Renewable energy from anaerobic digestion Comparison of ... · ILT2a-083-001 1/45 Renewable energy...
Transcript of Renewable energy from anaerobic digestion Comparison of ... · ILT2a-083-001 1/45 Renewable energy...
I LT2a-083-001 1/ 45
Renewable energy from anaerobic digestion
Comparison of different technologies – the road to successDr. Andreas Gronauer, coordinator of Bavarian biogas research network
Content:• motivation• technologies• situation in Bavaria• management of the process • evaluation: technical, biochemical, ecological, economical • key points for success
I LT2a-083-001 2/ 45
What ´ s sustainable in agriculture product ion?
Definit ion of sustainable development :
“development that "meets the needs of the present without com prom ising the abilit y of future generat ions to meet their own needs".
I t relates to the cont inuity of econom ic, social, inst itut ional and environmental aspects of human society, as well as the non-human environment .
UN, Brundt land Report , 1 9 8 7
I LT2a-083-001 3/ 45
mot ivat ion:predict ion of worldwide fossile oil demand
Oil demand:
aviation up to 2050:
2,7 – 9,4 times higher (IPCC)
Road traffic uo to 2030:
2,5 times higher (UPI)
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Mill
. Bar
relp
re d
ay
real andTheoretical oil production
Oil demand traffic
??
??
road trafficroad traffic
aviationaviationshippingshipping
I LT2a-083-001 4/ 45
mot ivat ion:CO2 concentrat ion in the atmosphere (IPCC, 2002)
I LT2a-083-001 5/ 45
mot ivat ion:Anaerobic Digest ion in Europe
The European Commission White Paper on Renewable Sources of Energy• Goal of doubling from 6% (1995) to 20% (2030) the
share of renewable energies • Biomass to contribute more than 80% of the total
additional RES contribution by 2010• Biogas (livestock, sewage treatment, landfills) to
contribute an additional 15 Mtoe • Current contribution estimated at 1-2 Mtoe
I LT2a-083-001 6/ 45
mot ivat ion:EC White Paper on Renewable Sources of Energy
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
wind
water
photo
votai
k
biomas
s
geoth
ermie
solar
colle
ctors
sum
Mio
t cru
de o
il eq
u.
(1995)
aim (2010)
necessary gain
~ 15 Mio ha biomass in the EU
=but only 10%of
Energy demand in the EU
0,002
0,26
0,258
I LT2a-083-001 7/ 45
Anzahl der Biogasanlagen in Bayern ( 2 0 0 6 )
1 - 1 5
1 6 - 3 0
3 1 - 4 5
4 6 - 6 0
6 1 - 7 5
7 6 - 9 0
> 9 0
Anzahl Biogasanlagen inAnzahl Biogasanlagen inBayern* :Bayern* :
1 .3 5 41 .3 5 4
Anzahl Biogasanlagen jeAnzahl Biogasanlagen jeLandkreis [ n] * :Landkreis [ n] * :
Anm erkung:Anm erkung:* I n Bet rieb am 3 1 .1 2 .2 0 0 6( ink l. 1 0 % Dunkelziffer )
0
München
Augsburg
Ansbach
Würzburg
Bayreuth
Landshut
Regensburg
Darstellung: Halam a
Quelle: Biogasanlagen-Bet reiberbefragung Bayern 2006.
