- Email: [email protected]
Impressions of the 1st World Conference and Exhibition on Biomass for Energy and Industry
Discussions
into real projects should be preceded by thorough studies to understand the environmental, social, economic, financial, and all technical aspects involved in the projects. 6. Conclusion This paper illustrates that, besides the normal learning curve for the BIGGT technology, different conceptions can contribute to make its introduction easier and faster by accelerating its competitiveness vis-a-vis other power generation options. It is important for biomass supporters to be alert
enough to take proper advantage of such opportunities, which can help accelerate, in this case, the introduction of commercial BIG-GT plants. It also indicates that it is not only technological advances, which most of the time require millions of dollars in investment, that are important for the introduction of a new technology. Simple and new concepts, which basically can be used at no extra cost, could also have a comparable influence and help, as much as the technological advances, to make biomass power generation a viable commer-
cial option in the near future. The authors can be contacted at: Phone: (+)5581-229-2981; Fax: 5581-229-2991 E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] References Carpentieri, E., 1991. PU/CEES Working Paper 119, Center for Energy and Environmental Studies, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, April. Carpentieri, E., and Silva, A., 1998. ‘‘WBP/SIGAME, the Brazilian BIG-GT Demonstration Project, actual status and perspectives’’, Biomass and Bioenergy, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 229-232. Waldheim, L., and Carpentieri, E., 1998. ‘‘Update on the progress of the Brazilian BIG-GT Demonstration Project’’, Special Biomass Session, ASME Turbo Expo 98; 2 to 5 June.
Impressions of the 1st World Conference and Exhibition on Biomass for Energy and Industry Andre Faaij Department of Science, Technology & Society, Utrecht University, Padualaan 14, 3584 CH, Utrecht, the Netherlands Luís Augusto Barbosa Cortez School of Agricultural Engineering (FEAGRI), State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), 13083-970 - Campinas, SP, Brazil e offer here some personal opinions and impressions formed during the first global conference on bioenergy. In the way it was organized the conference was certainly unique. In a joint effort, the European Commission and the US Department of Energy (with a number of other parties) supported this first global-scale event on bioenergy. More than 1,000 delegates from about 50 different countries came together in Seville, Spain, for the conference, which took place from 5 to 9 June 2000. Less unique was that the range of subjects at the conference was broad, covering feedstock availability and production, conversion technologies (power, heat, fuel, materials), implementation and policies, and research activities. As an overall impression, the multitude of activities, research programs, pilot and demonstration activities, and implementation schemes is impressive and considerable pro-
W
gress can be reported in many specific areas. This progress was particularly visible in the details of the poster sessions, the exhibition of manufacturers, and smaller workshops. Some examples follow. Co-firing (typically biomass plus coal) projects are starting off in many countries. Also, for BIG/CC technology co-firing with natural gas was shown to be a powerful way to make bioenergy more efficient and competitive. Developments in feedstock production and supply are steadily progressing as well: for example, over the past 5 years or so, 30% cost reductions have been observed in Scandinavia. Also, insights into bioenergy systems, their design and planning has considerably improved over the years. In many countries, notably in Eastern Europe, experience with bioenergy projects is increasing. However, one could also observe that no major breakthroughs are reported. For example, BIG/CC tech-
Energy for Sustainable Development
l
Volume IV No. 3
l
nology, something of the ‘‘Holy Grail’’ for the bioenergy field, is still not demonstrated on a commercial scale. Positive developments with demonstration of the Batelle indirect gasification concept in Burlington, Vermont, USA, the ARBRE project in the UK and perhaps the much delayed GEF project in Bahia-Brazil are hoped for, but this has been the case for many years. We have to be more patient. It is remarkable though that the advanced pressurized BIG/CC demonstration plant in Varnamo, Sweden, has seen 3600 hours of successful operation, but that it is on the verge of being mothballed. In the field of transportation fuels from biomass, much emphasis is still being laid on ethanol from surplus food crops (US, Europe), oilseeds (RME in Germany and France) and bio-oil via pyrolysis. In the longer term, however, these options are unlikely to result in competitive, efficient and clean utilisation of biofuels
