Tag Archives: alternative

Greener Pastures For Biopower

June 10, 2013 By Mackinnon Lawrence, principal research analyst, Navigant Research    Recent data released by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) paints a cloudy picture for electricity produced from biomass — or biopower — in the United States.   According to EIA, total net electricity generation from wood biomass reached 37.54 TWh in 2012, increasing less than 0.2 percent over 2011 totals (37.45 TWh).  Relative to wood biomass production, electricity produced from waste biomass jumped to 20.03 TWh in 2012, representing a 4.2 percent increase over 2011 totals (19.22 TWh). Both segments trail growth rates observed among competing renewable technologies like wind and solar. Installed biopower capacity across Europe is nearly four times that of the U.S. and, according to Navigant Research forecasts, electricity generation from biomass in the region is expected to reach nearly 300 TWh by 2020 under an aggressive scenario. Sluggish expansion in the U.S. belies biopower’s potential as a renewable source of baseload power production.  Dedicated large-scale facilities — defined as power stations with installed capacity in excess of 50 MW — for a time, were hailed as potential cornerstone players in emerging renewable energy portfolios. Using either wood biomass or the biogenic fraction of municipal solid waste (MSW), these facilities have substantial potential. Waiting for Harvest Proponents point to a range of potential biomass sources across the country that could support broader scale-up efforts. The thinning of forests across the Western U.S. produces an abundance of fuel while reducing the threat of wildfires, a danger that has ravaged many Western states in recent years. Pine beetle infestation across the Rocky Mountain region has led to efforts to identify potential markets for millions of acres of dead timber. ______________________________ The biopower industry must galvanize support in Washington despite a checkered public image. ____ _______________________ Despite the availability of this fuel at no cost, save for the expense of aggregating and collecting it, access has proven to be logistically challenging. Much of this biomass is located on federal land, which under existing federal regulations and protected by a complex patchwork of laws designed to support broader conservation efforts. The hard-to-harvest nature of these resources, which are scattered across millions of acres of variable terrain, also prevents their aggregation at a price point that can simultaneously pay for the service while also competing with incumbent fossil fuel resources. Beyond logistical challenges associated with feedstock aggregation, challenging economic conditions have also led to anemic growth in recent years. Shale gas, in particular, has emerged as a cheap and abundant source of fuel for baseload power generation across the U.S., and could serve as a bridge fuel for renewable power generation technologies, just as a slew of coal-fired plants are scheduled to sunset or shutter operations due to tightening emissions regulations under proposed Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations. Meanwhile, the logistics associated with collecting, aggregating, transporting and processing biomass feedstock drive up the cost of biopower production considerably. Based on the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s transparent levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) database, dedicated biopower facilities operations and maintenance (O&M) costs are on average 40 percent to 240 percent more expensive than natural gas. Project developers indicate that biopower facility economics decline rapidly once feedstock is sourced beyond 50 miles. Combined with a lack of 24/7 applications for heat c-produced at biopower facilities, the cost of unsubsidized electricity generation from biomass can be prohibitive.   Greener Pastures While larger dedicated biopower facilities face significant headwinds, a number of biopower-related opportunities are beginning to materialize across the United States. Growing demand for biomass that has been compressed, or “densified” to support aggressive bioenergy targets across the European Union, is driving a boom in the pellet production capacity in the U.S. Southeast.  Unlike the Western U.S., much of this forest cover sits on private land and is already harvested for commercial purposes by a well-established lumber industry.  Supporting biopower stations of more than 100 MW across the European Union, European utilities such as RWE and Drax have vertically integrated their operations by owning and operating pellet production facilities in Georgia and Louisiana. United States pellet production is expected to expand from three million tons in 2009 to 10 million tons by 2015. Integrated biorefineries, which are primarily designed to produce advanced biofuels and biochemicals, represent a potential growth area for electricity production from biomass as well.  First-of-a-kind facilities have recently commenced production providing electricity for onsite consumption and export to the grid. Under an optimistic scenario, Navigant Research forecasts that nearly 5 GW of new cogeneration capacity at biorefineries could come online by 2020 in the United States.  This represents an eleven-fold expansion over installed generation capacity in 2012 (465 MW). To realize potential growth in these segments, the biopower industry must galvanize support in Washington despite a checkered public image. Scrutiny over emissions, sustainability, and deforestation has led to the cancellation of projects in several states and made policymakers reluctant to extend the incentives needed to support industry growth. Ultimately, biopower’s future in the U.S. remains promising, but for now the sector lacks the right mix of incentives and market signals to drive faster expansion. About the Author Mackinnon Lawrence is a principal research analyst contributing to Navigant Research’s Smart Energy practice, with a focus on advanced biofuels and bioenergy. Lawrence has extensive experience as an attorney, consultant, and analyst with deep expertise on topics ranging from environmental policy and international affairs to clean energy. Continue reading

