skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Logistics, Costs, and GHG Impacts of Utility-Scale Co-Firing with 20% Biomass

Abstract

This study analyzes the possibility that biopower in the U.S. is a cost-competitive option to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In 2009, net greenhouse gas (GHG) emitted in the United States was equivalent to 5,618 million metric tons CO2, up 5.6% from 1990 (EPA 2011). Coal-fired power generation accounted for 1,748 million metric tons of this total. Intuitively, life-cycle CO2 emissions in the power sector could be reduced by substituting renewable biomass for coal. If just 20% of the coal combusted in 2009 had been replaced with biomass, CO2 emissions would have been reduced by 350 million metric tons, or about 6% of net annual GHG emission. This would have required approximately 225 million tons of dry biomass. Such an ambitious fuel substitution would require development of a biomass feedstock production and supply system tantamount to coal. This material would need to meet stringent specifications to ensure reliable conveyance to boiler burners, efficient combustion, and no adverse impact on heat transfer surfaces and flue gas cleanup operations. Therefore, this report addresses the potential cost/benefit tradeoffs of co-firing 20% specification-qualified biomass (on an energy content basis) in large U.S. coal-fired power plants. The dependence and sensitivity of feedstock cost on sourcemore » of material, location, supply distance, and demand pressure was established. Subsequently, the dependence of levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) on feedstock costs, power plant feed system retrofit, and impact on boiler performance was determined. Overall life-cycle assessment (LCA) of greenhouse gas emissions saving were next evaluated and compared to wind and solar energy to benchmark the leading alternatives for meeting renewable portfolio standards (or RPS).« less

Authors:
 [1]
  1. Idaho National Lab. (INL), Idaho Falls, ID (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Idaho National Lab. (INL), Idaho Falls, ID (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)
OSTI Identifier:
1236818
Report Number(s):
INL/EXT-12-25252
DOE Contract Number:  
AC07-05ID14517
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
09 BIOMASS FUELS; Biopower; Cofiring; Renewable Energy

Citation Formats

Nichol, Corrie Ian. Logistics, Costs, and GHG Impacts of Utility-Scale Co-Firing with 20% Biomass. United States: N. p., 2013. Web. doi:10.2172/1236818.
Nichol, Corrie Ian. Logistics, Costs, and GHG Impacts of Utility-Scale Co-Firing with 20% Biomass. United States. https://doi.org/10.2172/1236818
Nichol, Corrie Ian. 2013. "Logistics, Costs, and GHG Impacts of Utility-Scale Co-Firing with 20% Biomass". United States. https://doi.org/10.2172/1236818. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1236818.
@article{osti_1236818,
title = {Logistics, Costs, and GHG Impacts of Utility-Scale Co-Firing with 20% Biomass},
author = {Nichol, Corrie Ian},
abstractNote = {This study analyzes the possibility that biopower in the U.S. is a cost-competitive option to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In 2009, net greenhouse gas (GHG) emitted in the United States was equivalent to 5,618 million metric tons CO2, up 5.6% from 1990 (EPA 2011). Coal-fired power generation accounted for 1,748 million metric tons of this total. Intuitively, life-cycle CO2 emissions in the power sector could be reduced by substituting renewable biomass for coal. If just 20% of the coal combusted in 2009 had been replaced with biomass, CO2 emissions would have been reduced by 350 million metric tons, or about 6% of net annual GHG emission. This would have required approximately 225 million tons of dry biomass. Such an ambitious fuel substitution would require development of a biomass feedstock production and supply system tantamount to coal. This material would need to meet stringent specifications to ensure reliable conveyance to boiler burners, efficient combustion, and no adverse impact on heat transfer surfaces and flue gas cleanup operations. Therefore, this report addresses the potential cost/benefit tradeoffs of co-firing 20% specification-qualified biomass (on an energy content basis) in large U.S. coal-fired power plants. The dependence and sensitivity of feedstock cost on source of material, location, supply distance, and demand pressure was established. Subsequently, the dependence of levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) on feedstock costs, power plant feed system retrofit, and impact on boiler performance was determined. Overall life-cycle assessment (LCA) of greenhouse gas emissions saving were next evaluated and compared to wind and solar energy to benchmark the leading alternatives for meeting renewable portfolio standards (or RPS).},
doi = {10.2172/1236818},
url = {https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1236818}, journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Sat Jun 01 00:00:00 EDT 2013},
month = {Sat Jun 01 00:00:00 EDT 2013}
}