 per D3 RIN. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s easy to project that this could be a $400 million to $500 million market by 2020,&rdquo; Lack says. The question now is how EV load development will be factored into RVO calculations, when this pathway moves ahead, Lack adds. &ldquo;You&rsquo;ll have a huge supply coming into the market, and demand is already set, so it could oversupply a market in one year, if it&rsquo;s not done appropriately.&rdquo; As far as RIN ownership goes, there are a few different potential models&mdash;the manufacturer of vehicles, the utilities generating the power, or the charging stations contracting for the electricity and fueling the vehicles. What&rsquo;s essential, according to both Cleaves and Lack, is ensuring there is no double counting or fraud, potentially one of the main issues EPA is hung up on. Moving Forward The only scenario supported by law and consistent with how RNG and other biofuels are managed, Cleaves says, is such that the producer of the power is awarded the RIN. &ldquo;The producer registers the facility, manages and confirms feedstock supply and verification that it&rsquo;s a qualified feedstock,&rdquo; he says, explaining that this can be done two ways. &ldquo;The first is, consistent with how EPA has administered the RNG program, the agency can honor contracts between power producers and end users&mdash;and it&rsquo;s highly likely that those end users will be aggregated with an auto manufacturer like GM, Ford or Tesla, and the manufacturer will be able to provide the telemetric data, which will be matched with the generation put onto the grid, creating a RIN that is placed in the generator&rsquo;s account.&rdquo; Alternatively, Cleaves says, a method BPA believes is simpler and ultimately fool proof, is that every producer that makes power that could be used as transportation fuel shares a split of the pot. &ldquo;Everyone who produces power qualified under the program, would be registered and recorded in the EPA database, and on an annual basis, EPA would calculate how many EVs are on the road and how much power they consume, and therefore, how many RINs are potentially available from that pool of consumption. Then, they would take the amount generated and consumed, and give everyone a fractional or prorated RIN. It makes a lot of sense to do it that way, but either way, EPA has got to get off the dime and do it.&rdquo; For the impact earning RINs would have on the industry, Cleaves calls it &ldquo;a game-changer, just like it was for RNG. Before the RFS, RNG was worth just about what the value of natural gas was,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;A lot of new projects have come online and many are being developed, and it&rsquo;s a really good thing for the bioeconomy.&rdquo; The exact same thing can happen for biopower, he believes. &ldquo;In fact, not only will it promote growth of the industry, but it will stunt closure of a lot of these facilities that can&rsquo;t compete with natural gas, and we think it can help solve the wildfire problem in California. Right now, there just isn&rsquo;t enough money in that business to justify spending, and even with the BioMAT contracts, the cost of hauling high-hazard fuel is exorbitant. This would go a long way toward allowing those facilities to pull more and more high-hazard fuel from areas under threat of fire.&rdquo; Support for eRINs is there on the Hill, and continues to gain momentum, especially in areas where biomass power is prominent&mdash;i.e., recently, several New Hampshire congresspersons wrote EPA an open letter, stating that the EPA&rsquo;s inaction has created a multiyear backlog of applications from power producers seeking registration as RIN producers, and &ldquo;discouraged investment in new and innovative technologies that are ready to use this approved pathway&hellip;.while we understand the need to carefully review changes to the RFS program, we are concerned that delaying the inclusion of biomass and waste-to-energy electricity producers inadvertently favors certain types of agricultural feedstocks and fuel types,&rdquo; it states. And an effort headed by BPA, the American Biogas Council and the Waste Recovery Council, over 111 organizations signed a similar letter, pointing out the shortfalls in the cellulosic biofuel category and the difference eRINs could make. Biomass power producers are also individually reaching out to EPA. In October, Dean Rostrom, owner of Eagle Valley Clean Energy LLC, a 13-MW biomass cogeneration facility located in Eagle County, Colorado, sent a letter to Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler, urging him to promptly process applications. Rostrom notes that Eagle Valley&rsquo;s fuel is primarily sourced from waste material at regional saw mills and a 10-year stewardship contract issued by the U.S. Forest Service, which relies on the contract and the power plant as an essential tool to safely and efficiently dispose of hazardous fuel, including beetle-kill forest material. &ldquo;Our facility is the only one in Colorado that can consistently accept substantial amounts of hazardous fuel, and the arrangement among Eagle Valley Clean Energy, our logger, and the U.S. Forest Service is a model example of public-private cooperation to mitigate wildfire risk in our national forests&hellip;it is essential to our financial well-being that this program be extended to our plant, and it is only fair that biomass plants be entitled to benefit from the RFS program on an equal footing with other generators of renewable energy, such as wind and solar.