Terras de Santa Maria Biomass Power Plant Analysis and … · 2018-04-11 · Set up of a biomass...

Terras de Santa Maria Biomass Power Plant Analysis and Optimization

Pedro Andara Alves November 2012

Appendix 3: Presentations from the workshops

Page 71 of 367

2


Summary

1. Project goals

2. Power plant characterization

3. Brief description of the process

4. Process efficiency

5. Map of losses / Energy destiny

6. Suggested proposals


Page 72 of 367

Project goals

1. Biomass power plant workflow characterization and

comprehension

2. Process energy losses identification and quantification

3. Study and presentation of innovative solutions for

enhancing the operation and to improve its global

efficiency

3

Terras de Santa Maria Biomass Power Plant Analysis and Optimization Appendix 3: Presentations from the workshops

Page 73 of 367

Power plant characterization

Generated power (capacity): 10 MW

Biomass consumption: 250 ton/day

Location: Silvares, Oliveira de Azeméis, Portugal

Number of biomass suppliers: ≈ 40


Page 74 of 367

5

Brief description of the process

Electric Power generation Combustion gases


Condensate

50ºC

Vacuum (0,15 bar)

Chim

ney


Page 75 of 367

6

Electric power generation


Condensate

50ºC

Vacuum (0,15 bar)


Page 76 of 367

7

Combustion gases


7 of 367

8

Power efficiency of the process 𝜂 =𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑

𝐵𝑖𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 × 𝜌𝑏𝑖𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 × 𝐻𝑏𝑖𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛


haverage = 24.5%

0%

3%

5%

8%

10%

13%

15%

18%

20%

23%

25%

28%

30%

Eficiência Produção Maio MédiaMay Efficiency Average

Biomass consumption 944 ± 47 m3/day

251 ± 13 ton/day

Electric power generated 239 MWh/day

Self consumption 19 MWh/day

Biomass Heat of combustion 4593 ± 194 cal/g

Density 266 ± 48 kg/m3


Page 78 of 367

9

Map of losses / Energy destiny


Energy losses MWh/day

Combustion gases 83.23

Turbine 6.87

Aero condenser 550.23

Self consumption 19.20

TOTAL 659.53

12.62% 1.04%

83.43%

2.91%

Chaminé (Gás deCombustão)

Turbina (PerdasTérmicas)

Aerocondensador

Autoconsumo(Energia Elétrica)

Chamney (combustion gases) Chamney (combustion gases)

Turnine (thermic losses)

Aerocondenser

Self consumption (Electric energy)


Page 79 of 367

10

Suggested proposals

1. Using the saturated steam enthalpy (45/50 ºC, 0.15 bar)

from the turbine exhaust

2. Set up of a biomass dryer, using the combustion gases as

a drying energy source

3. Heating up of the make-up water with the lost heat from

the boiler drains discharge flash tank.

4. Moisture reduction from the biomass silo, using heat from

the combustion gases


Page 80 of 367

11

Proposal 1

Turbine room (and control room) cooling in order to cutback on the turbine

material damage.


Turbine

Saturated steam

50ºC

Condensate

50ºC Condensate

50ºC

Condensate

50ºC

Turbine

Saturated steam

50ºC

Cooling water Adsorption

chiller

Turbine room

Control room


Page 81 of 367

12

Proposal 1

Absorption and adsorption Chillers – generation of cold air from a hot source

The proposal was not accepted or implemented, since the high temperature issue in the turbine room was solved in another way and the enthalpy level of the exhaust is very low!!


Condensator

Evaporator

Absover

Generated cool

Heat exchanger

Generator

Separator


Page 82 of 367

13

Cooling of the turbine room and simultaneous “pre-pre-heating” of the combustion air


Air (external)

Fans

Turbine room

Heated air

Air

Combustion gases

140 ºC Combustion gases

210 ºC

Air

Combustion

air pre-heater


Page 83 of 367

14

Set up of a biomass dryer, using the combustion gases as a drying energy source

Proposal 2


Wet

biomass

Biomass

conveyor

Biomass dryer

Dry biomass

Biomass

silo

Electrostatic

precipitator Combustion gases

Combustion

gases


Page 84 of 367

15


(cont.)

Proposta 2

Available equipment examples


Page 85 of 367

16


(cont.)

Proposta 2

Even though interesting to improve the process efficiency, setting up a

biomass dryer would imply a too high cost – drying is only economically

viable in process such as pellets manufacturing, pyrolysis and Biomass

gasification

In the specific case of CTBTSM, this proposal was not accepted or

implemented since the set up for a dryer would be impossible for logistic

issues, as shortage of space.


Page 86 of 367

17

Heating up of the make-up water with the lost heat from the boiler drains

discharge flash tank.

Proposal 3

Current layout

Suggested proposal


Tap water

tank

Clean water

tank

WTS

Degasser

Tap water

tank Clean water

tank

WTS

Flash tank

(T~100ºC)

Boiler drains tank

Degasser


Page 87 of 367

18

Moisture reduction from the biomass silo, using the heat from the combustion

gases

Proposal 4

Proposal 4.1 – Combustion gases immediately before chimney


Electrostatic

precipitator

Combustion gases

130 ºC

157 ton/h

Ashes

Biomass

Room temp.

