[Gasification] Gasification Digest, Vol 4, Issue 24 CHP Costs
David Coote
dccoote at mira.net
Thu Dec 30 05:14:00 CST 2010
>Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Economy for CHP on Biomass (Thomas Koch)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 11:12:26 +0100
>From: "Thomas Koch" <TK at tke.dk>
>To: "Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification"
> <gasification at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>Subject: [Gasification] Economy for CHP on Biomass
>Message-ID:
> <9346E1844DED164EB6371F0BF87FBCF74DCCD8 at EXCHSERVER.tke.local>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>I just looked through the presentations from the Copenhagen meeting.
>
>My aim was to try to find out what the costs for small scale CHP om
>biomass can be expected to be in the near and the far future
>
>It was not easy to draw a conclusion from the presentations.
>
>The Skive plant is using fuel at 1200 DKK/tons (162 EUR) and has an
>availabilty of 50 % now.
>The pyroforce techmology seems to work but there where no economical
>numbers in their presentation.
Makes it very difficult to attract the interest of investors and
policy makers without the financial data. Other renewable
technologies such as PV's and wind have financial data available.
>The Stirling present investment figures of 1,4 MEUR for a 140 KWel
>plant and present a payback times of 5,5 years if they can sell the
>electricity at 270 EUR/MWh and the heat at 45 EUR/MWh and the
>maintenace cost are defined at 45 kEUR/years.
Did they give an efficiency figure for fuel conversion? And any data
on fuel requirements?
Was the maintenance cost only for maintenance? No operations cost
figures presented? 45kEUR/annum on an installation cost of 1.4MEUR is
around 3% of capital expenditure/annum. Which seems very low for a
small electricity generation plant.
>For our own 3 stage gasification technology we are expecting a
>total electricity production cost of 300-400 EUR/MWh with a fuel
>price of 5 EUR/GJ and no income for heat for a 1 MWel gasifier in
>generation 3. We base this number on approx 12000 hours operation
>wtih two 50 kWel gasifier.
>More details can be given if anyone are interested.
Please!
>
>Does anybody have data concerning the present and expected future
>operation economy of small scale CHP on biomass they would like to share?
I would also be very interested in any data along these lines. And if
anyone could point me at a good reference discussing the financial
impact of using Steam Rankine Cycle plants for cogen I would be very
grateful. As I understand it SRC plants lose a bit of electrical
generation efficiency and get more expensive when used for cogen. But
the heat can now be used.
Regards
David
>
>Best regards
>
>Thomas Koch
>www.tke.dk
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
>
>Fra: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org p? vegne af Tom Miles
>Sendt: on 29-12-2010 23:15
>Til: mark at ludlow.com; 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'
>Emne: Re: [Gasification] Syngas on Wiki_
>
>
>
>A thumbnail sketch of developments in small scale CHP including
>gasification, and the development of gasifiers for syngas production
>can be seen in this year's meetings and workshops of the IEA Task 33
>on Biomass Gasification and IEA Task 32 on Biomass Combustion and Cofiring.
>
>
>
>They held a joint workshop in October 7,2010 in Copenhagen on
>"State-of-the-art technologies for small biomass co generation".
>Individual presentations can be seen at:
>
>http://www.ieabcc.nl/meetings/task32_Copenhagen/index.html
>
>
>
>The last meeting of the IEA Task 33 on Biomass Gasification was held
>June 1-3, 2010 in Helsinki. Minutes of that meeting can be found at:
>
>http://media.godashboard.com//gti/IEA_Helsinki_Minutes_06-2010.pdf
><http://media.godashboard.com/gti/IEA_Helsinki_Minutes_06-2010.pdf>
>
>
>
>This meeting lists activities in the principal countries that are
>developing gasifiers for syngas and producer gas applications.