October 2000
13
Discussions
in the transport sector. Good ideas and concepts are being worked on, though, such as hydrogen production via advanced gasification systems, methanol, or -- a relative novelty in the field -- production of FischerTropsch liquids via biomass gasification. However, so far these options are only playing a modest role in research activities. Ethanol from lignocellulosic biomass produced via advanced hydrolysis techniques was much debated as a technology that can bring biofuels to competitive levels. However, major technical barriers need to be addressed, especially on fundamental issues such as enzyme development and process integration and optimization, before the projected favorable performance can be obtained. Forthcoming demonstration activities, especially in the US, are therefore very important and will be closely watched by many. It can also be noted that the global trend of liberalization of the energy markets does not make things easier for bioenergy. Major potential investors keep on sharpening their investment criteria, focussing on short-term activities. But, as is known, developing bioenergy as a modernized energy option for the world’s future energy supply will take more than just a few years and needs structural support and investments. Bioenergy, just like many other options essential for a sustainable global energy system, seems to be in a vacuum of the stringent energy markets on the one hand
and passive policy on the other. In addition, companies such as Shell and BP announced building a business in bioenergy (and other renewables) several years ago, but they were strikingly absent in the key presentations of this conference. Whether the Kyoto protocol can play a role to promote bioenergy remains to be seen. For the moment the focus in this debate seems to be on afforestation activities. Who is going to deal with this? Stable markets must be created and long-term research, development, and demonstration strategies developed and supported for a long period of time. In the policy field, the US reports a letter from the President that bioenergy will be supported, but it is unclear how and to what extent. The EU announced that new regulations for obligatory (modest) shares of renewable energy in the energy system are to be debated, but remained silent about concrete actions and activities and transparent long-term strategies. Most promising developments are seen in specific countries such as Brazil, where the PRO-ALCOOL program seems to be undergoing a revival due to high oil prices, macroeconomic developments and rationalization of the sugar/ethanol industry. Besides, the Netherlands shows that with limited biomass resources a considerable number of interesting full-scale projects (such as a 20 MWe co-gasification project) can be realized. But in a way those are mere inci-
dents on the global stage where bioenergy is supposed to play its major role. It is striking to note that at this first global bioenergy conference, attendance from participants from developing countries was minimal (between 5-10% depending on the definition), with, for example, just a handful of delegates from Africa, Brazil, China and India. This is the situation while the big potential for bioenergy is found especially in regions such as Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. In this sense the 1st global conference was clearly found wanting. The conference closed with welldeserved awards being given to A.A.C.M. Beenackers (Linneborn prize) and COPERSUCAR in Brazil, which was honored, interestingly, with the EUBIA (European Biomass Industry Association) award. The first initiative for a ‘‘Transatlantic’’ bio-conference was appreciated, but serious criticism is justified. The organizers and policy-makers involved in the coming major bioenergy conferences in Orlando, USA, (August 2001) and Amsterdam, the Netherlands, (2002) face the challenge of giving the bioenergy option the push and vision it really needs! Andre Faaij can be contacted at: Tel: 31-30-253-7643 Fax: 31-30-253-7601 E-mail: [email protected] L.A.B. Cortez can be contacted at: Tel: 55-19-7881033 Fax: 55-19-7881010 E-mail: [email protected]
You may use the pages of this journal to promote your activities Energy for Sustainable Development accepts advertisements dealing with energy conservation or promotion of renewable energy Indian advertisers can contact the Executive Editor for rupee tariff. Organisations placing advertisements Tariff (in US dollars) directly with Energy for Sustainable Development will get a 15% discount on tariff. One 3 issues All 4 1. Cover pages (in 4 colour) Write to: issue in a year issues in a year The Executive Editor Energy for Sustainable Development Back cover 600 1600 3000 25/5, Borebank Road Inside covers 480 1280 2400 Benson Town Bangalore -- 560 046, INDIA 2. Text pages (black & white) Phone: ++91 80 353 6563 Full page 160 400 720 Fax: ++91 80 353 8426
14