Water

Biomass (less moisture)

Boiler feeding

silo


Page 88 of 367

19

Moisture reduction from the biomass silo, using the heat from the combustion gases

Proposta 4

Proposal 4.2 – Combustion gases before the air pre-heater

Advantages

Moisture reduction on

combustion gases enhances

the pre-heater operation

Biomass drying

Biomass temperature

increase


Biomass

(Humidity~40%)

Room temp. Bioler feeding

silo

Water

Water

Combustion gases

64 ºC

Water – 3.9% (mo/mol)

Biomass

Humidity~25%

Combustion gases

164 ºC


Combustion gases

205 ºC

157 ton/h


Combustion

air pre-heater

Eco

nom

izer


Page 89 of 367

20

Acknowledgements

Prof. Carlos Alegria

Eng. Miguel Figueiredo

Prof. Clemente Pedro Nunes

Prof. Henrique Matos

GNIP

IST /DEQ / CPQ


Page 90 of 367

“A Strategic View of Energy in Portugal – Some Major Technological Challenges”

IEA/IETS: Annex XV – Excess Heat Workshop in Lisbon – ISEL 26/May/2014 .Clemente Pedro Nunes: - Professor of IST/University of Lisbon


Page 91 of 367

2

1. The Third Oil Shock: How the World has changed

Unlike the two previous Oil Shocks, that occurred in 1974/75 and in 1980/81, in which the oil supply was restricted by some OPEC members solely by political reasons, the Third Oil Shock was provoked by a rapid rise in consumption, namely by the emerging economies of South and East Asia.

This, together with the statistical information that the

overall geological oil reserves apparently entered in 2005 a steady decline (that is the new yearly oil discoveries are smaller than the world consumption in that same year) made a dramatic jump of oil prices from an average of around 16 US Dollar/ barrel in 1999/2000 to an all time high average semester price above 130 US Dollar/barrel in the first half of 2008, and then an all time yearly average price of 111,6 USD/barrel in 2011.

2 Appendix 3: Presentations from the workshops

Page 92 of 367

2. Energy - The World and Europe: A Synthetic Strategic Overview

• It is important to stress that, at a World level, the projections of the International Energy Agency for 2030 indicate that the most important items of Primary Energy Demand shall be:

- Oil

- Coal

- Natural Gas

- Nuclear

- Hydro and other renewables

• If we consider the evolution, in a 60 year period, we see that Oil will continue to be the dominant factor, that Coal is next and still on the rise, and that Gas and also biomass are the other major “rising stars”:

3


Page 93 of 367

World Primary Energy Demand until 2030

4

IEA, 2013


Page 94 of 367

5

4 500

6 000

7 500

9 000

10 500

12 000

13 500

10

05

1.7

1

10

21

7.4

0

10

28

6.5

2

10

70

7.9

2

11

24

0.8

8

11

60

8.4

1

11

92

2.5

4

12

10

9.6

0

12

38

5.2

5

12

29

2.6

7

12

86

8.1

3

13

20

1.7

6

[Mto

e]

Years

World Total Primary Energy Production in years 2000-2011

[Mtoe]

Coal and peat

29.17%

Oil 31.31%

Gas 21.25%

Nuclear 5.11% Hydro

2.27%

Heat 0.01%

Geothermal, solar, wind

0.96%

Biofuels and Waste 9.93%

RES 10,89%

Share of World Total Primary Energy Production form Different Sources in 2011

0

2 000

4 000

6 000

8 000

10 000

12 000

14 000

Mto

e

Years

World Total Primary Energy Production from Different Sources in years 2000-2011

RES

Heat

Hydro

Nuclear

Gas

IEA, 2013


Page 95 of 367

World Energy Situation: Electricity Generation • If we focus on Electricity Generation, we can see that

“Coal and Peat” are still the dominant source 41%, although Natural Gas is clearly on the rise (21%).

• Hydro is the most important renewable source of electricity, followed by “wind” and “Biofuels and Wastes” with around 2% each.

• In a regional basis, “Asia and Oceania” was clearly the “rising star” in the last ten years, while North America and Europe almost stagnated.

• In terms of consuming sectors, industry is dominant with 42,6%, followed by Residential (27%) and Commercial and Public Services (23%).


Page 96 of 367

2011: Coal – 41% Gas – 21% Hydro – 16% Nuclear – 12% Oil – 5% RES – 5% (biofuels and wastes 2%)

0

2 500

5 000

7 500

10 000

12 500

15 000

17 500

20 000

22 500

TW

h

Years

Total World Electricity Generation by Regions 2000-2010

Asia & Oceania

Africa

Middle East

Eurasia

Europe

Central & SouthAmerica

North America

Primary solid biofuels 27.71%

Biogases 5.20%

Liquid biofuels 0.51%

Municipal waste 6.53% Industrial waste

2.72%

Geothermal 7.00%

Solar 6.41%

Wind 43.92%

World Electricity Generation from RES in 2011

Electricity consumption by

different sectors in 2011:

Industry – 42,6%

Residential – 27%

Services – 23%

Transport – 1,6%

Agriculture and foresty – 2,6%

7

IEA, 2013


Page 97 of 367

European Primary Energy Demand by Source

• In terms of Primary Energy Consumption in Europe, oil is also the biggest component with 31,1%, but Coal has been relegated to third place with 17,2%, overtaken by Natural Gas with 24,3%.

• On the other hand Nuclear, with 14,3%, and “Other Renewables” 9,5% have a percentage weight much higher in Europe than in world, as a whole.

• However it should be stressed that Hydro has today a smaller impact in Europe than in the World.