>Highlights from other countries that did not present at the 2010
>meeting can be found at:
>
>http://www.gastechnology.org/webroot/app/xn/xd.aspx?it=enweb&xd=iea/taskminutes.xml
><http://www.gastechnology.org/webroot/app/xn/xd.aspx?it=enweb&xd=iea/taskminutes.xml>
>
>
>
>
>Additional presentations for research and commercial systems can be
>found in the Programme of "Gasification 2010," the International
>Seminar on Gasification held 28-29 October, in Gothenburg, Sweden
>
>http://www.sgc.se/gasification2010/programme.asp
>
>
>
>Happy Holidays
>
>
>
>Tom Miles
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
>[mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Mark Ludlow
>Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 1:37 PM
>To: 'Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification'
>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Syngas on Wiki_
>
>
>
>Hmmm,
>
>Ben a lot of "gas" generated on this topic but not much useable
>energy! Chicken Little would feel right at home! I doubt that many
>who buy the GEK expect to go into methanol production. Do I smell
>just a little envy?
>
>
>
>From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
>[mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of
>Pannirselvam P.V
>Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 1:22 PM
>To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification
>Cc: M at ry; Rajesh sk
>Subject: Re: [Gasification] Syngas on Wiki_
>
>
>
> Tom ,Jim,Toby
>
>
>
> We need happy end to the hot debate on syngas 2010
>
> Many list member can agree with me that public or private
> retrack statements is a correct peaceful end as proposed by
> Jim as more damage was being done to him and GEK, I can prove
> that this is not the request of crew of Jim as some one put here
> , but independent observer .Every member here has their
> voice heard , independent they are from poor country or rich
> country , independent of person like me with Phd , working with
> university or an technical person with elementary school.The new
> social network make this possible via our lists with equal rights
> .some are proved expert of the start of art as much as Jim or
> more , but if one do not explained well here , the
> experience alone can not make one for other to follow as crew.
> We all here can not blindly follow with hero workship of few
> people or expert or so called imaginary Jim crew, even though he
> has world wide network, disciples.wiki,fotoblog etc,There is no
> need for him to use the power of
> his gasification crew against few misunderstanding.
>
>If he really use his syngas based
>hydrogen globalizeded distributed network power as some one
>supect here , our list can be innudated with emailsand .our list
>email system could have exploded wiith this syngas based
>hydrogen explosives emails and bda demage done to GEK and JIM
>could have disappeared
>
>
>
> But , as Jim travel and know the biodiversity , really respect
> all even one who misunderstand too open minded , not too much
> commercial business minded , but there is always limit to this .
>
>
>
> Thus I wish especial new near to Jim and Toby , making the debate
> live and the good side of this very hot debate
>
>
>
>Jim even though , too much demaged his true image and good
>motivation , has not asked public apology , but very educated and
>polite to ask only publick retrack and I hopethat he accept too
>private retrack ,latter inform about the same
>
>
>
> Making error is human , I hope the persons misunderstood
> They can fell and be super human , if they can if not publick
> retrack openly or at least send private email retrack.
>
>
>
> I wish Jim accept this private re-track and we will end this big
> mis understanding in our very big lists
>
>
>
>As really what we need for this list in the new year is peace ,
>progress, unity in diversity , respect for all list members ,
>including All the energy experts , academics like me , farmers ,
>Small Energy enterprise owners .Our unity in diversity make our
>list very especial and diferent as we need all, the more divesity
>much better for the sustainable growth of our list.
>
>
>
>
>
>Yours truely
>
>Dr.Panniselvam
>
>
>
>
>On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 5:52 PM, jim mason <jim at allpowerlabs.org> wrote:
>
>On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 7:31 AM, Toby Seiler <seilertechco at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Tom,
> >
> > Jim was right, I'm working on a machine that is intended to some
> degree to integrate principles of making synthesis gas, so I have a
> vested interest in his use of terminology used in marketing his
> product that, I believe, contributes to a public
> misunderstanding. I've asked Jim nice many times in the past to
> consider the differences that Doug, Bill Klein, Greg and many other
> professionals on this list have explained to Jim and myself years ago.
> >
>
>well toby, there you go again. and now you've also ignored the raw
>data, in addition to the previous detailed description and logical
>argument. again, the comedy here is I AM NOT USING THE TERM SYNGAS TO
>DESCRIBE OR MARKET THE GEK.
