Status of Bioenergy in Serbia

Dragoljub Daki PhD*, Prof. Milan Martinov PhD **

* Innovation Center, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering University of Belgrade, Serbia** Faculty of technical science University of Novi Sad, Serbia,

Speaker: Dragoljub Daki PhD Scientific Counselor

Workshop on International Cooperation in the field of bioenergyMoscow 22 to 14 October 2013

SCOPE OF PRESENTATION

Introductory notes

Serbian Energy Indicators

Structure of energy consumption in Serbia

Serbias commitments regarding the renewable energy sources

Conclusions

Biomass in Serbia- Structure of potential - Technologies for biomass utilization- Governmental measures for increasing and enhancement of biomass utilization for energy purposes

- Industrial capacity- Main application potential- Comparative economic parameters of thermal facilities of 4 MW power- Comparative economic parameters of CHP facilities of 4 MW power- Obstacles to wider use of biomass as a RES - Good example of a development project in field of biomass utilization

Why is RES important for Serbia

Serbia EU

Final energy consumption (toe/c) 0.86 2.39

Electricity consumption (MWh/c) 3.20 6.20

Final energy intensity (kg.oe/$) 0.67 0.19

Electricity intensity (kWh/$) 2.45 0.50

energy consumption per cap. 2-3 x less than in EU 3-5 x less efficient use of energy than EU

Serbian Energy indicators:

lignite is main domestic energy source (but reserves for onlynext 40 years, even if there is no new units)

Structure of energy consumption in Serbia

Natural gas Oil Hydro coal geother. Biomass TotalDom. Import Dom. Import Dom. Dom. Import Dom. Dom.

Mtoe (Million tones of oil equivalent)

0.45 1.66 1.11 3.10 0.8 7.82 0.93 0.001 0.31 15,75

Domestic sources 10,49 Mtoe 66,6% of TotalImport sources 5,26 Mtoe 33.4% of Total

Thermal power plants production 2,46 Mtoe (2,46x(3) 7.38 Mtoe from coal)

Serbias obligations regarding the renewable energy sources

Serbias significant RES potential is still not sufficiently exploited due to a number of reason that cause a lack of investment activity in renewable energy sector.

The Government of the Republic of Serbia has recently accepted the Decision of the Ministerial Council of Energy Community on the promotion of the use of renewable energy by means of transposition of the EU Directive 2009/28/EC on renewable energy.

This decision sets consumption to 27% by 2020, with respect to baseline of 21% in 2009, which will lead to intensive activities in sector in the forthcoming period

Biomass will have an important role in increasing of RES in Serbia in forthcoming period

Why biomass in particular ?

Biomass

62%

Hydro

14%

Solar

15%

Geothermal

5%

Wind

4%

Source Biomass Hydro Solar Geoth. Wind

% 62 14 15 5 4 100

t 3.7 0.9 0.9 0.3 0.2 6,0

RES Potential in Serbia

Biomass in Serbia

~2.0 million ha of forest area

~2.5 million m3/y yearly cutting rate

~ 5.1 million ha of agricultural Land~2/3 arable land

~2/3 of arable land - crops

Areas under forests Agricultural land

Structure of biomass sources in Serbia ?

Type StructureEnergy pot.

[TJ/year]Total [TJ/year]

Woody biomass

Heating wood 10 000

approx. 43 000

Wood waste after cutting

23 000

Wood waste from industry

2 800

Unofficial (illegal) cutting

6 700

Agricultural biomass

Farming 40 000approx. 65 000Orchards and

vineyards25 000

TOTAL: approx. 108 000

B I O M A S S

preparation storehousing transportation

combustion pyrolisysgasification alcoholic fermentati

on

anaerobic fermentati

on

pressing,extraction

esterification

Gaseous fuel

Liquid fuel

Electric power Work Heat

thermo-chemical conversion

physico- chemicalconv.

bio- chemical conv.

(pyrolitical oil, methanol)

(ethanol) (biogass)(vegetable oil)

(methanol estar)

Technologies for Biomass utilization in Serbia

Existing industrial units Existing industrial capacities, with no production 2 CHP units under construction

Governmental measures for increasing and enhancement of

biomass utilization for energy purposes

2011 National Action Plan for RES

2012 Decree on Incentives for Privileged Power Producers (feed-in tariffs)

2012 Energy Law adopted

2012. Construction of Plants and Electricity/Heat Generation from Biomassin Republic of Serbia (guide for Investors), with UNDP help.

