Sunday, March 23, 2014

A different cost analysis on woodchip burning

Science: Reasons for not installing a woodchip boiler

Reasons for not installing a woodchip boiler(it's a little technical) 

Thank you Mr. Mitchell for this information

Sustainability Coordinator

Office of the Provost
63 South Main, Room 316
HB 6011
Dartmouth College
Hanover, NH 03755-3529
Dartmouth College

1. Greater CO2/BTU

Wood chips                 221.943 pounds of CO2 per Million BTU

#6 oil                           173.906


#2 oil                           161.386


Solar Thermal              0


2. Accelerates greenhouse gas emissions -- Instantaneous release of carbon through burning which would take decades to release through decay

3. Dangerous trend for New England Forests -- Trades negative impacts, without clear ecological benefit.

Benefits: releases carbon on earth's surface, local fuel source, reduce dependence on foreign oil

Costs: Consumes large amounts of bioproductivity at a time in history when extinction rates are 100 to 1000 times faster than historic levels (due to habitat loss and human encroachment), the planets forests cannot sequester the carbon currently released and we have better alternatives.

4. The alternatives to a woodchip boiler could be further explored.  Quantum efficiency and conservation programs would also reduce expenses, but also be a clear environmental solution reducing greenhouse gas emissions and environmental impacts.


5. Forests have the highest value of all land types for ecosystem services.

$33 trillion / 28 million acres = 1.2 million /acre

Bob Costanza at the University of Vermont developed a methodology that assigns a monetary value to 17 ecosystem services.  These include soil formation, recreation, nutrient cycling, water regulation and supply, climate regulation, habitat, flood and storm protection, food and raw materials production, genetic resources, atmospheric gas balance and pollination. A team of researchers from the United States, Argentina, and the Netherlands has put an average price tag of US$33 trillion a year on these fundamental ecosystem services, which are largely taken for granted because they are free. That is nearly twice the value of the global gross national product (GNP) of US$18 trillion [1]

http://esd.uvm.edu/ What is the value of forests ecosystem services compared against industrial logging?

6. Woodchips have no value added component.  Some European countries get over 10 times the jobs per unit of wood cut.  Woodchips, pulp and dimensional lumber are the least value-added products possible.  Burning biomass in 2006 seems a crude use of bioproductivity.

7. The quantity needed to provide energy to an economy or system that has not done their conservation work first it large. As a back of the envelope calculation:

About one cord a year translates into a 1.9 acre footprint (from my book Radical Simplicity) this figure is adjusted to world average forest productivity so someone in Africa on land with lower productivity wouldn't be unfairly measured.  Our forests in New England are about double world average forest productivity.

8. Scientific community is not in agreement as to biomass fuels carbon spectrum over time.  Younger forests have shallower roots and if managed by frequent rotations will likely deplete surface nutrients and compact soils.

Stands managed as old growth sequester more carbon:

25 year old forest: 12,000 lbs of carbon / 25 = 480 lbs of C per acre per year x 44/12 =1,760 lbs of CO2 per acre per year

120 year old forest: 128,000 lbs of carbon / 120 = 1,066 lbs of C per year per acre x 44/12 =3,909 lbs of CO2 per acre per year

9. I don't see there being an ecological free lunch -- that is to say, woodchips being a so-called waste, could build soil adding carbon and nitrogen, duff, water retention.  As a gardener knows, if you continue to take from the land without returning nutrient, the land slowly degrades.  What is the long term effect of forests after several industrial logging operations?   How soon would even so-called waste-food be consumed leaving trees to be chipped?  A BC forester, Herb Hammond, said that it can take 250 years for creek timing and flow patterns to return to normal after an industrial logging operation.

10. I feel like I need to apologize, I love forests.  I have walked miles of industrial forests.  To get the volume needed to feed municipal of institutional boilers requires industrial impacts to the landscape. 
Here is some more detailed ideas:

The model should be inclusive of multiple factors and include feedback loops so each project learns and adjusts future steps based upon a growing information base and experiential wisdom.

As an example, the following factors influence a building's emissions:

Area per occupant -- A

Technology of systems -- T

Envelope effectiveness -- E

Operational controls - O

Management effectiveness - M

User habits - U

Extending useful life -- L

Emissions/BTU of fuel source -- F

Total building performance = A x T x E x O x M x U x L x F

If we designed for a performance increase in each factor by a "best practices" margin, total system performance can be radically improved as factors multiply by one another. Assume "1" to be current practices and that the following usage reduction multipliers could be achieved.

