Biomass-Gasifier/Gas Turbine

Cogeneration in the Pulp and

Paper Industry
Increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide from fossil fuel combustion is raising new
interest in using renewable biomass for energy. Modest-scale cogeneration systems
using air-blown gasifiers coupled to aeroderivative gas turbines are expected to have
E. D. Larson high efficiencies and low unit capital costs, making them well-suited for use with
Center for Energy and
biomass. Biomass-gasifier/gas turbine (BIG/GT) technology is not commercial,
Environmental Studies,
School of Engineering and Applied Science,
but efforts aimed at near-term commercialization are ongoing worldwide. Estimated
Princeton University,
performance and cost and prospects for commercial development of two BIG/GT
Princeton, NJ 08544 systems are described, one using solid biomass fuel (e.g., wood chips), the other
using kraft black liquor. At an energy-efficient kraft pulp mill, a BIG/GT cogen-
eration system could produce over three times as much electricity as is typically
produced today. The mill's on-site energy needs could be met and a large surplus
of electricity would be available for export. Using in addition currently unutilized
forest residues for fuel, electricity production would be nearly five times today's
level. The total cost to produce the electricity in excess of on-site needs is estimated
to be below 4 cents per kWh in most cases. At projected growth rates for kraft pulp
production, the associated biomass residue fuels could support up to 100 GW of
BIG/GT capacity at kraft pulp mills worldwide in 2020 (30 GW in the US). The
excess electricity production worldwide in 2020 would be equivalent to 10 percent
of today's electricity production from fossil fuels.

Introduction
Biomass energy substituted for fossil fuels could help reduce processes. One potentially large market for BIG/GT units is
carbon dioxide emissions that are contributing to the green- in the sugar cane processing industries, where bagasse (residues
house warming of the earth, since biomass absorbs the same left after crushing the cane) and barbojo (the tops and leaves
amount of carbon in growing as it releases when consumed as of the cane plant) could be used as fuel. The 1987 global level
fuel. A major challenge to using biomass for energy is to of cane production could support 95 GW of BIG/GT cogen-
identify conversion technologies for providing more conven- eration capacity, which would permit large quantities of elec-
ient energy forms, like electricity or liquid fuels, at competitive tricity in excess of on-site process needs to be produced
costs and at the modest scales dictated by the low efficiency competitively (Ogden et al., 1990). The pulp and paper industry
of photosynthesis. Power generation and cogeneration systems represents another possible near-term application of BIG/GT
using pressurized, air-blown biomass gasifiers integrated with technology where processing by-products would be the fuel.
power cycles involving aeroderivative gas turbines are one This paper assesses the performance, cost, and prospects for
promising set of technologies for "modernizing" bioenergy. commercialization of BIG/GT technologies for kraft pulp mills
These technologies have the potential for high efficiency and and explores the potential for cogenerating electricity in excess
low unit capital cost at modest scale (Larson et al., 1989; of on-site needs.
Larson and Williams, 1990).
Biomass-gasifier/gas turbine (BIG/GT) systems might even-
tually be fueled by biomass grown on dedictated energy plan- BIG/GT Technology
tations (Hall et al., 1990), but initial applications are likely to Two BIG/GT technologies are described here. One would
be where biomass fuels already exist as residues of industrial use solid fuels (e.g., wood chips, wood waste, crop residues,
etc.); the other, black liquor from kraft pulp production. Steam-
Contributed by the International Gas Turbine Institute and presented at the injected gas turbines (STIGs) and intercooled steam-injected
36th International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress and Exposition, Or- gas turbines (ISTIGs) are alternative aeroderivative turbine
lando, Florida, June 3-6, 1991. Manuscript received at ASME Headquarters
March 4, 1991. Paper No. 91-GT-280. Associate Technical Editor: L. A. Riek- cycles that are considered (Larson and Williams, 1987; Wil-
ert. liams and Larson, 1989). Gas-turbine/steam-turbine combined

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power OCTOBER 1992, Vol. 114 / 665

Copyright © 1992 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/05/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
 B10HASS
HOT FEEDSTOCK
PAR- TO
TICLE
FUEL STACK
CLEAN-
GAS UP
3000 - Typical Oxygen Blown,
Cold Gas Cleanup

HEAT
RECOVERY
STEAM
GENERATORS
2000
BOOST
COMP.

A - Typical Fixed Bed with

Hoi Gaa Cleanup

— G

STEAh INJECTED
GAS TURBINE 100 200 300
Power Output, MWe

Fig. 1 Biomass-gasifier/steam-injected gas turbine cycle Fig. 2 Cost comparison (in 1988 $) of coal-gasifier/gas turbine power
plants (Pitrolo and Graham, 1990). The upper curve represents technol-
ogy like the Cool Water commercial demonstration plant that uses a
Texaco entrained-bed gasifier, cold-gas cleanup, and a combined cycle.
The lower curve represents systems using air-blown fixed-bed gasifi-
cycles based on advanced aeroderivative turbines are also po- cation with hot gas clean up and either combined cycles or steam-
tential candidates. 1 injected gas turbines. The points on this curve are calculated costs for
specific plants using integral numbers of gasifiers and commercial gas
Solid-Biomass Gasifier/Gas Turbines. A biomass-gasi- turbines. See also Synthetic Fuels Associates (1983) for additional dis-
cussion of effects of scale on the cost of Cool Water technology.
fier/steam-injected gas turbine (BIG/STIG) fueled with solid
biomass (Fig. 1) would be similar in many respects to the more
familiar coal-gasifier/gas turbine (IGCC) technology com-
mercially demonstrated at Cool Water (Clark, 1988). Impor- make alternative biomass feedstocks acceptable for this gasifier
tant differences would include the use of air-blown instead of and the suitability of this design for biomass/gas turbine ap-
oxygen-blown gasification and a steam-injected gas turbine plications.
instead of a combined cycle. The sensitivity to scale of oxygen Fluidized-bed gasifiers have higher throughput capabilities
plants and conventional combined cycles makes the Cool Water and greater fuel flexibility than fixed-beds, including the ability
technology uneconomic for relatively smaller applications (Fig. to handle low-density feedstocks like undensified crop residues
2). Also, while the gas exiting the gasifier must be cleaned, so or sawdust (Larson et al., 1989). A major drawback of flu-
doing would not require developing advanced cleanup tech- idized-beds is the higher level of particulates in the raw gas,
nologies (as required for hot sulfur removal from coal), because which makes gas cleanup more challenging. Large-scale at-
most biomass contains negligible sulfur. Furthermore, biomass mospheric-pressure fluidized-bed gasifiers are commerically
is more reactive than coal and thus easier to gasify (Fig. 3), operating with biomass fuels to produce boiler fuel, and a
so that fixed-bed and fluidized-bed gasifiers, which operate at significant amount of work was also done in the late 1970s
lower average temperatures than entrained beds such as the and early 1980s on pressurized biomass-fueled units designed
one at Cool Water, can provide essentially complete carbon for use in methanol production.
conversion and high gasification efficiency (Larson et al., 1989). Perhaps the most important development issue for BIG/GT
technology relating to gasifier design is gas cleanup, specifically
Gasifier Design Options. The fixed-bed gasifier is attrac- removal of alkali compounds (formed primarily from potas-
tive for relatively dense fuels (wood chips, hog fuel, or densified sium and sodium in the feedstock) and particulates at elevated
biomass) because of its simplicity and high efficiency (Larson temperatures. Estimates of the tolerable concentration of alkali
et al., 1989). Among several fixed-bed units on which there vapors in fuel gas for gas turbine applications are very low—
has been development work during the last decade, the Lurgi 100 to 200 parts per billion (Horner, 1985; Scandrett and Clift,
dry-ash gasifier appears to be a good candidate for biomass 1984). The extent of alkali production and required removal
applications (Corman, 1987). Its use in coal-IGCC applications from biomass gas has not been measured. Based on coal-related
has been extensively evaluated (Corman, 1986). Limited pilot- work, however, the gasifier exit temperature appears to be the
scale testing has been carried out by the General Electric Com- most important controlling parameter. At fixed-bed gasifier
pany using biomass pellets and RDF/coal briquettes (Larson exit temperatures (500-600 °C) most of the alkalis appears to
et al., 1989). More extensive testing is required to determine condense on particulates and can thus be controlled by con-
the degree of fuel processing (e.g., densification) needed to trolling particulates. Particulate cleanup with fixed-bed gasi-
fiers appears possible using cyclones, based on data for coal
(Corman and Horner, 1986). Alkali that manages to reach the
Some advanced aeroderivative turbines with low expected costs will be better combustor would be in a chemically bound form and would
suited to combined cycles than to steam injection. For example, the LM-6000, not vaporize in short residence-time combustors (Corman,
which will enter commercial service in 1992, will produce 42.4 MW at a simple-
cycle efficiency greater than 36 percent (HHV basis, natural gas fuel) and will 1989). With fluidized-bed gasifiers (800-900°C exit tempera-
have an estimated gen-set equipment price of $230/kW to $250/kW (de Biasi, tures), some cooling of the gas would be required to condense
1990), much less than the $400/kW price for the most efficient (33 percent) alkalis. Also, more efficient particle removal technology would
aeroderivative gas turbine available today (Jersey Central, 1989). An LM-6000 be needed, e.g., barrier filters. Demonstration of a significant
based combined cycle would produce 53.3 MW at an expected efficiency of
some 48 percent (HHV). Because the gas turbine involved in this combined cycle new design for ceramic barrier filters, intended in part to over-
would be cheap and because the steam turbine would provide only 1/5 of the come the problems that traditional candle filters have in with-
output (compared to 1/3 for a combined cycle based on the use of industrial standing thermal and mechanical shock, is ongoing in Finland
gas turbines), the LM6000 combined cycle may prove competitive with much (Isaksson, 1989). Other designs are under development in the
larger combined cycles based on industrial turbines. See Stambler (1990) for
discussion of other advanced aeroderivative engines. US (Pitrolo and Graham, 1990).

