Photo Credit: Michigan Technological University
article tools
Increase Text Size Increase Text Size Decreate Text Size Decrease Text Size
Share Email This Story Share Share This Story Reader comments Reader Comments (6) View image gallery Image Gallery (4) Add to favorites Add to Bookmarks Printer friendly version Printer Friendly Version
Article Tool Sponsor:

Advertise with us

More Jobs
0 ratings - Sign-in to rate this article
October 23, 2008

Michigan Utility and MTU Join Forces To Study Biomass-powered Electricity

by Jennifer Donovan, Michigan Technological University
Michigan, United States [RenewableEnergyWorld.com]

Michigan's forest industry produces thousands of jobs and hundreds of thousands of tons of unused residues each year. Why not use that woody material to help generate clean electric power?

"Michigan has been blessed with an abundant forest resource. If managed wisely, this resource can help the state's power companies reduce CO2 and other air emissions today while other promising technologies are developed for future, additional emission reductions."

-- Brian Warner, Director of Environmental Services, Wolverine Power Cooperative

That was one of the important questions Wolverine Power Cooperative asked Michigan Technological University professor Robert Froese and colleagues regarding the cooperative's Wolverine Clean Energy Venture near Rogers City, Mich.

The answer, presented in a report to Wolverine, state legislators and representatives of Governor Jennifer Granholm, demonstrates the potential for homegrown biomass to reduce the use of fossil fuel while also decreasing carbon dioxide emissions from the generation of electricity.

"Neither inherent productivity nor environmental sustainability is holding back biomass production," the Michigan Tech researchers concluded. "Clearly, Wolverine has the potential to take a leading role in the development of clean energy from biomass for Michigan."

Brian Warner, director of environmental services for Wolverine Power Cooperative, was also encouraged by the results of this initial study. "Wolverine is excited about the potential for increased use of sustainable biomass for the generation of electricity for our Michigan-based members," Warner said.

Unused logging residues and other material removed from timberland within 75 miles of Rogers City total about 220,000 dry tons per year, enough to generate at least 35 megawatts (MW) of electricity.

Froese reported that only one-third of forest growth in the area is harvested. If forest land was utilized to its full potential, Wolverine could count on sufficient fuel from residues alone to produce enough electricity from the Rogers City plant to serve 75,000 homes.

Equally promising, the Michigan Tech researcher said, is the potential for using idle agricultural lands to grow energy crops, including switchgrass and fast growing trees such as hybrid poplar, silver maple and European larch. Within 75 miles of Rogers City, there are nearly 500,000 acres of open land not being used for agriculture. (See images below of one-year-old hybrid poplar plantings, left, and silver maple plantings, right.)

"The land is available, and it is good land for growing energy crops," said Froese. "Also, idle land could be used without concern about competition with existing agricultural crops."

Based on the findings of the report, Wolverine partnered again with Froese to install trial plantings this spring near the Rogers City area. These trials will help understand the optimum way to cultivate energy crops, by evaluating growth of a variety of tree species, different spacing of the species planted and various seedling types.

"While Wolverine and Michigan Tech have much more to learn, and Wolverine cannot commit to the use of biomass for the Wolverine Clean Energy Venture at this time, the use of biomass would clearly contribute to the local economy and is consistent with Wolverine's environmental stewardship goals," Warner said.

Other areas studied by Michigan Tech researchers included carbon dioxide emission reduction potential, environmental impacts, energy consumption, resource depletion and other implications of generating power entirely from coal compared to using 1 to 20 percent of various kinds of biomass. The use of biomass was then compared to other CO2 emission reduction options, such as geologic sequestration and improved forest management measures.

Michigan Tech found that using up to 20 percent biomass from logging residues offered the greatest potential CO2 and energy consumption reduction compared to geologic sequestration or reducing CO2 emission through forest stand management.

"Michigan has been blessed with an abundant forest resource. If managed wisely, this resource can help the state's power companies reduce CO2 and other air emissions today while other promising technologies are developed for future, additional emission reductions," Warner said.