&rdquo; The longer it takes for the EPA to approve pathways for eRINS, the more challenging it becomes for biomass power producers to stretch the clock and survive financially, says Stacy Cook, manager of biomass power plant Koda Energy in Shakopee, Minnesota. &ldquo;Renewable biomass power must compete with other generation sources that benefit from production tax credits that biomass power is not eligible to receive," he says. "These other generation sources can then deliver watts into the system at a much lower price than biomass that does not receive the production tax credit revenue, creating an uneven playing field when presenting a rate case to the Public Utilities Commissions.&rdquo; &nbsp;In Minnesota, Cook says, there have recently been closings of biomass power facilities that provided many career jobs with benefits in the facilities, provided employment for hundreds in the transportation and handling of the biomass feedstocks, and provided a beneficial outlet for excess forestry and agriculture waste residuals in the state while keeping a portion of that volume from landfills.&nbsp; &ldquo;The ability to earn eRINs in our facility would reduce the price we would need to receive from energy sales while still remaining financially viable,&rdquo; Cook adds. &ldquo;The cost per watt that the ratepayer sees, compared to other sources that receive PTC support, would be much more equitable. It would help our facility to remain in service to the community as an outlet to beneficially use the diseased tree and excess nature-derived waste materials.&rdquo; Cleaves says every Senate and House member who has a biomass or biogas plant in their state is aware of the eRIN issue, and that there is favorable language in the Senate House appropriations bills currently being worked on in conference. &ldquo;We would like to strengthen those bills to send a very clear message to EPA that says this isn&rsquo;t discretionary, it is mandated under the RFS, and it needs to be acted upon,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re pursuing a political strategy that involves outreach to the agency at the highest political level and the White House, and also exploring all legislative options. We&rsquo;re doing what we can, and what we have heard from EPA recently is very favorable in terms of them caring about the issue&mdash;they believe it&rsquo;s a valid pathway and they are committed to getting it done, but there are other competing priorities and limited resources. Our strategy on the Hill is making it clear to EPA this is just as important as anything else the agency is doing with the RFS right now, because these are rural jobs, this is baseload power, and they can&rsquo;t pick winners and losers in implanting a federal statute, which we&rsquo;re concerned has happened.&rdquo;&nbsp; Cleaves urges biomass power producers to write their representatives. &ldquo;Congress is most effective when they hear from people who vote them in and out of office, and this is a perfect example of that. We have had a steady drum beat of biomass and biogas producers communicate their concerns to Congress, and there has been significant success in terms of educating staffers on the seriousness of the issue, and motivating members of Congress to reach out to the agency and the White House. If this continues, we believe we will ultimately prevail.&rdquo; Many people have been frustrated by the agency&rsquo;s inability to act quickly on the pathway, but it isn&rsquo;t a simple issue, Cleaves points out. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s not a pathway from an individual company or a boutique fuel,&rdquo; he adds. &ldquo;Once this pathway is implemented, it will be approaching 50 percent of the D3 RIN market, so it&rsquo;s a very significant programmatic issue and not just a niche, one-off issue. We&rsquo;re excited about it. We think it&rsquo;s the future of the RFS because growth of EVs will be very significant, and we want to make sure the industry is part of that.&rdquo; Author: Anna Simet Editor, Biomass Magazine 701-738-4961 <a href="mailto:asimet@bbiinternational.com" target="_blank">asimet@bbiinternational.com</a>