666 / Vol. 114, OCTOBER 1992 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/05/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 0.9 "V 1 \ UVODAK COAL
-
o

§„.,
0-8

' V. •
fil •D/ /I
*/ //

7 111
a.)

J:/ j
(A) " °- 6 ^"^
(II)
S
3
0.5
- f I 1 I
° 0.4 . CELLULOSE
'a/ /

ON
5 °--i'
0.2

0.1 I . .. 500 600

Hi/
700 800 900
100 300 500 700 900
TEMPERATURE (°C) TEMPERATURE C O

Fig. 3 Comparison of gasification characteristics of biomass and coal (Larson et al., 1989): (a) weight loss
as a function of pyrolysis temperature for coal and cellulose (a major component of biomass); (b) gasification
rates in steam of chars from different feedstocks

Table 1 Performance and capital cost estimates of biomass power generating systems 3

Cogeneration Performance Full Installed

Maximum Electricity Capital
Electricity Process Steam Performance Cost'
(MW) (%Effic.) (kg/hr) (%Effic.) (MW) (%Effic.) (1990 $/kW)
15% mc Fuel
BIG/ISTIGb
LM-8000 97 37.9 76,200 25.4 111.2 42.9 890
BIG/STIG'
LM-5000 39 31.3 47,700 30.0 53 35.6 1150
LM-1600 15 29.8 21,800 33.8 20 33.0 1420
LM-38 4 29.1 5,700 32.4 5.4 33.1 1900
50% mc Fuel
BIG/STIG d 38.3 29.5 47,700 28.9 52.3 33.5 1250B
CEST' 37 10.0 319,000 52.1 77 20.9 1560
(a) All efficiencies are based on the higher heating value of the fuel. The indicated fuel moisture contents
(mc) of 15% and 50% are fractions of the wet weight of the biomass.
(b) Preliminary performance estimate derived from performance with coal (Ogden et al., 1990). In the
"full electricity performance" mode no process steam is produced.
(c) A previous estimate of BIG/STIG efficiency (Larson and Williams, 1990) was conservative, due
largely to use of a conservative gasification efficiency. However, it appears that gasifier efficiency with
biomass should be at least as high as with coal. The estimates here are based on gasifier efficiency equal
to that estimated for a coal-gasifier/STIG. In the "full electricity performance" mode no process steam
is produced.
(d) The lower efficiencies and slightly lower electricity production compared to the case with 15% mc
fuel reflect the estimated energy use associated with drying the fuel to 15-20% mc. See footnote 12 for
additional discussion of the drying technology assumed to be used here.
(e) This is a double-extraction/condensing steam turbine, with assumed boiler efficiency 68%, feedwater
temperature 182°C, turbine inlet steam conditions 6.2 MPa, 400°C. Maximum process steam corresponds
to operation with minimum flow to the condenser. Saturated process steam conditions are 12.9 bar (119
t/hr) and 4.4 bar (300 t/hr). Maximum electricity corresponds to minimum required extraction of 72 1/
hr of saturated steam at 4.4 bar.
(f) The unit installed costs for the BIG/ISTIG, BIG/STIG and CEST are given by the following equations
(Larson, 1990); ($/kW), ST1G = 2516(MW)" 0 ' 2 2 , ($/kW) S T I G = 2746(MW)' 0 ' 2 2 , and ($/
k W) CEST = 6279(MW) ~ 0 3 2 .
(g) Includes $86/kW for a steam-based drier (see footnote 12).

System Performance and Cost. Table 1 gives estimates of ogies offer flexibility in handling variable process steam de-
the performance of B I G / S T I G a n d B I G / I S T I G systems in m a n d s ( L a r s o n a n d W i l l i a m s , 1987). O p e r a t e d in the
cogeneration and power-only modes of operation assuming cogeneration m o d e , the gas turbine systems would produce
biomass fuel input with 15 percent moisture content (mc). 2 much less steam (as a fraction of fuel input) than the C E S T .
Gasifiers for B I G / G T systems require fuel with less than about Operated in either cogeneration or power-only modes, the gas
25 percent mc to produce a gas of acceptable quality for gas turbine is a more efficient electricity producer.
turbines. Gas turbine systems would also have capital cost advantages
Table 1 also compares the performance of a B I G / S T I G and over C E S T systems (Table 1). A 53-MW B I G / S T I G based on
a double-extraction condensing steam turbine (CEST) system the LM-5000 gas turbine would have a total installed cost of
(a commercially available option for biomass cogeneration), $1150/kW (or $ 1 2 5 0 / k W if costs for drying equipment are
taking account of the energy losses associated with drying the included). 3 The B I G / G T cost estimates are based on detailed
fuel for the B I G / S T I G . Both C E S T and B I G / S T I G technol- cost estimates for similar systems using coal as fuel, from which
3
Unless indicated otherwise, higher heating values are used for fuels through- Unless indicated otherwise, all costs in this paper have been converted to
out this paper. first-quarter 1990 dollars using the US GNP deflator.

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power OCTOBER 1992, Vol. 114 / 667

