Posted on 10/24/2016 9:32:24 AM PDT by nickcarraway
By year's end, Portland General Electric will fire up its 550-megawatt power plant in Boardman for a daylong test burn, feeding 8,000 tons of pulverized, roasted wood into its boilers instead of the usual diet of coal.
The exercise is meant to gauge whether the aging fossil fuel plant could reliably generate electricity using renewable feedstock such as "torrefied" wood after its scheduled closure in 2020. If it works — technically, economically and environmentally — Oregon's only coal-fired power plant could one day become the country's largest biomass power plant.
It's an uncertain, embryonic effort, but some believe the payoff could be substantial. The conversion of Boardman and other coal plants could extend the life of existing equipment, benefiting ratepayers, while helping utilities comply with state renewable power mandates. It could cut pollution from power plants and logging operations. And it could boost forest restoration efforts, particularly in overstocked national forests east of the Cascades, by creating a viable market for the small trees, tree tops and limbs left over from thinning and logging projects.
"There are job creation opportunities. We can take more material out of the woods. It's a big winner — if it works," said Bruce Daucsavage, president of Prineville-based Ochoco Lumber Co., which operates the only remaining sawmill in Grant County.
(Excerpt) Read more at oregonlive.com ...
Why not, they seem to be bringing all the 19th century technologies back. But only for the little people. The Dems will live just fine.
CC
Not 100% sure but charcoal has about a 5x lesser density than anthracite coal. A typical open hopper coal car can carry 100 tons which means it would take 5 train cars to carry the equivalent in charcoal.
8000 tons/100=80 x 5= 400 train car loads of charcoal.
They are going to burn 400 train car loads of charcoal in one day? 16 carloads per hour or almost 4 car loads per minute? Something ain’t right.
It would be much mire greener to stop all electricity going to Portland. Impound all cars & trucks burning fuel to bring food too.
I know at least 3 families (aka “little people”), due to the high cost of electricity, who have in the last couple of years, switched almost exclusively to wood-burning stoves (regular, not ‘roasted’ wood) for heating their houses in the winter. One of the guys, whenever there are storms with trees down (we’ve had a bunch), drives around neighborhoods & offers to haul away trees for free - this is how he gets his firewood at no cost other than the gas in his vehicle & some ‘sweat equity’. I’m sure the “greenies” would be upset, but when electricity goes up for various reasons (like shutting down coal plants), this is what happens. I can see the day coming where we’ll be doing it, too (we have acreage/trees).
“Roasted wood”.......do they really mean CHARCOAL?
Torrefaction of biomass, e.g., wood or grain, is a mild form of pyrolysis at temperatures typically between 200 and 320 °C. Torrefaction changes biomass properties to provide a much better fuel quality for combustion and gasification applications. Torrefaction leads to a dry product with no biological activity like rotting.
There are plants being planned/built on the east coast too. Maine and NC if I remember correctly. The idea is to make a wood pellet that can be burned in plants that previously burned coal. The torrefied pellet could be shipped in bulk without the potential increase in moisture content that current wood pellets are prone to.
The plants on the east coast are planned to ship to Europe by boat. The wood pellet is “carbon neutral” so if they can be substituted for coal, it brings those plants into compliance with government regulations for generation of electricity without expensive modifications. This does not mean these plants will not burn coal too. Just not 100% coal as they currently do.
We have a measly acre in NYS and just from normal tree trimming and the occaisionally thinning generate enough firewood to provide about 1/3 of our heating costs.
Haha! I pretty much think this kind of explanation on packaging or explanation of "green biomass energy" coupled with "artisanal" would be an automatic sale to some dumbsh!t libtard! Funny! You probably could mark that sh!t up double in Oregon or Seattle or thereabouts.
What’s old is new again.
I keep thinking of building a woodgas generator for backup power. It’s on my list, right after “build a house”.
Johnny used to have one. I miss his expertise in the matter.
Should we all stand up and cheer? /s
Depends how it’s done. A lot of woodgas systems use the waste heat from the main combustion chamber to prepare the next batch of fuel.
The worthless Department of Energy was to find America's energy answer by now. The eco-Nazi's run many agencies that block any answer to this pressing problem. For the most part government is worthless and the left is a clear and present danger to our society.
So woodstove == BAD, but wood fired coal plant == green biomass power plant. Got it; wait, what?
I remember in the 1970s when hippy vans sported bumper stickers “ Split Wood Not Atoms”
“What’s next after this?”
Charcoal fired steam-powered locomotives and charcoal fired steam-powered automobiles of course. Followed by candles for light and wood stoves for cooking and heat, naturally.
This is all in response to governments both in the US and in Europe that have mandated that “X” amount of the material used to produce electricity must come from lower carbon energy sources. So, if you want to continue selling electricity in our country/state etc. you need to buy it from some source with lower carbon emissions. Therefore, the utility either builds natural gas plants, windmills, etc.
Torrefied pellets let them use the same plant that burns coal(yes, you get less BTUs from wood as opposed to coal) with the least money spent to meet the government requirements.
I do not think you will see this in residential use in wood pellet stoves anytime soon. It costs too much to cook the pellets more. There is an increase in BTUs over regular pellets. However, it would not be enough to make most home pellet stove users switch. Their target market are utilities and large pellet consumers like college campuses that want to be “green”.
Not charcoal. Wood is heated to dry it and change its structure, not to the point of charcoaling though. Should burn hotter and cleaner than untreated wood. The method is also used to treat lumber to make it rot proof.
6500 BTU/pound charcoal vs 8,250 PWB or 10,500 Montana or 11,700 Illinois basin or 13,000 East Ky coal ?
“They are going to burn 400 train car loads of charcoal in one day? 16 carloads per hour or almost 4 car loads per minute? Something ain’t right.”
16 carloads per hour would be about a quarter of a car load per minute.
They are doing it in the UP of Michigan. The diffrence is, they are using power plants at paper mills and using their excess power adding it to the grid.
Not one of those mills are using coal. They burn the spent black liqor and mix it with bio mass.
The Escanaba Mill produces enough power to supply a city the size of the Green Bay Wisconsin area and up till a couple years ago, they were not ever allowed to sell their excess power.
They now can.
But, NOTHING can replace coal, unless its hydroelectric, for plants that provide power as their only source of revenue.
They tried this at KI Sawyer in the UP of Michigan. It failed.
The idea was to make pellets out of the biomass. Then they would use those pellets at the coal fired plants at Marquette Michigan.
It will NOT work unless it is used at a site where they produce their own power to run the plants-I.E. Paper Mills.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.