Page 98 of 367

9

1 580

1 600

1 620

1 640

1 660

1 680

1 700

1 720

1 740

1 760

1 780

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

1 6

84

.93

3

1 7

25

.18

9

1 7

19

.87

5

1 7

55

.79

4

1 7

75

.07

6

1 7

76

.97

5

1 7

78

.63

2

1 7

57

.56

0

1 7

50

.07

1

1 6

50

.30

9

1 7

15

.72

5

1 6

54

.00

9

Mto

e

Years

EU Total Primary Energy Supply in years 2000-2011

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Mto

e

Years

Europe Energy Production from Different Sources in years 2000-2011

RES

Hydro

Nuclear

Natural Gas

Oil

Coal and peat

Coal and peat 17,28%

Oil 33.10%

Natural Gas 24.28%

Nuclear 14,30%

Hydro 1.60%

Geothermal, solar, wind

1.68%

Biofuels and Waste 7.77%

RES 9,45%

Share of Eu Energy Production from Different Sources in year 2011

The EU primary energy

IEA, 2013


Page 99 of 367

European Energy Situation: Electricity Generation

• If we focus on the sources of electricity production in Europe, we see that in 2011 the most important single contributor was Nuclear, 28%, immediately followed by Coal with 27%.

• The most important renewable source of electricity was Hydro with 10%, followed by wind and “Biofuels and Wastes”, with around 5% each.

• In terms of Consuming Sectors, Industry was still the most important with 37,3%, but Residential and “Commercial and Public Services” followed with 29% each, already .

10


Page 100 of 367

Primary solid biofuels 19.14%

Biogases 9.39%

Liquid biofuels 1.26%

Municipal waste 9.02%

Industrial waste 0.95% Geothermal

1.53%

Solar 12.06%

Wind 46.65%

Share of EU Electricity Generation from RES in 2011

2011 Coal – 27%

Gas – 21%

Hydro – 10%

Nuclear – 28%

Oil – 2%

RES – 12%

(biofuels and wastes 5%)

Electricity consumption

by different sectors in 2011:

Industry – 37,3%

Residential – 29%

Services – 29%

Transport – 2,5%

Agriculture and foresty 2,2% 0

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

3 000

3 500

TW

h

Years

Europe Electricity Generation from Different Sources i 2000-2011

Other sourcesRESHydro (includes production from pumped storage plants and tide)NuclearGasOilCoal and peat

11

IEA, 2013


Page 101 of 367

Europe Electricity Generation from Different Sources in years

2000-2011. Source: Own elaboration based on data from IEA and

U.S. EIA (access on September 2013) [7,8].

European Electricity Generation from RES in years 2000-2011. Source: Own

elaboration based on data from IEA (access on September 2013) [7].

12

IEA, 2013


Page 102 of 367

2011 Survey of resource efficiency policies in IEA member and cooperating countries - PORTUGAL , Eurostat

World, Europe and Portugal


Page 103 of 367

3. The Portuguese energy basis: a sixty eight years global overview (1945-2013)

3.1 - The major highlights • 1950 `s: National Hydroelectric Plan; • 1960 to 1974: Major Fuel Oil Power Stations; • 1974 a 1981: Two Major Oil Shocks; • 1983 a 1990: National Energy Plan and subsequent

installation of Major Coal Fired Power Plants in Sines and in Abrantes/Middle Tagus Valley.

• 1994 to 2000: Introduction of Natural Gas, direct gas pipeline from Algeria and refrigerated LNG terminal in the Sines harbour;

• After 2001: Third major Oil Shock, Wind Power and Energy Efficiency Plan.

• After 2005: Energy becomes a major constraint in the Portuguese Economic Development.


Page 104 of 367

year 1998 2000 2002 2005 2006 2007(1) 2008(1) 2009(1) 2010(1) 2011(1) 2012(1)

Coal

3232 3813 3500 3349 3310 2883 2526 2858 1657 2223 2915

13,90% 15,10% 13,30% 12,40% 12,80% 11,30% 10,34% 11,84% 7,20% 9,98% 13,58%

Oil

15634 15568 16417 15877 14305 13763 12610 11765 11245 10361 9291

67,40% 61,60% 62,30% 58,70% 55,20% 54,00% 51,61% 48,74% 49,10% 46,53% 43,28%

Natural gas

700 2064 2743 3761 3595 3826 4157 4233 4507 4492 3950

3,00% 8,20% 10,40% 13,90% 13,90% 15,90% 17,01% 17,54% 19,70% 20,17% 18,40%

Hydro and Electric Imports

1145 1088 873 1027 1454 1541 1439 1186 1648 1284 1252

4,90% 4,30% 3,30% 3,80% 5,60% 6,10% 5,89% 4,91% 7,20% 5,77% 5,84%

Wind Geothermal and Solar

13 21 40 159 259 367 515 714 871 890 996

0,10% 0,10% 0,20% 0,60% 1,00% 1,40% 2,11% 2,95% 3,80% 4,0% 4,60%

Biomass, Biofuels and Resídues

2484 2699 2761 2874 2983 3098 3147 3343 2974 3018 3069

10,70% 10,70% 10,50% 10,60% 11,50% 12,20% 12,88% 14,02% 13,00% 13,55% 14,30%

TOTAL 23208 25253 26334 27047 25906 25479 24435 24139 22902 22268 21474

Variation from previous year (%) 5,80% 1,50% 4,50% 2,30% -4,20% -1,60% -4,10% -1,12% -5,10% -2,77% -3,56%

Net Primary Energy Consumption Evolution from 1998 to 2012 (103 toe)

(1) Not included in these official statistics figures, is the significant amount of liquid fuel purchases that were made in Spain, directly by the final consumers .