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/05/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 the costs for sulfur removal have been subtracted (Table 2). 4 Table 2 Cost estimates for coal and biomass-gasifier STIGs and ISTIGs
For comparison, a natural-gas LM-5000 STIG is estimated to (1990$/kW).
cost $650/kW to $760/kW (Larson, 1990). The cost advantage
of the BIG/GT units would increase over the CEST, the smaller STIG ISTIG
Coal" Biob* Coal" Biob'
the plant size, because of the lower sensitivity of gas turbine I. Process Capital Cost
system costs to scale (Larson and Williams, 1990). Fuel handling 45.9 45.9 42.5 42.5
Blast air system 15.6 15.6 11.1 11.1
Gasification plant 186.4 186.4 96.3 96.3
Commercialization Prospects. At least four major initia- Raw-gas physical cleanup 10.2 10.2 8.9 8.9
tives bearing on the commercial development of BIG/GT tech- Raw-gas chemical cleanup 202.8 0.0 174.8 0.0
nology are under way or have recently been announced Gas turbine/HRSG 341.1 341.1 297.1 297.1
Balance of plant
worldwide.5 Ahlstrom, a Finnish producer of biomass gasi-
Mechanical 46.6 46.6 38.2 38.2
fiers, plans to build a 6-10 MW e BIG/GT cogeneration dem- Electrical 75.3 75.3 56.1 56.1
onstration plant in Southern Sweden in collaboration with Civil 75.9 75.9 70.3 70.3
Sydkraft, a major Swedish electric utility (Ahlstrom and Syd- SUBTOTAL 999.8 797.0 795.3 620.5
kraft, 1990). The plant will use an Ahlstrom pressurized cir- II. Total Plant Cost
culating fluidized-bed gasifier, a proprietary alkali removal Process plant cost 999.8 797.0 795.3 620.5
system, and ceramic filters for particulates. The plant will begin Engineering home office (10%) 100.0 79.7 79.5 62.1
operating in 1993. Process contingency (6.2%) 62.0 49.4 49.3 38.5
In Brazil, a major electric utility in the Northeast has an Project contingency (17.4%) 174.0 138.7 138.4 108.0
SUBTOTAL 1,335.8 1,064.8 1,062.5 829.1
ongoing R&D program to develop biomass from planted for-
ests as a major fuel source for power generation, with con- III. Total Plant Investment
version to electricity using BIG/GT units (Carpentieri, 1990). Total plant cost 1,335.8 1,064.8 1,062.5 829.1
As part of the overall program initiated in 1982, the utility is AFDC (1.8%) 24.0 19.2 19.1 14.9
SUBTOTAL 1,359.8 1,084.0 1,081.6 844.0
currently planning a BIG/GT demonstration at the 18 MWE
level. The overall program goal is commercial implementation IV. Total Capital Requirement
of plantation-based BIG/GT systems starting in 1998. Total plant investment 1,359.8 1,084.0 1,081.6 844.0
Preproduction costs (2.8%) 38.1 30.4 30.3 23.6
In the US, the Department of Energy (DOE) announced in Inventory capital (2.8%) 38.1 30.4 30.3 23.6
late 1990 a major new program initiative to commercialize Initial chemicals, catalysts 2.9 0.0 2.7 0.0
BIG/GT technology (San Martin, 1990). Specific program goals Land 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.5
were not announced, but the overall target is commercialization
TOTAL 1440 1,146 1,146 898
of BIG/GT technology by the late 1990s. The USDOE also
recently selected the pressurized bubbling-fluidized bed REN- (a) F r o m (Corman, 1986) for 2 parallel gasifier/LM-5000 gas t u r b i n e
UGAS gasifier developed by the Institute of Gas Technology t r a i n s (total o u t p u t 101 MW) for t h e STIG a n d a single gasifier/LM-
(IGT) for a large-scale gasification demonstration (Babu, 1990). 8000 gas t u r b i n e for t h e ISTIG (109 MW).
A pressurized pilot-scale RENUGAS unit has extensive op- (b) Costs for t h e biomass-based p l a n t s are a s s u m e d to be the s a m e
erating experience on a variety of biomass feedstocks (Evans as for coal, except t h a t the raw-gas chemical cleanup needed with
coal is excluded since i t would n o t be needed for most biomass.
et al., 1988). The scaled-up unit will be built in Hawaii and
be run initially on sugarcane bagasse (100 tonne per day ca- (c) A s s u m i n g a single gasifier/LM-5000 gas turbine for the STIG,
t h e n e t power o u t p u t would be 53 M W (see Table 1). T h e u n i t
pacity). Start-up is anticipated in late 1992. costs for this a r r a n g e m e n t would not be substantially different from
Also in the US, the Vermont Department of Public Service, a system with double t h e o u t p u t using two parallel t r a i n s (Corman,
in cooperation with in-state electric utilities, is exploring pos- 1990). T h e n e t power o u t p u t of t h e BIG/ISTIG is 111 M W (see
Table 1).
sibilities for a commercial demonstration of BIG/GT tech-
nology fueled by wood chips derived from forest management

operations (Sterzinger, 1990). The DOE, US Environmental

The BIG/ST1G cost estimate is consistent with the estimated cost for a 37-
MW BIG/combined-cycle plant designed in a feasibility study carried out at the
Protection Agency, and the US Agency for International De-
Shell International Petroleum Company (Elliott and Booth, 1990). The Shell velopment are jointly supporting pre-project gasification tests
design consisted of an Ahlstrom circulating fluidized-bed gasifier with ceramic- of the proposed fuels. The General Electric Company has
filter gas cleanup feeding a Rolls Royce RB211 aeroderivative gas turbine, which proposed undertaking these studies using the pilot-scale fixed-
would provide 27 MW of the plant's output. Overall efficiency on 15 percent bed gasifier and gas turbine simulator facility at its corporate
moisture content wheat straw was estimated to be 38-40 percent (HHV). The
total installed capital cost was estimated to be $1200-1300/kW for plants built research headquarters.
subsequent to the demonstration plant, which was estimated to cost $1600/kW
to $1700/kW. Kraft Black Liquor Gasifier/Gas Turbines. Worldwide
5
In addition to the development efforts described here dedicated to biomass, some 2.6 billion GJ of black liquor were produced in 1988 at
there are additional coal-related efforts ongoing with possible significance for
biomass. In Germany, the Rheinbraun/Uhde company recently joined with the
kraft pulp mills, 40 percent of this in the US (Larson, 1990).
Lurgi Company to plan construction of a 275 MW coal-IGCC demonstration Black liquor is the most important source of both energy and
plant in Germany that will use a pressurized gasifier marrying Rheinbraun/ chemicals in the pulp and paper industry. It will continue to
Uhde's HTW (High Temperature Winkler) design to Lurgi's circulating fluidized play a significant role in the US and other industrialized coun-
bed technology (Anon., 1990). The plant is scheduled for startup in 1995. Cur-
rently, a pressurized (13.5 bar) commercial HTW unit is operating on peat in
tries, as the pulp and paper industry is one of the few basic-
Finland for chemical synthesis (Larson et al., 1989). A 25-bar HTW coal-fueled materials processing industries that has strong growth potential
pilot plant has been running since Nov. 1989 in Germany. in these regions (Williams et al., 1987). Although most pulp
Tampella, a Finnish company, recently entered into a licensing agreement is made in industrialized countries today, production growth
with the Institute of Gas Technology (IGT) to commercialize IGT's U-GAS rates are highest in the developing world (FAO, 1982), so black
fluidized-bed gasifier, the technology from which IGT's biomass gasification
process, RENUGAS, was derived (Salo, 1990). Tampella is now building a 10 liquor will grow rapidly in importance in many of these regions
MWfuc!, 35-bar demonstration unit at its research headquarters in Tampere, as well.
Finland. Startup is scheduled for early 1991. Coal will be the primary fuel, but Black liquor is typically consumed today in Tomlinson re-
some biomass testing may also be undertaken. Tampella is planning to construct,
starting in 1993, a commercial-scale unit (150 MW fud ) that will fuel a gas turbine. covery boilers, a technology commercialized in the early 1900s.
The plant will most likely be located at one of Tampeiia's own pulp mills, using Steam is raised (usually to drive a steam turbine cogeneration
coal, waste bark, and pulp mill waste sludge for fuel. system) and a chemical smelt is produced containing NaC0 3

668 / Vol. 114, OCTOBER 1992 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/05/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 process steam Table 3 Heat balance for the MTCI pilot plant black liquor gaslfler with
cold-gas cleanup''

Energy per
Mass Energy tonne pulp°
flow flow Hard Soft
(kg/hr) (GJ/hr) (GJ/tp) (GJ/tp)
Inputs
Black liquor dry solids' 909 13.93 19.9 23.3
Outputs
Fuel gas (10.6 MJ/Nm3 HHV) 518.5 7.884 11.2 13.16
Export steam (42 bar, sat.) 950 2.557 3.65 4.27
Carbon recoverable 15 0.516 0.74 0.86
Losses
Flue at stack 3171 1.586 2.27 2.65
Hot salts discharge 392 0.265 0.378 0.44
Process gas to scrubber 1222 0.925 1.32 1.54
Heat loss from gasifier 0.193 0.276 0.32

(a) From (MTCI, 1990).