 

 

Jennifer Donovan is Director of Public Relations at Michigan Technological University and an active member of the National Association of Science Writers.

Image Gallery (4)
 
Reader Comments (6)
 
No image available
October 24, 2008
What a waste of biomass!!!

It would be better to use the biomass directly in residential and industrial heating, where efficiencies of more than 90% can be achieved.

A regular coal fired power plant has an efficiency of around 36–40% (see Wikipedia), so most of the energy is waster!

Hence, biomass would be much better used for heating purposes than for co-firing traditional coal-fired power plants.
Comment 1 of 6
No image available
October 24, 2008
Mr. Mohr,

I hear this position from many biomass suppliers regarding using biomass for heat rather than for electricity. Please understand that this statement is true for ALL fuels...coal has a higher heating than electric efficiency as well, so should we all be burning coal in our home heating systems? Natural gas is the same, etc., though to different efficiencies per fuel due to heat content, mositure, combustion technology, etc.

Biomass via fuel pellets is good for residential and commercial due to the fact that pellets are densified on a btu/lb basis which allows for smaller storage and ease of handling, when compared to wood chips and other residues. Pricing is competitive with natural gas, fuel oil, and propane. For the residential and commercial user, it comes down to ease (we are a very lazy species) and lowest cost (we have been and will continue to take home less per pay period as governments grow).

I applaud the use of biomass for power generation because it offsets traditional fossil fuels, takes care of managing the forests, can replace portions of old and less efficient / environmentally sound fossil fuel generators, and creates jobs LOCALLY to the community and not a community that is 100's of miles away and most of the time out of State.

Cheers to Wolverine and MTU...
Comment 2 of 6
No image available
October 24, 2008
There are lots of benefits of using biomass for fuel, but don't forget that wood emits about the same amount of GHG's per MJ as coal. People tend to say you can ignore the CO2 from wood because it's been absorbed from the atmosphere, but that's already happened whether the wood is burnt or not. What happens to the forestry residues at the moment? If they're left on the forest floor, over time a portion will be absorbed into the soil and the rest will rot, over 10's of years. So burning it instead accelerates the release of CO2. There's probably still less released from burning wood than from burning coal AND having the wood rot, but maybe not as much as foresters like to think.
Comment 3 of 6
No image available
October 25, 2008
Woody biomass is a good choice. The left over banches and stumpage is just left there to rot,wich collects termites and becomes a fire hazard plus when it is decomposing it is also creating CO2. If we can learn to control the amount that is left over it may play in a better enviroment. Also take some of the burnden off of using so much coal if mixxed with coal may even create a cleaner burning power plant. Alot needs to be studied. I say lets try it. As for carbon sequestration I believe all power plants should be connected to Algae production and the remander entrapted under ground.
Comment 4 of 6
No image available
October 25, 2008
Biomass should never be burnt.

Closed-Loop Pyrolysis allows a 1/3 of each ton to return to the soil as biochar,
with many fertility benefits.
And 2/3 of each ton to be combusted as bio-gas & bio-oil.

Quiet a virtuous energy cycle

See: http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org/?q=node
Comment 5 of 6
No image available
November 3, 2008
Pyrolysis is still an incinerator technology, just in disguise. Bio-char is a waste by-product PR'd as a "beneficial" soil additive.

Also, it isn't like burning biomass is some new idea to help us reduce GHG emissions. It's where we started out and looking back to England circa the Industrial Revolution - trees became scare until coal entered the picture, which would ultimately power that revolution.

I can't help but feel we'd be going backwards by promoting biomass on anything other than small scale, home heating, and communities with excess residues. We now have technologies to move us past inefficient combustion technologies, so why don't we?
Comment 6 of 6
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In
Featured Total Access Partners
Click company logos to learn more
PennWell Corporation Hydro Group PetersenDean Roofing and Solar Systems BP Solar Rolls Battery Engineering American Wind Energy Association Magnum Energy Inc.
WORLD'S #1 RENEWABLE ENERGY NETWORK
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network Logo