Page 105 of 367

• By far, the biggest input of an indigenous Energy Source is

Biomass/Biofuels/Residues that reached in 2012 14,3% of the PEC.

• In terms of the contribution of the “new renewables” (that is wind,

solar, and geothermal) this remains at a relatively low level of 4,6%

of the PEC in 2012.

• Relative stagnation of the production of Hydroelectricity, always

very dependent on weather factors. It is however necessary to

analyse with great care the hydroelectric statistics, because they

include only the “new primary hydroelectricity” produced, and as

such the hydroelectricity now produced from the water pumped up

by wind power, is not considered “primary” any more.

Main Highlights


Page 106 of 367

Global Portuguese Energy Efficiency: GDP versus Primary Energy Consumption

Evolution of the GDP growth(%) versus Primary Energy Consumption (%), (PEC)

(1) Note including in these official statistics the significant amount of liquid fuel purchases that were made in Spain, directly by the final consumers .

17

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

GDP4 4,6 3,8 3,4 1,7 0,4 -1,1 0,8 1,6 1,9 0,1 -2,7 1,3 -1,3 -3,2

Primary EnergyConsumption 5,8 7,2 1,5 -0,2 4,5 -2,3 2,7 2,3 -4,2(1) -1,6(1)

-4,1(1) - 1,1(1) -5,1(1) -2,77(1) -3,56(1)

Comparison between the Evolution of the GDP and PEC (1997=100)

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

GDP 100 104 108,8 112,9 116,8 118,7 119,2 117,9 118,9 120,8 123 123,1 119,8 121,4 119,8 116,0

Primary

Energy

Consumption 100 105,8 113,4 115,1 114,9 120,1 117,3 120,5 123,2 118,1(1) 116,2(1) 111,4(1)110,2(1)

104,6(1) 101,7(1) 98,1(1)

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

GDP4 4,6 3,8 3,4 1,7 0,4 -1,1 0,8 1,6 1,9 0,1 -2,7 1,3 -1,3 -3,2

Primary EnergyConsumption 5,8 7,2 1,5 -0,2 4,5 -2,3 2,7 2,3 -4,2(1) -1,6(1)

-4,1(1) - 1,1(1) -5,1(1) -2,77(1) -3,56(1)

Comparison between the Evolution of the GDP and PEC (1997=100)

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

GDP 100 104 108,8 112,9 116,8 118,7 119,2 117,9 118,9 120,8 123 123,1 119,8 121,4 119,8 116,0

Primary

Energy

Consumption 100 105,8 113,4 115,1 114,9 120,1 117,3 120,5 123,2 118,1(1) 116,2(1) 111,4(1)110,2(1)

104,6(1) 101,7(1) 98,1(1)


Page 107 of 367

• In terms of the total liquid consumption of primary energy in TOE´s, there

was a reduction of 1,9% between 1997 and 2012. It is also evident an

important reduction of 21,5% between the peak energy consumption that

was reached in 2005 and the year 2012, which is certainly also a

consequence of the deep economic crisis that affects Portugal;

• The global energy efficiency in the economy, as a whole, has increased

17,9% in this period, despite the fact that there was a worsening situation

in the transport, domestic and service sectors, including the state sector;

• Industry has strongly improved its energy efficiency;

• Other observations:

It should be stressed that since 2006 there are important direct purchases

of liquid fuels in Spain, by end users, that are not included in the statistics,

due to the lower taxes applied in Spain. This fact can distort the “official”

analysis of the evolution of the global energy efficiency.

Main Highlights


Page 108 of 367

19

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2011

2012

Coal 164 175 210 214 233 187 261 332 325 302 455 326 179 305 342

Oil and derivatives 1.224 1.794 3.213 3.129 2.843 2.794 3.233 4.147

(1) 4.485

(1) 4.951

(1) 5.881

(1) 3.418

(1) 4.174

(1) 5351

(1) 5059

Natural gas 65 165 333 439 410 465 462 753 818 889 1249 995 1151 1366 1432

Electricity (Balance) 11 -18 9 15 65 101 130 282 273 305 634 222 107 143 382

Biomas/

others - - - - - - - - - - - - -53 -65 -77

TOTAL 1.464 2.116 3.765 3.797 3.551 3.502 4.086 5.514 (1)

5.901 (1)

6.447 (1)

8.219 (1)

4.960 (1)

5.561 (1)

7100 (1)

7138

Evolution in relation to the previous year (%) -24 +44,5 +77,9 +0,9 -6,5 -1,4 +16,7 +35 +7.0 +9,3 +27,5 -39,6 +12.1 +27.7 +0,5

(1) Not included in these official statistics figures, are the significant amount of liquid fuel purchases that were made in Spain, directly by the final consumers

3.3. Evolution of the liquid Energy Bill of Portugal in the last 14 years (in millions of Euros)


Page 109 of 367

• The liquid Energy Bill paid by Portugal has increased 387,6% between 1998

and 2012: And this despite the fact that in 2012 the primary energy

consumption was 7,5% lower than in 1998 ;

• There was a small reduction of the direct dependence of the portuguese

economy to the price of oil that went from 70,4% in 1998, to 61,7%, in 2012.

