Sdigestate Ads Fuel

July 17, 2009 David Dunn Central Vermont Public Service 77 Grove Street Rutland, Vermont 05701 RE:
Assessment of Digested Cow Manure Solids for Densified Boiler Fuel
Dear Mr. Dunn: We are pleased to enclose the final report on the assessment of digested cow manure solids for densified boiler fuel. These preliminary results show that this material cannot effectively be used as a boiler fuel due to issues around combustion. Several case study examples are included that highlight some specific challenges to using manure as a boiler fuel. Diluting the digested manure solids by blending it with other biomass materials such as wood, however, would dramatically improve its viability as a boiler fuel. We have greatly appreciated the opportunity to collaborate with Central Vermont Public Service and to research this topic in detail. If you have any questions or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely,
Christopher Recchia Executive Director
Encl.
PO Box 1611, Montpelier, VT 05601-1611 ph 802-223-7770 fax 802-223-7772 info@biomasscenter.org www.biomasscenter.org
FINAL REPORT
Assessment of Digested Cow Manure Solids for Densified Boiler Fuel
Prepared for: David Dunn Central Vermont Public Service Rutland, Vermont
July17, 2009
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................................................................................. 3 Project Overview ...................................................................................................................... 3 DMS as a Boiler Fuel................................................................................................................. 3 Feasibility of Electrical Generation and Heating with DMS.................................................. 4 Case Studies............................................................................................................................... 4 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................ 4 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 6 Project Overview ...................................................................................................................... 6 Central Vermont Public Service.............................................................................................. 6 Biomass Energy Resource Center ........................................................................................... 6 Scope of Study ........................................................................................................................... 6 Methods...................................................................................................................................... 7 CVPS COW POWER FARMS ..................................................................................................... 8 Montagne Farm ......................................................................................................................... 8 Green Mountain Dairy .............................................................................................................. 9 Blue Spruce Farm ..................................................................................................................... 9 St. Pierre Farm........................................................................................................................ 10 DIGESTED MANURE SOLIDS FUEL PROPERTIES .............................................................. 11 DMS AS A FUEL ......................................................................................................................... 13 Processing DMS into a Useable Fuel..................................................................................... 13 Drying DMS.............................................................................................................................. 13 Rotary Drum Drying ................................................................................................. 14 Air Drying................................................................................................................. 15 Natural Air Drying .............................................................................................................. 16 Enhanced Air Drying ............................................................................................................ 16 DMS Densification................................................................................................................... 16 Densification Methods ............................................................................................... 16 Uses and Markets for Densified DMS ........................................................................ 17 Test Densification...................................................................................................... 18 COMBUSTION ........................................................................................................................... 19 Combustion Options............................................................................................................... 19 Combustion Technologies...................................................................................................... 19 Stoker Systems .......................................................................................................... 19 Pneumatic Fuel Injection Suspension Combustion ..................................................... 19 Mineral Fusion During Combustion ...................................................................................... 19 Combustion Emissions ........................................................................................................... 20 Potential Emissions from DMS Combustion .............................................................. 20 Emissions Rates from Wood Combustion .................................................................. 21 FEASIBILITY OF ELECTRICAL GENERATION FROM DMS COMBUSTION SYSTEM .. 22 Electrical Generation Technology......................................................................................... 22 Potential for Electrical Generation ....................................................................................... 22 CASE STUDIES OF EXAMPLE PROJECTS ............................................................................ 24 Manure Pelletization for Fertilizer ........................................................................................ 24
BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009
Promest BV: Helmond, Netherland ........................................................................... 24 Perdue-AgriRecycle: Seaford, Delaware ...................................................................... 24 Manure Briquetting................................................................................................................. 25 Cow Manure for Combustion ................................................................................................ 25 Weise Farms: Greenleaf, Wisconsin ............................................................................ 25 Eagle Creek Wholesale: Portage County, Ohio ........................................................... 26 Others ...................................................................................................................................... 27 CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................... 28 APPENDICES Appendix A. Ultimate and Proximate Analysis Appendix B. Mineral Composition Analysis
Appendix C. Pellet Fuels Institute Table of Pellet Fuel Quality Specifications Appendix D. Mars Minerals Test Pelletization Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Overview Central Vermont Public Service (CVPS) launched the Cow Power program with the installation of an anaerobic digester at the Blue Spruce Farm in Bridport, Vermont in 2004. Since then CVPS has signed on five more farms that are currently producing electricity. The biogas from the digester fuels engine gen-sets while the digested manure is passed through a solids separator. Liquids are diverted to a lagoon and stored for periodic land application as part of the farms nutrient management program. Solids from the separation process are used as a bedding substitute to sawdust. This study explores the potential for these digested manure solids (DMS) to instead be used as a boiler fuel. DMS as a Boiler Fuel DMS is significantly different from typical raw dairy manure. Two main factors make DMS favorable for use as a biomass combustion fuel: it has been de-watered and many of the problematic nutrients have been removed with the water. The material sampled has a sufficient energy value of 7,883 Btu per dry pound (only 5 percent less than typical wood fuel). While DMS is comparatively better suited for both densification and combustion than raw manure, it still faces numerous challenges. The dewatered manure solids have nearly ten times the amount of ash content as typical wood fuels. Higher ash fuels can present issues such as slagging and fouling of ash material when combusted. (Most biomass combustion equipment manufacturers design their systems to handle a maximum of 6 to 7 percent ash content.) Also the remaining nutrients, especially nitrogen and sulfur could present significant emissions issues. The dewatered solids have a very high moisture content averaging 65 percent. Considerable drying is necessary before the material can be densified, and some drying is required to burn the loose material directly. The material also has a high concentration of relatively large fibers (100 percent of DMS were between 10 45 mesh) due to the fact that many of the small fibers are removed in the dewatering process, making it necessary to further grind the material before it can be densified. Despite this minor challenge, with the proper conditions of moisture content, pressure and heat, a durable pellet can be produced. However, other densified form factors such as larger tablets or briquettes may prove more feasible given the materials characteristics. Also blending the dewatered manure solids with other fibers such as grass or sawdust could achieve more desirable physical properties for pelletization. Drying the digested manure solids from 65 to 5 percent as needed for densification would require tremendous amount of energy and would dramatically reduce the net energy assuming the DMS were used to fuel to drying process. BERCs calculations indicate that as much as 16 percent of the materials energy value (on a dry matter basis) would be used to dry the DMS for densification. The best option for consideration is drying to 45 percent moisture, using 12 percent of the materials energy value, for direct use as loose boiler fuel.
Feasibility of Electrical Generation and Heating with DMS Given the volumes of digested manure solids beyond the farms bedding requirements most farms had insufficient amounts of possible boiler fuel to fire a large enough steam boiler to warrant electrical generation using steam turbine technology (St. Pierre farm, the largest of the four farms, would generate a maximum of 121 kWh of electricity). It should be noted that while there is insufficient volumes of fuel to power a larger enough steam boiler to produce electricity, there is enough fuel to run a smaller boiler that could help meet the farms thermal load. If the farms no longer recycle the digested manure solids as bedding and the volumes generated increased significantly (more than 15,000 wet tons per year), further analysis of feasibility of steam boiler and turbine systems may be advisable. If the farms have distinct thermal loads that could be met using smaller hot water boilers, the detailed feasibility of using the digested manure solids should be examined. Case Studies Many equipment manufacturers claim they are able to effectively burn cow manure as a boiler fuel. However, there are practically no installed systems in the United States at this time. Perhaps the only known system in the US that has attempted to burn dried cow manure on a large-scale is the Weise Brothers Farm that installed a manure drying system, a 400 horse power high pressure steam boiler, and 600 kW steam turbine at their farm in Greenleaf, Wisconsin. The 1,600-cow farm incinerates most of its manure to produce enough electricity to power 700 homes. Unfortunately, since the system was first installed and throughout its operation, it has been plagued by numerous issues most of which stem from using cow manure as a boiler fuel. Eagle Creek Wholesale in Portage County, Ohio heats 3.5 acres of greenhouse space with manure, but supplements with sawdust and woodchips. Conclusions Unlike the cow manure being burned at the Weise Farm in Eastern Wisconsin, the digested manure solids produced by the Cow Power Farms has been dewatered and many of the nutrients and minerals that cause slagging and fouling when combusted are not present. Without any successful systems using cow manure to learn from, it is difficult to definitively conclude whether this material can be used as a boiler fuel. In the absence of successful projects, BERC relied upon the laboratory analysis and the experience and knowledge of solid fuel combustion experts. The data gathered and examined as part of this study suggest that the digested manure solids can be used as a boiler fuel and that the material could provide further energy value. However, the high moisture and ash contents can present challenges for combustion and maintenance. Given the relative small volumes of DMS produced, the possible technical difficulties of combustion, the overall nutrient and soil amendment value of composted DMS, and the abundance of inexpensive and cleaner burning solid biomass fuels (such as woodchips and wood pellets), the