2011 Decree on the Emission Limits of the Air Pollutants adopted

Od 2006-2010 Ministry of Science and Technology Development financed 22 RES projects, 13 from the biomass field. In period 2010-2014 18 RES projects have been financed, 9 from the biomass field. The projects are classified into: technology development projects and multidisciplinary projects

Energy Law (main specifications relating to biomass)

What are: biomass, bio-fuel, bio-liquid (definitions) Balance of RES and biomass Conditions for construction of new energy facilities RES energy and incentives Warranty of biomass origin Privileged producers and incentives Price formation

National Action Plan for RES of Republic of Serbia (main specifications relating to biomass)

The terms defined in detail: Biomass (of plant and animal origin), bio-liquids, bio-gas, facilities for bio-gas production, etc

An overview of measures for achieving the projected increase of RES share in the total consumption

Concrete measures for promotion of use of biomass energy Biomass energy is classified into:

Forestry biomass (from cutting, remains from the industry, recycled) Agricultural and fishery (primary products, remains from the primary production) Waste biomass (biodegradable waste, paper waste, etc)

Yearly predictions are given, up to 2020, of the increase of the RES share in total consumption, as well as share of individual RES

Year 2013 2016 2018 2020

Heating and

Cooling1.24 1.178 1.178 1.167

Power

Production 0.951 0.992 1.059 1.151

Transport / 0.074 0.159 0.246

2.191 2.344 2.396 2.564

Projected use of RES in Republic of Serbia until 2020 (Mtoe)

Decree on Incentives for Privileged Power Producers (feed-in tariffs for the electric energy from biomass)

Plant type Installed capacity Incentivized price P (MW) (c/kWh)

up to 1 13,26

Biomass plants 1 10 13.82-0.56*Pabove 10 8,22

up to 0,2 15,66

Bio-gas plants 0,2-1 16,498-4,188*Pabove 1 12,31

Bio-gas of animal origin 12,31

Decree on the Emission Limits of the Air Pollutants

(main specifications related to biomass)

Measurement of the emissions and recalculation of the results

Emission limits Monitoring of the emissions Defining of the measuring points Emission limits (defined only for wood)

Power ref O2 (%) SO2 (mg/m3) NO2 (mg/m3) POWDER (mg/m3) CO (mg/m3) Flue gas no.

1

50- 150 kW 13 4000

150-500 kW 13 250 2000

500-1000 kW 13 250 1000

organic meter

1-2,5 MW 11 1000 250 100 150 10 (mg/m3) like C

2,5-50 MW 11 1000 250 50 150 10 (mg/m3) like C

Construction of Plants and Power/Heat generation from Biomass

in the Republic of Serbia (Guide for investors),

with UNDP help.

The language English and Serbian The Guide accompanying the Action Plan, with detailed

description of procedures for construction of an energy

facility burning biomass of any type or origin.

Administrative path is quite complicated, with a number of application forms. It is described in the Guide.

Administrative procedures so far were one of the main obstacles in the investors decisions

The further simplifying of the procedure is in the process

Installed industrial capacity of biomass RES in Serbia

Type of

plantPower (Capacity)

Number

of units Technology applied Note

Heat< 5 MWth >20 Grate combustion, in BFB and cigar

burning

>5 MWth 5 Great and pulverized combustion

CHP < 3 MWel 2 ORC and steam turbine In construction

Bio-gas < 1 MWel 3 Bio-gas from manure

Bio-diesel 300.000t/Y

2 250.000 t/y Lurgi, 50.000 nn Producing eatable oil

Pelet

producers

? 2 big

Many

smal

Capacity and capability of local industry

Over 20 factories producing boilers and furnaces, 3 of them (with references) capable to construct biomass boilers power to 20 MWth. Some of those

companies are exporting biomass boilers to EU countries.

The available combustion technologies owned by local companies: on grate, pulverized fuel, in the bubbling fluidized bed and cigar burning.

Licensed technologies: combustion on grate There are no turbine producers None of the local companies own the technology for biogas facilities construction,

but a lot of them could participate in projects as a subcontractors or license users

There are no companies producing OTO engines, suitable for biogas burning There is one company producing power generators (SIEMENS) Most of the local companies would cooperate with reputable foreign companies,

in using licenses, as well as mutual development and knowledge transfer in

certain technologies, especially in agricultural biomass utilization.