Energy for Sustainable Development
l
Volume IV No. 3
l
October 2000
into real projects should be preceded by thorough studies to understand the environmental, social, economic, financial, and all technical aspects involved in the projects. 6. Conclusion This paper illustrates that, besides the normal learning curve for the BIGGT technology, different conceptions can contribute to make its introduction easier and faster by accelerating its competitiveness vis-a-vis other power generation options. It is important for biomass supporters to be alert
enough to take proper advantage of such opportunities, which can help accelerate, in this case, the introduction of commercial BIG-GT plants. It also indicates that it is not only technological advances, which most of the time require millions of dollars in investment, that are important for the introduction of a new technology. Simple and new concepts, which basically can be used at no extra cost, could also have a comparable influence and help, as much as the technological advances, to make biomass power generation a viable commer-
cial option in the near future. The authors can be contacted at: Phone: (+)5581-229-2981; Fax: 5581-229-2991 E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] References Carpentieri, E., 1991. PU/CEES Working Paper 119, Center for Energy and Environmental Studies, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, April. Carpentieri, E., and Silva, A., 1998. ‘‘WBP/SIGAME, the Brazilian BIG-GT Demonstration Project, actual status and perspectives’’, Biomass and Bioenergy, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 229-232. Waldheim, L., and Carpentieri, E., 1998. ‘‘Update on the progress of the Brazilian BIG-GT Demonstration Project’’, Special Biomass Session, ASME Turbo Expo 98; 2 to 5 June.
Impressions of the 1st World Conference and Exhibition on Biomass for Energy and Industry Andre Faaij Department of Science, Technology & Society, Utrecht University, Padualaan 14, 3584 CH, Utrecht, the Netherlands Luís Augusto Barbosa Cortez School of Agricultural Engineering (FEAGRI), State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), 13083-970 - Campinas, SP, Brazil e offer here some personal opinions and impressions formed during the first global conference on bioenergy. In the way it was organized the conference was certainly unique. In a joint effort, the European Commission and the US Department of Energy (with a number of other parties) supported this first global-scale event on bioenergy. More than 1,000 delegates from about 50 different countries came together in Seville, Spain, for the conference, which took place from 5 to 9 June 2000. Less unique was that the range of subjects at the conference was broad, covering feedstock availability and production, conversion technologies (power, heat, fuel, materials), implementation and policies, and research activities. As an overall impression, the multitude of activities, research programs, pilot and demonstration activities, and implementation schemes is impressive and considerable pro-
W
gress can be reported in many specific areas. This progress was particularly visible in the details of the poster sessions, the exhibition of manufacturers, and smaller workshops. Some examples follow. Co-firing (typically biomass plus coal) projects are starting off in many countries. Also, for BIG/CC technology co-firing with natural gas was shown to be a powerful way to make bioenergy more efficient and competitive. Developments in feedstock production and supply are steadily progressing as well: for example, over the past 5 years or so, 30% cost reductions have been observed in Scandinavia. Also, insights into bioenergy systems, their design and planning has considerably improved over the years. In many countries, notably in Eastern Europe, experience with bioenergy projects is increasing. However, one could also observe that no major breakthroughs are reported. For example, BIG/CC tech-
Energy for Sustainable Development
l
Volume IV No. 3
l
nology, something of the ‘‘Holy Grail’’ for the bioenergy field, is still not demonstrated on a commercial scale. Positive developments with demonstration of the Batelle indirect gasification concept in Burlington, Vermont, USA, the ARBRE project in the UK and perhaps the much delayed GEF project in Bahia-Brazil are hoped for, but this has been the case for many years. We have to be more patient. It is remarkable though that the advanced pressurized BIG/CC demonstration plant in Varnamo, Sweden, has seen 3600 hours of successful operation, but that it is on the verge of being mothballed. In the field of transportation fuels from biomass, much emphasis is still being laid on ethanol from surplus food crops (US, Europe), oilseeds (RME in Germany and France) and bio-oil via pyrolysis. In the longer term, however, these options are unlikely to result in competitive, efficient and clean utilisation of biofuels
October 2000
13
Discussions