2018/12/Feat1-Biomass-Lead-0119_15454076800784_largethumb.jpg

2018/12/Feat1-Biomass-Lead-0119_15454076800784_thumb.jpg

2018/12/Feat1-Biomass-Lead-0119_15454076800784.jpg

2018/12/Feat1-Biomass-CellulosicVolumn-0119_15454076785787.jpg

With nearly 200 1-MW-plus waste-to-energy and biomass power plants across the U.S., many could qualify as eRIN producers under the RFS, helping fulfill cellulosic biofuel pool RVOs.

2018/12/Feat1-Biomass-Map-0119_15454076811188.jpg

FROM JANUARY/FEBRUARY ISSUE: The electric vehicle market is predicted to soar, and, pending overdue action by the U.S. EPA, biomass power producers are positioned to help meet goals set forth in the Renewable Fuel Standard.

A Rightful Role in the RFS

GE sells distributed power business&nbsp;&nbsp; Advent International has completed the acquisition of General Electric&rsquo;s distributed power business and is now a standalone energy company rebranded as INNIO. The transaction includes the Jenbacher and Waukesha product lines, the digital platform and related services offerings, with main operating sites in Austria, Canada and the U.S. INNIO has a proven track record of more than 80 years of reciprocating engine heritage in distributed power generation and gas compression. Kiel receives Clean Energy Legislative Champion award On Oct. 30, Minnesota Rep. Debra Kiel was presented with the 2018 Clean Energy Legislative Champion Award by Clean Energy Economy Minnesota at an event hosted by Northwest Manufacturing. Kiel has championed a bill the past two legislative sessions that would assist Minnesota homeowners in addressing the financial challenges associated with purchasing an advanced biomass heating system. This marks the second year that CEEM recognized a member of the Minnesota Legislature for their commitment to innovative, reliable and affordable clean energy. Bathan AG names Streetz business development director Bathan AG has appointed Holger Streetz as director of business development, effective in December.Streetz has some 10 years of experience in the biomass and renewable energy industry, serving as a board member of Bathan AG for eight years, handling investor relations and managing international projects. In his new position, he will be responsible for expansion of strategic co-operations and the development of new markets, with a focus on biomass and animal feed in the Americas and Europe. &nbsp; Covanta announces new vice president of safety and health Covanta, a world leader in sustainable waste and energy solutions, has hired Charles E. Clarke as vice president of safety and health. At Covanta, he is tasked with setting the direction and driving continuous improvement of the company&rsquo;s safety and health programs, identifying leading and lagging indicators for new and existing operations, construction and capital projects. &nbsp;&nbsp; Clarke brings more than 25 years of safety, health and environmental excellence. He comes to Covanta from Air Liquide, where he was a corporate safety and industrial hygiene manager. Prior to Air Liquide, he held various senior-level positions with Ascend Performance Materials, Rhone-Poulenc/Aventis and others.