Area per occupant -- 0.8 (20% reduction)

Technology of systems - 0.7

Envelope effectiveness - 0.5

Operational controls - 0.9

Management effectiveness - 0.9

User habits - 0.8

Extending useful life - 0.8

Emissions/BTU of fuel source - 0.8

The total building emissions now become the following fraction:

= A(0.8) x T(0.7) x E(0.5) x O(0.9) x M(0.9) x U(0.8) x L(0.8) x F(0.8)

= 0.116 or an 8.6 fold increase in performance.  Isn't multiplication exciting?

Suggested Strategies for Campus Emission Reduction

A comprehensive plan would include but not be limited to the list of strategies below used in the suggested ranking by preference. An assessment of the potential reduction possible through each strategy could be plotted against goals and milestones.

a.) Freeze emission growth. Attempting to reach a moving target is discouraging. All new programs and initiatives could be required to demonstrate carbon neutrality. Ensure each new building completed is carbon neutral through efficient design, on-site energy production and purchase of renewable energy credits and/or offsets. A commitment to not allowing the target to continue to grow would inspire creative problem solving and management. Accepting that limits exist (design constraints) can foster ingenuity.

b.) Reducing the use of fossil fuels (direct and embodied) through resource efficiency and conservation in all our operations including commuting. Factors included would mirror the example given in 4.2 above applied to campus systems as well as individual systems. These multiplying factors would include: Utilization, Technology, Building Performance, Operational Decisions, Administrative Drivers, Management Effectiveness, User Habits, Energy Choices...

c.) Optimizing the utilization and care of assets. Decisions to demolish buildings should be preceded by a detailed economic and ecological footprint analysis that would compare a tear-down to a strategic retrofit. Preventive maintenance and extending the useful life can dramatically reduce impacts.  A building torn down half-way into its useful life doubles its construction and disposal footprint. Demolition typically releases toxic substances into the environment and the salvage value is a fraction of the asset's value. A study conducted in Bellingham Washington determined the value of salvage materials to be $1.04 per sq ft. New construction at Dartmouth typically costs over $250 per sq ft.

o          Footprint of 100,000 square foot 40-year building: 100,000 x 12.2 ff = 1.22 M sq ft./4840 = 252 acres, with 45 acres being the energy footprint.

o          Disposal footprint if land filled: 100,000 x 13.48lbs/sq ft x 481 ff/40yr/12mo = 1.35 M sq ft./4840 = 279 acres 

o          Disposal footprint if recycled: Approximately half that of sending it to the land fill or 140 acres.

Factor: 0.8

d.) Fostering an environment of commitment to excellence in sustainable daily practices beginning with staff, faculty and administration spreading into student life. Behavior changes can yield significant reductions. For example, the benefit of a vehicle that is 20% more efficient is erased if we travel 20% more. Efficiency coupled with behavior however has a multiplying effect; i.e. 20% more efficient coupled with a 20% reduction in vehicle miles traveled yield a 40% decrease in CO2. Critical to any comprehensive program is education and buy-in to the initiatives objectives.

Factor: 0.7

e.) Burning cleaner fuels.

Factor: 0.9 

f.) Installing renewable energy equipment such as solar thermal and photo voltaic panels on campus.

Factor: 0.9

g.) Purchasing renewable wind and solar energy credits.

Factor: 0.8

h.) Establishing procurement guidelines aimed at purchasing commodities such as food, services, materials and supplies from businesses with documented sustainability practices located within the local region.

Factor: 0.8

i.) Managing our land holdings for ecosystem services including biodiversity, air quality, carbon sequestration, soil stabilization, watershed integrity, wilderness and cultural values. The college owns 39,356 acres of lands of which 384 acres have conservation easements. This land can be managed such that the carbon stored on the land (volume of standing trees) increases each year.  Either through restoring lands or documenting an increase in stored carbon, this land could be used to offset remaining CO2 after items a-h above have been completed.

Tufts climate Initiative reports that a Northeast, maple-beech-birch forests will sequester

CO2 according to the age of the stand as follows:

25 year old forest: 12,000 lbs of carbon / 25 = 480 lbs of C per acre per year x 44/12 =1,760 lbs of CO2 per acre per year

120 year old forest: 128,000 lbs of carbon / 120 = 1,066 lbs of C per year per acre x 44/12 =3,909 lbs of CO2 per acre per year

For this example, we will use the lower number applied to Dartmouth's 39,356 acres:

Pounds of CO2 sequestered per acre per year: 1,760 lbs/acre/yr

39,356 acres x 1,760lbs/acre/yr. = 69.27 x 10exp6 lbs/yr

For a 120 year old stand: 39,356 x 3,909 lbs/acre/yr = 153.84 x 10exp6 lbs/yr

j.) Purchasing of carbon offsets. These can currently be purchased for $10/metric ton of CO2.

k.) Usage of plant-based fuels. There is an increase in carbon emissions per BTU from burning woodchips compared to #6 fuel oil: 221.9 vs. 173.9 pounds of co2/10exp6 BTU.