(b) A s s u m i n g 1.3 and 1.55 t o n n e s of dry black liquor are available
per tonne of air-dry pulp produced from hardwood and softwood
feedstock, respectively ( J a a k k o Poyry, 1989).
Fig. 4 Schematic MTCI black liquor gasification system (MTCI, 1990)
(c) T h e dry black liquor h a s a h e a t i n g value of about 15 GJ/dry
tonne (MTCI, 1990). T h e liquor is i n p u t to t h e gasifier as a 6 5 %
solids solution, t h e typical concentration of black liquor from
evaporators a t a kraft pulp mill.
and Na2S. The smelt is converted into NaOH and Na2S, which
is recycled for use in the pulping process (Grace and Malcolm,
1989). The high capital costs and smelt-water explosion risks
of Tomlinson recovery boilers and an interest in increasing the diluted with water and used in the product gas scrubber to
electrical output from pulp mill cogeneration systems have recover H2S and Na2S, which are recycled to the pulping proc-
motivated R&D work during the last 20 years on black liquor ess as green liquor. The expected performance of the pilot-
gasification for energy recovery. The market potential for ret- scale MTCI plant is shown in Table 3. Assuming all carbon
rofit applications alone is quite large, because many existing is converted, the overall gasification efficiency would be 60
recovery boilers will be due for replacement within the next percent on a higher heating value basis. Firing gas turbines
decade or so (Jaakko Poyry, 1989). with the gas would give estimated black liquor-to-electricity
conversion efficiencies of 21 percent for an LM5000 STIG and
Gasification Technologies. Promising development efforts 25 percent for an LM8000 ISTIG.7 At a kraft pulp mill pro-
ongoing today are on an entrained-bed gasifier by Chemrec, ducing 1000 tonnes of air-dry pulp per day (tpd), the available
a Swedish company (Stigsson, 1989), and on a fluidized-bed black liquor would be sufficient to support 55 MWs of STIG
unit by MTCI, an American company (Durai-Swamy et al., or 64 MWs of ISTIG capacity.
1989). In both cases the work is aimed at the near-term de- A preliminary estimate of the installed cost of an MTCI
velopment of modular atmospheric-pressure gasifiers that can gasification unit for a 1000 tpd pulp mill is $60-80 million
be used to expand the black liquor processing capacity of a (Warren, 1990), which is essentially the cost of a new Tom-
pulp mill without the capital-intensive replacement of the com- linson recovery boiler (Hunter, 1990). For purposes of prelim-
plete recovery boiler. The Chemrec and MTCI technologies inary economic analysis later in the paper, the cost for the
are at roughly the same stage of development. A Chemrec pilot gasifier is charged to chemical recovery rather than cogener-
plant processing 3 tons per hour (dry black liquor solids) is ation, giving rise to installed capital costs of $770/kW for the
currently under construction at a mill in Sweden, with a larger non-gasifier portion of a 55-MW black-liquor BIG/STIG and
commercial-scale unit planned for installation in a US mill in $750/kW for a 64-MW BIG/ISTIG.8
the mid-1990s. A 1 ton per hour MTCI gasifier will be installed
at a US mill in late 1991. Pressurized versions of these tech-
nologies appear to be good candidates for gas turbine appli- BIG/GT Application at Kraft Pulp Mills
cations, e.g., see Kignell (1990) and Kelleher (1985).6 Given Most kraft pulp mills today are designed to meet their on-
black liquor's chemical composition, particular development site steam and electricity needs using all of the biomass fuels
effort should be focused on alkali removal from the fuel gas currently available at the mill. Steam is raised in recovery and
to make it suitable for gas turbine use. waste-wood boilers to drive a back-pressure steam turbine co-
generation system. If an additional design objective were to
Performance and Costs. Estimates of the performance and increase production of electricity for export, then improving
costs of the MTCI technology are used here for a preliminary the end-use electricity efficiency of the mill and adopting co-
evaluation of gas turbine applications of black liquor gasifi- generation technologies having higher electricity-to-heat ratios,
cation. The MTCI gasifier uses a pulse combustor with in-bed like BIG/GTs, would be important. The possibilities for ex-
heater tubes providing heat to gasify the black liquor (Fig. 4). porting electricity are explored here.
A product gas cooler and flue gas heat recovery steam generator
produce steam. Dry NaCQ3 is discharged from the gasifier, Hypothetical Pulp Mill Case Study. The application of
BIG/GT systems to a hypothetical kraft pulp mill is explored

While pressurization would be desirable, it may not strictly be necessary.

For example, the MTCI technology produces a relatively high heating value gas
7
(Table 3) without using oxygen and cools the gas during wet scrubbing, so that In cogeneration operation, the fraction of input black liquor energy converted
costs to compress the gas to gas turbine combustor pressures may not be pro- to steam and electricity, respectively, would be an estimated 18 and 18 percent
hibitive. To produce a gas with an equally high heating value using the Chemrec with STIG and 13 and 22 percent with ISTIG.
8
technology would require use of oxygen instead of air, but at the relatively large These costs are developed from Table 2 assuming zero cost for the fuel
scale of most pulp mills, oxygen could probably be provided at acceptable cost. handling, blast air, gasification plant, and gas cleanup equipment. Other equip-
(In the future, many pulp mills will have oxygen plants on-site to supply oxygen ment costs are assumed to be the same as shown in Table 2. Total costs are
delignification systems that reduce chlorine use for bleaching.) assumed to follow the scaling laws given in Table 1, note (f).

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power OCTOBER 1992, Vol. 114 / 669

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/05/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 4 Steam and electricity demands (net of powerhouse) at a modern bleached sulfate pulp mill in the
Southeastern US"

Steam Steam
@ 13 bar @ 4.4 bar Total Steam Electricity
End Use OVrir) (GJ/tp) (t/hr) (GJ/tp) (t/hr) (GJ/tp) (kWh/tp)

Black liq. evaporation _. _ 84.1 4.33 84.1 4.33 66.0

Pulp drying 69.5 3.64 5.9 0.30 75.4 3.94 153.4b
Digester 19.1 1.00 23.2 1.19 42.3 2.19 145.9C
Dearator - - 34.1 1.75 34.1 1.75 -
Chemicals generation - - 20.9 1.08 20.9 1.08 73.5d
Chip pre-steaming - - 13.6 0.70 13.6 0.70 -
Chiller/HVAC - - 13.6 0.70 13.6 0.70 4.6
Bleaching - - 10.0 0.51 10.0 0.51 88.8"
Fluid-bed calciner - - - - - - 42.5
Other 10.9 0.57 9.5 0.49 20.4 1.06 81.5 r
TOTAL 99.5 5.21 214.9 11.05 314.4 16.26 656.2

(a) Based on measurements from a mill in the Southeastern region of the US producing 1000
tonnes of air-dried pulp per day. The mill was started up in 1981. The data here are for
typical summer operation. The powerhouse requires approximately an additional 24% steam
and 19% electricity over the totals shown in this table.
(b) Consists of 35.3 kWh/tp, 117.1 kWh/tp, and 0.96 kWh/tp for stock preparation, dryer, and
finishing & shipping, respectively.
(c) Consists of 43.2 kWh/tp and 102.7 kWh/tp for digester and washing/screening, respectively.
(d) Consists of 10.1 kWh/tp and 63.4 kWh/tp for chemical preparation and oxygen supply to the
delignification stage, respectively.
(e) Consists of 41.5 kWh/tp and 47.3 kWh/tp to the bleach plant and the oxygen delignification
stage, respectively.
(f) Consists of 25 kWh/tp, 15.8 kWh/tp, 24.7 kWh/tp, 1.92 kWh/tp, and 14.1 kWh/tp to wood
preparation, water supply, air supply, odor control, and miscellaneous, respectively.

Table 5 Energy use (net of powerhouse) at Swedish bleached kraft pulp 3000
mills 3

Year ==> 1973 1980 1984 1990 {projected)

BIG/ISTIG
Steam (GJ/tp) 16.8 12.2 11.0 7.8 2000
Electricity (kWh/tp) 790 740 740 590

(a) Quantities are expressed per air-dried tonne of pulp. For 1973,
the average Swedish mill (Jonsson et al., 1977). For 1980, the most
efficient Swedish mill; for 1984, representing the most efficient
Swedish mill; and for 1990, the technically and economically •Si 1000
feasible level of demand in a new Swedish mill (Alsefelt, 1990). J-

