tom christofk, air pollution control officer placer county air pollution control district 2012...
TRANSCRIPT
Tom Christofk, Air Pollution Control OfficerPlacer County Air Pollution Control District
2012 ANNUAL MEETING OF THE BIOMASS POWER ASSOCIATION/CALIFORNIA BIOMASS
ENERGY ALLIANCE
LAS VEGAS
FEBRUARY 29, 2012
GHG Mitigation from Diversion of Forest Biomass Waste
Agenda
Placer County Forested LandscapeBiomass for Energy Demonstration ProjectBiomass for Energy Greenhouse Gas Offset ProtocolCEQA Mitigation Project ExampleOther Forest Related Initiatives
Placer County
Placer County Landscape
Sacramento Valley to Lake Tahoe550,000 acres of forested land (> 50% of total county land),
including three National ForestsOak woodlands in valley, mixed conifer in foothills and SierraNumerous wildland-urban interfacesHeavy fuel loads throughout forested landscape from decades of
fire suppressionHistory of major wildfires in National Forests
Gap, Ponderosa, Star, Ralston, American River Complex, Angora – over 60,000 acres
Concerted effort for forest fuel hazard reduction thinning By-product -- excess waste biomass
Wildfire ImpactsRalston Wildfire, Sept 2006
Fuel treatment prior to fire
No treatment prior to fire
Angora Wildfire, June 2007
Tahoe Forest ThinningMassive South Shore fuels reduction project approvedJanuary 13, 2012Tahoe Daily Tribune SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, Calif. — The U.S. Forest Service Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit has approved a more than 10,000 acre project to reduce wildfire risk to communities at Lake Tahoe's South Shore and restore the health of the area's forests, according to a Friday statement.
The South Shore Fuel Reduction and Healthy Forest Restoration Project will thin trees and brush on national forest system land from Cascade Lake to the Nevada stateline. The project will take approximately eight years.
The project is designed to provide defensible space, reduce the risk of high intensity fire and create forests better able to resist drought, insects and disease, while restoring stream environment zones, meadows and aspen stands, according to the statement.
Thinning by crews with chain saws, removing trees using tracked and rubber-tired equipment and prescribed fire are included in the project.
The Forest Service plans to move forward with hand thinning as soon as conditions allow. Mechanical thinning will undergo permitting through the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board before starting.
“The fuel reduction efforts outlined in the South Shore project are critical to protecting our communities from wildfire,” said LTBMU Forest Supervisor Nancy Gibson in the statement. “We will continue to work closely with the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board, and our goal is to begin implementing the project this summer.”
Positive Effects of Fuel Treatments
Fire
Un-thinned
Thinned
Cone Wildfire, Lassen National Forest, Sept 2002
Positive Effects of Fuel TreatmentsWallow Wildfire, Apache National Forest, Arizona, May 2011,
500,000 acres, largest wildfire in Arizona history
Fire
Fuel Treatment Thinning
Existing Piles Prepared for Burning
Tahoe National Forest
Woody Biomass Wastes
Open BurningCost to chip and transport
biomass to bioenergy facility
> Price paid by bioenergy facility for
biomass fuel
Air Emissions Benefits
1 MWh electricity
Fire Threat
Source: California Department of
Forestry and Fire Protection, Fire and
Resource Assessment Program (FRAP), prepared for
the “National Fire Plan”, V05_1, 2005.
Open Burn vs Renewable Energy
Open Pile Burn
Controlled Energy Generation
VS
Grind and Haul Biomass Waste
Demonstration Project
60 miles
Criteria Air Pollutants
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000P
ile B
urn
Bio
mas
s to
Ene
rgy
Pile
Bur
n
Bio
mas
s to
Ene
rgy
Pile
Bur
n
Bio
mas
s to
Ene
rgy
Pile
Bur
n
Bio
mas
s to
Ene
rgy
Em
issi
on
s (l
b)
Biomass BoilerBiomass ChippingBiomass TransportOpen Pile Burn
NOxPM-10 CO VOC
1,000,000
99% 99%60%97%
Results from 2008 biomass energy project that processed 6,800 BDT biomass from thinning project on USFS Tahoe National Forest American River District
Greenhouse Gases
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
Open Burning Biomass to Energy
CO
2e (
ton
s)Grid electricity (unrealized)Open pile burning (CH4)
Open pile burning (CO2)*Transport
ChippingBiomass power plant (CH4)Biomass power plant (CO2)*
0.4 tons CO2 reduced per 1 dry ton biomass
GHG Cost Effectiveness
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55
GH
G (C
O2e
) C
ost
Eff
ecti
ven
ess
($ /
ton
CO
2e)
Biomass Processing and Transport Cost ($/BDT biomass)
30
40
Biomass fuel value at biomass to energy plant ($/BDT)
Demo Project
Demonstration Project Conditions
Biomass for Energy Project Greenhouse Gas Protocol