viability of DMS as a densified fuel for on-farm energy production or off-farm pellet fuel sales is limited.
INTRODUCTION Project Overview Central Vermont Public Service (CVPS) launched the Cow Power program with the installation of an anaerobic digester at the Blue Spruce Farm in Bridport, Vermont in 2004. Since then CVPS has signed on five more farms that are currently producing electricity. Biogas from the digester fuels engine gen-sets, while the digested manure slurry is passed through a solids separator. Liquids from the dewatering process are diverted to a lagoon and stored for periodic land application as part of the farms nutrient management program. Solids from the separation process are used as a bedding substitute to sawdust. However, several of the farms generate more digested manure solids (DMS) than is needed for bedding the cows. This presents an opportunity to study potential on-farm uses for this material. CVPS hired BERC to explore the potential for using digested manure solids as a boiler fuel. Central Vermont Public Service Central Vermont Public Service (CVPS) is an independent, investor-owned electric utility providing energy and energy-related services to customers in nearly three-quarters of the towns, villages and cities in Vermont. Biomass Energy Resource Center The Biomass Energy Resource Center (BERC) is an independent, national nonprofit organization located in Montpelier, Vermont with a Midwest office in Madison, Wisconsin. BERC assists communities, colleges and universities, state and local governments, businesses, utilities, schools, and others in making the most of their local energy resources. BERC is a project-focused organization whose mission is to achieve a healthier environment, strengthen local economies, and increase energy security across the United States through the development of sustainable biomass energy systems at the community level. BERC's particular focus is on the use of woody biomass and other pelletizable biomass fuels. Scope of Study BERC was hired by CVPS to examine the feasibility of using digested manure solids (DMS) from the digester systems from four of the CVPS Cow Power farms as a boiler fuel. This assessment consists of three main components: a review of any existing similar projects using manure as fuel, evaluation of the materials suitability for densification, and a review of the materials fuel properties. While many options for blending DMS with other biomass materials (wood fibers, grasses, etc.) exist and could possibly help improve the viability of DMS as an effective boiler fuel, comparing the numerous blends was not part of the scope of this study.
Methods BERC conducted a detailed review of the literature and contacted national manure management experts and renewable energy equipment vendors to identify any existing technologies, commercially available equipment, and existing operations that use dairy manure as a boiler fuel. BERC visited the four farms, interviewed the farm owners, and gathered samples for densification trials and for laboratory analysis. DMS samples were shipped to a pelletization laboratory in Pennsylvania and brought to a local bench-scale pellet mill for test densification. Additional samples were shipped to a national laboratory in Colorado which specializes in analyzing biomass fuels. Laboratory and densification results were analyzed and our findings are summarized in this report.
CVPS COW POWER FARMS While the number of farms that are participating in the CVPS Cow Power program is increasing, four dairy farms with digesters and dewatering equipment were selected for this study. The following tables give basic background information on the four farms that were examined as part of this study. Montagne Farm Location St. Albans, Vermont David Montagne grew up on his grandparents' farm and in 1975 David began running the farm for his parents. As time went on, he and his wife Cathy purchased the farm, and it grew from 80 cows to the nearly 700 they have now. The digester was installed and has been producing electricity since September 18, 2007. 680 milking The farm produces over 15 million pounds of milk per year and is expected to produce 1.4 million KWHkilowatt hours (kh) of electricity per year. 11,500 cubic yards annually
Background
Cows Milk and Electricity Production
Estimated production of manure solids
Green Mountain Dairy Location Sheldon, Vermont Owners Brian and Bill Rowell grew up on a farm in Albany, Vermont. Brian's family owns Green Mountain Forest Products in Sheldon. Ten years ago, Brian decided to go back into farming and started up Green Mountain Dairy. Green Mountain Dairy Farm came online in March, 2007. 1,050 milking The farm produces over 20 million pounds of milk per year and is estimated to produce 1,828,000 kWh of electricity per year.
Background
17,500 cubic yards annually
Blue Spruce Farm Location Bridport, Vermont The Audets' Blue Spruce Farm was started in 1965 by Norm Audet, with 30 cows. Norm has passed on the farm to his three sons, Earnest, Earl and Eugene and it has since grown to 1,500 cows.
Background
950 milking The farm produces approximately 24 million pounds of milk a year and produced 1.3 million kWh in the Cow Power program in 2006. The Audets recently added a second generator to boost their energy production. 16,000 cubic yards annually
St. Pierre Farm Location Richford, Vermont The Pleasant Valley Farm, owned by Mark and Amanda St. Pierre, was constructed in 1998. Mark began farming on his own in 1986, and at one time operated four farms in the Richford area, until he consolidated and built the Pleasant Valley Farm. Berkshire Cow Power, a subsidiary of Pleasant Valley Farm, began generating electricity in 2006. 1,500 milking The farm produces over 40 million pounds of milk per year, and is expected to produce 3.5 million kWh of electricity per year.
Background
25,000 cubic yards annually
10
DIGESTED MANURE SOLIDS FUEL PROPERTIES Digested manure solids (DMS) differ from typical dairy manure in several main ways that dramatically affect the materials suitability as a biomass fuel. Typical dairy manure is 90 percent liquids and 10 percent solids and has significant concentrations of nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium. DMS, on the other hand, has been through the digestion process (thereby removing some of the materials potential energy value), has been dewatered using screw or belt press equipment (effectively lowering the moisture content from 90 to 65 percent moisture, making is a stackable solid versus a liquid slurry), and has significantly lower nutrient concentrations (the dewatering process separates out water soluble nutrients from the solids). In order to better understand the specific fuel qualities of DMS, samples from all four farms were gathered and shipped to a nationally accredited biomass fuel testing laboratory in Golden, Colorado. Proximate and ultimate analyses were conducted, both of which are common tests used for determining the properties of solid fuels including biomass materials. Proximate analysis gives the fixed carbon, volatile and ash content of biomass, helping to understand how a fuel will combust. The ultimate analysis gives the elemental (C, H, O, S, N) composition. DMS Ultimate & Proximate Analysis Results Wet Basis Dry Basis 60.96 75.95% N/A 2.60 4.40% 9.05 11.85% 17.86 29.30% 69.22 73.85% 3.59 7.02% 14.94 18.93% 1909 - 3084 7809 - 7902 11.29 - 18.72 46.69 - 47.96 1.28 - 2.15 5.23 - 5.50 0.56 - 0.73 1.41- 1.96 0.09 - 0.23 0.38 - 0.62 8.45 - 13.92 33.65 - 35.66
Parameter Moisture Content Ash Content Volatile Matter Fixed Carbon Btu/lb (HHV 1) Carbon Hydrogen Nitrogen Sulfur Oxygen
For comparison, proximate and ultimate analysis test results of typical woodchip boiler fuel are included as well in the table below.
Higher Heating Value
11
Typical Wood Fuel Ultimate & Proximate Analysis Parameter Wet Basis Moisture Content 35-45% Ash Content 0.25 1.0% Volatile Matter 48 55% Fixed Carbon 7 10% 1 Btu/lb (HHV ) 4,700 5,000 Carbon 29 30% Hydrogen 34% Nitrogen 0.03 - 0.04% Sulfur <0.01 Oxygen 20-25%
Dry Basis N/A 0.5 2.0% 80 90% 10 17% 8,000 9,000 50 51% 5 -7% 0.04 0.08% <0.01 40-50%
The material sampled has a sufficient energy value of 7,883 Btu/dry pound (only 5 percent less than typical wood fuel). Although DMS has been de-watered, the moisture content is still quite high as compared to other biomass fuels like green woodchips (60 to 75 percent compared to 35 to 45 percent, respectively). Ideally, solid fuels used for direct combustion would have a moisture content less than 50 percent. DMS ash content (on a dry weight basis) ranged from 9 to nearly 12 percent. This is, on average, over 20 times more ash than from premium grade pellets and seven times more than from typical woodchips (containing some bark). The volatile matter content of DMS is fairly comparable to the volatile matter content of woodchips; similarly, the amount of fixed carbon is comparable to that for wood. On a dry weight basis the Btu content is also very similar to wood only 5 to 10 percent less. Where DMS differs dramatically and where significant issues may arise with using DMS as a solid fuel for combustion are the nitrogen and sulfur content. DMS material sampled from the four farms contained, on average, over 27 times more nitrogen and more than 46 times more sulfur than typical wood fuels. Both nitrogen and sulfur content in combustion fuels have a direct impact on the amount of nitrogen oxide and sulfur oxide emissions, both of which have associated environmental impacts. Both NOx and SOx are air pollutants that help form acid rain; NOx is also a greenhouse gas. One critical parameter not analyzed by the laboratory was the bulk density of DMS material. Based on the materials particle size, consistency, and moisture content we estimate DMS to weigh approximately 37 lbs per cubic foot or roughly 1,000 lbs per cubic yard.
12
DMS AS A FUEL Processing DMS into a Useable Fuel DMS is not a viable fuel as is. The 10 percent ash content can present some challenges in combustion, since most biomass combustion systems can handle fuels with ash content up to 6 or 7 percent. Nutrient composition may also present some challenges, since this can translate to higher ash content, formation of fused minerals, and pollutant emissions. But the main reason the material is not suitable on an as is basis is the excessive moisture content. As was shown in the analysis results presented above, DMS has a moisture content of 60 to 75 percent, while most solid biomass fuel combustion systems require a drier fuel in the range of 50 percent moisture. When wet materials are burned, water vapors are driven off and significant amounts of latent heat can be lost with the combustion of wet materials. If materials can be dried, combustion can be made more efficient. Solid biomass materials under 50 percent moisture content can generally be combusted while materials over 50 percent moisture content typically prove difficult to burn. There are still ways, however, to use DMS as a boiler fuel, all of which require some further processing. One option would be to blend DMS with other drier biomass fibers, creating a lower moisture fuel. It is also possible to avoid blending by further drying DMS, with two main options. . The material can be dried: 1. to 5 percent moisture for densification (pelletization), or 2. to approximately 45 percent moisture for loose combustion. Pelletized solid fuels are easier to transport, store, convey and combust since they are uniform in shape, size and moisture content. Pellets can also be a more marketable product and have a higher energy density on a volume basis compared to loose, dried DMS. There is a significant energy investment in pelletizing fuels, however, and so for on-site use combusting loose, dried DMS material can be more cost-effective. These two fuel options are the primary focus of the assessment conducted here. Drying DMS There are numerous methods of drying materials such as cow manure beyond the levels achieved with mechanical methods of dewatering, all of which involve using air to absorb moisture from the material and to transport vapor. Methods of drying material vary depending on the starting moisture content and the target moisture content, and so drying DMS for densification may use a different method than drying for direct combustion. Methods for both options are described in this section.
13
Rotary Drum Drying For the DMS material from the Cow Power farms, the starting moisture content is assumed to be, on average, 65 percent. For the first option (drying to 5 percent moisture for DMS densification) more aggressive drying methods are needed. The most common technique for drying green biomass materials for densification is the use of rotary drum driers, used for a wide array of materials from sawdust at pellet plants to feed at grain mills. A recent study by a Polish researcher concluded the energy requirements of drying biomass materials for pelletization are very significant1,508 Btu per one pound of water evaporated 2. The following graph and tables illustrate the amount of energy required to dry DMS to various moisture content levels using the rotary drum method. The table below shows the energy required to dry DMS to various moisture contents using the rotary drum method as well as the net energy content after drying. Based on our calculations this would require nearly 2.0 million Btu per ton of materialrequiring over 16 percent of the materials total energy value.
Swigon et al. 2005