number of biogas plants in Bavar ia
number of biogas plants per subregion
com ment : operat ing 31.12.2006
situat ion in Bavar ia:num ber of biogas plants in Bavaria (2006)
I LT2a-083-001 8/ 45
0 2.000 4.000 6.000 8.000
Ist-Situation (Schätzung)
Technisches Potential
Ernterückstände und Exkremente NawaroIndustrielle Reststoffe Kommunale Reststoffe
GWhel pro Jahr1.806
7.235
situat ion in Bavar ia:evaluat ion of potent ials for biogas product ion in Bavar ia
LfLArbeits-
schwerpunkt„Biogas“
(Koordination: ILT)
(IPS) (IPS)
(IPZ)
(ITE)(ITE)
(IEM)(IEM)
(ILB) (ILB) (IAB)(IAB)
(AIW)(AIW)
(AQU)(AQU)
externe Partner
(ILT)Tier und Technik
(ILT)Tier und TechnikTier und Technik
LfLkey act iv it y
Biogascoordinator:
Dr. A. Gronauer
I LT2a-083-001 10/ 45
technology: lab scale and half scale experimental setup´ s 300 digester (228 Batch; 72 f low)
Batch-digester
Flow digester
I LT2a-083-001 11/ 45
technology: full scale plants (n= 42 )
I LT2a-083-001 12/ 45
Scient if ic screening of agr icultural biogas plants in Bavaria (Germany)
Object ives:
- Creat ion of a data pool concerning efficiency, funct ionality and reliabilit y of agr icultural biogas plants
- I mprovement of concepts applied in pract ice to increase the biogas yield from renewable pr imary products (RPP) , org. residues, manure
- Evaluat ion of applicability of different technologies for the digest ion of RPP
technology: evaluat ion of biogas plants in pract ice
I LT2a-083-001 13/ 45
technology: configurat ion of five selected biogas plants
Plant Start-up Stages Digester volume Storage capacity Temperature Digestate storage Engine El. capacityNo. year m³ m³ °C type kW1 2005 2 5.100 3.000 mesophilic covered Gas 6252 2004 2 3.400 1.500 mesophilic open Dual-fuel 5803 2004 3 1.960 1.106 thermophilic open 2504 2005 2 1.160 1.570 mesophilic open Gas 3245 2005 2 2.800 2.400 mesophilic covered Gas 347
Dual-fuel
I LT2a-083-001 14/ 45
• Scale for input mater ial• Biogas flow meter• Biogas analyzer (CH4, O2, H2S; possibly CO2, H2)• Elect r ic meter for generated elect r icit y + own
elect r icity demand
+ Regular sam pling for chem ical analysis:• Qualit y cont rol of input : DM, oDM, ( total C, N)• Project ion of methane yield: Weender, van Soest• Digester content : DM, oDM, individual volat ile fat t y
acids (alternat ively: total organic acids + alcalinity) , NH4-N, (pH)
• Digestate: DM, oDM, ( total C, N, total organic acids)
Measuring equipm ent / process m onitoring
I LT2a-083-001 15/ 45
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1 2 3 4 5Plant ID
Rel
ativ
e sh
are
[% F
M]
Maize silage Liquid manure Solid manureGrass silage Whole crop silage ShredSudan grass silage Corn-cob-mix Mash from maize grainsWater Other
management of the process: m ix of input mater ials
Different fodder causes different biodegradability, m ethane potent ial and nut rit ion qualit y of m icro organism
I LT2a-083-001 16/ 45
f irst key quest ion for success:
? Process stability ?
I LT2a-083-001 17/ 45
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
35001
/06
02/0
6
03/0
6
04/0
6
05/0
6
06/0
6
07/0
6
08/0
6
09/0
6
10/0
6
11/0
6
12/0
6
01/0
7
02/0
7
03/0
7
04/0
7
05/0
7
06/0
7
07/0
7
08/0
7
09/0
7
kWel
.*t-1
bzw
. t*d
-1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Leistung Leistung (MW 30 d) Methangehalt
BR= 2 ,5 BR= 1 ,0 BR= 2 ,6BR= 2 ,0
me
tha
nco
nte
nt
%
kW
el.
*t-
1;
t d
-1
power power 30 d average methane
management of the process: pract ice exam ple:
stop of feedin (1 weeks)
stop of feedin (2 weeks)
opt im izat ion of feeding rat io
I LT2a-083-001 18/ 45
management of the process: pract ice exam ple:
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
01/0
6
02/0
6
03/0
6
04/0
6
05/0
6
06/0
6
07/0
6
08/0
6
09/0
6
10/0
6
11/0
6
12/0
6
01/0
7
02/0
7
03/0
7
04/0
7
05/0
7
06/0
7
07/0
7
08/0
7
09/0
7
mg*
l-1
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
1,4
1,6
FFS gesamt Essigsre. Propionsre. iso-Buttersre. FOS/TAC
stop of feedin (2 weeks)
stop of feedin (1 weeks)
opt im izat ion of feeding rat io
I LT2a-083-001 19/ 45
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
11/0
6
12/0
6
01/0
7
02/0
7
03/0
7
04/0
7
05/0
7
06/0
7
07/0
7
08/0
7
08/0
7
kWh
el.