There are no local bio-fuel producing equipment

Main potential for utilizing biomass in Serbia

Serbia has many urban villages, and towns suitable for central heating systems:

10 towns (one of them being capitol Belgrade) 52 urban entities (small towns) 550 villages Being urbanized, the district heating could be introduced relatively simple. Partly,

the district heating system can apply the biomass, in small plants on the border of

the towns or villages. The district heating plants in Serbia are operating with

average heating load of 45%, 18 h/day, 6 moth/year. It would be desirable that

the facilities are operating at load at least of 70-80% in 300 days in a year, 24

h/day. There is a possibility to build a small industrial zones, primarily engaged in

growing and processing of agricultural products. In that way, the agriculture would

be able to change its structure from the low intensity to high intensity, making a

greater profit, which increases chances for sustainability, consequently survival of

the rural areas. The dying out of rural areas is one of the greatest problems in

Serbia.

Some of the facilities could operate as CHP.

* Pay-back period is going to be somewhat longer in case the investment is realized through a bank loan.

Comparison Parameter

FuelBiomass Light fuel oil Heavy fuel oil Gas

Fuel price 45 /t 1100 /t 550 /t 0,4 /m3

Investment 1.200.000 280.000 350.000 250.000Overall efficiency 0.84 0.90 0.88 0.92

Average load 70% 70% 70% 70%Working days per year

360 360 360 360

Fuel consumption 8.100 t/year 2.300 t/ year 2.400 t/ year 2.450.000

Total fuel costs 364.500 / year 2.530.000 / year 1.320.000 / year 980.000 / yearEnergy produced 24.200.000 kWh/ year 24.200.000 kWh/

year24.200.000 kWh/ year 24.200.000 kWh year

Other productioncosts

121.000 60.500 70.500 32.000

Price of 1 kWh 2 c/kWh 10.66 c/kWh 5.74 c/kWh 4.18 c/kWhPrice ratio 1kWh/1kWhBM *

1 5,33 2,87 2,09

Difference in costs in comparison with biomass facility per year 2.205.000 1.005.000 627.000

** Simple pay-back period in comparison with the biomass facility 0.42 year 0.85 year 1.5 year

25 year return (during the lifetime of the facility) in comparison with the referent fuel 55.125.000 24.125.000 14.475.000

Comparative economic parameters of thermal facilities of 4 MW power

* Pay-back period is going to be somewhat longer in case the investment is realized through a bank loan.** The calculation is was carried out for guaranteed feed-in electricity tariffs for12 years.

*** Data for thermal unit

Comparison Parameter

FuelBiomass Light fuel oil Heavy fuel oil Gas

Investment 3.000.0001.200.000***

2.000.000280.000***

2.150.000350.000***

1.900.000250.000***

Overall efficiency 0.78 0.85 0.82 0.87

Heat produced 20.000.000kWh/year

20.000.000 kWh/ year

20.000.000 kWh/ year

20.000.000 kWh/year

Electricity produced 4.350.000 kWh/ year 4.350.000 kWh/ year 4.350.000 kWh/ year 4.350.000 kWh/ year

Price of kWh el. 13.6 C/kWh 5 C/kWh 5 C/kWh 8.89 C/kWhOther production costs 146.000 86.000 95.000 75.000

Price of 1kWh produced 2.2 c/kWh 11 c/kWh 6 c/kWh 4.4 c/kWh

Profit from electricity (/Y) 590.000 220.000 220.000 387.000

Difference in costs in comparison with biomass facility per year 2.475.000 1.275.000 728.000

* Simple pay-back period in comparison with the biomass facility 0.40 god 0.66 god 1.51 god

25 year return (during facility lifetime) in comparison with the referent fuel **

57.000.00055.125.000***

27.000.00024.125.000***

15.000.00014.475.000***

Comparative economic parameters of CHP facilities of 4 MWth (0.6 MWe power)

Barriers to wider use of biomass as a RES in Serbia

The greatest use of biomass as a RES is expected in the field of growing and processing of agricultural products, in frame of sustainable development of the

agriculture. The agriculture is a sector of a low accumulation that cannot develop

without the state support.

