No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
An Alaska case study: Biomass technology
Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Abstract
This review examines commercial biomass boilers installed around the state of Alaska for key performance and cost metrics. Capital costs and operation and maintenance costs vary with the boiler type and location around the state. Most boiler manufacturers claim system life expectancies of 20–30 years, assuming normal running conditions and adherence to maintenance schedules. System efficiencies vary with the biomass system type, installation protocol, operation and maintenance protocols, piping distance, thermal storage, and wood moisture content. Sizing biomass units to meet approximately 80% of peak required heat load ensures that the boiler will run at the maximum heat output. The boiler itself presents the highest cost for most installations. Other substantial costs include the site foundation, the boiler building, and the integration of the system into the building. Fuel storage and construction management are also large expenses although not reported in each project. Despite the large installed capacity of chip boilers in the Interior, their installation costs per installed BTUh are higher than those of other boilers.
... In terms of understanding non-technical aspects, Vandever [46] find that in Fort Yukon, Alaska, the main motivation to move away from diesel-based generation is because of the high cost of diesel, rather than minimizing the greenhouse gas (GHG) footprint of fossil fuel use. Whitney et al. [47] cover all of Alaska and summarize the cost variations of installing biomass based boilers. Deep-dive case studies into specific bioenergy projects are even more rare. ...
Community-led bioenergy projects show great promise to address a range of issues for remote and Indigenous Arctic communities that typically rely on diesel for meeting their energy demands. However, there is very little research devoted to better understanding what makes individual projects successful. In this study, we analyze the case of the Galena Bioenergy Project (Alaska)—a biomass heating project that uses locally sourced woody biomass to help meet the heating demands of a large educational campus. Using project documents and other publicly available reports, we evaluate the project’s success using three indicators: operational, environmental, and community level socio-economic benefits. We find that the project shows signs of success in all three respects. It has a reliable fuel supply chain for operations, makes contributions towards greenhouse gas reductions by replacing diesel and has improved energy and economic security for the community. We also examine enabling factors behind the project’s success and identify the following factors as crucial: community-level input and support, state level financial support, access to forest biomass with no competing use, predictable demand and committed leadership. Our findings have important implications for other remote communities across the Boreal zone—especially those with nearby forest resources. Our examination of this case study ultimately highlights potential pathways for long-term success and, more specifically, shows how biomass resources might be best utilized through community-led initiatives to sustainably support energy security in Arctic communities.
... However, Alaskans produce 48 metric tonnes of carbon dioxide per capita each year (8.18% of which is from electricity generation) [24]. The Alaskan Centre for Energy and Power have reported case studies involving the deployment of diesel [2], wind [25], solar PV [26], biomass technologies [27] and storage [28] alongside the transmission and integration of these [29,30]. ...
Many remote communities are reliant on fossil fuels to produce electricity and/or heat. The environmental impact from these generation systems in remote regions have significant emissions from the transportation of fuel to the generation site and only exacerbate the effects of climate change on these communities. Power via sustainable methods is a priority to avoid further environmental damage and sustain local communities (aligns with UNSDG 7, 11 and 13).
A life cycle assessment for the deployment of a renewable electricity generation device (ORPC, Rivgen®) in Alaska, USA as a case study comparison against the existing diesel electricity generation method was analysed using ReCiPe methodology . The kg CO2 eq/MWh is shown to decrease from 1345.45 kg CO2 eq/MWh with diesel electricity generation to 17.49 kg CO2 eq/MWh after a 20-year Rivgen® deployment. The impact of operations and maintenance is minimised if local operators service the device instead of OEMs, with an additional saving of between 0.03 and 25.50% across environmental impact categories. Although the marine hydrokinetic device is less environmentally harmful compared to diesel electricity generating sets, optimal deployment of the device is required to overcome some environmental burdens; agricultural land occupation, water depletion and metal depletion.
The results demonstrate that deployment of renewable electricity generation devices to off grid remote locations for electricity generation can have the same or less, environmental impact as urban grid systems
... However, Alaskans produce 48 metric tonnes of carbon dioxide per capita each year (8.18% of which is from electricity generation) [24]. The Alaskan Centre for Energy and Power have reported case studies involving the deployment of diesel [2], wind [25], solar PV [26], biomass technologies [27] and storage [28] alongside the transmission and integration of these [29,30]. ...
The long-term economic viability of offshore wind power is not only reliant on reducing installation, commissioning, and operations and maintenance costs, but also on the elimination of subsidies and grants. Current economic analyses use historical price and cost data to predict the levelised cost, net present value, payback period and internal rate of return from offshore wind. These analyses use parameters such as water depth at site, number and size of turbines, grid connection costs, equipment costs, revenue from the wholesale market price of electricity, operations and maintenance costs, revenue from subsidies and the cost of finance amongst others to build a model to determine the viability of the array. Here we review the challenges of accurately estimating levelised cost of energy (LCOE) for offshore wind outlining differing approaches to calculating LCOE, the factors influencing this, and the impact of variation in LCOE calculation. Current costs for the production of offshore wind energy are summarised based on publicly available datasets.
... The Capital cost and maintenance cost varies with the type of boiler. The boilers have a lifetime of 20-30yrs (Erin et al., 2017). The biomass conversion technique based on application is given in Figure 11. ...
EPA-report-Revised-signed.pdf for Test Report: Model WHS2000 Solid Fuel Hydronic Furnace
- Intertek
Appropriate Designs Google Scholar
- J Siegenthaler
G100248857MID-006R-REVISED-06232011-signed.pdf for Test Report: Model WHS1500V Solid Fuel Hydronic Furnace
- Intertek
for Test Report: Model WHS2000 Solid Fuel Hydronic Furnace
- Intertek
Model WHS2000 Solid Fuel Hydronic Furnace
- Intertek
- For Test Report