Biomass has potential but the conversion process is expensive. A biomass plant probably costs about four times more to build than a coal plant. So why do it? Clearly, the overarching needs are the twin desires to wean ourselves from fossil fuels along with the need to reduce pollution and particularly greenhouse gases that may cause global warming. In the case of Duluth, it might start by retrofitting its steam plant there at a cost of $4 million.

Biomass consists of any fuel produced from organic matter, which can include not just forest waste but also agricultural waste, organic waste and municipal waste. Sugar, for example, is extracted from canes by removing the juice whereas the remainder of the plant contains material that when burned will discharge heat. Among non-hydro renewable sources, biomass plays a key role today with 7,000 MW of installed capacity and producing 37 billion kilowatt hours of electricity each year, says the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

The Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee is bullish on biomass fuels. It says that a national strategy that focuses on converting 1 billion tons of dry biomass into energy would displace 30 percent of the nation's petroleum consumption for transportation. That, in turn, would cut greenhouse gases by 10 percent.

At the same time, the lab says that such a concentration of resources would increase biomass consumption in the industrial sector by 2 percent annually through 2030 while biomass use by electric utilities would double every 10 years. It adds that such goals are realistic because the country could convert 1 billion tons of dry biomass into energy without jeopardizing other commodities such as food. That amount would represent a six-fold increase in the production of biomass today.

Shell Renewables forecasts that traditional and new forms of biomass will provide 30-40 percent of the worldwide energy demand. That includes fueling everything from power generation to automobiles to industrial facilities.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 signed in August aims to motivate businesses to rev up their biomass production. To do so, the U.S. government will partner with private enterprise while funding levels for biomass energy has jumped from $54 million to $200 million in this current fiscal year. The goal is to produce the first one billion gallons of biofuel by 2015.

Sharing the Risks

To get there, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has awarded $12.6 million this year alone for 11 projects. Private companies will ante up another $7 million. Other government agencies participating include the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy.

"This cooperative conservation partnership benefits our nation with enhanced energy security, a cleaner environment and revitalized rural economies," says Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns, in a press release. "The grants will help develop additional renewable energy sources and expand markets for agricultural products." The University of Minnesota is one of the participants. It's creating a biomass gasification system and will receive nearly $1.9 million.

At about $14 per million BTUs, January deliveries for natural gas are at a record high. Biomass is one way around this. It's also a way to lessen carbon dioxide emissions, or CO2. Biomass crops, such as trees, absorb CO2. When burned, however, the biomass material releases the CO2 back into the atmosphere. But, such discharges are considered "neutral," meaning that the plants absorbed the same amount as the materials released -- unlike traditional fossil fuels that essentially discharge all new CO2 into the air.

The Energy Department has been actively involved with utilities seeking to expand biomass generation since 2001. Alliant Energy is developing a combined-cycle plant that uses corn starch as a feedstock. United Technologies, meanwhile, is testing a biomass gasifier coupled with a fuel cell and steam turbine options that run on wood residue. Similarly, Progress Energy is developing a biomass gasification process that uses wood waste. If all goes well, the technologies could be commercialized in a few years.

A generation unit in Burlington, Vt. converts 200 tons of wood chips into fuel and mixes it with natural gas to produce 50 megawatts of electricity. Other utilities want to do the same. Alliant is using this technology along with Xcel Energy, the Tennessee Valley Authority, Alabama Power Co., AES Corp., City of Lakeland, Fla., Tacoma Public Utilities, Allegheny Power and Georgia Power. Altogether, their biomass plants have a combined capacity of about 1,300 MW.

Overseas the idea has taken off. China gets 19 percent of its primary energy supply from biomass fuels while India receives 42 percent. Sweden, furthermore, gets 19 percent of energy from bark, straw and wood chips and expects to receive 40 percent from such sources by 2020.

Pending Matters

Biomass technologies aren't yet commercially viable. If the source is gasified, it must be used at the point of production. If it is liquefied, it can be stored and transported but the technologies necessary to do so may be out of reach for some. Solid fuels are often expensive to transport and therefore have limited applications.

But there appears to be a determination to bring this fuel source to the front lines of renewable energy sources. Voters in Idaho's panhandle will decide on Nov. 1 whether they want to sign off on a $9.5 million bond issuance that would burn wood chips, spindly trees and organic debris to create electricity -- and to replace a certain percentage of natural gas usage in its schools. Proponents there say that another school district in Darby, Mont. have made the switch and in doing so have cut heating bills by 70 percent. They say biomass costs them the equivalent of $2-$3 per million BTUs.

The Western Governor's Association awarded Colorado $100,000 in an effort to implement biomass projects. Dead trees dot the entire state and the wood chips would be the fuel source for projects that could get underway in as little as a year. And, Dynamotive out of Canada has built a cogeneration plant that it wants to become part of mainstream power production. It now uses biomass fuel to produce "bio-oil" and then takes a portion of the energy to feed the Ontario power grid.

The discussion over whether the government ought to get involved in renewable energy development and particularly that of biomass energy is under constant scrutiny. Current involvement is partially political and partially practical. Simply, public-private partnerships have proved invaluable when it comes to bringing emerging technologies to the fore. Biomass is worth the risk, given that alternative energy forms are essential to beat high natural gas prices and to lessen the level of harmful emissions.

For far more extensive news on the energy/power visit:  http://www.energycentral.com .

Copyright © 1996-2005 by CyberTech, Inc. All rights reserved.