Bio diesel from waste oil can be an interim strategy while available; however, our large consumption of heating oil far exceeds regional French fry production. Virgin bio diesel is not recommended due to the impacts of converting forest lands to mono-cultures or using crop land for energy. The trading of externalities, ecosystem services and world food supply (one billion humans face debilitating poverty) need careful evaluation.

[1] Adapted from R. Costanza et al., "The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital," Nature Vol. 387 (1997), p. 256, Table 2.

61 comments:

  1. Solar Thermal is way to proceed just as natrual gas hydo cars / like minds There is studies . maps which shows that Templeton thermal source " would work here" and keep the school at 68 deg year round once install FREE HEAT
    plan well Seek the Hillbillies remember " when the rabbit is sch-each-ing and fox comes a running its not to help !!!"
    out with old in with new

    ReplyDelete
  2. The DCR supports this endeavor, US Forest Services supports this endeavor, Senator Brewer and Many others support this endeavor, but some will not see that this will be one of the ways the school department can actually reduce tax increases for facility upkeep. Voting against a smart project like the BioMass furnace only demonstrates further a lack of care for rational solutions to difficult problems.

    Some facts are certain, death, taxes, and the price of oil will always go up. Break free of the fossil fuel folly. Vote for a smart future.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I fail to see the reasoning behind the propane use during summer months. When we have a wind turbine spinning over the heads of the track runners why we can't get power cheaper to heat the water with electric instead of a fosil fuel. one that can go boom and when i say boom i mean big boom. The turbine deal with the district was not such a sweet deal for the school as we see the Light Dept get all the rewards and share very little with the people at risk. The renewable energy credits are a big bonus above the normal payback and not shared. 1/3 of a million per year could help alot with a electric bill.
    Solar grants are available for electric production if the light dept would join me in getting a net metering system in Templeton and allow us to produce the power and lower our bills in the future. Sterling has net metering and many companies will offer solar set ups for a lease deal and will lower the bills also. Problem is the General manager is against this as he would rather control who he buys the power from. I would like to see a billboard on the turbine of the total Renewable Energy Credits recieved by TMLWP for the produced power sold. 300k in one year? A private company would be taxed on the power produced. TMLWP is not. Grants for our school solar set up is not available now due to the factors involved with the wind turbine and TMLWP rules imposed by the general managers strategic actions. The chapter 164 laws empower him to gobble up all the power to control our needs and also keep competition from being nothing but a comparable factor to justify a charge he imposes on our town and the people who live here.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This Biomass project is not an fiscally responsible project. The payback is in the range of 13-15 years. Any industry would reject such a proposal with a payback such as that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. To poster Greene, what is the payback on oil burners? If you agree that the Biomass has a payback of 13 - 15 years and have a life of 30 to 35 years, then this seems like a smart choice. Instead of paying a large amount for oil the school could save money and have the boilers paid for without any additional appropriations.

    ReplyDelete
  6. An oil fired boiler can have 20-30 years life span as well. We are talking about scrapping an oil fired boiler that MAY be reaching the end of its life (or it MAY have another 10 years) for basically a big wood burning stove. Yes, if we NEVER have to do any extra maintenance to the Biomass boiler then it WILL save us money, but that is highly unlikely. But first, we need to make it through the first 13 years without a hitch. Sorry, but in my opinion this is not an improvement, this is spending money just because it is there.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The cost of woodchips is not insulated from the cost of diesel. From the buncher/feller, to the skidder, to the processor, to the chipper and finally to the truck doing the hauling. Diesel fuel is a big expense for a chipping operation. If the price of diesel fuel goes up, the price of wood chips goes up.

    ReplyDelete
  8. without competition people selling wood chips can charge whatever they want. unlike oil with the competitive market you are guaranteed to pay market price

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There IS competition. I can think of 5 diff companies off top of my head.

      Delete
  9. People with common sense understand

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, your right, people with common sense understand that you replace a heating system before it completely breaks down & costs even more to fix it. They understand that saving over 200k per year in oil costs are a good thing. They understand that being proactive instead of reactionary, like the rest of this town, is the only viable way to survive.

