industry
NEWS GPI conference addresses options for reducing emissions
The best way to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from coal-fired power plants in the U.S. is to replace plants that are more than 25 years old with facilities that coproduce electricity and synthetic fuels from coal and biomass while employing carbon capture and storage systems, according to Robert Williams, senior research scientist at the Princeton Environmental Institute. In order to meet the goal of reducing U.S. emissions by 80 percent of 2005 levels by 2050, the nation needs to look mostly at coal power and transportation, Williams told the crowd of about 115 people during the Great Plains Institute conference on Nov. 2 at North Dakota State University in Fargo. The conference, titled The Future of Coal and Biomass in a Carbon-Constrained World: Technology and Policy Opportunities for the Midwest, featured several topics and hosted speakers from as far away as China. Tackling both coal power and transportation emissions simultaneously is the best option for meeting that 80 percent goal, Williams said. “That’s a very daunting task,” he said. “We need to make radical change and we need to get underway soon.” Retrofitting existing coal power plants with carbon capture and storage systems is one option, but Williams said it’s extremely expensive and energy- and water-intensive. Completely replacing the systems not only leads to decarbonized energy, he said, but also enables coal to play a major role in the realization of zero GHG emissions in the production of synthetic transportation fuels. The replacement would mean a switch from combustion to gasification, which allows a relatively simple carbon dioxide removal, Williams said.
Great Plains Institute Working on tomorrow’s energy solutions with today’s leaders
A coproduction system with carbon capture and storage, producing two-thirds synthetic fuels and one-third electricity, fired by 11 percent biomass, reduces system-wide GHG emissions by 50 percent, whereas a system with 38 percent biomass reduces emissions by 90 percent, he said. Obstacles to making the switch remain, however, and are mainly institutional, not economic, Williams said. They include managing three commodity products and two feedstocks simultaneously, along with forming new strategic alliances that can overcome obstacles in the private sector and federal government. Williams said new policies are also needed, including a strong, broad carbon mitigation policy that would protect biomass synfuels investors against oil price collapse risk. Carbon capture and storage early-action policies are important, he said, along with incentives for commercial-scale demonstrations between 2010 and 2020 and policies for widespread implementation thereafter. In addition, more policies supporting research and development of thermochemical bioenergy are needed, along with policies regarding the logistics of biomass supply. —Lisa Gibson
GPI conference: Biomass creates opportunities for wildlife, agriculture There could be a balance in managing land for energy and wildlife simultaneously, creating several opportunities for both sectors, according to Dave Nomsen, vice president of governmental affairs for Pheasants Forever. Nomsen spoke at the Great Plains Institute’s Nov. 2 conference. “There are some intriguing possibilities,” he said of that balance. Prescribed burning, while limited in many parts of the country, can ensure plant residual is removed and recycled to keep the land productive. Harvesting biomass removes vegetation and keeps it in an early plant successional stage rotation, he said. Removing exotic, invasive plant species such as reed canary creates a better habitat and those plant species might be beneficial for biofuels production, he added. Also speaking at the conference was Robert Bonnie, senior environment and climate advisor to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. Enormous opportunities exist for the agricultural sector in climate change legislation, Bonnie told attendees. “If we do it right; if we get the incentives right,” he said. The two large climate change markets for agriculture are energy and carbon offsets, he said. Land stewardship activities can make carbon credits an attractive market, but Bonnie cautioned that if skepticism is not addressed responsibly, it will eliminate those markets. “It’s also important to note that there are costs to inaction,” he said.
The U.S. EPA will move forward with some kind of legislation and the country is better off if it is comprehensive. It’s crucial that rural America is at the table for climate legislation in order to get the design right to provide benefits and opportunities, Bonnie emphasized. “The most important thing is that rural America participates in this debate,” he said. U.S. Sens. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., and Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., addressed conference attendees via satellite, both focusing on current legislation. “It will take time to properly craft climate legislation,” Conrad said, adding that biomass should play a large role in the renewable energy and fuel portfolio. Climate change legislation will not be on the floor of the Senate this year, Dorgan said, as crafting healthcare legislation has taken longer than expected, but it will be on the floor next year. Coal, however, will continue to play a role in the country’s energy future, Conrad said, adding that 90 percent of North Dakota’s electricity comes from coal. Climate change efforts that don’t involve coal would drastically increase the price of electricity, he added. According to Dorgan, one-fourth of oil pumped globally goes to the U.S. and 70 percent of that is from outside the country. While plenty of work is being done, there still is a long way to go, he said. —Lisa Gibson
12|2009 BIOMASS MAGAZINE 19