09/0
7
cont inous increase of elect r icit y fed into the grid4300 to 5800 and 7150 KWh/ d
~ increase of cash flow 8 0 0 € to 1100 and 1 3 0 0 € per day
management of the process: pract ice exam ple: effect of opt im zat ion
I LT2a-083-001 20/ 45
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
06/06 08/06 10/06 12/06 02/07 04/07
Time
Ele
ctri
c po
wer
out
put [
kW]
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
Aci
d co
ncen
trat
ion
[mg
acet
ic a
cid
equi
v.*l
-1]
Power output Acetic acid F1 Propionic acid F1Volatile fatty acids (cumul.) F1 Acetic acid F2 Propionic acid F2Volatile fatty acids (cumul.) F2
evaluat ion: process monitor ing – plant No. 5
I LT2a-083-001 21/ 45
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
06/06 08/06 10/06 12/06 02/07 04/07
Time
Ele
ctri
c po
wer
out
put [
kW]
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
Aci
d co
ncen
trat
ion
[mg
acet
ic a
cid
equi
v.*l
-1]
Power output Acetic acid F1 Propionic acid F1Volatile fatty acids (cumul.) F1 Acetic acid F2 Propionic acid F2Volatile fatty acids (cumul.) F2
evaluat ion: process monitor ing – plant No. 5
process stabilit y
is one key factor for success !
I LT2a-083-001 22/ 45
Renewable energy from anaerobic digestion
Comparison of different technologies – the road to successDr. Andreas Gronauer, coordinator of Bavarian biogas research network
Content:• motivation• situation in Bavaria• technologies• management of the process• evaluation: technical, biochemical, ecological, economical• key points for success• summary
I LT2a-083-001 23/ 45
100 200 300 400 m3*t-1 600
2536
Liquid cattle manureLiquid swine manure
93103
Fodder beetsGrass
155171
195 202
Green maize, dough stageMaize silage, dough stage, high-grain
Grass silage, first cutMaize silage, waxy stage, high-grain
3539
Potato mash, freshWhey
68 90
291
Potato peelingsSilage from sugar beet leafs
Brewer`s grain silage
220Food waste400
469486
552600
657
Skimmed greaseMolasses
Waste breadCanola cake, 15 % fat
Waste greaseBaking wastes
evaluation: Biogas product ion of different input mater ials (FM)
I LT2a-083-001 24/ 45
Renewable energy from anaerobic digestion
Comparison of different technologies – the road to successDr. Andreas Gronauer, coordinator of Bavarian biogas research network
Content:• motivation• situation in Bavaria• technologies• management of the process• evaluation: technical, biochemical, ecological, economical • key points for success• summary
I LT2a-083-001 25/ 45
evaluat ion: history of German renewable energy law
Degression 2%Laufzeit 15 Jahre
Degression 1%Laufzeit 20 Jahre
Degression 1,5%Laufzeit 20 Jahre
0
5
10
15
20
25
1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
Current Entry Law (StrEG)
Renewable EnergyLaw (EEG)
Renewable Energy Law (EEG) Novelle (150 kW;o.KWK;o. Tec)
ct/kWh
Novel of EEGct/kWh ren. crops CHP Tec
bis 150 kW 11,5 + 6,0 + 2,0 + 2,0bis 500 kW 9,9 + 6,0 + 2,0 + 2,0bis 5 MW 8,9 + 4,0 + 2,0 + 2,0über 5 MW 8,9 - + 2,0 -
NovelNovel of EEGof EEGct/kWh ren. crops CHP Tec
bis 150 kW 11,5 + 6,0 + 2,0 + 2,0bis 500 kW 9,9 + 6,0 + 2,0 + 2,0bis 5 MW 8,9 + 4,0 + 2,0 + 2,0über 5 MW 8,9 - + 2,0 -
I LT2a-083-001 26/ 45
Jun
06
Jul 0
6
Aug
06
Sep
06
Okt
06
Nov
06
Dez
06
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Nov