&nbsp; Clarke holds a Bachelor of Science degree from Rutgers School of Environmental and Biological Sciences (formerly known as Cook College), a Juris Doctor degree from West Virginia University College of Law and a Master of Science degree in industrial hygiene from the University of Michigan. Coalition for Renewable Natural Gas hits member milestone With the addition of eight new members in September and October, the Coalition for Renewable Natural Gas&mdash;the trade association representing the North American renewable natural gas (RNG, biomethane or upgraded biogas) industry&mdash;now represents more than 150 member companies and organizations. The RNG Coalition began with seven members in July 2011, when there were just 31 operating RNG projects in North America. Today, there are 85 production facilities, with dozens more under construction.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The eight newest members represent the broad value chain of the RNG industry. They include engineering and consulting firm Bartlett &amp; West, law firm Kilpatrick Townsend &amp; Stockton, Northeast Gas Association, WGL, EnviTec Biogas, SysAdvance, Ingevity and the New Jersey Clean Cities Coalition. Renewable Energy Group names Warner CEO Advanced biofuel producer Renewable Energy Group Inc. has named Cynthia Warner president and CEO effective January 14, at which time she will also join the board of directors. Randy Howard, who has served as president and CEO since July 2017, will remain on the board and assist in the transition. Warner brings more than 35 years of experience in the energy industry, including an extensive background in refining. Most recently, she served as executive vice president of operations for Andeavor (formerly Tesoro Corp.). Prior to her most recent role, Warner served as executive vice president of strategy and business development for Andeavor. Other past positions include president, CEO and chairman of the board at Sapphire Energy, a biofuels company, and group vice president of global refining and of health, safety, security, environmental and technology for British Petroleum. Warner serves as a member of the board of directors for IDEX Corp., and as a member of the National Petroleum Council. Verbio to buy DuPont cellulosic ethanol plant, convert to RNG DuPont Industrial Biosciences has reached an agreement to sell its Nevada, Iowa, cellulosic ethanol facility to the U.S. subsidiary of German bioenergy producer Verbio Vereinigte BioEnergie AG. On Nov. 8, Dupont and Verbio North America Corp. announced the companies have reached terms for VNA to acquire the 30 MMgy facility, along with a portion of its corn stover inventory. The transaction is subject to customary closing conditions and was expected to close in November. VNA intends to produce renewable natural gas (RNG) made from corn stover and other cellulosic crop residues at the site, which will be Verbio&rsquo;s third facility devoted to the technology. VNA plans to start construction on the Nevada RNG plant in the spring, with commercial RNG production expected to begin summer 2020. Doosan Babcock strengthens partnership with Drax Power Doosan Babcock and Drax Power Ltd. have agreed a new long-term contract for the provision of maintenance and outage services to the U.K.&rsquo;s largest power station. The deal, worth at least &pound;60 million, continues to cement the strong relationship between both companies dating back to the construction of the plant near Selby, Yorkshire, which began 50 years ago.&nbsp; The new, four-year partnership, with the option for a further four years, will strengthen workforce collaboration and improve efficiencies in maintaining and extending the life of the plant, which is responsible for providing 7 percent of the U.K.&rsquo;s electricity.