based on data for a mill in the Southeastern US producing

1000 tpd of bleached sulfate pulp from loblolly pine. 9 The
biomass fuels available at the real mill currently consist of 10 20
black liquor (25.3 GJ per tonne of pulp produced), hog fuel
(bark, sawdust, etc.) derived from logs brought into the mill Steam (GJ/tp)
(7.0 GJ/tp), and additional purchased bark (2.0 GJ/tp). The Fig. 5 Steam and electricity production (net of the cogeneration plant)
mill's energy requirements (net of the cogeneration plant) with by-product fuels (7 GJ/tp hog fuel and 25.3 GJ/tp black liquor) at a
amount to 16.3 GJ/tp of process steam and 656 kWh/tp of hypothetical kraft pulp mill. Quantities are shown per tonne of air-dried
pulp produced. For the gas turbine systems, separate gasification of
electricity (Table 4). In addition, the calciner used to regenerate the hog fuel and black liquor are assumed. Also, 3.3 GJftp of black liquor
CaO from CaC0 3 in the chemical recovery loop of the mill has been assumed to be gasified to meet the calciner energy demand
requires 2 GJ/tp of fuel oil (or comparably clean fuel). (2 GJ/tp), and thus to be unavailable for steam and electricity production.
The hog fuel input to the gasifier is actually 6.7 GJ/tp, which accounts
Black Liquor and Hog Fuel Use. Assuming only black for energy required for drying the fuel. For the CEST, separate hog fuel
and recovery boilers are assumed. In addition, 2 GJ/tp of fuel would need
liquor and hog fuel are available at the hypothetical mill (no to be purchased for the calciner.
purchased bark), CEST, BIG/STIG and BIG/ISTIG systems
would cogenerate electricity and steam as shown in Fig. 5.
Some reduction in mill steam use would be needed to enable
any of the cogeneration systems to meet on-site steam de-
mand.10 On-site steam demand for the hypothetical mill would US mill's demand), 9.6 GJ/tp (41 percent less), and 8.2 G J /
need to be 13.8 GJ/tp (15 percent less than the Southeastern tp (50 percent less), respectively, for CEST, BIG/STIG, and
BIG/ISTIG systems. It appears that such reductions are pos-
sible, particularly if they can be built into the design of a
The mill is owned by a major producer that does not wish to be identified. greenfield mill (Table 5). The corresponding electricity pro-
Data we present relating to the mill are based primarily on measured values duction levels would be 535, 1684, and 2052 kWh/tp, respec-
corresponding to a typical efficient summer day of operation. tively. Some reduction in electricity demand would be needed
10
An alternative would be to increase steam production by augmenting the
available "free" fuel supply with purchased fuel, as the case-study mill does for the CEST to be able to supply all on-site electricity needs.
currently. This case is not considered here. An electricity audit at the Southeastern US mill indicated that

670 / Vol. 114, OCTOBER 1992 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/05/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 6 Wood produced as roundwood, logging residues, and other removals In the Southeastern US In
1986, and residues associated with pulpwood production from roundwood in this region

Volume of wood produced'

(million ft3) Pulpwood Residues produced
Round- Logging Other prodution" (tonnes per tonne of)
d
wood Residues Removals (% of total) pulpwood kraft pulp*
Growing Stockh
Softwood 2,415 192 229 67.5 0.024 0.067
Hardwood 925 193 214 22.2 0.114 0.319
Other Sources'
Softwood 111 61 29 5.1 0.809 2.27
Hardwood 276 201 156 5.2 1.297 3.63
Sub-totals
Softwood 2,526 253 258 72.6 0.079 0.222
Hardwood 1,200 394 370 27.4 0.339 0.948
Total 3,727 648 628 100.0 0.150 0.42

(a) From (Waddell et al., 1989). The Southeastern region of the US includes the states of Florida, Georgia,
North and South Carolina, and Virginia.
(b) Growing stock is defined as the main stem of live trees on timberland, between a 1-ft. (30.5 cm)
stump and 4-inch (10.2 cm) diameter top (of central stem) excluding bark, or to the point where the
central stem breaks into limbs. Roundwood from growing stock includes logs, bolts, and other round
timber generated from harvesting trees for industrial or consumer use. Logging residues include downed
and dead growing stock left on the ground after harvest. Other removals refer to unutilized wood from
cut or otherwise killed growing stock during cultural operations (e.g., from precommercial thinning), or
from timberland clearing.
(c) Roundwood "other sources" include salvable dead trees, rough and rotton cull trees, noncommercial
tree species, trees less than 5-inches (12.7 cm) diameter at breast height, tops, and roundwood harvested
from non-forest land (e.g., fence rows). Logging residues include wood other than growing stock left
on the ground after harvest that is sound enough to chip, including dead and downed cull tress and tops
to a 4-inch (10.2 cm) diameter (measured without bark) and excluding stumps and limbs. Other removals
include wood other than growing stock left on the ground after cultural operations (e.g., precommercial
thinning), or timberland clearing that is sound enough to chip (including dead and downed cull trees
and tops to a 4-inch (10.2 cm) diameter—excluding bark) and excluding stumps and limbs.
(d) Estimates based on (Tansey, 1990), assuming the same specific density for residues and roundwood
(38 lb/ft3 (609 kg/m3) for bone-dry wood). The first two numbers in this columns are weighted averages
for residues from the harvest of sawtimber and poletimber trees for pulpwood, assuming that 30% of
pulpwood comes from sawtimber and 70% from poletimber trees. The disaggregated residue ratios for
growing stock are 0.062 t/t (softwood) and 0.220 t/t (hardwood) for sawtimber trees and 0.007 t/t
(softwood) and 0.068 t/t (hardwood) for poletimber trees. [Sawtimber trees are those larger than 11
inches (27.9 cm) in diameter at breast height (dbh) for softwood and larger than 13 inches (33.0 cm)
dbh for hardwood. Poletimber trees are 5 to 10.9 inches (12.7 to 27.7 cm) dbh for softwood and 5 to
12.9 inches (12.7 to 32.8 cm) dbh for hardwood.] For "other sources," the residue ratios are assumed
to be the same as the average ratios calculated from the first three columns of this table. The last three
numbers in the column are weighted according to the percentage of pulpwood produced.
(e) Calculated assuming that 2.8 dry tonnes of pulpwood are used to produce one tonne of kraft pulp.
This is the average 1983 value for US sulphate pulp mills (American Pulpwood Association, 1989).

25 percent savings in electricity use would be cost-effective," considered in the analysis here, since pulp producers could
an estimate consistent with others that have been made (Larson reasonably be expected to be able to acquire these residues,
and Nilsson, 1991), which would reduce demand from 656 to but not necessarily the others.
492 kWh/tp. Reduced on-site electricity demand would permit It may be entirely feasible to remove all the residues in the
the BIG/GT systems to produce even greater excess electricity Southeastern US without damage to long-term soil productivity
that could be marketed off-site, e.g., sold to the local utility. (Larson, 1990), but local effects of residue removal must be
well understood before beginning residue use for power. In
Forest Residue Use. The exportable electricity production the harvest of coniferous trees today, about 3/4 of the above-
from the hypothetical mill could be increased further if cur- ground biomass is typically removed as merchantable wood,
rently unutilized forest residues, produced during commercial containing 40 to 50 percent of the tree's above-ground nitrogen,
harvest of forests, were used at the mill. Residues, as defined phosphorus, potassium, calcium, and magnesium (Freedman
here, exclude roots, stumps, branches, needles and leaves. The etal., 1981). Some additional nutrients would be removed with
volume of forest residues currently produced in the South- residue use, but may not necessarily result in excessive nutrient
eastern US is about 1/3 the volume of harvested roundwood depletion (Carlisle and Methven, 1979) or degradation of soil
(Table 6). Some 0.42 tonnes of currently unutilized residues organic matter status. Knowing the nutrient balance alone
(equivalent to 8 GJ in energy terms) are associated with each appears insufficient to predict the effects of residue removal
tonne of kraft pulp produced. Additional residues equivalent on subsequent soil productivity, because of complex, site-spe-
to 21 GJ/tp are produced in forest-industry operations other cific climatologic, geologic, hydrologic, and biological con-
than pulpwood production. Only the 8 GJ/tp of residues are siderations (Carlisle and Methven, 1979; Norton, 1976; Mann
et al., 1988). It is clear, however, that forest productivity over-
all can be raised substantially through improved forest man-
11
agement and advanced genetic manipulations (Farnum et al.,
This estimate is based on a 3-week on-site audit of the existing electrical 1983; Wells and Jorgensen, 1978; Linder, 1989; Davey, 1989).
system at the mill. The potential savings would come largely from trimming Residue removal for power generation might be made an in-
pump impellers to reduce inefficiencies due to oversizing and installation of
variable speed drives on large pumps and fans. tegral consideration of such developments. Modifications in

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power OCTOBER 1992, Vol. 114 / 671