14
Starting Moisture Content 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65%
Ending Moisture Content 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%
Energy Input (Btu) 618,280 769,080 919,880 1,070,680 1,221,480 1,372,280 1,523,080 1,673,880 1,824,680 1,975,480
Resulting Energy Value (Btu) 5,029,354 5,675,760 6,353,698 7,063,168 7,804,170 8,576,704 9,380,770 10,216,368 11,083,498 11,824,500
Percent Energy Required to Achieve Lower Moisture Content 12% 14% 14% 15% 16% 16% 16% 16% 16% 17%
DMS will need to be dried for direct combustion as well, though not to the same degree as for densification. Still, DMS will need to be dried from approximately 65 to approximately 45 percent moisture content for direct combustion. The following table illustrates the amount of energy required for both options assuming the additional drying for loose combustion will require direct energy inputs. The starting moisture content for both options is 65 percent and both options consider using a rotary drum drier. Drying to 45% 618,280 Btus 4.50 6.75 Drying to 5% 1,824,680 Btus 13.25 20.0
Energy Required in Btu Gallons of Oil/ton Gallons of Propane/ton
Air Drying However, loose DMS can be dried for direct combustion using other methods that are less energy intensive than the rotary drum drier. These passive methods involve using air to drive the evaporation process. Material can be dried passively as it is moved by conveyors, or the drying can be done by blowing ducted air, which can be heated, over the material as it is conveyed thereby speeding up the drying process. In both methods, the effectiveness of the drying depends largely on the amount of material surface area exposed to dry air.
15
Natural Air Drying Although piles of DMS located in the storage garages may experience some air drying, there are ways to speed up the drying process. Stored piles of DMS can be spread thinly over the garage floor with a bucket loader or skidsteer to expose more material to the air. Another method relies on passive drying as the DMS material is conveyed from the screw/belt press units to the storage area. If the material is spread thinly over the conveyor belt and the belt runs slowly, more moisture will be evaporated. Agitating the material as it is moved can also speed up the process, but will add to the electrical energy invested in drying. Enhanced Air Drying It may be feasible to reduce moisture in DMS by ducting warm air over a transport conveyor as the solids travel from the screw/belt press units to the solids storage area instead of either passive air drying or using a rotary drum drier. Instead of burning a fuel to provide the heat for the drying, it would be possible to capture some warm air from the engine room or boiler room for this purpose. If waste heat from either the engine or boiler room were used drying the DMS down to 45% moisture content could be achieved without significant additional energy inputs. DMS Densification Densification Methods After the material has been dried to a suitable moisture content, DMS may require further mixing and grinding to get an even mixture of small particle size material that presses easily into the dies of the machine making the pellets. If DMS is blended with other fibers such as grass or sawdust mixing and regrinding will be even more important. According to the laboratory results from Mars Minerals, the high concentration of relatively large fibers in DMS material (100 percent of DMS were between 10 45 mesh), left over after the small fibers are removed in the dewatering process, makes it necessary to further grind the material before it can be densified. The grinding can be done with a hammer mill. However, there is both an art and science to densification and slight adjustments to either the material or the settings of the pellet mill could yield a durable pellet without further need for grinding and mixing. Once the material has been dried and blended to optimal conditions, this material is then fed into the pelletizer. There are two main types of pellet mills: a flat die mill and a ring die mill. A ram piston or pressing roller (depending on the type of mill used) on the pelletizer forces the material through a die which molds the material into the desired pellet shape and size. The material can be pressed into the more typical pellet shape (between one or one and one-half inches long by approximately onequarter to five-sixteenths inches in diameter) or into larger briquettes, which may prove more feasible given the materials characteristics.
16
The high amounts of pressure and heat created in the process help the material to bind (heat is generated by the piston or rollers). For wood pellets, lignin naturally present in the material holds the pellets together and so no additional binders are required. For other materials low in lignin content wax, vegetable oil, starch and clay can be added to the material to enhance the binding of the material into a durable pellet. Once the pellets are made, they are spread out to cool; once cooled, they are moved to storage from where they would be distributed for use. The figure below summarizes this process. Blending & Mixing Grinding Drying Densification & Extrusion Cooling & Storage
There is significant energy input into conveying and drying the material for pelletization, but also for pressing the material into pellets. This high-energy process can be costly. Uses and Markets for Densified DMS Ideally, the cost to produce these pellets would be off-set by the production of a marketable product, either as an energy product or fertilizer/soil amendment. Off-site sale of this pelletized material as an energy product is not feasible because of the high ash content produced during combustion (as discussed in the preceding section on fuel properties). The high ash content from these pellets is too high even for some industrial users. There is currently no local market for super industrial grade pellets or briquettes for fuel. Off-site sale of pellets as a fertilizer or soil amendment is technically feasible, though this material would likely have a low market value due to reduced nutrient content after the dewatering process. Soil amendments such as compost range in market value between $20 and $40 per cubic yard (approximately $40 and $80 per ton). As a soil amendment, the added value of drying and pelletizing the DMS is small when compared to the added costs. While pelletization for off-site sales does not appear to be cost-efective, pelletization for use on-site as an energy product could be technically feasible. However, economically speaking, there is also little return on investment in making pellets for on-site use. The pelletizing equipment is expensive, there is a significant amount of space required for pelletizing, and the energy input is high (and also expensive). It would not make sense to invest the energy, space, time and money into making DMS into pellets for use on-site when the material could be used for energy by directly combusting loose, dried DMS or applying it as is for fertilization or soil amendment.
17
Test Densification As part of the assessment of the feasibility of using DMS as a densified boiler fuel, BERC collected samples from all four farms and sent samples to Mars Minerals for preliminary evaluation of whether the DMS can be effectively pelletized. Mars Minerals first conducted sieve analysis on the material to determine the distribution of particle size. Mars Minerals found that 39.6% of the DMS was retained by and 10 mesh screen and the remaining 60.4% were retained by a 45 mesh screen. This means that there were no fine particles in the 80 to 325 mesh size. The likely reason for little fine particles is that the belt or screw press dewatering process only captures the larger DMS fibers and the fine particles remain suspended in the water. Having a range of particle and fiber sizes is helpful for making quality pellets. Mars minerals conducted several attempts to pelletize the DMS samples with little success. Numerous runs using a pin mixer pelletizer yielded partially agglomerated granulesnot durable pellets. Mars Minerals concluded that the material was too wet and contained insuffiencent fine particles to effectively pelletize. They recommended further testing of blending the DMS with other materials. Further information on Mars Minerals pelletization trials can be found in Appendix D. In effort to get a second opinion, samples of DMS were taken to Palmer Garage located in North Ferrisburg, Vermont. Nate Palmer, the owner of Palmers Garage, spread the DMS material on the garage floor and air dried the material for two days and ran the dried DMS through a small 5 horsepower Chinese-made pelletizer. Mr. Palmer was successful at achieving the right conditions of moisture content, feed rate, and extrusion pressure to produce a durable pellet. See photo shown above. While these pellets would likely not meet the Pellet Fuels Institute standards of pellet quality (see Appendix C), it was demonstrated that the DMS material could be effectively pelletized without further blending with other materials or the use of binders.
18
COMBUSTION Combustion Options As with drying DMS, there are two options for combusting the material. One option is to combust loose DMS that has been dried to 45 percent moisture content; the second option is to combust densified DMS material that has been dried to 5 percent moisture and made into pellets. While pelletization for off-site sale or on-site use as an energy product was not found to be the best use of the material (see discussion in the above section on processing DMS into a useable fuel) it is included in this discussion on combustion for the purpose of comparison. Combustion Technologies There are two main types of solid fuel combustion systems: stokers and suspension combustors. Each type is described in more detail below. Both types could be suitable for combusting biomass fuels, but each lends more easily to different applications. Stoker Systems Stoker systems feed fuel into the combustion chamber using augers (or stokers). Most often the fuel is augered in horizontally on to a grate where the fuel is held during combustion. Many stoker systems used fixed grates set at a downward angle and feed fuel in at the top of the grate and ash tumbles to the bottom of the angled grate. Other stoker systems use a traveling grate that is slowly moving material from the feed inlet to the ash outlet. Both fixed bed and traveling grate stoker boilers are a readily-available commercial technology that has been the standard for combusting biomass fuels. They are offered by a number of manufacturers in the United States. A traveling grate stoker is the best system option for high ash fuels such as DMS because it does not allow the minerals enough time to slag during combustion. A fixed grate option may be a viable option for a small system using DMS fuel. Pneumatic Fuel Injection Suspension Combustion Several biomass combustion system manufacturers offer units that inject the biomass fuel into the combustion chamber using forced air and burn the fuel in suspension. These systems are excellent for large systems fueled with loose, dry materials with low ash content (such as sawdust). Due to the extremely high ash content of the DMS material this system type is not recommended. Mineral Fusion During Combustion Total ash content is an extremely important factor in assessing a materials overall viability as a biomass combustion fuel; however it is actually the mineral composition of the ash that is most vital. The presence of certain forms of minerals in biomass fuel can cause serious complications during combustion. Significant amounts of silica and alkali minerals such as potassium, sodium,
19
sulfur, or chlorine present in the ash can form slag or fused minerals that melt and bind to the inside of the combustion chamber, blocking air flow and in turn limiting combustion efficiency. In addition to impacting combustion efficiency, clinker creation can impact system performance by jamming automatic ash removal equipment and even blocking the flow of new fuel stokered onto the combustion bed grates. These minerals can also lead to fouling or the production of corrosive exhaust gases that can degrade the interior of combustion systems. To determine whether the DMS material would present issues with slagging and fouling as a result of the mineral composition of the ash, laboratory analysis was performed (see Appendix C for full results). As a general guideline, the alkali content of the ash should not exceed 0.4 lbs per million Btu. Above this threshold the potential for mineral fusion increases significantly. 3 The DMS material has a calculated 2.39 lbs/MMBtu of alkali (nearly six times more the threshold level for slagging issues). With this concentration of alkali minerals combusting the DMS (without blending with other materials) would prove very problematic. Combustion Emissions Potential Emissions from DMS Combustion The emissions from biomass-fired boilers are different from emissions of natural gas, propane or oil boilers. A number of these components are air pollutants and are discussed below. Boiler emissions are typically measured in pounds of pollutant per million British thermal units (Btu). In terms of health impacts from biomass combustion, particulate matter (PM) is the air pollutant of greatest concern. Particulates are pieces of solid matter or very fine droplets, ranging in size from visible to invisible. Relatively small PM, 10 micrometers or less in diameter, is called PM10. Small PM is of greater concern for human health than larger PM, since small particles remain air-born for longer distances and can be inhaled deep within the lungs. Particulate matter exacerbates asthma, lung diseases and increases mortality among sensitive populations. Increasingly, concern about very fine particulates (2.5 microns and smaller) is receiving more attention by health and environmental officials for the same reasons. Investigation is ongoing into emissions of very fine particulates from biomass boilers. The particulate emissions rate from DMS fuel is estimated to be roughly the same as for wood fuels, approximately 0.1 0.2 lbs of PM 10 (without pollution controls) and depending on system size a combustor would require either a multi-cyclone mechanical device or a fabric filtration system such as a bag house. BERC recommends a cyclone in sequence with a baghouse to minimize particulate emissions to the greatest extent possible.
Miles, Tom. Alkali Deposits Found in Biomass Power Plants. April, 1995.
20
Emission rates of nitrogen oxides from DMS fuel would be higher than that for typical wood fuel, about 27 times greater or nearly 4.5 lbs per million Btu. Similarly, emission rates of sulfur oxides from DMS fuel would be about 46 times the amount of that from typical wood fuels; however, this rate would be less than that for heating oil, and so would not likely trigger air quality permitting thresholds. Both the system size and its potential to emit pollutants can trigger air quality thresholds. If a system has the potential to produce more than 10 tons of NOx per year, air dispersion modeling would be required; at more than 50 tons per year, the system (or farm) would be considered a major source of pollution, triggering an air quality review and possibly requiring installation of emissions reduction equipment. In short, the greater the number and overall quantity of pollutants emitted, the more regulations will be triggered at the State level and possibly up to the Federal level. Emissions Rates from Wood Combustion The chart below characterizes emission rates of several criteria pollutants from wood, oil, natural gas and propane, for comparison to those from DMS fuel discussed above.
This table is from the Resource Systems Group report titled Air Pollution Control Technologies for Small Wood-fired Boilers (2001).
21
FEASIBILITY OF ELECTRICAL GENERATION FROM DMS COMBUSTION SYSTEM Electrical Generation Technology While thermal loads can readily be met with smaller combustion systems and densified DMS (pellets), electrical generation requires larger boilers generating sufficient amounts of steam by burning sufficient amounts of fuel. In this case, loose, dried DMS fuel is best. It is assumed that systems below 100 kW would use steam engines and systems larger than 100 kW would utilize steam turbines. Potential for Electrical Generation The following table provides ballpark calculations of potential electrical generating capacity based on the volumes of DMS generated at each farm. These numbers are not detailed engineering calculations.
Farm Montagne Farm Green Mountain Dairy Blue Spruce Farm St. Pierre Farm
Annual DMS Hourly DMS Generation output 5 (green tons) 4 (green tons) 5,750 0.82