2018/12/Briefs-Biomass-Warner-0119_15454078567277_largethumb.jpg

2018/12/Briefs-Biomass-Warner-0119_15454078567277_thumb.jpg

2018/12/Briefs-Biomass-Warner-0119_15454078567277.jpg

2018/12/Briefs-Biomass-Clarke-0119_15454078488699.jpg

The CEOs of Drax Power and Doosan Babcock, Andy Koss and Andy Colquhoun, announce the companies have agreed to a long-term contract for the provision of maintenance and outage services to the U.K.â€™s largest power station.

2018/12/Briefs-Biomass-Drax-Contract-0119_15454078506478.jpg

Clean Energy Economy Minnesotaâ€™s Gregg Mast, left, and Benjamin Stafford, right, present Rep. Debra Kiel with the Clean Energy Legislative Champion Award.

2018/12/Briefs-Biomass-Kiel-0119_15454078517119.jpg

2018/12/Briefs-Biomass-RNG-logo-0119_15454078526819.jpg

2018/12/Briefs-Biomass-Streetz-0119_15454078537015.jpg

2018/12/Briefs-Biomass-Verbio-logo-0119_15454078546958.jpg

Business Briefs

In recent years, we&rsquo;ve heard more and more from people who believe the government is trying to regulate wood stoves out of existence. One surprising angle is that they feel the pellet lobby is partly to blame.&nbsp; Much of the grassroots appeal of wood stoves is not having to purchase your heating fuel from a big corporation. And surely, the move toward more pellet devices must be led by corporations trying to make a buck off people who heat with wood. We&rsquo;ve seen the evils of the big multinationals who control oil and gas. Is that the future of the corporations who want to sell us pellets? In truth, most of the companies making wood pellets for domestic heating are little more than mom-and-pop companies based in the Northeast and Northwest. Recently, Lignetics has been buying up some of them, becoming the largest pellet producer in the process. But they are hardly a big corporation by anyone&rsquo;s standards.&nbsp; Maybe these pellet fuel companies are just symbols of a change toward more modern heating, which some people don&rsquo;t like. Pellet heating barely existed 30 years ago, and now these technologies are capturing about 30 percent of stove sales.&nbsp; For some, pellet stoves represent the antithesis of old wood stove technologies, which can cost under $1,000, require no electricity and virtually no upkeep, and run on fuel that can be obtained for free. Part of the appeal of free fuel is that there is no tax and no oversight, enabling a genuine energy independence. Isn&rsquo;t that something worth fighting for? My organization, the Alliance for Green Heat, is sometimes accused of being part of this conspiracy. I also serve on the board of directors of the Biomass Thermal Energy Council. The &ldquo;pellet lobby&rdquo; consists mainly of BTEC and the Pellet Fuel institute. BTEC advocates for all biomass fuels&mdash;cordwood, chips and pellets&mdash;and PFI is an outgrowth of HPBA, which represents cordwood, pellets and gas.&nbsp; Both BTEC and PFI are made up of small member companies that, for better or worse, are not aligned with Washington&rsquo;s most influential and deep-pocketed actors. In fact, they are not even fully accepted as core members of the renewable energy lobby in D.C., which is dominated by wind, solar and other technologies with far more clout and funding.&nbsp; The Alliance for Green Heat is leaning more toward pellet heating in recent years. We are also guilty of supporting regulations that will drive up the cost of wood stoves.&nbsp; At a recent meeting, our board of directors debated the importance of having cheap wood stoves on the market. Most of our board heats with wood and are committed to helping lower-income families avoid fossil heating fuels. During the meeting, I voiced concern that the traditional $650 U.S. EPA-certified wood stove is likely to be bought by families who are the least able to absorb the health impacts of living with too much smoke around the house. What is the true cost of that stove, if health impacts are factored in? There are clear benefits of cleaner, more efficient stoves, but at $1,500 to $2,500, doesn&rsquo;t the cost lock out lower-income families, some of whom will just keep their even dirtier, uncertified stove? We would love to see cheap, reliable, and consistently clean stoves on the market.&nbsp; However, for wood stoves to be consistently clean, that means some level of automation that prevents smoldering. Our Wood Stove Design Challenge promotes R&amp;D in that direction. Kudos to the engineers at SBI, VcV, Wittus, MF Fire and Hwam, who are dedicated to a cleaner, healthier future for wood stoves. The current policy debate is not about stoves, but about whether wood furnaces and boilers that sell for as low as $3,000 should get a two-year sell-through that would allow them to stay on the market through 2022. We believe it&rsquo;s critical to prevent these furnaces and boilers from being installed in thousands more neighborhoods. They were part of the outdoor wood boiler boom that left an indelible stain on our entire community and poisoned the air for an untold number of families. Our best shot at being a top tier renewable energy technology is to leave that dirty legacy behind.&nbsp; President Trump is spurring the demographic that says it&rsquo;s none of my business what sort of stove or boiler they are allowed to buy. He is emboldening those who are sure that climate change is a hoax and a conspiracy aimed at restricting their freedoms. It&rsquo;s only logical, to some, that those of us who push the rapid expansion of pellet heating are part of that conspiracy.&nbsp; I don&rsquo;t mind being part of the &ldquo;conspiracy&rdquo; that believes climate change is real and supports renewable energy as part of the solution. As for the wood vs. pellet debate, I&rsquo;m fine with letting the engineers decide. I&rsquo;ll support whoever can build the cleanest and most efficient technology that is still relatively affordable. For now, that&rsquo;s pellet stoves and boilers, but we look forward to the day when many affordable, automated wood stoves are on the market. Author: John Ackerly President, Alliance for Green Heat <a href="mailto:jackerly@forgreenheat.org" target="_blank">jackerly@forgreenheat.org</a> <a href="http://www.forgreeheat.org" target="_blank">www.forgreeheat.org</a>