>
>i posted the raw data relating to the use of the syngas term on the
>gek site. you glossed over it without impact on your claims. here it
>is again below. i would like for you to respond to this data. and
>hopefully retract your statement that i am using this term to market
>the GEK currently, along with the assertion that i am actively trying
>to mislead about the nitrogen content in the gek gas (of which there
>is plenty).
>
>that represents the current state of affairs and representation.
>
>as for future states of affairs and representations, the more i look
>into the history of this term, its use internationally, and general
>movement in use academically, govt, commercially and popularly, i
>think i am going to start using it actively. the transition is
>actually much further along than i realized when i was just waving
>hands around here about it being a better term.
>
>but again, the current representation of the gek on our site does not
>use the term actively. please respond to the data i have presented.
>show some nuance. if we cannot respond reasonably to data clearly
>presented, description and argument clearly constructed, how are we
>every going to make meaningful progress on the problem of biomass
>thermal conversion? vocabulary might be the least of our problems
>here . . .
>
>here's the gek site term use inventory. you may have to click "show
>hidden" to see it.
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>below is an inventory of actual usage of the terms in
>question on the gek site. i've done this for the 8 most visited pages
>on the site, in order. i've then pulled out a much lower visited
>page, but the one where i thought my "sins" would be the most
>pronounced. this is the one where the details of gasification are
>explained. it is the 14th most visited page.
>
>as you will see, there is no sentence of the type "the GEK makes
>syngas". in actuality, the "syngas" term is barely even used. in the
>top 8 pages, only 3 occurrances, 1 to note that "syngas" is one of
>many terms used for the gas, and 2 in passing while talking about
>mixing systems. in contrast, there are 82 occurrances of the term
>"gasifier", 28 occurrances of the term "gasification", 9 for "wood
>gas", 0 for "producer gas", 0 for "suction gas", 0 for "synthesis
>gas". i'll even eliminate the two passing uses of the term while
>discussing mixing if that helps quell this nonsensical lexical
>tempest.
>
>more to your point, the selling pages have exactly 0 declarations that
>"syngas" is the gas being made by the GEK. that's right- zero. the
>term is in not used anywhere to make a claim about the type of gas the
>gek makes, nor to promote its sale. not sure if this changes
>anything, but that's the data. as a man of science, i trust you will
>recalibrate your conclusions in relation to the real data.
>
>
>here's the detail inventory. it is done over the permanent content on
>each page. not rss feeds in the left column from elsewhere, which
>change constantly and not in my control (though i could find zero
>occurances of the "syngas" term there either).
>
>1. GEK gasifier home page: http://www.gekgasifier.com
><http://www.gekgasifier.com/>
>gasifier (9), gasification (4), syngas (1), wood gas (0), producer gas
>(0), synthesis gas (0)
> the "offending" syngas sentence at the bottom of the page:
>"The system automatically adjusts syngas/air mixture via a wide band
>Bosch oxygen sensor, shakes the grate when needed, and removes ash via
>a mechanical auger.")
>
>2. How to make the GEK page: http://www.gekgasifier.com/wood-gasifier-plans/
>gasifier (8), gasification (3), syngas (0), wood gas (1), producer gas
>(0), synthesis gas (0)
>
>3. Power Pallet info and buy page:
>http://www.gekgasifier.com/gasification-store/gasifier-genset-skids/
>gasifier (19), gasification (3), syngas (2), wood gas (2), producer
>gas (0), synthesis gas (0)
> the two 2 syngas references are again in the context of
>talking about fuel/air mixing
>
>4. Store front: http://www.gekgasifier.com/gasification-store/
>gasifier (8), gasification (3), syngas (0), wood gas (1), producer gas
>(0), synthesis gas (0)
>
>5. Wiki page with detail plans and CAD drawings on making and using
>the GEK:
>http://wiki.gekgasifier.com/w/page/6123754/How-to-Build-and-Run-the-GEK-Gasifier
>gasifier (8), gasification (3), syngas (0), wood gas (2), producer gas
>(0), synthesis gas (0)
>
>6. BEK biochar info page:
>http://www.gekgasifier.com/reactor-options/pyrolysis-biochar/
>gasifier (5), gasification (2), syngas (0), wood gas (2), producer gas
>(0), synthesis gas (0)
>
>7. Gasification Basics, intro to the tech:
>http://www.gekgasifier.com/gasification-basics/
>gasifier (8), gasification (6), syngas (0), wood gas (0), producer gas
>(0), synthesis gas (0)
> the closest i get to sin here is:
>"Gasification is the use of heat to tranform solid biomass, or other
>carbonaceous solids, into a synthetic "natural gas like" flammable
>fuel.")