Boiler size Steam (MMBtu/hr output output) 6 (lbs/hr) 7 2.6 2,224
Potential Electrical Generation (kW/hr) 8 55
8,750 8,000 12,500
1.25 1.14 1.78
4.0 3.7 5.8
3,385 3,095 4,803
85 77 121
As is shown in the chart above, most of the farms do not produce enough DMS to fuel the larger steam boilers required for electrical production. The greatest potential for electrical generation is at the St. Pierre Farm, where an additional 121 kW of electricity could be produced if all DMS material generated on the farm was dried to 45 percent moisture and used as fuel. This is, however, on the small side for warranting an electrical generation project. Ultimately, it is up to CVPS to determine where electrical generation could make the most sense, given their program goals. It is
Assumes 1,000 pounds per cubic yard for 65% moisture content DMS and that100% of the farms DMS generation is devoted to fuel versus bedding or compost. 5 Assumes 20 hours per day and 350 days per year 6 Assumes a high pressure (300PSI) steam boiler system 7 Assumes 65% boiler efficiency 8 Assumes 100% of high pressure steam is used for electrical generation (no thermal)
4
22
important to note that the electrical generation capacity could be increased by supplementing with wood fuels.
23
CASE STUDIES OF EXAMPLE PROJECTS Several examples of existing manure-pelletization projects were found through BERCs literature and on-line review. While there were no operational projects actually pelletizing and combusting dairy manure, there were several projects worth mentioning where manure is pelletized for energy and fertilizer and manure is directly combusted. Manure Pelletization for Fertilizer It should be noted that many of the pelletization projects mentioned in this section differ slightly from the common pellet referred to by those in the energy industry. These pellets are perhaps more accurately called granules. Promest BV: Helmond, Netherland This centralized bio-gas facility aimed to take 100,000 tons of swine manure for digestion and make 10,000 tons of manure pellets for export to Spain and Portugal for agricultural markets. The plant, originally built in 1990 is no-longer operational due to technical issues related to manures corrosive properties and the high cost of transporting the raw manure to the centralized plant. 9
Perdue-AgriRecycle: Seaford, Delaware This poultry manure pelletization plant, designed as a waste management strategy for local chicken farmers, has processed approximately 60,000 tons of chicken manure since it opened in July, 2001. After incineration and composting proved to be poor choices for dealing with the excess manure (due to emissions restrictions and logistical problems, respectively), pelletizing the material for fertilizer became the most feasible option since the waste could be easily transported before and after processing and because the plant produced a marketable product. A $13 million investment from Perdue and a grant from the State of Delaware helped build the plant that now processes 95,000 tons of manure per year. Before the pelletization plant, farms were spreading some of the material on their fields according to their Nutrient Management Plans. Now manure is swapped between chicken farmers and grain growers, becoming a pelletized fertilizer before being applied at grain farms. The plant now serves a mutually-beneficial relationship, where Perdue contracts the clean-out and transport of the waste to a third party at no cost to the growers, and the plant is supplied with lots of material for fertilizer (one chicken house generally supplies 200 tons of manure per year). Once the delivery truck arrives at the plant (one of about 10 that visit per day), it is driven directly into a large, completely enclosed holding area where the manure is unloaded after the doors are closed.
9
http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2007-0219-200257/c5.pdf
24
The negative air pressure of the plant draws air in from the outside, preventing the escape of any dust or particulates, and the air inside is completely changed and cleaned with special scrubbing technology 9 to 10 times every hour. The manure is smashed by machine and is then moved to a 10 by 40 foot heating chamber where the material is dried and pasteurized by spinning it through a stream of heat (650 F). The product can be as hot as 180 F, killing any remaining bacteria and fungus; it is then ground and mixed with steam so that it can be shaped into pellets. These pellets are packaged in one-ton containers that are then shipped by truck or railway car and are primarily for large-scale agricultural applications such as amendment for golf courses, catfish feed, or fruit and vegetable fertilizer. An additional grinder has been installed to make smaller pellets which are more suitable for commercial markets such as lawn care and gardening. Manure Briquetting Pelletization is just one method of densifying material for use as a fuel. Loose materials including cow manure can also be pressed into larger bricks or briquettes. While no specific cases of industrial briquetting of cow manure were found, multiple references to programs promoting briquetting of cow manure as cooking fuel in developing counties were found. Cow Manure for Combustion Weise Farms: Greenleaf, Wisconsin This 1,600-cow farm near Wrightstown, Wisconsin incinerates most of the farms manure using a system that will generate steam to power a turbine/generator combination with the capacity to produce 600 kilowatts (kW) of electricity, or enough to power 700 homes. Wiese Farms has signed a contract to sell the electricity to Wisconsin Public Service (WPS). While numerous projects combust poultry manure, this farms system is one of few examples of using straight cow manure as a combustible fuel. Previously, manure had been applied to land used to grow 800 to 1,000 acres of winter wheat. Excess manure had to be trucked off site, as far as ten miles, which was getting expensive. The intent of this project was turning a waste into power as a cost-effective way to remove excess manure. Skill Associates, based in Kaukauna, Wisconsin, designed the system. Manure at the Weise Farm is deposited into reception pits located under each barn, then into a dry pit, and then further to a homogenizing tank that is 35 square feet and 10 feet deep and holds about 2 days worth of manure. Agitators in the tank keep the manure moving to reduce anaerobic activity and odor and also to chop the manure into finer particles. Waste grain and feed, dry-pack manure and milking water are sometimes added to the tank as well.
25
The finely chopped manure is then pumped from the homogenizing tank to a bio dryer, which is a concrete tank resembling a bunker silo. Augers mix this material with water and heated air (160 to 200 F) is pumped through a ground layer of gravel. This drying and mixing process brings drier solids to the top as the wetter solids sink towards the bottom gravel layer and heat source. Computers regulate the whole process and sensors track the temperature and moisture content of the mixture; the augers can be directed to work in specific areas of the dryer. Moisture leaving the mixture is exhausted through fans at the top of the building. Dry manure can be diverted at this point for use as bedding; otherwise, the material is sent to the boiler house located 23 feet away. Within the boiler house, the conveyor dumps dry manure into a steel feed tank that is approximately 20 by 40 feet and 10 feet deep, holding 3 days worth of boiler fuel. From here, the material is augered and conveyed to a feed box, from which it is fed into the firebox of the incinerator. Woodchips are burned at first to get the system up to temperature; the manure is burned at 1,800 to 2,000 F and blowers force air into the combustion chamber for more complete combustion. The ash produced reportedly amounts to a manure spreaders-worth every week. Steam is produced at 305 pounds per square inch (psi) to turn a turbine that in turn drives an electrical generator. Waste heat from electrical generation is collected and piped back into the drying system. The system is requires 6 to 15 gallons of well water per day to supplement the recycled water from the cooling tower. Based on telephone conversations with several industry experts who were involved with the installation of the system and post installation trouble-shooting, this system has been plagued with a range of on-going issues. Many of the issues facing the system stem from the nutrients and minerals concentrated in the dehydrated manure boiler fuel. Eagle Creek Wholesale: Portage County, Ohio Eagle Creek Wholesale LLC, a greenhouse operation Portage County heats 3.5 acres of greenhouse space with cow and horse manure, sawdust and woodchips and there are plans to add 2 acres more acres of greenhouse space to be heated the same way. The greenhouse is one part of a mulitcompany family business that includes cattle farming and a mulch and sawdust service. The other businesses fuel the greenhouse operation: the cattle produce fuel and the sawdust is delivered to horse farms where more fuel is collected.
26
The goal is to be completely energy self-sufficient. John Bonner, general manager of Eagle Creek, found biomass to be a financially feasible source of renewable energy (in addition to wind: the operation also has a 50 kW wind turbine with a second one on the way). Hes not sure what the payback from the biomass boiler will be, but is impressed with the tremendous fuel cost savings over a natural gas bill that was approaching $200,000 in the 2005-06 heating season. Eagle Creek's 5 million-BTU boiler is fired by a mixture of sawdust, woodchips, and cow and horse manure. These solid fuels are dried and stored in a room adjacent to the boiler in two piles contained in concrete stalls: one pile of a manure mixture and one pile of a wood mixture. Paddles on the floor of each stall move, sift and mix the fuels before sending them to the boiler. The boiler keeps more than 60,000 gallons of water at 200 degrees and pressurized to 25 pounds per square inch; this superheated water is piped to the greenhouses for heating. Others As part of the literature review conducted for this study numerous other preliminary projects looking to use manure as a fuel were identified. Many of the other projects identified had announced their intent to use cow manure as a boiler fuel or were still in the preliminary stages of project development. Several combustion system vendors approached claimed numerous installed systems using cattle manure as boiler fuel. When pushed further for project specifics, claims were altered to suggest these projects were still under consideration by clients. Several examples of energy projects or studies using cow manure as boiler fuel are listed below: A corn ethanol plant in Herford, Texas owned by Panda Energy is planning to use cow manure as boiler fuel to meet the plants steam needs. Texas A&M University is currently conducting and study on manure from cattle feedlots as a boiler fuel A nonprofit organization based in Colorado, ICAST, is conducting a study of feedlot cattle manure as a boiler fuel.
27
CONCLUSIONS The DMS material sampled had a sufficient energy value of 7,883 Btu per dry pound (only 5 percent less than typical wood fuel). Two main factors make DMS more favorable for use as a biomass combustion fuel than normal cow manureit has been de-watered and many of the problematic nutrients have been removed with the water. While DMS is comparatively better suited for both densification and combustion than raw manure, it still faces numerous challenges. DMS was not found to be a viable fuel as is, due mainly to its high moisture content. The material would need to be dried in order to use it as a boiler fuel. It would be possible to dry the material from 65 to 5 percent moisture content and pelletize it for easier storage, conveyance and combustion or application (depending on whether an energy or soil amendment product is being produced). This process would involve using a small rotary drum for drying, a hammer mill for grinding the material down to a small particle size, and a pelletizer (or pellet mill) to make the pellets. These pellets could then potentially be sold as an energy or soil amendment product; however, with ash content over 10 percent and a diminished nutrient content after the dewatering process, neither potential product is likely to be viable in the respective markets. The pellets could instead be used on-site for energy production; however, pellets are energy- and cost-intensive to produce, with as much as 16 percent of the energy present in the material being used for drying to 5 percent. The farms would be better off directly combusting loose DMS material dried to 45 percent moisture using forced warm air while the material is spread thin over a conveyor belt. Many equipment manufacturers claim they are able to effectively burn cow manure as a boiler fuel. However, there are practically no installed systems in the United States at this time. Perhaps the only known system in the US that has attempted to burn dried cow manure on a large-scale is the Weise Brothers Farm that installed a manure drying system, a 400 horse power high pressure steam boiler, and 600 kW steam turbine at their farm in Greenleaf, Wisconsin. The 1,600-cow farm incinerates most of its manure to produce enough electricity to power 700 homes. Unfortunately, since the system was first installed and throughout its operation, it has been plagued by numerous issues most of which stem from using cow manure as a boiler fuel. Eagle Creek Wholesale in Portage County, Ohio heats 3.5 acres of greenhouse space with manure, but supplements with sawdust and woodchips. DMS produced by the Cow Power Farms has been dewatered and is absent many of the nutrients and minerals causing slagging and fouling problems seen at Weise Farms. Despite leaching out many of the problematic nutrients in the dewatering process, there was still nearly six times more alkali minerals than the recommended threshold of 0.4 lbs/MMBtu. At this concentration significant slagging and fouling of minerals would occur during combustion, making the use of DMS as a reliable boiler fuel extremely unlikely. Given the small volumes of DMS produced beyond the farms bedding requirements, most farms had insufficient amounts of possible boiler fuel to fire a large enough steam boiler to warrant electrical generation using steam turbine technology. Electrical production could be possible at
28
farms producing substantial DMS fuel, with the largest potential capacity at the St. Pierre farm. CVPS should decide where electrical generation makes sense, given the results shown here and their program goals. Electrical generation capacity could be increased by supplementing with wood fuels. While there are insufficient volumes of fuel to power a large enough steam boiler to produce electricity, there is enough fuel to run a smaller boiler that could help meet the farms thermal load. Pollutant emissions could be an important factor in the feasibility of DMS as boiler fuel. While particulate emissions, which are roughly equivalent to those from wood, could be minimized with a cyclone and baghouse in sequence, NOx and SOx emissions will be much greater than those from wood. SOx emissions will not likely be of concern to air quality regulators since the emission rate from DMS would still be less than from heating oil. NOx emissions, however, could be a greater concern as they could be as much as 27 times greater than those from wood. Any farm interested in pursuing the use of DMS as boiler fuel should involve air quality regulators early on in the development of the project concept. CVPS may look to other states, such as Wisconsin, that may already have systems in place for addressing air quality issues. These states could serve as examples for the air quality side of a program focused on converting farms to using DMS as boiler fuel.
29
Hazen Researcn. Inc.
I'|AZEN
c"io"", Coio+o-i usr
E;l333l3l3,iiil
23 2008 December Date 002-ZM5 HRIProject HRISeriesNo. 1117/08-L DateRec'd. L2/09/08 C u s t .P . 0 . # Identification Sample Dairy Mountain Green At'| 11/20 1-0:30
Biomass Energy Resource Center AdanSherman 43 State Street Montpel ier, W 05602 Reporti ng B a s i s> (Z) Proximate Moi sture Ash Volati I e FixedC Total Sulfur Btu/lb (HHV) ]'1l'lF Btu/l b l"lAF Btu/lb Air Dry Loss(3) Ultimate(3) l'|o i sture Carbon Hydrogen Nitrogen Sulfur Ash Oxygen* Total Chl ori ne* 60.96 3.53 29.30 1 0 00 .0 0.00 9.05 75.05 15.90 100.00 0. 4 1 3 7902 8757 8689 As Rec'd
Air Dry
l-.bu
6.2r
8 .9 1 73.85 15.64 100.00 0.406 7775
0 .1 6 1 3084 320L 60.33
60.96 t8.72 2.L5 0 .5 6 0 .1 6 3 .5 3 t3.92 100 0 .0
0.00 47.96 5.50 L.42 0.41 9.05 35.66 100.00
1.60 4 7. r 9 5. 4 1 1. 4 0 0.41 B .9 1 35.08 100.00
Forms of Sulfur (as S,Z)