05
Dez
05
Jan
06
Feb
06
Mrz
06
Apr
06
Mai
06
[€/kWel]
evaluat ion: elect r icity sales during 1st year of operat ion
plant 1plant 2plant 3
9 6 0 € / kW el
1 .2 8 0 € / kW el
1 .3 8 0 € / kW el
source: Röhling, Keymer 2008, LfL- I LB
I LT2a-083-001 27/ 45
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1st month 2nd month 3rd month 4th month 5th month
[€/kWel]
~ 8 4 .0 0 0 .- -€
2 3 0 € / kW el
plant 1plant 2plant 3
evaluat ion: elect r icity sales during start -up phase (5 months)
source: Röhling, Keymer 2008, LfL- I LB
I LT2a-083-001 28/ 45
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4.000
Biogas plantintegrated into
farm
Biogas plantas separateenterpr ise
Average
Data base:
10 Bavar ian pilot plants
[€/kWel]
2,400 €/ kWel
Ø 3 6 0 kW el
3,550 €/ kWel
Ø 3 5 4 kW el
3,200 €/ kWel
Ø 3 5 6 kW el
evaluat ion: specif ic investment costs
source: Röhling, Keymer 2008, LfL- I LB
I LT2a-083-001 29/ 45
1 7 .1 0 Cent / kW hel
Receipts per kWhel: 17,10 Cent
Data base: n= 5, 1st year of operat ion, avg. installed elect r ical capacit y: 324 kW
evaluat ion: calculat ion of revenue
source: Röhling, Keymer 2008, LfL- I LB
I LT2a-083-001 30/ 45
Receipts per kWhel: 17,10 Cent
Fixed costs per kWhel: - 6,42 Cent
Operat ing costs per kWhel: - 2,98 Cent
7,70 Cent� Labor, costs for input , debt service
7 .7 0 6 .4 2
2 .9 8
Data base: n= 5, 1st year of operat ion, avg. installed elect r ical capacit y: 324 kW
evaluat ion: calculat ion of revenue
source: Röhling, Keymer 2008, LfL- I LB
I LT2a-083-001 31/ 45
Renewable energy from anaerobic digestion
Comparison of different technologies – the road to successDr. Andreas Gronauer, coordinator of Bavarian biogas research network
Content:• motivation• situation in Bavaria• technologies• management of the process• evaluation: technical, biochemical, ecological, economical • key points for success• summary
I LT2a-083-001 32/ 45
evaluat ion: GHG em issions: model calculat ions
+ Open digestate storageVariant 5 :
+ Plant elect r icit y dem and supplied from gridVariant 4 :
+ No heat useVariant 3 :
+ 100 % renewable prim ary products (RPP) as inputVariant 2 :
• 1/ 3 of organic dry m at ter input from anim al m anure• Feed- in of surplus elect r icit y only• Gas recovery during digestate storage• 65 % ut ilizat ion rat io for off-heat
Variant 1 :
I LT2a-083-001 33/ 45
evaluat ion: residual biogas (digestate storage)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
ID biogas plant
Bio
gas
[Nm
3B
ioga
s/t o
DM
]
38°C 22°C
I LT2a-083-001 34/ 45
evaluat ion: residual biogas (digestate storage)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
ID biogas plant
Bio
gas
[Nm
3B
ioga
s/t o
DM
]
38°C 22°CLow residual biogas product ion = low CH4-em ission
is one key factor for environmental success !
I LT2a-083-001 35/ 45
evaluat ion: GHG emissions: Balance of GHG em issions
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
GH
Gem
issi
ons
from
ele
ctri
city
pro
duct
ion
[g C
O2-
equ.
per
kWhe
l]
Variant 1 2 3 4 5
206179
277
-204
-13
Errichtung der Anlage Strombezug Nawaro-BereitstellungMethanschlupf Sonstige Methanemissionen Methan aus GärrestlagerMinderemissionen Widü Wärmegutschrift Summe
ConstructionMethane slippageBonus manure dig.