2018/12/John-Ackerly-0115_15454080719293_largethumb.jpg

2018/12/John-Ackerly-0115_15454080719293_thumb.jpg

2018/12/John-Ackerly-0115_15454080719293.jpg

In recent years, we've heard more and more from people who believe the government is trying to regulate wood stoves out of existence. 

The Conspiracy Against  Wood Stoves

Happy New Year to all in the biomass industry. This year, we are kicking off with a new Congress. The House will be led by a Democratic majority, while the Senate will remain Republican-led. In light of the new dynamics, we thought we would look at what that could mean for biomass, and what we can expect from the federal government in 2019. Democrats have made climate legislation one of the central goals of their newfound majority. It&rsquo;s likely that we&rsquo;ll see several proposals for how to reverse climate change and invest in more renewable energy growth. While they will no doubt aim for bold proposals like a carbon tax, their ambitions will have to be somewhat muted because of the Republican Senate and administration.&nbsp; Most important, we think that the new configuration of Congress could be helpful for our primary objective in 2019: getting the U.S. EPA to process applications for electricity producers to participate in the RFS. There is already significant support on both sides of the aisle for including electricity from biogas, biomass and waste-to-energy in the RFS, a program that Congress signed off on 12 years ago, and the EPA five years ago. The extra oversight that a Democratic House may conduct on the EPA could help nudge the agency to move forward with processing eRINs (short for electric RINs, or renewable identification numbers that refer to the credits awarded to fuel producers under the RFS). Plus, eRINs have bipartisan support in both the House and Senate, and the coalition we&rsquo;ve formed with the biogas and waste-to-energy industries, along with dairy farmers and local governments standing to benefit, expands our reach quite a bit. There are also several policy proposals that we are keeping an eye on in the new year. The following are a few of the proposals that have already been unveiled. Rep. Ted Deutch, D.-Fla., has unveiled a bill called the Carbon Dividend Trust Fund. The bipartisan plan, with support from several members of the Climate Solutions Caucus, relies on a $15 per ton tax on carbon emissions, which would increase by $10 each year, with the goal of reducing carbon emissions by 40 percent in 12 years and 90 percent by 2050. The bill is unclear on how it will treat biomass, calling for a study on biomass carbon emissions before deciding how to proceed. Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., is proposing the Green New Deal&mdash;not a fully developed plan, but a proposal to establish a committee to develop a plan. In general terms, Ocasio-Cortez wants to tie economic shortcomings with environmental solutions&mdash;for instance, hiring Americans to build solar panels. While she hasn&rsquo;t mentioned biomass, she has said that the plan should only fund renewable energy, so biomass should qualify. There could be other opportunities for biomass as well. It would be interesting, for instance, to see how the Green New Deal approached forest management. It&rsquo;s unlikely that a plan like this would gain traction over the next two years, but could be an issue discussed during the 2020 presidential race. Finally, Rep. Tom Reed, R-N.Y., has proposed a new incentives plan for renewable energy. Under this plan, renewable energy projects would only be eligible for government funding when they account for up to 2 percent of the total U.S. energy output. This could put biomass in a good position relative to other sources of energy, as one of the smaller energy sources. It&rsquo;s doubtful that this plan would be considered as it is currently written by a Democratic majority, but is noteworthy as a Republican plan to rethink tax incentives for renewables. Our biggest hope for 2019 is to see eRINs included in the implementation of the RFS, but we are also preparing for the other policy initiatives that may come our way. If you&rsquo;d like to learn more or get involved with our RFS efforts, please don&rsquo;t hesitate to reach out. Author: Bob Cleaves President, Biomass Power Association <a href="mailto:bob@usabiomass.org" target="_blank">bob@usabiomass.org</a> <a href="http://www.usabiomass.org" target="_blank">www.usabiomass.org</a>

2019/01/Cleaves_15465298186737_largethumb.jpg

2019/01/Cleaves_15465298186737_thumb.jpg

2019/01/Cleaves_15465298186737.jpg

Our biggest hope for 2019 is to see eRINs included in the implementation of the RFS, but we are also preparing for the other policy initiatives that may come our way.