Sulfate Pyriti c 0rgan ic Total 0 .1 6 0. 4 1
Btu= Lb. Alkali/MM Lb. Ash/MM Btu= LL.46 1.04 Btu= Lb. S02/MM X Moisture @ HGI= A s " R e c ' dS . p.Gr.= Free Swelling Index= BTU=9,799 F-Factor(dry),DSCF/]'1M By: RgportPrepared
t
Waten SolubleAlkalies (fr) Na20 Yr20
.Vidria Sir,-)ar kr
ffi
Supervisor FuelsLaboratory
* 0xygen by Difference. * Not usually reportedas part of the ultimate analysis.

An Employee-Owned Company
I I.U\ZEN I
HazenResearch, Inc.
4601Indiana Street Golden, CO 80403 USA Tel: (303)279-4501 Fax:(303) 278"1528
23 2008 Decenber Date -z]..|s HRIProject 002 HRISeries No. LLLT /08-2 DateRec'd. L2/09/08 C u s t .P . 0 . #
Identification Sample ST. P'iemeFarm L1./20 3:45 PM
Biomass Energy Resource Center Adam Shennan 43 State Street Montpelier, W 05602
Reporti ng > Basis (3) Proximate Moi sture Ash Vol ati I e FixedC Total Sul fur Btu/lb (HHV) MMF Btu/lb MF Btu/lb Air Dry Loss(Z) Ultinate(fr) Moi sture Carbon Hydrogen Nitrogen fur Sul Ash 0xygen* Total Chl ori ne**
As Rec'd
Dry
Air Dry
75.95 2.60 t7.86 3.59 1 0 00 .0 0.092 1909 1961 75.54
0 .0 0 L0.79 74.27 L4.94 1 0 00 .0 0.384 7939 8986 8899
1.67 10.61 73.03 14.69 1 0 00 .0 0.378 7806
75.95 Ll,.29 t.28 0.34 0 .0 9 2.60 8.45 100. 00
0.00 46.93
1. 4 1 0.38 L0.79 35.16 100.00
s.33
1.67 46.L5 5.24 1.39 0.38 10.61 34.56 100. 00
Forms of Sulfur (as S,fr) Sul fate Pyriti c organi c Total 0 .0 9 0.38 Alkalies(E) Water Soluble Na20 K20 * 0xygen by Difference.
Btu= Lb. Alkali/l'lM Lb. Ash/]'|t'l Btu= 13.59 Btu= 0.97 Lb. S02/M}'l Y,Moisture @ HGI= A s , R e c ' dS . p.Gr.= Free Swelling Index= BTU=9,506 F-Factor(dry),DSCF/l'l]'i ReportFrepared By: ,Vi.uja 6r+r+.rGbr
@ sor Fuel s Laboratory Supervi
* Not usually reportedas part of the ultimate analysis.