in the transport sector. Good ideas and concepts are being worked on, though, such as hydrogen production via advanced gasification systems, methanol, or -- a relative novelty in the field -- production of FischerTropsch liquids via biomass gasification. However, so far these options are only playing a modest role in research activities. Ethanol from lignocellulosic biomass produced via advanced hydrolysis techniques was much debated as a technology that can bring biofuels to competitive levels. However, major technical barriers need to be addressed, especially on fundamental issues such as enzyme development and process integration and optimization, before the projected favorable performance can be obtained. Forthcoming demonstration activities, especially in the US, are therefore very important and will be closely watched by many. It can also be noted that the global trend of liberalization of the energy markets does not make things easier for bioenergy. Major potential investors keep on sharpening their investment criteria, focussing on short-term activities. But, as is known, developing bioenergy as a modernized energy option for the world’s future energy supply will take more than just a few years and needs structural support and investments. Bioenergy, just like many other options essential for a sustainable global energy system, seems to be in a vacuum of the stringent energy markets on the one hand
and passive policy on the other. In addition, companies such as Shell and BP announced building a business in bioenergy (and other renewables) several years ago, but they were strikingly absent in the key presentations of this conference. Whether the Kyoto protocol can play a role to promote bioenergy remains to be seen. For the moment the focus in this debate seems to be on afforestation activities. Who is going to deal with this? Stable markets must be created and long-term research, development, and demonstration strategies developed and supported for a long period of time. In the policy field, the US reports a letter from the President that bioenergy will be supported, but it is unclear how and to what extent. The EU announced that new regulations for obligatory (modest) shares of renewable energy in the energy system are to be debated, but remained silent about concrete actions and activities and transparent long-term strategies. Most promising developments are seen in specific countries such as Brazil, where the PRO-ALCOOL program seems to be undergoing a revival due to high oil prices, macroeconomic developments and rationalization of the sugar/ethanol industry. Besides, the Netherlands shows that with limited biomass resources a considerable number of interesting full-scale projects (such as a 20 MWe co-gasification project) can be realized. But in a way those are mere inci-
dents on the global stage where bioenergy is supposed to play its major role. It is striking to note that at this first global bioenergy conference, attendance from participants from developing countries was minimal (between 5-10% depending on the definition), with, for example, just a handful of delegates from Africa, Brazil, China and India. This is the situation while the big potential for bioenergy is found especially in regions such as Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. In this sense the 1st global conference was clearly found wanting. The conference closed with welldeserved awards being given to A.A.C.M. Beenackers (Linneborn prize) and COPERSUCAR in Brazil, which was honored, interestingly, with the EUBIA (European Biomass Industry Association) award. The first initiative for a ‘‘Transatlantic’’ bio-conference was appreciated, but serious criticism is justified. The organizers and policy-makers involved in the coming major bioenergy conferences in Orlando, USA, (August 2001) and Amsterdam, the Netherlands, (2002) face the challenge of giving the bioenergy option the push and vision it really needs! Andre Faaij can be contacted at: Tel: 31-30-253-7643 Fax: 31-30-253-7601 E-mail: [email protected] L.A.B. Cortez can be contacted at: Tel: 55-19-7881033 Fax: 55-19-7881010 E-mail: [email protected]
You may use the pages of this journal to promote your activities Energy for Sustainable Development accepts advertisements dealing with energy conservation or promotion of renewable energy Indian advertisers can contact the Executive Editor for rupee tariff. Organisations placing advertisements Tariff (in US dollars) directly with Energy for Sustainable Development will get a 15% discount on tariff. One 3 issues All 4 1. Cover pages (in 4 colour) Write to: issue in a year issues in a year The Executive Editor Energy for Sustainable Development Back cover 600 1600 3000 25/5, Borebank Road Inside covers 480 1280 2400 Benson Town Bangalore -- 560 046, INDIA 2. Text pages (black & white) Phone: ++91 80 353 6563 Full page 160 400 720 Fax: ++91 80 353 8426
14
Energy for Sustainable Development
l
Volume IV No. 3
l
October 2000