Utilize excess biomass wastes for energy as alternative to baseline business as usual (open burning) Monetary support for biomass processing and transport to energy facility
Greenhouse gas benefits result from: Avoided methane from open pile burning Renewable biomass energy displaces fossil fuels
Endorsed by: California Board of Forestry California Air Districts, including San Joaquin, South Coast, Mendocino, Butte,
Feather River
Applicable for use to provide offsets for CEQA mitigation purposes
Follows format of the Climate Action Reserve’s Livestock Manure GHG Offset Protocol
Protocol Accounting
Biomass ProcessingFossil Fuel Engines : CO2
Biomass TransportFossil Fuel Engines : CO2
Energy RecoveryBiomass Conversion : CH4, CO2
Operations at Biomass
Generation Site
Biomass for Energy Project
Energy Production
Uncontrolled Open Burning
CH4, CO2
In-field DecayCH4
Baseline Energy SupplyFossil Fuel Combustion : CO2
Baseline, Business as Usual
Excess Biomass
GHG Open BurnGHG Reduction GHG DecayGHG Baseline Energy
GHG Biomass
Energy
GHG Biomass Processing
= + +
– – – GHG Biomass Transport
Project Implementation
Purchase GHG Mitigation, Held in
District Escrow
Select GHG Biomass Waste For Energy Mitigation Project
District Verification
District Issues GHG
Mitigation Credit
Project Proponent Needs GHG CEQA
Mitigation
Conduct Project using Biomass Waste for Energy GHG Offset
Protocol
Project Implementer is
Paid
Mitigation Credit Bank
Emission and Cost Adjustment
Identification of Biomass Energy Project Opportunities
Identify current and future management projects which will generate excess waste biomass Land managers -- USFS, Fire Agencies, BLM, private forest
products industry, etc. Biomass plant fuel managers
Determine amount and cost of available excess waste biomass
Conduct biomass projects to generate GHG offsets Coordinate biomass generator, processing and transport
contractors, biomass facility Determine GHG offsets using Biomass Waste for Energy Offset
Protocol
Example Project Needing CEQA Mitigation
GHG Emissions Source GHG (tons CO2e / yr)
Project 70,000
Possible Allowances Given to Capped Sector* -10,000
On-site Mitigation Projects -30,000
CARB Approved Offsets -6,000
Net Project Total 24,000
CEQA Significance Threshold 10,000
Net Exceedance of CEQA Significance Threshold 14,000
GHG Source: Natural gas fired boilers to produce high pressure steam used for oil production/recovery from diatomaceous earth
*Fuel sector likely to be under CARB Cap in 2015
Other Placer County / Placer Air District Initiatives
Support the establishment of state-of-the-art, distributed generation biomass facilities Tahoe Region Combined 2 – 3 MW Heat & Power (US DOE Grant)
30,000 BDT/yr sustainable woody biomass resources within 30 mile radius
Foresthill Region Bio-Methane Fuel Initiative (CA Energy Com Grant)
50,000 BDT/yr sustainable woody biomass resources available within 30 mile radius
Advocating for a Wildfire Hazard Reduction Adder as a component of the Feed-In-Tariff rulemaking by the California Public Utilities Commission (< 3 MW facilities)
Quantifying benefits derived from implementation of the Placer County Conservation Plan (PCCP) – Oak Woodlands Management and Preservation
Funding research with USFS to evaluate the GHG benefits of forest fuel thinning -- avoided wildfire and enhanced forest growth
Development of California Air District Offset Exchange
Joint effort of several air districts Leverage decades of experience with Emission
Reduction Credits (ERC’s) for criteria pollutants Uniquely positioned to offer assistance to businesses,
others Keep local investments, jobs, and benefits in California
Complementary to state cap-and-trade programFill a niche for GHG mitigation for CEQA and NEPA;
work to expand uses in future
Purpose of Exchange
Goal is to provide a trusted source of high quality California-based greenhouse gas offsets to keep investments, jobs, and benefits in-state, through a California Air Pollution Control Officer’s Association (CAPCOA) developed and operated Exchange. The focus will be to provide credible mitigation options for project developers. Financial resources invested in-state will help create local jobs, and realize needed air pollution co-benefits from projects in California.
Core Values and Operating Principles of the CAPCOA Exchange
Quality California offsetsCollaborationIntegritySecurityTransparencyLow transaction costsExcellent customer serviceProtocol development
Placer County Air Pollution Control District Award
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Recognizes Outstanding & Innovative Efforts to Achieve Cleaner Air
2011 Clean Air Excellence Award for
Forest Resource Sustainability in Placer County
We have processed and transported 15,000 BDT’s of waste to biomass energy facilities which has fueled the generation of 15,000 MW hours of renewable electricity, enough to power more than 1,500 homes for one year.
This Project was chosen “for its impact, innovation and replicability”