>
>8. Gasifier kits info and buy page:
>http://www.gekgasifier.com/gasification-store/gasifier-systems-and-kits/
>gasifier (17), gasification (4), syngas (0), wood gas (1), producer
>gas (0), synthesis gas (0)
>
>
>Here's where i thought my biggest "sins" would be. This is the page
>with the detailed explanation of how gasification works:
>http://www.gekgasifier.com/gasification-basics/how-it-works/
>gasifier (8), gasification (18), syngas (2), wood gas (2), producer
>gas (1), synthesis gas (0), suction gas (1)
> there are 2 sentences with syngas. the "offending sentences:
>"The gas produced by this method goes by a variety of names: "wood
>gas", "syngas", "producer gas", "suction gas", etc."
>"This is why an engine run on syngas can have such clean emissions."
>
>
>those appear to be the facts from my neck of the woods. others are
>invited to review the above pages and point out where they think
>things are otherwise or should be changed. i'll happily change them,
>as i don't really have a horse in this race.
>
>percentage nitrogen density isn't really the relevant racetrack to
>work out the real issues with this tech.
>
>
>jim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > The Gasification list has moved to
> > gasification at bioenerglists.org - please update your email
> contacts to reflect the change.
> > Please visit http://info.bioenergylists.org
> <http://info.bioenergylists.org/> for more news on the list move.
> > Thank you,
> > Gasification Administrator
> >
>
>
>
>--
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Jim Mason
>Website: http://www.whatiamupto.com <http://www.whatiamupto.com/>
>Current Projects:
> - Gasifier Experimenters Kit (the GEK):
> http://www.gekgasifier.com <http://www.gekgasifier.com/>
> - Escape from Berkeley alt fuels vehicle race:
> www.escapefromberkeley.com <http://www.escapefromberkeley.com/>
> - ALL Power Labs on Twitter: http://twitter.com/allpowerlabs
> - Shipyard Announce list:
>http://lists.spaceship.com/listinfo.cgi/icp-spaceship.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>Gasification mailing list
>
>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>Gasification at bioenergylists.org
>
>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org
>
>for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:
>http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/
>
>
>
>
>--
>************************************************
>P.V.PANNIRSELVAM
>ASSOCIATE . PROF.
>Research Group ,GPEC, Coordinator
>Computer aided Cost engineering
>
>DEQ - Departamento de Engenharia Qu?mica
>CT - Centro de Tecnologia / UFRN, Lagoa Nova - Natal/RN
>Campus Universit?rio. CEP: 59.072-970
>North East,Brazil
>*******************************************
>https://sites.google.com/a/biomassa.eq.ufrn.br/sites/
> and
>http://ecosyseng.wetpaint.com/
>
>
>Fone ;Office
>84 3215-3769 , Ramal 210
>Home : 84 3217-1557
>
>Mobile :558488145083
>
>Email:
>pvpa at msn.com
>panruti2002 at yahoo.com
>pannirbr at gmail.com
>pvpa at msn.com
>
>
>
>-------------- next part --------------
>A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>Name: winmail.dat
>Type: application/ms-tnef
>Size: 21027 bytes
>Desc: not available
>URL:
><http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20101230/533030b7/attachment.bin>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Gasification mailing list
>
>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>Gasification at bioenergylists.org
>
>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org
>
>for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:
>http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/
>
>
>
>End of Gasification Digest, Vol 4, Issue 24
>*******************************************
More information about the Gasification
mailing list