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/05/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 4000 private ownership. Using only hog fuel and black liquor, the
busbar costs are 7.8 cents, 3.2 cents, and 2.6 cents per kWh,
respectively, for the CEST, BIG/STIG, and BIG/ISTIG. Add-
i 3000
ing the forest residues, the estimated costs are 6.6-7.6 cents,
3.9-4.3 cents, and 3.2-3.5 cents per kWh.
e With private ownership, the real internal rate of return before
+•* taxes and corrected for inflation (IRR) would be less than 3
u percent per year for CEST, 13-16 percent per year for BIG/
3 2000 STIG, and 21-23 percent per year for BIG/ISTIG when excess
« electricity is sold for 5 cents per kWh (Table 7). Revenues from
electricity sales would be up to $124/tp. For comparison, pro-
ducing bleached kraft pulp at a modern mill costs about $400/
1000 tp.
u The economic analysis here is applicable to a new mill, as-
suming a greenfield pulp mill incorporating energy efficiency
s improvements (excluding the cogeneration plant) would cost
about the same as a conventional-technology greenfield mill.
Existing CEST BIG/STIG BIG/ISTIG To assess the economics of retrofit applications to existing mills,
Fig. 6 Electricity production at a hypothetical 1000 tonne of pulp per the cost of end-use efficiency improvements would need to be
day kraft mill with alternative biomass cogeneration systems. A typical estimated. This has not been done here. However, the afford-
existing system produces 535 kWh/tp (not enough to meet on-site needs
without purchasing supplementary biofuel). For the CEST and BIG/STIG
able capital expenditure for retrofitting more efficient end-use
systems, the mill's process steam demand is assumed to be 9.6 GJ/tp. equipment can be estimated. For example, for an overall IRR
For the BIG/ISTIG it is assumed to be 8.2 GJ/tp. Calciner fuel demands of 12 percent with excess electricity sold for 5 cents per kWh,
are assumed to be met as described in the caption of Fig. 5. the allowable capital cost for end-use retrofits at a mill installing
a black-liquor/hog-fuel BIG/STIG or BIG/ISTIG would be
$37 million or $79 million, respectively.13
forestry practices may raise unit costs of producing biomass,
or resulting productivity gains could lower costs. Industry, Electric Utility, and Global Impacts. The results
for the hypothetical mill can be extrapolated to provide a rough
Assuming productivity issues relating to residue removal can
estimate of the global potential for use of BIG/GTs in the
be adequately addressed, utilizing the 8 GJ/tp of forest residues
kraft pulp industry. Assuming global chemical-pulp produc-
for electricity production at a pulp mill would lead to total
tion grows to the year 2020 at regional rates projected for the
electricity production from CEST, BIG/STIG, and BIG/IS-
period 1980-2000 by the Food and Agriculture Organization
TIG systems as shown in Fig. 6. The most efficient system,
(FAO, 1982), up to some 676 TWh of exportable electricity
BIG/ISTIG, would produce nearly five times the electricity
could be produced using black liquor, hog fuel, and forest
typically generated today.
residues as fuel (Table 8) from some 100 GW of installed BIG/
Economics. The economics of producing excess electricity ISTIG generating capacity. This electricity production is equiv-
at the hypothetical mill will depend largely on the cost of the alent to 10 percent of the current global total from fossil fuels,
feedstocks. Here, hog fuel and black liquor are assigned a or 14 percent of the total from coal.
value essentially equivalent to their energy value today: The For the US, which has the world's largest kraft pulp industry,
cogeneration facility supplies on-site steam and electricity to the 1988 level of chemical pulp production would allow pro-
the mill in exchange for these fuels. All other costs of cogen- duction of up to 111 TWh per year of excess electricity (using
eration are charged to the electricity produced in excess of on- BIG/ISTIG) or about 7 percent of all electricity production
site use. Costs for forest residues will vary locally, but would from coal (Energy Information Administration, 1989a). The
probably be in the range of $2-$3/GJ delivered to the mill at maximum associated export electricity production in 2020, as-
50 percent moisture content, e.g., see Envirosphere (1986) and suming 1.9 percent per year growth in pulp production (FAO,
Fulkerson et al. (1989). This is roughly the cost for wood that 1982), would be 204 TWh per year from some 30 GW of
might be grown on energy plantations (Kulp, 1990; Perlack installed capacity. This would be equivalent to 13 percent of
and Ranney, 1987), which might provide a competitive alter- the current electricity generation from coal. The corresponding
native source of fuel. Some sizing (e.g., hogging or chipping) biofuel consumption would be 3.3 billion GJ, or 7 percent of
and drying would be required for the gas turbine systems, the estimated potential economically available US biomass re-
raising the cost of residues to $3-$4/GJ. 12 The CEST systems sources (Larson, 1990).
would not require the extra fuel processing.
The estimated costs of producing excess electricity at hy- Conclusions
pothetical energy-efficient pulp mills using alternative cogen-
eration technologies are shown in Table 7 assuming utility or The biomass-gasifier/gas turbine (BIG/GT) is a promising
technology for biomass electricity generation because of ex-
pected high efficiencies and low unit capital costs at the modest
scales appropriate for biomass applications and the good near-
12
Drying wood chips from 50 to 20 percent moisture content is estimated to
term prospects for its commercialization. Kraft black liquor
cost about $0.55/GJ, based on a commercial system, which condenses saturated gasifiers are undergoing commercial development for the re-
15-bar steam to provide heat and which evolves saturated 3-bar steam from the covery boiler replacement market. They may be developed for
wood chips (Muenter, 1990). The 3-bar steam can then be used, e.g., in the BIG/GT applications over a longer period.
digester, bleach plant, or evaporators at the mill. Drying 150 MW of biofuel
(roughly the fuel use for an LM5000 BIG/STIG) requires 30 t/h of 15-bar steam Dedicated bioenergy plantations may cost-effectively pro-
and produces about 20 t/h of 3 bar steam, which corresponds to a net steam vide fuel for BIG/GT applications in the long term, but initial
use of about 15 GJ/h. Electricity use is 0.75 MWh/h. Total capital cost for the applications are likely to be fueled with by-products of in-
dryer is estimated to be $4.5 million. With electricity costing 5 cents/kWh and dustrial processes, since large quantities are currently available
input steam valued at $3.9/GJ sl „ m (its value if used to produce electricity selling
for 5 cents/kWh), the total cost for capital, electricity, and input steam comes
to S0.80/GJ of fuel produced. Assigning to the produced 3-bar steam a value For mills where the forest residues would also be used, the affordable retrofit
of $l/GJ s t c a „ results in a credit of S0.25/GJ of fuel, giving a total cost of $0.55/ costs would be $11 or $32 million for the BIG/STIG, assuming high- or low-
GJrilei. cost residues (Table 7), and $71 or $92 million for the BIG/ISTIG.

672 / Vol. 114, OCTOBER 1992 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/05/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 7 Economics of excess electricity production at a hypothetical 1000 tpd kraft pulp mill

Private Electricity
Fuels and Utility Ownership b Ownership' Sales Revenues
Cogeneration (Busbar Cost, cents per kWh) (Internal rate (GWh/ @ $0.05c/kWh
Technologies" Capital" O&M'! Fuel r TOTAL of return) year) ($/tp)
Black liquor
+ hog fuel
CEST 7.06 0.72 0.0 7.8 2.8 113 16
BIG/STIG 1.93 0.72 0.56 3.2 18.7 417 60
BIG/ISTIG 1.56 0.60 0.43 2.6 25.1 . 546 78
+ Forest residues
(low-cost case)
CEST 3.83 0.72 2.00 6.6 2.7 275 39
BIG/STIG 1.63 0.72 1.53 3.9 16.1 683 97
BIG/ISTIG 1.37 0.60 1.20 3.2 23.0 866 124
(high-cost case)
CEST 3.83 0.72 3.00 7.6 neg. 275 39
BIG/STIG 1.63 0.72 1.92 4.3 13.5 683 97
BIG/ISTIG 1.37 0.60 1.51 3.5 20.6 866 124
(a) Steam demands met by the cogeneration systems are 9.6 GJ/tp for CEST and BIG/STIG and 8.2
GJ/tp for BIG/ISTIG. Electricity demand is 492 kWh/tp in all cases. Typical annual operating hours
for a large pulping operation are assumed (8400 hours/yr).
(b) Assuming a 6.1% annual discount rate, an insurance charge equal to 0.5% of the initial capital cost
per year and a 30-year life. With property and corporate taxes and existing tax preferences for renewable
resource generating plants, the capital recovery factor (CRF) is 0.101 (Technology Evaluation Section,
1986).
(c) Real (inflation-corrected) internal rate of return before taxes, assuming a 25-year life, an insurance
charge equal to 0.5% of the initial capital cost per year, and electricity revenues of 5 cents per kWh.
(d) Separate gasifier/gas-turbine units are assumed for black liquor and solid feedstocks. Also, a capital
cost credit (equivalent to the cost of a Tomlinson recovery boiler) is assumed since the gasification system
would also be serving the mill's chemical recovery requirements (see footnote 8). The capital cost for
drying equipment needed with the BIG/GT units is included in the fuel cost (see footnote 12). In estimating
the CEST capital cost, use of a single steam turbine is assumed, and a credit is taken equal to the cost
of a Tomlinson recovery boiler.
(e) The O&M costs for the BIG/ISTIG are based on (Williams, 1989). BIG/STIG O&M costs are scaled
from the ISTIG number by the ratio of STIG to ISTIG efficiency. The CEST O&M costs are assumed
to be the same as for BIG/STIG.
(f) Fuel costs for CEST are assumed zero for hog fuel and black liquor. For BIG/STIG and BIG/ISTIG,
$1/GJ is charged for hog fuel for drying (see footnote 12) and other pre-gasification handling. No charge
for black liquor. The low and high forest-residue costs are assumed to be S3/GJ and $4/GJ charged to
the gas turbine systems, respectively. CEST charges are $2/GJ and S3/GJ. The lower costs for CEST
account for less required pre-processing (e.g., drying).