This was due to the strong increase in the consumption of Natural Gas

registered in the last few years, compensate in a great part the lower

consumption of oil;

• The imported component of the Primary Energy went down only

slightly: 85,1% in 1998 to 78,4% in 2012. That is, only 6,7% in 13 Years.

And this without counting with the purchases “of the books” in Spain after

2005, as was mentioned before;

• It is very important to mention that the only energy item in which

Portugal is a net exporter, is biomass.

20

Main Highlights


Page 110 of 367

21

4. The Next Thirty Years

4.1 The Major Technological Questions

There are three major technological questions whose evolution is

fundamental in order to foresee the future energy balance in a 30

years horizon:

a) Nuclear fusion from hydrogen isotopes, or from other light nucleus;

b) The separation/capture/storage of CO2 from the gas emissions of coal/hydrocarbons fired power plants;


Page 111 of 367

22

c) The discovery/commercial development of hydrocarbons from major

new and “unexpected” geological reserves, capable of decisively

influence the respective supply/demand global balance.

Taking into consideration the classic development phases of the new

scientific knowledge, laboratory confirmation/pilot plant/industrial

prototype, all the forecasts of the IEA/OCDE point to a very high

improbability of market release of global new major energy

quantities from these new sources/technologies within the next 30

years.

It is however very important to point out that the new production of

Shale Gas in the USA is a very important economic factor in

economical terms in the whole of North America, and that poses an

additional strategic challenge for the economic competitiveness of

Europe.


Page 112 of 367

23

4.2 The Portuguese Future Energy Scenarios If we consider 2025 as a year in which major technological and investment decisions taken as from now in Portugal can still have a major macroeconomic impact, we have built two basic Scenarios, one called “Indecision” in which no radical new initiatives are taken, and the other called “Mobilization”. The results of these two scenarios are presented in the following table :


Page 113 of 367

1998 2009 2010 2011 2012 2025 2025

(1) (1) (1) (1)

Cenário I / Indecision

Cenário II / Mobilization

Coal 3232 2858 1657 2223 2915 1800 400

13,9% 11,84% 7,2% 9,98% 13,57

% 6,7% 1,7%

Natural gas 700 4233 4507 4492 3950 4650 1300 3,0% 17,54% 19,7% 20,17% 18,4% 17,2% 5,4%

Hydroelectricity 950 775 1423 1041 573 1400 2000 4,21% 3,21% 6,2% 4,7% 2,68% 5,2% 8,3%

Wind Geothermal and Solar 13

714

871

890

996

1200 1700 0,1% 2,95% 3,8% 4,0% 4,6% 4,4% 7,1%

Biomass, Biofuels and Resídues 2484

3383

2974

3018

3069

3750 5300 10,7% 14,02% 13,0% 13,55% 14,3% 13,9% 22,1%

Net Electrical Transfer 195

411 225 242 679 500 0

0,8% 1,70% 1,0% 1,1% 3,16% 1,9% 0,0%

Nuclear/Uranium 0 0 0 0 0 0 3600 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 15,0%

Oil 15634 (1)

11765 (1)

11245 (1)

10361 (1)

9292 13700 9700

67,4% 48,74% 49,01% 46,05% 43,28

% 50,7% 40,4%

Total 23208 24139 22902 22268 21474 27000 24000

24

Evolution of the Net Primary Energy Consumption in Portugal (103x toe) Official Statistics: 1998 / 2008 / 2009/2010/2011/2012

Prospective Scenarios: 2025 (Indecision versus Mobilization)

(1) Not included in these official statistics figures, are the significant amount of liquid fuel purchases that were made in Spain, directly by the final consumers (Data: DGGE and GEIPA/IST)January 2013


Page 114 of 367

25

If we compare Scenario I with Scenario II Portugal will import in 2025, in total, more 9,25 millions TEP in Scenario I compared with Scenario II, in terms of oil, natural gas, coal and electricity.

If we consider an average oil price of 140 US Dollars per barrel in 2025 that will mean around 9,3 thousand million Euros per year more money to be paid by Portugal in 2025 in Scenario I, compared with Scenario II, for exactly the same economic performance of the country


Page 115 of 367

26

5- Biomass and Wind Power in Portugal

Biomass, namely for the production of steam and electricity, is already the major Portuguese indigenous component of primary energy use in our country.

However, several studies carried out point to a potential major increase in use of this indigenous primary energy source to something between 3 and 4 million TOE/year.


Page 116 of 367

27

This is potentially a major source of additional revenue, namely in many impoverished areas of inland center and northern Portugal, that will contribute to stabilize socially and demographically these regions and to make the cleaning of these forests economically sustainable.

This forest cleaning is in turn vital to avoid, in a rational way, the summer bush fires that have repeatedly plagued the country, and in a specially serious way in 2003 and 2005.

So, the development of the competitive energy use of biomass is a decisive challenge for Portugal.