Posted on by tsiadmin | Posted in Investment, investments, News, Property, Taylor Scott International, TSI, Uk | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Greener Pastures For Biopower

Foresight To Invest In Kedco’s U.K. Biomass Power Facility

By Louise Downing June 04, 2013 Foresight Group LLP, a U.K. investor, will channel funds into Kedco Plc (KED)’s planned biomass facility in London and help raise further money for the project. Foresight will provide funds for debt and equity to part finance construction and operation of the 12-megawatt project, Cork, Ireland-based Kedco said in a statement. A co-investor is needed to invest, it said. Foresight today confirmed the deal. Kedco, which has invested more than 2 million pounds ($3 million) in the plant, will retain equity and won’t be required to invest further. Construction is due for the third quarter. The U.K. Department of Energy and Climate Change estimates bioenergy plants may meet 8 percent to 11 percent of the nation’s primary energy demand by 2020. To contact the reporter on this story: Louise Downing in London at ldowning4@bloomberg.net To contact the editor responsible for this story: Reed Landberg at landberg@bloomberg.net Continue reading

Posted on by tsiadmin | Posted in Investment, investments, London, News, Property, Taylor Scott International, TSI, Uk | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Foresight To Invest In Kedco’s U.K. Biomass Power Facility

Gold Standard Seeks Comments As It Expands Forest Carbon Palette

Author: Gloria Gonzalez Until late last year, the Gold Standard seemed happy to serve as a go-to standard for renewable energy and energy efficiency offsets while watching the Verified Carbon Standard take a dominant position in land-based offsets. Now the Gold Standard is seeking input from participants as it expands its land-based coverage, beginning with Afforestation/Reforestation. 5 June 2013 | Reflecting its origins in the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism and stewardship by the once-anti-forest-carbon WWF, the Gold Standard covers just one segment of the forest carbon spectrum – Afforestion/Reforestation (A/R). But it boosted its coverage with last year’s acquisition of the CarbonFix standard , and now the traditionally energy-facing standard is requesting input on its new and improved draft A/R requirements and guidelines while preparing to expand into agroforestry, improved forest management, improved livestock management and climate-smart agriculture. You can offer comments here . A/R commenting will close on June 28, and the requirements are expected to be published in August 2013 and road tested for six months. Initial projects using the framework will be in the voluntary carbon markets, but existing projects from other standards or from compliance markets can seek Gold Standard certification if they meet the requirements. The forestry sector has an average annual biophysical mitigation potential of 5.4 billion tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO 2 e) until 2050, according to the IPCC Third Assessment Report, and  the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) is currently the most popular standard applied to A/R projects. The Gold Standard’s framework pursues permanent carbon reductions by requiring an independent assessment of the full project design during the design phase to ensure that the expected climate benefits and sustainable development objectives are feasible. The organization will also require dual monitoring and verification of the carbon performance and sustainable implementation of all projects, including an independent audit of a project’s sustainable development indicators and risk mitigation measures at least every five years. The Gold Standard will also put in place a compliance mechanism to deal with unexpected complications, including a guarantee through its new compliance reserve that every carbon dioxide certificate represents a tonne of Gold Standard carbon reduction. The compliance reserve is a “last resort” as Gold Standard projects must first undergo rigorous certification of their safeguards and sustainable development both at the design phase and during the lifetime of the project, according to the organization. A key challenge for the Gold Standard in developing the framework is that land use and forests carbon projects typically have long-range planning horizons and need to be sustainable over multiple decades. “Mandating, for example, a century of project monitoring is unrealistic, even dangerous as it focuses attention away from what is really needed to make a land use and forests project fundamentally robust,” the organization said in the draft framework document out for public consultation – an apparent reference to California’s Climate Action Reserve (CAR), which requires forest owners to monitor and verify a project for a period of 100 years following the issuance of Climate Reserve Tonnes (CRT) for greenhouse gas reductions or removals achieved by the project. The CarbonFix Acquisition The Gold Standard extended its reach into the land use and forest space via its September 2012 acquisition of the CarbonFix Standard. The Gold Standard’s A/R requirements – the actual methodology and rules for A/R projects as opposed to the broader framework – leverage about 80% of their content from the CarbonFix methodology while another 20% of the framework was added or updated according to Gold Standard specifications, explains Tanya Petersen, director of marketing and communications for the Gold Standard. Existing CarbonFix projects will need to provide evidence that they meet the additional “20%” of the methodology that reflects Gold Standard requirements, and comply with other Gold Standard rules, such as a more prescriptive stakeholder consultation, during the project cycle. But all CarbonFix projects are expected to be able to make the transition, she said. There are currently 12 CarbonFix projects which over time ex-ante have generated a total volume of about 6 million tonnes of carbon offsets. Continue reading

Posted on by tsiadmin | Posted in Investment, investments, News, Property, Taylor Scott International, TSI, Uk | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Gold Standard Seeks Comments As It Expands Forest Carbon Palette