Serbia has no a development bank to finance, in a organized way, projects in this field.

International funding (not many) are usually placed through the commercial banks, so the final costs are unacceptable.

Despite the governmental guidance, the procedures for obtaining the licenses are still very complicated, and time extended. Consequently, many potential investors

are backing-up.

The biomass market is still not regulated. The norms on limits of emission are not explicit (they are defined just for the

forestry biomass) and not synchronized with the local capabilities.

Low predict changing of feed-in tariff for CHP on gas according with changing of gases price but there not same principle for biomass CHP.

Good example of a development project in field of biomass utilization

Boiler (1,5-2 MW) with cigar burning of baled agricultural remains

Industrial prototype

The boiler heats 1 ha of green-houses and has been opearting for 4 heating seasons withno problem of any kind.Based on the boiler, SECO granted 7.000.000 for a CHP facility, aimed for heating of a hospital and 1ha of greenhouses and power production

X

Y

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

Temperature,[K]: 400 500 600 700 800 900 10001100120013001400150016001700180019002000

SECOND GENERATION OF BIOFUELS

The activities related to second generation of biofuels are in progress, first of all definition of available feedstock. It seems that some of crop residues can be used as substrate for biogas production, and production of biomethane.

Depending on the development of lignocelluloses ethanol technologies, same materials can be used.

One investigation focuses crop residues as potential feedstock for second generation biofuels. In the country is especially, based on available amount, interesting corn stover.

The objectives is to define available, harvestable mass, but on field remained mass, background for influences on soil characteristics, nutrients offtake, SOM, i.e. soil fertility, as well as erosion.

One of the objectives was to define supply security, based on yield reduction due to draught during reproductive period.

24

Range of relative yields of stover fractions, result of statistical elaboration of all samples, 2011

1 lowest 0.2 m of stalks, 2stalk+leaves, 3 cobs, 4 husks, 5 sum of 1 and 5 (total aboveground residues), 6 sum of 2, 3 and 4

Example of obtained results

The following harvest procedures have been considered in order to calculate harvestable mass, based on fractions of residual material and harvest losses.

Two-pass harvest. Grain harvest by combine with snapperhead and integrated shredder-cornrower. The stover is picked-up from windrow by round or big rectangular baler. Cutting height is 0.2 m. Percentages of harvested fractions are 70, 90 and 90 %, for stalks+leaves, cobs and husks respectively, with additional baling losses of 20 %.

Multi-pass harvest. This is conventional stover harvest procedure. As previous but combine harvester is equipped with integrated stover shredder. It is followed by raking, forming windrow and baling. The cutting height is 0.2 m. Percentages of harvested fractions are 70 % for stalks+leaves and 40 % for cobs and husks combined, with additional baling losses of 20 %.

Ears harvest. For the harvest is used picker-husker. All cobs are available after natural drying and threshing in yard, without losses.

26

SeasonHarvest

procedure

Harvestable mass Remained mass

RY, %M, Mg/ha

DMPTM, % M, Mg/ha DM

2011

1 51 5.5 53 4.8

2 41 4.5 43 5.9

3 18 1.9 19 8.4

2012

1 72 3.8 53 3.4

2 59 3.1 43 4.0

3 22 1.1 16 6.0

RY relative yield (to grain); M mass calculated based on average grain yield; PTM percentage of total mass

Harvestable and remained corn residues for defined harvest procedures

For both seasons the percentage of harvestable mass related to total was same for the harvest procedures 1 and 2, 53 and 43 % respectively, but harvestable mass considerably lower, 5.5/3.8 and 4.5/3.1 Mg/ha.

Conclusion

The prospects of RES biomass utilization in Serbia are indisputable, because the biomass is the greatest RES potential in the country.

The potential of biomass utilization in province of Vojvodina has to be directed primarily to utilization of the agricultural residues and wastes, whilst in central Serbia to forestry biomass.

Launching of technology or products in biomass energy sector in Serbia is simpler through cooperation with the local companies.

Crop residues present significant feedstock for second generation biofuels, especially corn stover.

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Ministry of

Education, Science and Technological Development

of Serbia, through the project III42011

Development and improvement of technologies

for energy efficient and environmentally sound use

of several types of agricultural and forest biomass

and possible utilization for cogeneration.