Page 117 of 367

28

• Biomass is the most important indigenous primary energy used in

Portugal;

• The use of Biomass for energy purposes is a very efficient way to

manage the forests. To cut the smaller eucalyptus and pine trees is

the best way both to promote the healthy growth of the bigger trees

and to prevent forest wildfires in the Summer by adequately

removing the useless combustible matter from the forests;

• The main challenges of this use are related to the logistic process to

obtain and transport this biomass, and the technological ways to

increase the overall thermal efficiency of the Biomass based Power

Station;

• Wind Power has bean very “fashionable” in the last 15 Years in

Portugal, and the electricity thus produced is protected by law

through the feed-in tariffs;

5.1 - Strategic Comparison Between Wind and Biomass Based Power Stations


Page 118 of 367

29

• These feed- in tariffs guarantee, by law, that all electricity produced by

wind power has a fixed price for the producers, and that the electricity

has a priority access to the system, thus forcing the reduction of the

production of electricity of the conventional power plant, whenever the

wind blows;

• The major drawback of the use of wind Power for Electrical

production is the intermittence of the wind;

• With the present level of installed wind power capacity in Portugal,

which is more then 4.600 MW, in order to operate properly, the system

needs two very expensive backups:

a) Gas fired Power Stations that have to enter into production whenever the

wind stops blowing, in order to avoid blackouts;

b) Reversible Hydroelectric Systems to “store” electricity by pumping water

upstream.

• This means an enormous indirect finantial and economic cost, derived

from the wind power, in order for the global energy system no work in

an acceptable way, namely avoiding sudden blackouts.


Page 119 of 367

Who is APEB ??

Belmonte 2MW (contest nº 6) V. V. Ródão 5MW

Sertã 4MW (contest nº 10) Oliv. Azeméis 10MW

Created in 2010, it represents the producers of electricity from Biomass Based dedicated Power Stations, with 14 members whose licences represent a total power capacity of 120 MW. However only 4 are already operating, representing a total of 21MW

Power Stations associated to APEB that are already in operation


Page 120 of 367

Portugal has 39% of its territory

covered by forests, plus 23% as bushland

The Economic value of the portuguese forest is quite considerable- Portugal is an example

In the northern and central coastal zones the eucalyptus has a higher productivity

The portuguese forests create more economic value than other european forests.

• Aplied Research and Technological Support • Sustainable Forest Management and Environmental Protection • Genetic improvement of eucalyptus species

The portuguese forests based industry represent more than 9% of our exports, of which 4% are pulp and paper


Page 121 of 367

32

The problem of pine disease (nematode) has spread to all the Continental territory

But the portuguese forest has structural problems

•Low value of the forest products

•Dimension and sustainability of resource for

a higher wood demand

•Low productivity of the eucaliptus forest

•Forest certification

•DestructiveForest wild Fires in the Summer

•Territorial stewardship

•Low professional training

•There is no good system of forest insurances

Evolution of the prices of wood of eucalyptus and pines, for crushing purpose,

at the factory gates

Total number of rural properties and its average size by municipality


Page 122 of 367

The UK Bioenergy Plan is huge: However the forests make up only 18% of its territory 840.000 ton

The UK that currently imports 5 Mton of wood chips and pellets, plans to import in 2017 around 30 Mton ( 6 times more!). Our wood is already being sold to the UK! The UK remains with the CO2 credits and Portugal consumers more fossil energy and pays CO2 credits for it

2 examples only 1) Port Talbots UK 350 MW - the biggest in operation 100% biomass 2) Drax, UK, 3690 MW – The biggest coal based power station in europe already uses 10% biomass in co-combustion; within 10 years it expects to achieve 100%


Page 123 of 367

34

Biomass shall be the main renewable energy source of the more competitive countries

Projection for electricity generation in 2030 in the EUA; it will be the major source of renewable energy to produce electricity; source: EIA

Projections of energy demand for Biomass in 2030 in Europe EU27 source: EUBIA

In Europe In the USA


Page 124 of 367

The more developed countrie expand the land areas for energy plantations to produce biomass/biofuels. Portugal is already in the world maps for this purpose.

And Portugal is already in the world maps of pellets and energy plantations

The portuguese exports of biomass pellets ( around 700.000 ton/year in 2012), already appear as a reference in the major international flows. 700.000 ton of pellets mean around 1.4 million primary forest biomass that the portuguese forests already supply to the export markets.

The pellets Market : - Europe is the world major center for the consumption of pellets

Energy Plantations


Page 125 of 367

36

5.2 - Biomass: The Major Economic Challenges

The government has already introduced in 2006 and 2007 some important legislation to promote the use of biomass, for the production of electricity, but new major projects both in R and D and in infrastructure optimization are needed in order to reach the necessary objectives.

It is very important that new major R and D projects are jointly carried

out by industry and the university research centers concerned, in order to reduce the “lead time” and to obtain economic fruition in the shortest possible time, of biomass based energy investments. This is applicable both for industrial use (for example: new biomass designed burners and boilers) and for domestic use ( for example: new biomass based heating systems).

Also, the land owners where biomass is grown, should direcly receive

the CO2 credits, in relation to the “Carbon sink” that they are in fact promoting by growing their trees.


Page 126 of 367

5.3 - The Total Cost of Electricity from wind in Portugal

Wind power is an inherently intermittent source of energy that benefits in Portugal from a legal system called “feed-in tariffs”, that guarantee that all energy produced is paid by the consumers at a fixed price.

This means that this electricity is always paid, even when it is

not consumed. Besides, the wind power already installed in Portugal is more

than 4.500 which means that is higher than the consumption level at the off hours.

This together with the facts: - Spain the only country with which Portugal is electrically

connected, has also about 25.000 MW of intermittent capacity; - The interconnection between the Iberian Peninsula and

France is very small, which means that the Iberian Peninsula is, in practical terms, an “Electrical Island “.