Grid electricityDiff. methane emissionsBonus heat use
Production of RPMMethane from digestate storageSum of GHG emissions
I LT2a-083-001 36/ 45
evaluat ion: balance of GHG em issions of 5 biogas plants
193
-21
-279
335
144
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
GH
Gem
issi
ons
from
ele
ctri
city
pro
duct
ion
[g C
O2-
equ.
per
kWhe
l]2
-400,0
-200,0
0,0
200,0
400,0
600,0
energy production German current mix (616)
average of 5 plants
plant 1 2 3 4 5
Strombezug Nawaro-BereitstellungSonstige Methanemissionen Methan aus GärrestlagerWärmegutschrift Summe
ConstructionMethane slippageBonus manure dig.fossil fuel for engine
Grid electricityDiff. methane emissionsBonus heat use
Production of RPMMethane from digestate storageSum of GHG emissions
I LT2a-083-001 37/ 45
evaluat ion: GHG emissions: summary (GHG em issions)
• Specific GHG em issions of elect r icit y product ion from biogas (RPP + manure) signif icant ly below current German gr id em issions
• Measures to effect ively reduce GHG em issions of agr icultural biogas plants– Reduce leakiness of biogas installat ions– Recover biogas dur ing digestate storage– Feed- in surplus elect r icity only
• Addit ional factors to reduce GHG em issions– Efficient heat use– Anaerobic digest ion of animal manure
• Research demand for N2O-em issions from RPP product ion
I LT2a-083-001 38/ 45
evaluat ion: GHG emissions: sanitary effects of anaerobic digest ion
0.04 - 0.15> 1 (3 CFU →→→→ <0.3 CFU)Thermophilic campylobacters
0.27 - 2.04> 2 (102 →→→→ <100)Yersinia enterocolitica
10629 10629 -- 4000004000000 0 -- --0.50.5Clostridium perfringens
3298 3298 -- 40000040000000Bacillus cereus group
0.48 - 1.2not detectedRotavirus sp.
0.12 - 0.36not detectedEnterovirus sp.
4 - 6.8 (1. phase)
< 0.8 [8.9 (- 121.3121.3)]
n.a.
(ca. 4?)
0.12 - 1.6
T99.99 (h) thermophilicBerbling / literature
scoreReduction (10log)Berbling (8-9h, 55°C)
Parameter
4.8 - 6.0< bathing water directiveFecal coliforms
not detectedNorovirus (Gg1+2)
> 2.5 - 3.0Intestinal enterococci
> 5Cryptosporidium parvum
3.5 - 5.6≤≤≤≤ bathing water directiveColiforms / Serratia marcescens
moresen
sitive at
thermophilic
conditions, to
o:
all relvant a
gentsof vir
al ep
izootic
s
(M. H
oferer
, 2001
)
MGRT: > 4 h (8 - 9 h) at ≥≥≥≥ 55°C
0.04 - 0.15> 1 (3 CFU →→→→ <0.3 CFU)Thermophilic campylobacters
0.27 - 2.04> 2 (102 →→→→ <100)Yersinia enterocolitica
10629 10629 -- 4000004000000 0 -- --0.50.5Clostridium perfringens
3298 3298 -- 40000040000000Bacillus cereus group
0.48 - 1.2not detectedRotavirus sp.
0.12 - 0.36not detectedEnterovirus sp.
4 - 6.8 (1. phase)
< 0.8 [8.9 (- 121.3121.3)]
n.a.
(ca. 4?)
0.12 - 1.6
T99.99 (h) thermophilicBerbling / literature
scoreReduction (10log)Berbling (8-9h, 55°C)
Parameter
4.8 - 6.0< bathing water directiveFecal coliforms
not detectedNorovirus (Gg1+2)
> 2.5 - 3.0Intestinal enterococci
> 5Cryptosporidium parvum
3.5 - 5.6≤≤≤≤ bathing water directiveColiforms / Serratia marcescens
moresen
sitive at
thermophilic
conditions, to
o:
all relvant a
gentsof vir
al ep
izootic
s
(M. H
oferer
, 2001
)
MGRT: > 4 h (8 - 9 h) at ≥≥≥≥ 55°C
I LT2a-083-001 39/ 45
evaluat ion: GHG emissions: sanitary effects of anaerobic digest ion
0.04 - 0.15> 1 (3 CFU →→→→ <0.3 CFU)Thermophilic campylobacters
0.27 - 2.04> 2 (102 →→→→ <100)Yersinia enterocolitica
10629 10629 -- 4000004000000 0 -- --0.50.5Clostridium perfringens
3298 3298 -- 40000040000000Bacillus cereus group
0.48 - 1.2not detectedRotavirus sp.