Goal for 2019:  Get Electricity Included in RFS

One of the stories I chose for this month&rsquo;s theme of &ldquo;Plant O&amp;M, Efficiency and Innovation,&rdquo; is a little unconventional compared to other stories we have done in the past. I even tagged it as a policy story, but I think it's still very relevant, as each of these theme components yields the next in line&mdash;i.e., sufficient O&amp;M leads to efficiency, strides in efficiency and related technology equates to innovation, and finally, innovation yields evolution. This is where I went in my page-10 feature, &ldquo;A Rightful Place in the RFS,&rdquo; as the program has advanced over the years, and&mdash;soon, hopefully&mdash;will&nbsp; be a catalyst for exciting evolution in the biomass power sector. This topic of biomass-based electricity renewable identification numbers (eRINs) has been on our radar for quite some time, but this is the first instance we have dug way into the details. Carrie Annand, vice president of the Biomass Power Association, spoke about it on stage at the International Biomass Conference &amp; Expo in April, and at the time, I think the concept was just beginning to gain momentum. Now, it&rsquo;s a pressing topic. A complicated matter indeed, but in just a few words, biomass electricity producers who meet set criteria are eligible to earn eRINs under the Renewable Fuel Standard. The problem is that the EPA has not yet acted on a growing pile of pathway approval applications, and when it finally will is anyone&rsquo;s guess. Bob Cleaves, president of the BPA, said this could be a game-changer for the industry, especially plants that are struggling to compete with cheap fossil fuels and other subsidized forms of energy, but he emphasized that the industry needs to work closely with the agency to help devise solutions to challenges with implementing eRINs, such as fraud and double counting prevention. On top of these two features, on page 16, you&rsquo;ll find &ldquo;High-Tech Inspections,&rdquo; by staff writer Patrick C. Miller, detailing some exciting innovation in plant O&amp;M and inspections, through the use of drones and robotics. These technologies have numerous potential benefits, particularly cutting down drastically on man-hours needed during inspections and outages. Also in this issue, we have included contributions detailing strategic maintenance and downtime prevention&mdash;one on corrosion management in anaerobic digestion and sludge tanks, and another discussing potential issues with refractory linings in boilers and heaters when switching to biomass. Biomass is a unique, widely varying fuel that offers different complexities depending on type and intended use. It was challenging to narrow this month&rsquo;s theme down to just a handful of stories, but we&rsquo;re confident you&rsquo;ll draw some value from them.

2018/12/Anna-Simet-2018_15454082626011_largethumb.jpg

2018/12/Anna-Simet-2018_15454082626011_thumb.jpg

2018/12/Anna-Simet-2018_15454082626011.jpg

Biomass is a unique, widely varying fuel that offers different complexities depending on type and intended use. 

January/February 2019

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Columns

The Conspiracy Against Wood Stoves

Goal for 2019: Get Electricity Included in RFS

Innovation Yields Evolution

Featured

High-Tech Inspections

A Rightful Role in the RFS

Contributions

Corrosion Management of Anaerobic Digesters and Sludge Tanks

The Effect of Biomass Fuel on Boiler Refractories

January/February 2019.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

The Conspiracy Against Wood Stoves

Goal for 2019: Get Electricity Included in RFS

Innovation Yields Evolution

Featured

High-Tech Inspections

A Rightful Role in the RFS

Contributions

Corrosion Management of Anaerobic Digesters and Sludge Tanks

The Effect of Biomass Fuel on Boiler Refractories

January/February 2019