Page 127 of 367

This means that, if we add solar power which is also intermittent, the total intermittent electrical power installed in the Iberian Peninsula is more than 31.000 MW .

- In order to guarantee that the supply is always assured, even if the wind does not blow, the system has to dispose of an equal power capacity that is able to operate at will whenever it is needed .

This is done namely by gas fired power stations that only operate as a back up to the system .

And when the wind blows these power stations are switched off, but of course all the fixed costs related to this idle time have to be supported by the clients .

- On the other hand, when the wind blows strongly and there is not enough consumption, as it happens often at night, as this electricity is always paid to the producers the less harmful solution is to use this extra electricity in dams, by pumping water for storage upriver .

But of course all these pumping costs and the fixed costs of these dams, have also to be paid by the consumers .


Page 128 of 367

• As such, in order for the system to operate, there are three additional costs, besides the basic feed-in tariffs:

- Back up power stations, to avoid blackouts: 34 Euros/MWh - “Storage” of Electricity in river dams: 21 Euros/MWh - Pumping of water to “storage” electricity: 7 Euros/MWh

Total extra costs: 62 Euros/MWh

As the average basic feed-in tariffs paid in 2012 for wind power production was: 102 Euros/MWh

The total cost of wind electricity in Portugal in 2012 was: 164 Euros/MWh


Page 129 of 367

40 6. Process Integration (Pinch Technology)

A Technology to Increase The Energy Efficiency of industrial Processes, Including Biomass Based Power Stations In the process of transforming wastes containing biomass to energy, it is very important to use Process integration/Pinch Technology. This allows not only to increase the overall efficiency of these types of power stations, but also to obtain the best “waste heat recovery”, thus potentially leading to very competitive CHP (Combined Heat and Power) Systems.


Page 130 of 367

41

• The Energy link between the Iberian Peninsula and France through

Pyrenees;

• This is decisive in the case of its Electrical Link;

• The Iberian Peninsula has an intermittent electric power capacity of

30.000 MW (25.000 MW in Spain and 5.000 MW in Portugal) and the

existing link has at present a flow capacity of only 3.000 MW;

• This leads to an enormous inefficiency in the production and

consumption of electricity from Wind Power, in the Iberian peninsula.

This has been tackled with a double back-up of gas Based Power Stations

and Reversible Hydroelectric Systems which create however an

enormous financial burden to the global system, and above all to the

Iberian consumers.

7. Energy: The Relations between Portugal and the European Union

a) The Priority Factor to be Resolved:


Page 131 of 367

b) Promote technological partnerships, both at an enterprise and

public policies levels, in order to optimize the energy base in

Portugal to improve economic competitiveness of the country.

For instance, any new possible nuclear project in the Iberian

Peninsula should be considered in the framework of a joint

partnership between Portugal, France and Spain, within an

European perspective.

c) Joint industrial investments in Biofuels, both biodiesel and

bioethanol, putting into commercial use a great amount of semi-

abandoned lands, namely in Trás-os-Montes, Beira Baixa and

Alentejo, including properties near the new Alqueva lake.

d) To increase the geological studies and the commercial explorations

that may allow that Europe can extract possible benefits from its

own resources in terms of Shale Gas and Tight/Shale Oil.


Page 132 of 367

Energy Optimization in a

Biodiesel Production Process

26th May 2014

José Palmeira (ISEL)

João Silva (ISEL) Henrique Matos (IST)


Page 133 of 367

Summary:

1 – Case Study Description

2 – Pinch Analysis – First Approach

3 – Pinch Analysis – Second Approach

4 – Proposed HEN

5 – Final Conclusions


Page 134 of 367

Main product: Biodiesel

Subproduct: Aqueous glycerin

Raw materials: vegetable oils (palm, soybean, rapeseed)

Utilities: steam at 2.5 bar, 134 °C cold water


Page 135 of 367

1x HE Recovery

1 HE Recovery

1 HE Recovery

1 HE Recovery 2 x cold streams

2 x hot streams

3 x cold streams

2 x hot streams

1 x cold streams

1 x hot streams

2 x cold streams

2 x hot streams


Page 136 of 367

Stream

Description

C1

Raw oil

C2

Process

Water

C3

Neutral

Oil

C4

Raw

FAME

C5

Glycerine

phase

C6

Column

Feed

C7

Washed

FAME

C8

Reboiler

Feed

T in (ºC) 29 26 45 36 35 48 50 104

T out (ºC)

Duty (kW)

90

446

88

107

62

119

45

71

62

18

75

125

85

253

104

1099

Total duty (kW) 2239

20%

5%

5%

3%

1% 6%

11%

49%

C1C2C3C4C5C6C7C8

Cold Streams Description

Energy distribution of cold streams


Page 137 of 367

Hot Streams Description

Stream

Description

H1

Dried

FAME

H2

Neutral

Oil

H3

Reactor

Effluent 1

H4

Reactor

Effluent 1

H5

Aqueous

Glycerine

H6

Methanol

distillate

H7

Vacuum

steam

T in (ºC) 90 80 60 49 104 65 134

T out (ºC)

Duty (kW)