I I.AZEN I
HazenResearch, Inc.
4601Indiana Street Golden, CO 80403 USA Tel: (303)279-4501 Fax:(303) 278-1528
23 2008 Date Decenber HRIProject 002-ZM5 HRISeriesNo. 1117/08-3 DateRec'd. L2/09/08 C u s t .P . 0 . # Identification Sample Farm Montagne LL/20L2:00PM
Biomass Energy Resource Center Adam Shennan 43 State Street Montpelier. W 05602 Reporti ng > Basis (X) Proxinate Mo i sture Ash Vol at'iI e FixedC Total fur Sul Btu/lb (HHV) l'lt'lF Btu/lb MF Btu/lb Air Dry Loss(X) U l t i n a t e( 8 ) l4oi sture Carbon Hydrogen Nitrogen fur Sul Ash 0xygen* Total Chl onine** Forns of Sulfun(as S,U) l fate Su Pyri ti c 0rgani c Total 0.23 0.62
Water Soluble Alkalies (X) Na20 K20 62.88 L7.33 1.94 0.73 0.23 4.40 12.49 100.00 0.00 46.69 5.23 1.96 0.62 11.85 33.65 1 0 00 .0 62.88 4.40 25.70 7.02 1 0 00 .0 0.230 2899 3035 62.07 0 .0 0 11.85 69.22 18.93 100. 00 0.620 7809 8955 As Rec'd
Dry
Air Dry
2.L3 11 .60 67.75 L8.52 1 0 00 .0 0.607 7643
B8s9
2.L3 45.70 5.L2 r.92 0.61 11.60 32.92 100.00
Lb. Alkali/t'|]'lBtu= Lb. Ash/l4l.| Btu= 15.18 Lb. S02/MM Btu= 1 .5 9 HGI= @ I }'loisture A s R e c ' d .S P . G r . = Free Swelling Index= DSCF/M]'| BTU=9.687 F-Factor(dry), By: Report P.repared
t.
.Vttr"lc-.Arst*'-- Av-ffi
FuelsLaboratory Supervisor
* Oxygen by Difference. * Not usually reportedas part of the uitimate ana lysis .
I F]AZEN I
Inc. HazenResearch,
4601Indiana Street CO 80403 USA Golden, Tel: (303)279-4501 Fax:(303)278-1528
25 2009 February Date HRIProject 002'ZV0 HRISeriesNo.A1.66/09 DateRec'd. 0I/26/09 C u s t .P . 0 . # ldentification: Sample Farm BlubSpruce Solids1/16934AH
Center Research Energy Bionass Adan Sherman P0 Box1611W 05602 Montpeuer, of Ash(E) Analvsis Elemental
AL2O3 TI02 FE2O3
(Deq F) Tenperatures AshFusion Oxidizing Atnosphere

Initi al Softening Hemi spheri ca1 Fluid
sI02
cAo
].,tG0 NMO K20 P205
s03
c02
LL
28.2L 0.63 0.04 1 .1 3 23.70 6 .8 1 7.L2 10. 50 10.30 3.00 3 .7 0 0.82 95.96
Reducing Atmosphere 2100 2LL5 2L25 2140
2L39 2L49 2L50 2l5r
Total
By: ReportPrepared rngnam . uunn Sup FuglsLaboratory C) prior te;analysis Note: The ash wascalcined @1LL0deg F (600
. 'l:-" .. -.
I FIAZEN I
HazenResearch, Inc.
4601lndiana Street Golden, CO 80403 USA Tel: (303)279-4501 Fax:(303) 278-1528
research Center Energy Biomass AdamSherman POBox1611 VT 05602 Montpeuer,
DATE PROJ.# oTRL# REC'D
25, 2009 February 002-Z'lO 4166/09 01n6l09
ldentification Farm BlueSDruce Solids 1/16 9344M
o/o Moisture,
A166/09-1
69.22
GeraldH. Cunningham
values arenotsulfur corrected. Note: BTU/lb
I I.1AZEN I
HazenResearch, Inc.
4601lndiana Street Golden, CO 80403 USA Tel: (303) 279-4501 Fax:(303) 278-1528
Center Energy research Biomass AdamSherman 1 POBox161 VT Montoeuer. 05602
DATE PROJ. # CTRL# REC',D
February 25,2009 O02-7t0 A166/09 01t26109
Number A166/09-1
ldentification Farm BlueSDruce Solids 1/16 934AM
Sodium as Na2O,% 0.170
as Na2O,% Sodium 0.551
H. Cunningham Gerard
I F1AZEN I
HazenResearch. Inc,
4601lndiana Street Golden, CO 80403 USA Tel: (303)279-4501 Fax:(303)278-1528
Center research Biomass Energy AdamSherman POBox16t1 Montpeuer, VT 05602
DATE PROJ.# CTRL# REC'D
25, 2009 February OO2-a'/0 A166/09 01'26109
ldentification BlueSprucFarm 1/169344M Solids
as K2O,% Potassium 0.296
Potassium as K2O,%
A166/09-1
u.voz
GerafdH. Cunningham
PFI Standard Specification for Residential/Commercial Densified Fuel

18-June-2008 Pellet Fuel Institute (PFI) Standard Specification for Residential/Commercial Densified Fuel 1. Scope 1.1 This specification is applicable for the determination of fuel quality grade for Residential or Commercial Densified Fuel as shown in Table 1. 1.2 Fuel properties included in the specification are fines, bulk density, diameter, length, chloride, ash fusion properties, moisture content, heating value, pellet durability index and inorganic ash content. Bag weight is measured but is not part of the determination of fuel quality grade. 1.3 This specification is for the use of purchasers and users of Residential/Commercial Densified Fuel in selection of the grade most suitable to their needs. 1.4 Commercial users include commercial facilities that utilize densified fuel burning appliances or equipment that have the same fuel requirements as residential appliances. Commercial applications should not be confused with industrial applications, which can utilize a much wider array of materials and have vastly different fuel requirements. 1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. Any values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to the International System of Units (SI units), which are provided for information only and are not considered standard. 1.6 This standard specification does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard specification to establish appropriate safety and health practices and to determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. 2. Referenced Documents 2.1 ASTM Standards: ASTM E 873-82 (2006) Standard Test Method for Bulk Density of Densified Particulate Biomass Fuels. ASTM E 871-82 (2006) Standard Test Method for Moisture Analysis of Particulate Wood Fuels D 1102-84 (2001) Standard Test Method for Ash in Wood ASTM E 791-90 (2004) Standard Test Method for Calculating Refuse-Derived Fuel Analysis Data from As-Determined to Different Bases ASTM E 776-87 (2004) Standard Test Method for Forms of Chlorine in Refuse-Derived Fuel ASTM D 4208-02e1 Standard Test Method for Total Chlorine in Coal by the Oxygen Bomb Combustion/Ion Selective Electrode Method ASTM D 6721-01 (2006) Standard Test Method for Determination of Chlorine in Coal by Oxidative Hydrolysis Microcoulometry ASTM E 711-87 (2004) Standard Test Method for Gross Calorific Value of Refuse-Derived Fuel by the Bomb Calorimeter ASTM E29-06b Standard Practice for Using Significant Digits in Test Data to Determine Conformance with Specifications ASTM C702-98(2003) Standard Practice for Reducing Samples of Aggregate to Testing Size ASTM D1857-04 Standard Test Method for Fusibility of Coal and Coke Ash
Page 1 of 8 Copyright June 18, 2008