0.12 - 0.36not detectedEnterovirus sp.
4 - 6.8 (1. phase)
< 0.8 [8.9 (- 121.3121.3)]
n.a.
(ca. 4?)
0.12 - 1.6
T99.99 (h) thermophilicBerbling / literature
scoreReduction (10log)Berbling (8-9h, 55°C)
Parameter
4.8 - 6.0< bathing water directiveFecal coliforms
not detectedNorovirus (Gg1+2)
> 2.5 - 3.0Intestinal enterococci
> 5Cryptosporidium parvum
3.5 - 5.6≤≤≤≤ bathing water directiveColiforms / Serratia marcescens
moresen
sitive at
thermophilic
conditions, to
o:
all relvant a
gentsof vir
al ep
izootic
s
(M. H
oferer
, 2001
)
MGRT: > 4 h (8 - 9 h) at ≥≥≥≥ 55°C
0.04 - 0.15> 1 (3 CFU →→→→ <0.3 CFU)Thermophilic campylobacters
0.27 - 2.04> 2 (102 →→→→ <100)Yersinia enterocolitica
10629 10629 -- 4000004000000 0 -- --0.50.5Clostridium perfringens
3298 3298 -- 40000040000000Bacillus cereus group
0.48 - 1.2not detectedRotavirus sp.
0.12 - 0.36not detectedEnterovirus sp.
4 - 6.8 (1. phase)
< 0.8 [8.9 (- 121.3121.3)]
n.a.
(ca. 4?)
0.12 - 1.6
T99.99 (h) thermophilicBerbling / literature
scoreReduction (10log)Berbling (8-9h, 55°C)
Parameter
4.8 - 6.0< bathing water directiveFecal coliforms
not detectedNorovirus (Gg1+2)
> 2.5 - 3.0Intestinal enterococci
> 5Cryptosporidium parvum
3.5 - 5.6≤≤≤≤ bathing water directiveColiforms / Serratia marcescens
moresen
sitive at
thermophilic
conditions, to
o:
all relvant a
gentsof vir
al ep
izootic
s
(M. H
oferer
, 2001
)
MGRT: > 4 h (8 - 9 h) at ≥≥≥≥ 55°C
reduct ion of pathogenes
9 9 ,9 9 %
or
4 log
I LT2a-083-001 40/ 45
• Realist ic econom ical project ion• Ut ilizat ion of heat energy• Reasonable const ruct ion costs, part icularly for sm aller plants• Flexible design to facilitate extension• Cost , qualit y and m ix of input m aterials• Well-dim ensioned technical installat ions• Well im plem entat ion in the local infrast ructure ( logist ics + heat
usage)• Process m onitoring and cont rol• Biogas t reatm ent (de-watering, de-sulphurizat ion)• High engine ut ilizat ion rat io (aim : 8000 operat ing-h* a-1 = 91 % )• Low residual m ethane potent ial (aim : < 3% of input ) or closed
digestate storage inclusive gas ut ilisat ion• Addit ional ecological benefits like sanitat ion of m anure
key points for succes
I LT2a-083-001 41/ 45
What ´ s sustainable in agriculture product ion?
Definit ion of sustainable development :
“development that "meets the needs of the present without com prom ising the abilit y of future generat ions to meet their own needs".
I t relates to the cont inuity of econom ic, social, inst itut ional and environmental aspects of human society, as well as the non-human environment .
UN, Brundt land Report , 1 9 8 7
I LT2a-083-001 42/ 45
further informat ions:
www.lfl.bayern.de/ilt
Thank You
very mutch
for Your
attendance