Table 8 Global potential for production of electricity in excess of on-site needs with BIG/ISTIG cogeneration
technology in the kraft pulp industry

1988 2020
Chemical Potential Utility fossil- Projected Potential
pulp electricity fuel electricity pulp electricity
production" from pulph generation' production* from pulph
Region (106 t/yr) (TWh/yr) (TWh/yr) s
(10 tp/yr) (TWh/yr)
Industrialized 95.8 238 5,231 204.6 507
N. America 57.8 143 2,106 105.1 262
USSR 7.1 18 1,181 34.7 86
W. Europe 19.5 48 954 30.4 75
Japan 7.9 19 470 19.0 48
Oceania 0.93 3 116 11.2 27
E. Europe 2.7 7 404 3.7 9
Developing 8.8 23 1,432 68.6 169
Latin Am. 5.6 14 216 35.4 88
Asia 2.5 7 1,021 24.0 59
Africa 0.67 2 194 9.2 22
World 104.7 261 6,662 273.1 676

(a) From (FAO, 1990).

(b) Assuming 2,474 kWh/tp of electricity production in excess of process needs at efficient kraft
pulp mills.
(c) From (Energy Information Adminstration, 1989b).
(d) Assuming projected production growth rates, 1980-2000 (FAO, 1982) persist till 2020. The
growth rates are 1.9%/yr, North America; 5.1%/yr, USSR; 1.4%/yr, Western Europe; 2.8%/yr,
Japan; 8.1%/yr Oceania; 1%/yr, Eastern Europe; 5.9%/yr, Latin America; 7.3%/yr, Asia (excluding
Japan); and 8.5%/yr, Africa.

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power OCTOBER 1992, Vol. 114/673

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/05/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 at reasonable costs. The kraft pulp industry is a maj or producer Trees, Marcus Wallenberg Symposia Proceedings: 6, Falun, Sweden, pp. 33-
of biomass fuels (black liquor, hog fuel, and forest residues). 61.
de Biasi, V , 1990, "LM6000 Dubbed the 40/40 Machine Due for Full-Load
BIG/GT systems using these for fuel could produce large quan- Tests in Late 1991," Gas Turbine World, May-June, pp. 16-20.
tities of electricity in excess of on-site needs at kraft pulp mills Durai-Swamy, K., Warren, D. W., and Mansour, M. N., 1989, "Pulse-En-
at total levelized busbar costs of 3.2 to 4.3 cents per kWh hanced Indirect Gasification for Black Liquor Recovery," Proceedings, 1989
(assuming utility ownership) or pre-tax internal rates of return International Chemical Recovery Conference, TAPPI, Atlanta, GA.
Elliott, P., and Booth, R. T., 1990, "Sustainable Biomass Energy," selected
of 13 to 23 percent per year (assuming private ownership). papers, Shell International Petroleum Company, London.
The large quantities of electricity that could be exported Energy Information Administration, 1989a, Electric Power Annual 1988,
from pulp mills could reduce the need for building new utility DOE/EIA-0348(88), US Dept. of Energy, Washington, DC.
power plants and could help offset C 0 2 emissions associated Energy Information Administration, 1989b, International Energy Annual 1988,
DOE/EIA-0219(88), US Dept. of Energy, Washington, DC.
with fossil-fueled plants. To achieve the high levels of excess Envirosphere, Inc., 1986, Regional Logging Residue Supply Curve Project (2
electricity production would require some energy efficiency volumes), for the Bonneville Power Administration, Pacific Northwest and Alaska
improvements at pulp mills and the use of forest residues Regional Bioenergy Program, Bellevue, WA.
associated with pulp wood production. The high expected rates Evans, R. J., Knight, R. A., Onischak, M., and Babu, S. P., 1988, Devel-
opment of Biomass Gasification to Produce Substitute Fuels, PNL-6518, Battelle
of return may make large-scale biomass electricity production Pacific NW Lab., Richland, WA.
an interesting proposition for the pulp industry. The expertise FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 1982, World Forest Products
in the industry with producing, harvesting, and processing Demand and Supply 1990 and 2000, Forestry Paper 29, United Nations, Rome.
biomass fuels and the continued market strength projected for FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 1990, 1988 Yearbook of Forest
the industry make it particularly well-positioned to undertake Products, United Nations, Rome.
Farnum, P., Timmis, R., and Kulp, J. L., 1983, "Biotechnology of Forest
such an endeavor. Utilities might take an interest because the Yield," Science, Vol. 219, Feb., pp. 694-702.
power generation would represent small increments of rela- Freedman, B., Morash, R., and Hanson, A. J., 1981, "Biomass and Nutrient
tively low capital cost capacity that would be competitive at Removals by Conventional and Whole-Tree Clear-Cutting of a Red Spruce—
the busbar with many other new sources of utility electricity. Balsam Fir Stand in Central Nova Scotia," Can. J. For. Res., Vol. II, pp. 249-
257.
Fulkerson, W., et al., 1989, "Energy Technology R&D: What Could Make
a Difference?" ORNL-6541/V2/P2, Oak Ridge National Lab., Oak Ridge, TN,
Dec, Table 2.4-3.
Acknowledgments Grace, T. W., and Malcolm, E. W., 1989, Pulp and Paper Manufacture, Vol.
5: Alkaline Pulping, TAPPI, Atlanta, GA.
This research was supported by the Winrock International Hall, D. O., Mynick, H. E., and Williams, R. H., 1991, "Alternative Roles
Institute for Agricultural Development, the Office of Energy for Biomass in Coping With the Greenhouse Warming," Science and Global
of the US Agency for International Development, and the US Security, Vol. 2, pp. 113-151.
Environmental Protection Agency. The author thanks Robert Horner, M. W., 1985, "Simplified IGCC With Hot Fuel Gas Combustion,"
ASME Paper No. 85-JPGC-GT-13.
Williams for useful comments on draft versions of this paper Hunter, W. D., 1990, Weyerhauser Co., Tacoma, WA, personal communi-
and Jason Mark for assistance in the data analysis and cal- cation, Nov.
culations relating to energy production and use in the South- Isaksson, J., 1989, Ahlstrom Research and Development Center, Karhula,
eastern US pulp mill. Finland, personal communication.
Jaakko Poyry Oy, 1989, Assessment of Market Prospects for the Chemrec
Black Liquor Gasification Process, Helsinki, Finland, Mar.
Jersey Central Power & Light Co. and Sargent & Lundy, 1989, "A Comparison
of Steam-Injected Gas Turbine and Combined-Cycle Power Plants: Technology
References Assessment," GS-6415, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA.
Ahlstrom Corp. and Sydkraft, AB, 1990, "Sydkraft AB, Sweden and A. Jonsson, S. E., Nygaard, J., and Wiberg, R., 1977, Models for Energy Use
Ahlstrom, Finland Goes Ahead With Unique Gasification Process," press re- in Pulp and Paper Mills: Bleached Sulfate Pulp Mills, Swedish Pulp and Paper
lease, Nov. 7, Helsinki, Finland, and Malmo, Sweden. Association, Stockholm, Sweden.
Alsefelt, P . , 1989, Energy From the Forest Industry, Swedish Tech. Devel- Kelleher, E. G., 1985, "Black Liquor Gasification and Use of the Product
opment Board, Stockholm, Sweden. Gas in Combined-Cycle Cogeneration—Phase I I , " Tappi Journal, Nov., pp.
American Pulpwood Association, 1989, Pulpwood Statistics, Washington, 106-110.
DC, Nov. Kignell, J. E., 1990, "Novel Concept for Chemicals and Energy Recovery
Anon., 1990, "West German Companies to Jointly Offer High Temperature From Black Liquor," Proceedings oftheEUCEPA, SPCI, Stockholm, Sweden,
Power Units," Clean-Coal/Synfuels Letter, McGraw-Hill, New York, June 11, May.
p. 1. Kulp, J. L., 1990, "The Phytosystem as a Sink for Carbon Dioxide," EN-
Babu, S., 1990, Institute of Gas Technology, Chicago, Illinois, personal com- 6786, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA.
munication, Nov. Larson, E. D., and Williams, R. H., 1987, "Steam-Injected Gas Turbines,"
Carlisle, A., and Methven, I. R., 1979, "The Environmental Consequences ASME JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER, Vol. 109, pp.
of Intensive Forestry and the Removal of Whole Trees," Biological and Soci- 55-63.
ological Basis for Rational Use of Forest Resources for Energy and Oganics, Larson, E. D., Svenningsson, S., and Bjerle, I., 1989, "Biomass Gasification
US Department of Agriculture, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Ashe- for Gas Turbine Power Generation," Electricity: Efficient End-Use and New-
ville, NC, pp. 108-120. Generation Technologies, and Their Planning Implications, Lund University
Carpentieri, E., 1990 (Division Chief, Alternative Energy Sources, Hydroe- Press, Lund, Sweden, pp. 697-739.
lectric Company of Sao Francisco, Brazil), "Forest Plantations for Utility Elec- Larson, E. D., 1990, "Biomass-Gasifier/Gas-Turbine Applications in the Pulp
tricity in Northeast Brazil," presented at Winrock International Institute for and Paper Industry: An Initial Strategy for Reducing Electric Utility C 0 2 Emis-
Agricultural Development, Arlington, VA, Nov. 15. sions," Proc. Ninth Conference of Coal Gasification Power Plants, Electric
Clark, E., 1988, "Cool Water Gasification Program: An Update," EPRI Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA.
Journal, Electric Power Research Institute, Sept., pp. 45-48. Larson, E. D., and Williams, R. H., 1990, "Biomass-Gasifier Steam-Injected
Corman, J. C , 1986, Systems Analysis of Simplified IGCC Plants, for US Gas Turbine Cogeneration," ASME JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TUR-
Department of Energy by General Electric Corp. Research Center, Schenectady, BINES AND POWER, Vol. 112, pp. 157-163.
NY. Larson, E. D., and Nilsson, L. J., 1991, "Electricity Use and Efficiency in
Corman, J. C , and Horner, M. W., 1986, "Hot Gas Clean-Up for a Moving Pumping and Air Handling Systems," ASHRAE Transactions, Vol. 97, Pt. 2,
Bed Gasifier," Proc. 5th Annual Contractors' Conference on Coal Gasification pp. 363-377.
(AP-4680), Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, Chap. 14. Linder, S., 1989, "Nutritional Control of Forest Yield," Nutrition of Trees,
Corman, J. C , 1987, "Integrated Gasification-Steam Injected Gas Turbine Marcus Wallenberg Symposia Proceedings: 6, Falun, Sweden, pp. 62-89.
(IG-STIG)," presented at the Workshop on Biomass-Gasifier Steam-Injected Mann, L. K.,etal., 1988, "Effects of Whole-Tree and Stem-Only Clearcutting
Gas Turbines for the Cane Sugar Industry (Arlington, VA), organized by the on Postharvest Hydrologic Losses, Nutrient Capital, and Regrowth," Forest
Center for Energy and Environmental Studies, Princeton University, Princeton, Science, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 412-428.
NJ. MTCI (Manufacturing and Technology Conversion International, Inc.), 1990,
Corman, J. C , 1989, General Electric Research and Development Center, Testing of an Advanced Thermochemical Conversion Reactor System, Battelle
Schenectady, NY, personal communication to R. H . Williams. Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA.
Corman, J. C , 1990, General Electric Research and Development Center, Muenter, C , 1990, Stork Friesland Scandinavia AB, Gothenberg, Sweden,
Schenectady, NY, personal communication, Aug. personal communication, Sept.
Davey, C. B., 1989, "Forest Fertilization in the Americas," Nutrition of Norton, S. A., 1976, "Nutrient Budgets of Complete Tree Harvesting Versus