      Delete
    2. I bet you buy a new refrigerator every 8 years because the appliance store tells you your supposed to.

      Delete
    3. I buy big purchases, ie car, before the warranty runs out. Just like every other sane person.

      Delete
    4. So you by a new car 'cuz the warranty is about to expire? I'm thinkin' that Do isn't the only Stupid one.

      Delete
    5. Yes. Everything breaks. A smart person realizes this & doesn't throw good money after bad.

      Delete
    6. Yeah, it makes sense to spend many times the money on new when what you already have CAN BE REPAIRED FOR LESS. Sure, all mechanical things break; No kidding sherlock. But the wise man does what he can with what he has. You know, be a good steward and all. Don't let your equipment got to pot and then cry 'till you get new. This is why we can't have nice things.

      Delete
    7. ........"A smart person"......What are your qualifications there Einstein?

      Delete
    8. Or do you just like to sit around on your ponderous posterior typing insults?

      Delete
    9. Where's the insult? Because I have nice things that work properly?

      Delete
    10. Still waiting on the qualifications......

      Delete
    11. Oh, wait, you're going on what Ruthie said we MAY need. Gotcha.

      Delete
    12. ...." A smart person realizes this & doesn't throw good money after bad"......See, that statement infers or suggests that everyone who doesn't agree with you (or who is not in favor of wasting cash on new when fixing/upgrading may be better) is not smart. You know, insults.

      Delete
    13. Trust me, if I were going to insult you, it would be ALOT more obvious than that.

      Delete
    14. That's your comeback? Took you a whole day for that?

      Delete
  10. for Ruth to tell you and you to believe that the existing boiler, at 20 years old is at the end of it's life says a lot for your mentality.
    Commercial Boilers,unlike new home boilers, have a longer than 20 year life span.

    Remember, Ruth is like a General Contractor in her position, All these big $ ideas she brainwashers you guys with have a big impact on her pocketbook. She is no different than the last super that screwed us over.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How, on earth, do u possibly think she makes any money on this? That's more ridiculous than the 9/11 conspiracy's. This actually saves you, the taxpayer money. If you can't see that, you need help.

      Delete
    2. You help me sell this I'll make it worthwhile for you.

      Puff were you born yesterday.

      Delete
  11. Replies
    1. Or...you could just drop another 500k with NO payback. Pretty simple answer to this.

      Delete
    2. 500 for what? Have any actual experts weighed in on the necessity for a new boiler?

      Delete
  12. Anybody on this blog actually been inside one of the boilers to clean it? Usually the BURNER that goes bad. If we bought a boiler that has already expired in 20 years then we need to be asking the water company why the ph is so high? Anybody looked into retrofitting the existing boiler with an updated burner? Or are we just all standing around with a ruler and a cracker?

    ReplyDelete
  13. 20 years and we need a new one.....Who o.k.'d that purchase?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Crickets.........

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I needed a good laugh this morning, you guys can funny !! What my husband said is for the price of this project, we could buy a lot of oil. Regardless of anything else, he feels the price is too high. All of the guys in suits are going to get paid, and that will not be chicken feed. He is also against getting rid of the boiler. Puffy, I do not want to hurt your feelings but, I am willing to bet the majority of people in this town can not afford to buy a new car because the warranty is going to expire. I think the only people who could afford to do this must work for the Light and Water Departments or the Administration in the schools. I think out of touch is the only way to describe some of our younger folk. As for homeless people, take a look at the state parks in our area. When people loose their homes, that is where many of them end up. You can only live off other people for so long. Bev.

      Delete
    2. No Bev, they run unlicensed daycares and don't pay any taxes on it and then have the balls to tell the rest of us who play fair that we're not doing enough for the children.

      Delete
  15. OK, its official, all of you that think saving over 200k a year is a bad thing, have lost your minds. I'm done arguing about it, its an absolute no-brainer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I Do Think The School Could Have Saved Around 95 K When the last Super Had The Her Office's Done Over....And Oh Ya .. Don't Forget 3 k For Desks..At The town office STOP THE SPENDING....Oh Ya That Lease Is Going Up Also.And were Are These Chips Going To Come From ...I'll Tell You.. Our State For Forrest's...I Believe We Saw Signs Of This A Few Years Back... Remember When They Cut Trees.????????? Open Your Eyes...

      Delete
    2. I def agree about prev. super.