18-June-2008 2.2 Other Referenced Documents: Kansas State University - Mechanical Durability of Feed Pellets, Call Number: LD2668 .T4 1962 Y68 PFI Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Program for Residential/Commercial Densified Fuels 3. Terminology 3.1 Definitions: General 3.1.1 Bulk Density the fuel mass per cubic foot of the fuel sample as determined by ASTM E873-82 (2006). 3.1.2 Bag Weight the weight of the fuel plus the bag, determined by weighing a standard bag of fuel. 3.1.3 Diameter the average diameter of the fuel pellets in the fuel sample. 3.1.4 Pellet Durability Index (PDI) a parameter for specifying the ability of the fuel pellets to resist degradation caused by shipping and handling. 3.1.5 Fines the percentage of fuel material in the fuel sample passing through a 1/8 inch screen when the fuel is sampled after completion of production and bagging and before transportation, unloading, distribution, use, etc. 3.1.6 Inorganic Ash the percent inorganic material in the fuel sample as determined by ASTM D1102-84 (2001). 3.1.7 Length the weight percent of pellets exceeding 1.5 inches in length in the fuel sample. 3.1.8 Moisture the moisture content of the as-received fuel sample as determined by ASTM E871-82 (2006). 3.1.9 Heating Value The higher heating value of the fuel sample as determined by ASTM E711-87 (2004). 3.1.10 Additives Any substance other than virgin cellulosic material that has been intentionally introduced into the fuel feed stock prior to pellet extrusion (except steam/water). Trace amounts of grease or other lubricants that are introduced into the fuel processing stream as part of normal mill operations are not considered as additives. 3.1.11 Chemically Treated Materials Any feed stock material (cellulosic or otherwise) that has at any time been processed, formed, treated or contaminated with any bonding agent, resin, preservative, surface coating or other finish, or any other chemical compound. Trace amounts of grease or other lubricants that are introduced into the fuel processing stream as part of the normal mill operations are not considered as chemically treated materials. 3.1.12 NIST - The National Institute of Standards and Technology is a federal technology agency that develops and promotes measurement, standards, and technology.

18-June-2008
TABLE 1 PFI Fuel Grade Requirements
Table 1 Notes: 1. There is no required value or range for Heating Value. It is required to print the mean higher heating value in BTU per pound as well as the ash content on the fuel bag label using a bar scale to represent the mean value 2 Std. Dev. See note 9. 2. The bag must be labeled indicating which PFI grade of material is in the bag. See note 9. 3. The bag label must also disclose the type of materials as well as all additives used. For purposes of this standard specification, additives are defined in 3.1.10. See note 9. 4. It is required that manufacturers include on their bags the PFI logo and in a printed block the guaranteed analysis of the fuel. See note 9. 5. PFI prohibits the use of any chemically treated materials. For purposes of this standard specification, chemically treated materials are defined in 3.1.11. 6. The following applies to all limits in this table: For purposes of determining the fuel grade, all properties must fall at or within the specified limits listed for a particular grade. Observed or calculated values obtained from analysis shall be rounded to the nearest unit in the last righthand place of the figures used in expressing the limit in accordance with ASTM E 29-06b Standard Practice for Using Significant Digits in Test Data to Determine Conformance with Specifications. 7. It is the intent of these fuel grade requirements that failure to meet any fuel property requirement of a given grade does not automatically place a fuel in the next lower grade unless it meets all requirements of the lower grade. Page 3 of 8 Copyright June 18, 2008

18-June-2008 8. It is required to report ash fusion properties at a frequency as specified in the PFI Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Program for Residential/Commercial Densified Fuels. 9. Refer to PFI Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Program for Residential/Commercial Densified Fuels for specific labeling requirements for fuel properties and other information.
4. Detailed Requirements 4.1 The various grades of densified fuel shall conform to the limiting requirements shown in Table 1. 5. Sampling and Sample Handling 5.1 The reader is strongly advised to review all intended test methods and sampling requirements prior to sampling in order to understand the importance and effects of sampling technique and special handling required for each method. Representative samples shall be taken for testing in accordance with the PFI Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Program for Residential/Commercial Densified Fuels. 6. Test Methods 6.1 The requirements enumerated in this specification shall be determined in accordance with the referenced ASTM test methods or other referenced methods except where modifications are noted or in accordance with the test procedures specified. 6.1.1 Bulk Density Test Method E 873-82 (2006) except this method shall be revised to utilize a 1/4 cubic foot container that is tapped 25 times from 1 inch. In order to insure that an adequate sample quantity is available for this revised method, a minimum sample size of 12 pounds (5.44 kilograms) is recommended. 6.1.2 Bag Weight Record and report the sample bag weight using the balance or scale specified in 8.1. All weights shall be measured and recorded to the nearest gram. 6.1.3 Diameter - Select 5 pellets randomly out of the pellet sample being evaluated and measure the diameter of each pellet with the caliper specified in 8.2. Each measured pellet diameter shall be recorded to the nearest 0.001 inch. The average pellet diameter as well as the range of all pellet diameters measured shall be calculated and reported to the nearest 0.001 inch . 6.1.4 Pellet Durability Index (PDI) - Durability shall be determined by using the Kansas State method with one modification. The screen size used in determining durability shall be a 1/8-inch (3.17 mm) wire screen sieve. A summarization of the Kansas State method with the specified modification is provided in Annex A.1. All weight measurements shall be conducted using the analytical balance specified in 8.3 and recorded to the nearest 0.1 grams. It should be noted that the pellets remaining after performing the fines determination as specified in 6.1.5 can be used without further preparation to conduct the durability test. 6.1.5 Fines Determined using the following procedure that incorporates the use of a 1/8inch (3.17 mm) wire screen sieve. All weight measurements shall be recorded to the nearest 0.1 gram. 6.1.5.1 Secure a representative fuel sample. Page 4 of 8 Copyright June 18, 2008

18-June-2008 6.1.5.2 6.1.5.3 6.1.5.4 6.1.5.5 Reduce the sample size down to a minimum of 2.5 pounds (1,133 grams) using a sample splitter with 3.5-inch (89 mm) slots. Larger sample sizes may be used. Using the analytical balance specified in 8.3, weigh the sample and record as the initial sample weight. Weigh the receiving pan and record the weight. Attach a 1/8-inch (3.17 mm) screen to the receiving pan and place the pellet sample on the screen using care not to overload the screen. The maximum load on the screen should not exceed 1 pound (453 grams) of pellets per 100 square inches (654 square centimeters) of screen surface area. Smaller screens may require the sample to be screened in increments. Screen the sample by tilting the screen side to side 10 times. If the sample is being screened in increments, after the first portion has been screened remove the 1/8-inch (3.17 mm) screen from the base pan, and empty the pellets off the screen. Repeat 6.5.1.5 through 6.1.5.7 until the entire sample has been screened. Remove the 1/8-inch (3.17 mm) screen and weigh and record the weight of the base pan with the fines. Calculate and report the percent of fines to the nearest 0.01% as follows:
6.1.5.6 6.1.5.7
6.1.5.8 6.1.5.9 6.1.5.10
% Fines = [(Weight of Base Pan + Fines) (Weight of Base Pan)] x 100 Initial Sample Weight 6.1.6 6.1.7 Inorganic Ash - ASTM D 1102-84 (2001) Length - Starting with 2.5 pounds (1.13 kilograms) of pellets randomly selected from the sample being evaluated, hand sort to identify pellets over 1.50 inches in length. Use the caliper specified in 8.2 or a certified measuring block as specified in 8.4 to confirm that a pellet exceeds the specified length. The weight percent of all pellets exceeding the specified length shall be reported. In addition, of the pellets exceeding the specified length, the longest pellet shall be identified, measured with the caliper specified in 8.2, and the length reported as the maximum pellet length. Moisture - ASTM E 871-82 (2006) Higher Heating Value - ASTM E 711-87 (2004) Chloride - ASTM E 776-87 (2004) or ASTM D 4208-02e1 or ASTM D 6721-01 (2006) Ash Fusion - ASTM D1857-04
6.1.8 6.1.9 6.1.10 6.1.11
7. Sample Preparation 7.1 A sample preparation schematic is shown in Annex B.1 to illustrate how a 40 lb bag of pelletized material should be subdivided to perform the analysis procedures. All sample subdividing shall be conducted utilizing a sample splitter with a slot width of 3.5 inches (89 mm) and meeting the requirements specified in ASTM C702-98 (2003). 8. Equipment and Supplies 8.1 Scale A scale capable of weighing the sample bag of fuel to within 0.1 lb (0.05 kg). Must meet the calibration requirements specified in 9.1. Page 5 of 8 Copyright June 18, 2008

18-June-2008 8.2 Caliper A vernier caliper capable of measuring fuel diameter and length to within 0.001 in. (0.025 mm). Must meet the calibration requirements specified in 9.2. 8.3 Analytical Balance A balance with a resolution of 0.1 g or better. Must meet the calibration requirements specified in 9.3. 8.4 Measuring Block A 1.50 inch long gauge block used for screening fuel pieces for length. Must meet the requirements specified in 9.4. 9. Calibration and Standardization 9.1 Scale - Perform a multi-point calibration (at least five points spanning the operational range) of the scale before its initial use. The scale manufacturer's calibration results are sufficient for this purpose. Before each certification test, audit the scale by weighing at least one calibration weight (ASTM Class F) that corresponds to between 80 percent and 120 percent of the expected fuel bag weight. If the scale cannot reproduce the value of the calibration weight within 0.1 lb (0.05 kg) or 1 percent of the expected fuel bag weight, whichever is greater, recalibrate the scale before use with at least five calibration weights spanning the operational range of the scale. 9.2 Caliper Before each test, audit the caliper by measuring one NIST traceable gauge block that corresponds to between 80 percent and 120 percent of the anticipated fuel diameter and by measuring the length of the measuring block specified in 8.4. If the caliper can not reproduce the calibration gauge dimensions within 1%, the caliper may not be used. 9.3 Analytical Balance - Perform a multipoint NIST traceable calibration (at least five points spanning the operational range) of the analytical balance before the first test and semiannually, thereafter. Before each test, audit the balance by weighing at least one calibration weight (ASTM Class 1) that corresponds to 50 to 150 percent of the weight of the fuel sample to be measured. If the scale cannot reproduce the value of the calibration weight to within 0.1 g, recalibrate the balance before use with at least five calibration weights spanning the operational range of the balance. 9.4 Measuring Block The length of the block must be traceable to NIST and demonstrate accuracy of 0.01 in. from length specified in 8.4. The block manufacturers certification documents are sufficient for this purpose.