674 / Vol. 114, OCTOBER 1992 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/05/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Merchantable Bole Requirements," New Horizons for the Chemical Engineer Stigsson, L., 1989, " A New Concept for Kraft Recovery," Proc, 1989 In-
in Pulp and Paper Technology, AIChE Symposium Series No. 157, Vol. 72, ternational Chemical Recovery Conference, TAPPI, Atlanta, GA.
American Institute of Chemical Engineers, New York, pp. 17-23. Synthetic Fuels Associates, 1983, "Coal Gasification Systems: A Guide to
Ogden, J. M., Williams, R. H., and Fulmer, M. E., 1990, "Cogeneration Status, Applications, and Economics," AP-3109, Electric Power Research In-
Applications of Biomass Gasifier/Gas Turbine Technologies in the Cane Sugar stitute, Palo Alto, CA.
and Alcohol Industries: Getting Started With Bioenergy Strategies for Reducing Tansey, J. B., 1990, Southeast Forest Experiment Station, Forest Service, US
Greenhouse Gas Emissions," Energy and Environment in the 21st Century, MIT Department of Agriculture, Asheville, NC, personal communication, Aug.
Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 311-346. Technology Evaluation Section, 1986, TAG—Technical Assessment Guide
Perlack, R. D., and Ranney, J. W., 1987, "Economics of Short-Rotation Vol. 1: Electricity Supply—1986, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto,
Intensive Culture for the Production of Wood Energy Feedstocks," Energy: the CA.
International Journal, Vol. 12, No. 12, pp. 1217-1226.
Waddell, K. L., Oswald, D. D., and Powell, D. S., 1989, Forest Statistics of
Pitrolo, A. A., and Graham, L. E., 1990, "DOE Activities Supporting IGCC
the United States, 1987, Resource Bulletin PNW-RB-168, USDA Forest Service,
Technologies," Proc. Conf. on Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle Plants
Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, Sept., p. 95.
for Utility Applications, Chap, la, Canadian Electrical Assoc, Montreal, Can-
Warren, D. W. (Manager of Engineering), 1990, MTCI, Sante Fe Springs,
ada.
CA, personal communication, Aug.
Salo, K. (Director of R&D), 1990, Tampella Corp., Helsinki, Finland, personal
communication, Sept. Wells, C. G., and Jorgensen, J. R., 1978, "Nutrient Cycling in Loblolly Pine:
San Martin, R. (Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Utility Technologies, Silvicultural Implications," Tappi Journal, Vol. 61, No. 1, Jan., pp. 29-32.
Division of Conservation and Renewables), 1990, "DOE Research on Biomass Williams, R. H., Larson, E. D., and Ross, M. H., 1987, "Materials, Afflu-
Power Production," presented at the conference on Biomass for Utility Appli- ence, and Industrial Energy Use," Annual Review of Energy, Vol. 12, pp. 99-
cations, Tampa, FL, Oct., pp. 23-25. 144.
Scandrett, L. A., and Clift, R., 1984, "The Thermodynamics of Alkali Re- Williams, R. FL, 1989, "Biomass Gasifier/Gas Turbine Power and the Green-
moval From Coal-Derived Gases," Journal of the Institute of Energy, Vol. 57, house Warming," Proc. IEA/OECD Expert Seminar on Energy Technologies
Dec, pp. 391-397. for Reducing Emissions of Greenhouse Gases, OECD, Paris, France.
Stambler, I., 1990, "New Generation of Industrialized Aero Engines Coming Williams, R. H., and Larson, E. D., 1989, "Expanding Roles for Gas Turbines
for Mid-1990s Projects," Gas Turbine World, July-Aug., pp. 19-22. in Power Generation," Electricity: Efficient End Use and New Generation Tech-
Sterzinger, G. (Commissioner), 1990, Dept. of Public Service, State of Ver- nologies, and Their Planning Implications, Lund University Press, Lund, Swe-
mont, Montpelier, VT, personal communication, Aug. den, pp. 503-553.

For Your ASME Bookshelf

Proceedings of the 1992 Industrial Power Conference

Editor: D A Kennedy

This volume presents the latest technology in the industrial power area, including papers on plant
operations and improvement, environmental technology and regulations, and cogeneration.

1992 ISBN 0-7918-0765-7 PWR-Vol. 17 132 pp.

Order No. G00659 $40 List/$32 ASME Members

To order write ASME Order Department, 22 Law Drive, Box 2300, Fairfield, NJ 07007-2300
or call 800-THE-ASME (843-2763) or fax 201-882-1717.

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power OCTOBER 1992, Vol. 114/675

Downloaded From: http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/05/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use