      Delete
    3. It is to bad that people have no problem spending money that does not come directly from their pocket. Do you think the Elementary School Building Committee would have blown 230,000. looking for land, if they had to stand in front of town meeting to explain their actions, or had to ask the people of this town for permission to do something like that ?? It all adds up, and casts the other committees in town in a bad light. How many times can one committee ask for money for a feasibility study, and think no one is going to notice, while some people in this town struggle to make ends meet. It is time to take stock of where we are, and where we need to go, and most importantly, how do we get there.

      Delete
    4. It is also too bad that people don't realize what is actually happening. The state has been very very patient with this town. However, we have already lost 20% reimbursement due to our incompetence. We were originally getting 80% reimbursement, now it is 60%. If we don't do this now, we will lose it all & foot the entire bill ourselves.

      Our elementary schools will close. Sooner rather than later. They are old, outdated, & a safety hazard. Even the fire chief says the FD can't get to the upper floors of BES. They have asbestos under the floors, lead paint, & no handicap accessibility. They are grandfathered for that, but if any refurbishment is done, they lose that status. Therefore, no refurbishment can be done, because its impossible to make them accessible.

      Now, I realize that this is the worst year possible for this, but a debt exclusion only makes sense. If you want to say no to a new school, at least wait until we know what it would cost. This exclusion only ensures our previous $ isn't just wasted. If the state pays the majority, this could be a good deal. That, & if we do go into receivership, can anyone trust the state to not just shut the elementary schools down & force us to build? With zero reimbursement, all because we couldn't finish a feasibility study?

      This is how we take stock of where we are, & where we need to go, & how we get there.

      Delete
  16. 80% ? I have never heard that amount for the school project!
    Good question for the meeting tonight.
    Who is to be quoted on that info.
    Name of huff n puff is?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oops, my bad. I must be mixing up my projects. But my 60% argument still stands. We will lose it with a no vote.

      Delete
    2. You can't lose what you don't have.
      And now that we know you buy a new car because the warrantee is running out, I am confident of my opinion that we surely should not be following your wacked ideas

      Delete
    3. Ugh..... Trading in your car before the warranty runs out, & it completely depreciates is not wacked....it is smart & fiscally responsible. That is why 90%( a guess) of people do it, it saves money.

      Delete
  17. NOPE, your not saving anything. STOP listening to everything your told.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lol. U do what you do! & I'll do what I do. I'd rather only make a car pymnt than both a car pymnt & maintenance bills.

      Delete
    2. Maintainence bills, maybe $1000. Every 2 years. After 10 years approx. 5000. Spent. A lot less than what your spending/losing

      Delete
    3. Wow, u are crazy. A tranny alone is 3gs

      Delete
    4. I have never had tranny trouble, Tranny's don't just go. You are too gullible to the people who want your money. I hope to see you at my yardsale, I'll sell you some bottled air from Hawaii

      Delete
    5. All of this, DO, has nothing to do with the NEED for a new school, as the others are pretty much illegal, yet grandfathered. They can't be updated, its impossible.

      Delete
    6. Yes Ruth, Whatever you say Ruth, anything else Ruth. Gee the word for today is Grandfathered, I'm willing to bet Ruth must've said the schools problems were Grandfathered. Once again, You NEED to think for yourself

      Delete
    7. OK, mister I know everything but have never offered any solutions, what is your plan for the elementary schools?

      Delete
    8. save money where we can (don't want to here the BS that nothing can be cut), repair the schools (like 90% of the people in town do to there homes), enough to maintain them, and then work on getting a school built when we CAN AFFORD IT, (this BS about hurry up we have to do it now is getting old). I have a 100 year old house that has all the same problems as the schools and you know what, I DEAL WITH WHAT I HAVE AND I KEEP IT MAINTAINED, I don't need a new house just because I want one. there is NOTHING stopping me from making do with what I have.

      Delete
    9. How do you propose to remove the lead, asbestos, fix the plumbing, wiring, add more space for more kids, & most importantly, make them handicap accessible?

      Delete
    10. WOW, you really don't know the first thing about REPAIR do you. Lead and Asbestos is here and always has been, loosen your panty's and grow some balls, IT IS NOT NEARLY AS DANGEROUS HAS PEOPLE ARE LED TO BELIEVE, There are NO cases of people dying from asbestos that is in a building, the deaths are all from people who worked in the industry and dealt with it in raw form onn a daily basis. EVERYTHING else you mentioned is repairable, Many local tradesman would love to take on the work but the state wants to give it to the unions who screw us with outrageous rages.

      Delete
    11. & thank you for showing everyone on this blog that you have no idea what your talking about. My work here is done.

      Delete