18-June-2008 Annex A.1
Pellet Fuels Institute Standard Operating Procedure for: Durability Testing Residential/Commercial Pellet Fuels
Produced by: PFI Standards Committee The Pellet Fuels Institute has adopted the test procedure outlined by Kansas State University in assessing the durability of residential grade pelletized fuel products, with the exception that the screen size used in determining durability is to be a 1/8-inch (3.17 mm) wire screen sieve. The durability tester is to be of the metal tumbler type with chamber dimensions of 12 inches long (305 mm) x 5.5 inches wide (140 mm) x 12 inches deep (305 mm). The results of the test are interpreted as a standard measure of quality, which is referred to as the Pellet Durability Index (P.D.I). All durability tests should be conducted in duplicate and the average of the two tests reported. The procedure is outlined as follows: 1. Secure a representative sample. 2. Screen the representative sample with a 1/8-inch wire screen sieve to remove fines. Obtain the initial sample from the portion retained on the screen. 3. Weigh approximately 500 grams of screened sample and record as the initial weight (IW). 4. Tumble the pre-weighed sample of screened pellets in the durability tester for 10 minutes at 50 rotations per minute. 5. Re-screen the sample and weigh the portion retained on the 1/8-inch sieve. Record as the whole pellet sample weight (WPW). 6. Compute Pellet Durability Index (PDI) by dividing the whole pellet sample weight (WPW) by the initial weight (IW) of the sample and multiply by 100. Report to one decimal place. PDI = 100 X WPW IW 7. Repeat steps 2-6 on a second portion of the representative sample.

18-June-2008
PELLETIZING TECHNOLOGY
EQUIPMENT SYSTEMS SOLUTIONS WE BRING IT ALL TOGETHER
12-16-08
Test # 5040-08 summary On December 9, 2008 testing began to determine the pelletability of Biomass Energy Resource Centers bovine manure product. Three 5-gallon pails of dewatered bovine manure were received to be tested. The first step in pelletizing is the raw material analysis. The dewatered manure, as received, had a moisture content of 69.4 % and the bulk density was 15.2 lbs/ft3 (aerated) and 21.1 lbs/ft3 (compacted). The sieve analysis of the material, as received, is as follows:
10 mesh 45 mesh 80 mesh 120 mesh 200 mesh 325 mesh PAN retained cumulative 39.6% 39.6% 60.4% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0%
In order to make good pellets, we recommend that the raw material should have few particles +80 mesh. 100 % of this manure consists of +80 mesh particles. This is usually a poor number for most materials; however, this manure is not typical. Much of the +80 material was non-pelletizing fibers. As the material particle size increases, the likelihood of a good pellet decreases. The optimal particle size distribution should be realized in order to gain the maximum surface-to-surface contact within the pellet. Voids created in the pellet due to the lack of fine particles will result in diminished pellet strength.
Our experience with other fertilizers tells us that a Pin Mixer is best suited for this material. A Mars Mineral Pin Mixer is a high speed, conditioning and micropelletizing device that converts dust into small agglomerates through the action of a high speed rotor shaft and pin assembly and the addition of liquids such as water, binders, oil, or surfactants. A model 8D32L Pin Mixer was used. It was initially set at 1700 RPM, utilizing a size 4002 spray nozzle. The first two numbers of the nozzle size represent the angle of the flat spray. The 4002 flat sprays at 40 degrees. The second two numbers indicate the flow rate. The 4002 applies 2/10 of a gallon per minute (at 40 PSI). The material was fed into the Pin Mixer with a volumetric feeder. Test 1 Water was used as a binder. Repeated attempts yielded no pellets, but only broke up and partially agglomerated the fibers. The high moisture content (69.4%) was judged to be a contributing factor to the problem, in addition to the chiefly fibrous nature of the material. At this initial moisture content, the material did not efficiently flow through the volumetric feeder, which was set at 100 % output to achieve a favorable rate. To remedy this, the remaining available raw manure was air-dried for 24 hours. On December 10, 2008, the moisture content of the air-dried raw manure ranged from 24 to 34 %, and the bulk density was 6.9 lbs/ft3 (aerated). Test 2 The resultant, dried material flowed through the volumetric (screw) feeder much more efficiently. At a setting of 60 % output, the target feed rate of 48.3 lb/hr (7 ft/hr) was achieved. Again, adding water as a binder through a 4002 nozzle at 10 PSI, no pelletization was observed. However, when the water pressure was increased to 20 PSI, some pelletization was observed, among many nonagglomerated fibers, at 18 HP and 1700 RPM. Test 3 With a view to more effectively agglomerating the fibers, water was replaced as the binder with a 50:50 sodium lignosulfonate and water solution, by weight. Repeated attempts yielded no pellets, but only broke up and partially agglomerated the fibers. Test 4 Utilizing the 50:50 sodium lignosulfate and water binder, but this time through a 4004 nozzle, repeated attempts yielded no pellets, but only shortened fibers and occasional agglomeration into irregular 1 diameter clumps.
Test 5 Without adjusting the 60 % output setting of the volumetric feeder, the combined products of tests 3 and 4 were again fed to the Pin Mixer with the 50:50 sodium lignosulfate and water binder introduced at 20 PSI. No feeding problems were observed. At 23 HP and 1600 RPM, some pelletization occurred. The resultant pellet moisture content was 42 %. Sieve Analysis (and bulk density of non-sieved product) The resultant sets of pellets from tests 2 and 5 were each divided into 2 portions to be either oven-dried or air-dried for 24 hours. Sieve analyses of the 4 samples yielded the following data. Test 2, Air-Dried to 28.5 % moisture
4 mesh 10 mesh 16 mesh 20 mesh PAN retained cumulative 29.3% 29.3% 33.5% 62.8% 12.6% 75.4% 6.7% 82.1% 17.9% 100.0%
This test yielded 52.8 % pellets in the -4 x +20 size. The bulk density of the non-sieved product was 9.4 lbs/ft3 (aerated) and 12.2 lbs/ft3 (compacted). Test 2, Oven-Dried at 120C to 0.1 % moisture
This test yielded 46.0 % pellets in the -4 x +20 size. The bulk density of the non-sieved product was 5.9 lbs/ft3 (aerated) and 9.3 lbs/ft3 (compacted). Test 5, Air-Dried to 12.2 % moisture
4 mesh 10 mesh 16 mesh 20 mesh PAN
retained cumulative 7.1% 7.1% 20.6% 27.7% 33.3% 61.0% 15.2% 76.2% 23.8% 100.0%
This test yielded 69.1 % pellets in the -4 x +20 size. The bulk density of the non-sieved product was 15.7 lbs/ft3 (aerated) and 20.3 lbs/ft3 (compacted). Test 5, Oven-Dried at 120C to 0.0 % moisture
This test yielded 66.5 % pellets in the -4 x +20 size. The bulk density of the non-sieved product was 13.8 lbs/ft3 (aerated) and 17.6 lbs/ft3 (compacted). Summary The manure tested is not typical of other manures. This manure contains a large amount of fibers that are affecting the pelletization. Only by processing the material with multiple passes through the Pin Mixer could pellets be made. The moisture content is also too high for pelletizing and must be reduced by water removal or premixing with another dry material. Mars Mineral recommends additional testing with possible premixing with another material to reduce the moisture content of the feed and/or experimenting with the Pin Mixer operating settings.

Sdigestate Ads Fuel

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Sdigestate Ads Fuel

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

July 17, 2009 David Dunn Central Vermont Public Service 77 Grove Street Rutland, Vermont 05701 RE:

Assessment of Digested Cow Manure Solids for Densified Boiler Fuel

Christopher Recchia Executive Director

PO Box 1611, Montpelier, VT 05601-1611 ph 802-223-7770 fax 802-223-7772 info@biomasscenter.org www.biomasscenter.org

Assessment of Digested Cow Manure Solids for Densified Boiler Fuel

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

Cows Milk and Electricity Production

Estimated production of manure solids

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

Cows Milk and Electricity Production

Estimated production of manure solids

17,500 cubic yards annually

Cows Milk and Electricity Production

Estimated production of manure solids

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

Cows Milk and Electricity Production

Estimated production of manure solids

25,000 cubic yards annually

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

Higher Heating Value

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

Swigon et al. 2005

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

Energy Required in Btu Gallons of Oil/ton Gallons of Propane/ton

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

Boiler size Steam (MMBtu/hr output output) 6 (lbs/hr) 7 2.6 2,224

Potential Electrical Generation (kW/hr) 8 55

8,750 8,000 12,500

1.25 1.14 1.78

4.0 3.7 5.8

3,385 3,095 4,803

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

BERC Assessment of DMS for Boiler Fuel July 17, 2009

Hazen Researcn. Inc.

c"io"", Coio+o-i usr

8 .9 1 73.85 15.64 100.00 0.406 7775

0 .1 6 1 3084 320L 60.33

60.96 t8.72 2.L5 0 .5 6 0 .1 6 3 .5 3 t3.92 100 0 .0

0.00 47.96 5.50 L.42 0.41 9.05 35.66 100.00

1.60 4 7. r 9 5. 4 1 1. 4 0 0.41 B .9 1 35.08 100.00

Forms of Sulfur (as S,Z)

Waten SolubleAlkalies (fr) Na20 Yr20

* 0xygen by Difference. * Not usually reportedas part of the ultimate analysis.