35

394

45

248

52

69

36

111

66

147

65

998

27

34


20%

12%

3%

6%

7%

50%

2%

H1

H2

H3

H4

H5

H6

H7

Energy distribution of hot streams


Page 138 of 367

Total heating needs of the process 100%

Heating needs of eligible streams for integration

71% Heating needs of other

systems: 29%

Actual

integration: 18% Heat suplied by hot utility

53% Heat suplied by hot utility

29%

Total heat suplied by hot utility: 82%


Page 139 of 367

Composite curves for a MTA = 10 °C

Minimum hot utility= 1305 kW

Minimum cold utility=

1067 kW

Heat recovery= 934 kW

TARGETS ATm=10C

Heat recovered Qrecovery(kW) 934

Heating power from external utility Q Qmin (kW) 1305

Cooling power from external utility Q Fmin (kW) 1067

Pinch Temperature (cold stream) T Pinch,C (°C) 55

Pinch temperature (hot stream) T Pinch,H (°C) 65


Page 140 of 367

Variation of Recovered Heat with MTA


Page 141 of 367


Heating needs of eligible streams for integration

71% Heating needs of other

systems: 29%

Actual

integration: 18% Heat suplied by hot utility

53% Heat suplied by hot utility

29%

Total heat suplied by hot utility: 82%

Maximum integration: 29% Total heat suplied by hot utility: 71%


Page 142 of 367

Stream

Description

C1

Raw oil

C2

Process

Water

C3

Neutral Oil

C4

Raw FAME

C5

Glycerine

phase

C6

Column

Feed

C7

Washed

FAME

C8

Reboiler

Feed

T in (ºC) 29 26 45 36 35 48 50 104

T out (ºC)

Duty (kW)

90

446

88

107

62

119

45

71

62

18

75

125

85

253

104

1099 Total duty (kW) 2239

COLD Streams Description

Stream

Description

H1

Dried

FAME

H2

Neutral

Oil

H3

Reactor

Effluent 1

H4

Reactor

Effluent 2

H5

Aqueous

Glycerine

H6

Methanol

distillate

H7

Vacuum

steam

T in (ºC) 90 80 60 49 104 65 134

T out (ºC)

Duty (kW)

35

394

45

248

52

69

36

111

66

147

65

998

27

34


HOT Streams Description

969

1140


Page 143 of 367

Composite curves for a MTA = 10 °C

Heat recovery= 834 kW

TARGETS ATm=10C

1st Approach 2nd Approach

Heat recovery Qrecovery (kW) 934 834

Pinch Temperature (cold stream) T Pinch,C (°C) 55 50

Pinch temperature (hot stream) T Pinch,H (°C) 65 60


Page 144 of 367

Target annual savings with different MTA

0

20

40

60

80

5 10 15 20

An

nu

al s

avin

gs (

k€)

Minimum temperature approach (C)

Expected maximum income (MTA = 10°C)

56 k€ / year


Page 145 of 367

Restrictions to a grassroot design

Actual Heat Exchangers for energy recovery violates PINCH rule of heat exchange prohibition across pinch temperature

HEN based on Pinch Analysis must not account the actual Heat Exchangers

This would mean a full revamp of the actual Heat Exchanger Network

Constrains: Layout issues

High investment costs

Necessary stopage time


Page 146 of 367

Methodoly used for the proposed HEN

Keep existing 4 Heat Exchangers used for heat recovery

Search for additional heat recover opportunities

Generate several Heat Exchanger Networks

Recovered Energy

Distance between heat exchanger streams

Available area for new HE

Criteria for choice:

Additional Pressure loss in critical streams


Page 147 of 367

HEN1 HEN2 HEN3 HEN4 HEN5 HEN6 Actual HEN

HE1

HE2 X x

HE3 O O O

HE4

HE5 C2/H1 C4/H1 C2/H1 C2/H1 C2/H1 C4/H1 X

HE6 C4/H3 C2/H3 C4/H3 C4/H3 C4/H3 C2H3 X

HE7 C3/H5 C3/H5 X C3/H5 X X X

Total duty (kW) 734 747 712 734 712 725 575

Set of final HEN’s for final analysis

Heat Exchanger HE5 HE6 HE7

Streams C2 H1 C4 H3 C3 H5

T in (ºC) 26 58 36 59 45 82

T out (ºC) 48 52 44 52 54 66

Duty (kW) 38 59 62

Total duty (kW) 159

Heat Exchange Duties for HEN1


Page 148 of 367

Recovered energy distribution by Heat Exchangers


Page 149 of 367


Actual heat

recovery: 18% Heat suplied by hot utility:

82%

Heat Recovery:

23% Heat suplied by hot utility:

77%

Heat Recovery:

26% Heat suplied by hot utility:

74%

Heating needs of eligible

streams for integration: 36% Heating needs of other systems:

64%

AC

TUA

L

SITU

ATI

ON

P

RO

PO

SED

H

EN

PIN

CH

TA

RG

ETS

2

nd A

pp

roac

h


Page 150 of 367

The energy optimization in a running process plant is a multi-step task.

Pinch analysis was useful to establish maximum expected income from a HEN retrofit.

The proposed HEN will increase the actual recovered energy from 18% to 23% of total heating needs.

The expected economic benefit is estimated in 35 k€/year.

About 1MW of available heat at about 65C was left without any use. Novel heat recovery solutions should be explored.


Page 151 of 367


Page 152 of 367

Terras de Santa Maria Biomass Power Plant Analysis and … · 2018-04-11 · Set up of a biomass...

Documents

Transcript of Terras de Santa Maria Biomass Power Plant Analysis and … · 2018-04-11 · Set up of a biomass...