The potential of using forest residue to offset coal use in co-fired coal power plants in the eastern United States

Jason Parent, Marcello Graziano, Xiusheng (Harrison) Yang

Abstract


Abstract: The global transition from fossil fuel-based energy sources to renewable energy sources will be most effective, for at least the near future, by utilizing local resources and existing infrastructure. In many areas of the eastern United States, forest residue is abundant and can be used in existing facilities to supplement coal in coal-fired power plants. Thus forest residue has potential as a renewable energy source that could be effectively utilized in the near future. This study uses GIS to estimate the potential quantity of forest residue available for use in coal-fired power plants in the eastern United States. Transportation costs limit the distance over which it is feasible to transport forest residue to the power plants and these costs may fluctuate depending on economic conditions. Thus, we consider three scenarios in our analysis assuming the maximum feasible transport distances to be 60, 80, and 100 km. In the eastern U.S., the total annual forest residue available to coal plants is approximately 29.4, 40.2, and 48.2 million dry tons, respectively, for maximum transport distances of 60, 80, and 100 km. Assuming an 80 km transport distance, forest residue has the potential to reduce coal consumption by 22.3 million tons per year. Under this scenario, greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced by almost 58.1 million tons per year, and NOx and SOx emissions would be reduced by 69.3 and 122.6 thousand tons respectively. This analysis suggests that by offsetting coal use, forest residue has the potential to substantially reduce power plant emissions.
Keywords: forest residue, coal, biofuel, co-firing, GIS, alternative energy
DOI: 10.3965/j.ijabe.20140704.011

Citation: Parent J, Graziano M, Yang X S. The potential of using forest residue to offset coal use in co-fired coal power plants in the eastern United States. Int J Agric & Biol Eng, 2014; 7(4): 99-105.

Keywords


forest residue, coal, biofuel, co-firing, GIS, alternative energy

Full Text:

PDF

References


Blackwelder D B, Wilkerson E. Supply system costs of slash, forest thinnings, and commercial energy wood crops. Idaho National Laboratory. Technical Memorandum. Sept. 2008.

SmithW B, Miles P D, Vissage J S, Pugh S A. Forest Resources of the United States, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 2002.

Perez-Verdin G, Grebner D L, Munn I, Sun C. Grado S.

Economic impacts of woody biomass utilization for bioenergy in Mississippi. Forest Prod J, 2008; 58: 75–83.

Ranta T. Logging residues from regeneration fellings for biofuel production- a GIS-based availability and supply cost analysis. PhD dissertation. Lappeenranta University of Technology, 2002.

Perez-Verdin G, Grebner D L, Sun C, Munn I A, Schultz E B, Matney T G. Woody biomass availability for bioethanol conversion in Mississippi. Biomass Bioenergy, 2009; 33: 492–503.

International Energy Agency (IEA). Biomass for Power Generation and CHP. No.3 2007. http://www.iea.org/ techno/essentials.htm [2010-04-28].

Schulte L, Tyndall J, Hall R B, Grubh K. Rapid assessment of woody biomass capabilities in three regions of the U.S. Midwest. Report, Iowa State University, Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, 2008.

Huber G W, Dale B E. Grassoline at the pump. Sci Am, 2009; 301: 52–59.

McIverJ D, Starr L. A literature review on the environmental effects of postfire logging. W J of App For, 2001; 16: 159–168.

Börjesson P. Economic valuation of the environmental impact of logging residue recovery and nutrient compensation. Biomass Bioenergy, 2000; 19: 137–152.

Fleming R L, Powers R F, Foster N W, Kranabetter J M, Scott D A, Ponder F, et al. Effects of organic matter removal, soil compaction, and vegetation control on 5-year seedling performance: a regional comparison of Long-Term Soil Productivity sites. Can J For Res, 2006; 36: 529–550.

Nitterus K, Astrom M, Gunnarsson B. Commercial harvest of logging residue in clear-cuts affects the diversity and community composition of ground beetles (Coleoptera: carabidae). Scand J For Res, 2007; 22: 231–240.

Brown J K, Reinhardt E D, Kramer K A. Coarse woody debris: managing benefits and fire hazard in the recovering forest. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRSGTR- 105. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, 2003.

National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). Biomass Resources in the United States. 2009. http://www.nrel.gov/

gis/data_analysis.html [2010-04-28].

Homer C, Huang C, Yang L, Wylie B, Coan M. Development of a 2001 national landcover database for the United States. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens, 2004; 70: 829–840.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). The Emissions and Generation Resource Integrated Database for 2007. eGRID2007. Technical support document. 2007.

Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). Cost Distance. ArcGIS Desktop 9.3 Help. 2010. http://webhelp. esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.3/index.cfm?id=6198&pid=6193&topicname=Cost_Distance. [10-04-28].

Protected Areas Database of the United States. http://www. protectedlands.net/ [2010-9-17].

Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Bioenergy Conversion Factors, Biomass. http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/papers/misc/ energy_conv.html. [2010-10-20].

Hong B D, Slatick E R. Carbon Dioxide Emissions Factors for Coal. U.S. Energy Information Administration: Independent Statistics and Analysis. 1994. http://www.eia. doe.gov/cneaf/coal/quarterly/co2_article/co2.html [2010-04- 28].

Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). How Coal Works. 2009. http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/coalvswind/brief_ coal.html [2010-04-28].

Zhang Y, Mckechnie J, Cormier D, Lyng R, Mabee W, Ogino A, et al. Life cycle emissions and cost of producing electricity from coal, natural gas, and wood pellets in Ontario, Canada. Environ Sci Technol, 2010; 44, 538–544.

Energy Information Administration (EIA). August 2009. State Energy Consumption Estimates 1960 through 2007. (p. 4) http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/states/sep_use/notes/use_ print2007.pdf.

Energy Information Administration (EIA). Form EIA-5, and Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce, Monthly Report EM 545. 2009.

Vitousek P M, Aber J D, Howarth R W, Likens G E, Matson P A, Schindler D W, et al. Human alteration of the global nitrogen cycle: sources and consequences. Ecol Appl, 1997; 7: 737–750.




Copyright (c)



2023-2026 Copyright IJABE Editing and Publishing Office