conventional and emerging technology applications for

11

Conventional and Emerging Technology Applications for Utilizing Landfill Gas

Presented by:Rachel Goldstein

US EPA LMOP

March 1, 2005California Biomass Collaborative Forum

Sacramento, California

22

AgendaUses of Landfill GasTechnologies- advantages and disadvantages

Direct UseElectricCHPMicrotubinesVehicle Fuel

33

EPA’s Landfill Methane Outreach Program

Established in 1994Voluntary program that creates alliances among states, energy users/providers, the landfill gas industry, and communities

Mission: To reduce methane emissions by lowering barriers and promoting the development of cost-effective and

environmentally beneficial landfill gas energy (LFGE) projects.

44

Why Use Landfill Gas?Local, available fuel sourceEasy to capture and useSource of renewable energyConstant supply - 24 hours a day, 7 days a weekReliable technologies exist for using landfill gas ->90% up timeUses a source of energy that otherwise would have been wastedHelps the environment by reducing uncontrolled emissions of landfill gas

55

Possible Uses

Direct Use

Combined Heat and Power

Electricity Production

Alternate Fuels

66

Direct Gas Utilization

BoilersDirect thermal applicationsInnovative applications

Greenhouses Infrared heaters Pottery kilns Leachate evaporation

77

Direct Gas Utilization

Gas piped to a nearby customer for use in boiler or in industrial process100 projects in the USPipeline length range from half mile to 23 milesGas used on-site

88

Direct Use: BoilersAdvantages

Can be used either in industrial process or for electricity generation in steam turbineMature technology

DisadvantagesNeed large landfill sizeEnd use facility may require boiler retrofits which can be expensiveNeed high pressure for steam turbine use

99

Direct Use: BoilersSizing

Generally require larger landfill size, 3-5 million tons of waste in place

Costs$1.50 to $3.50 per MMBtu, depending on

Need for boiler retrofitsWhether for use in industrial process or in steam turbine

1010

Direct Use: Thermal Applications

AdvantagesSimple technologyMinimal processing requirementsMost cost effective

DisadvantagesNeed energy user to be sited in close proximity to the landfillRight of way permitsLocal terrain may not be conducive to pipeline installation

1111

Direct Use: Thermal Applications

SizingApplicable to wide variety of landfill sizes

Costs$1.50 to $3.50 per MMBtu, depending on

Pipeline lengthCollection system in-place at landfillTerrain

1212

Combined Heat and Power

Large Industrial

Microturbine Applications

1313

Combined Heat and Power: Industrial

AdvantagesGreater overall energy recovery efficiency from waste heat recovery - up to 80% Specialized CHP systems availableFlexible - hot water or steam generation from recovered heat

DisadvantagesAdditional cost associated with electricity generation component

1414

Combined Heat and Power: Industrial

SizingGenerally applicable to mid to larger size landfills

CostsAvailable information indicate overall costs in the $1200-$2000 per kWh range.

1515

Combined Heat and Power: Microturbines

AdvantagesGreater overall energy recovery efficiency from waste heat recovery - up to 75% Specialized CHP systems availableFlexible - hot water or steam generation from recovered heatLow emissions and noise

DisadvantagesAdditional cost associated with electricity generation componentCost of gas conditioning to remove Siloxane

1616

Combined Heat and Power: Microturbines

SizingGenerally applicable to small to mid size landfills

CostsAvailable information indicate overall installed costs in the $1800-$3000 per kWh range.

1717

Electricity GenerationMost prevalent type of project in the US

In US, 1000 MW of capacity from over 200 operational projects

Electricity sold to utility, cooperative or nearby customerAverage project size: 3 MW (500 kW - 50 MW) 50 MW Steam Turbine, Puente Hills LF, CA

1818

Electricity Generation

Internal Combustion EnginesTurbinesMicroturbinesEmerging Technologies

Stirling EngineOrganic Rankine Cycle Engine

1919

Internal Combustion Engine

AdvantagesLow cost, high efficiency and reliabilityMost common technology

DisadvantagesProblems due to particulate matter buildupCorrosion of engine parts and catalystsHigh NOx emissions

2020

Internal Combustion Engine

Sizing1-3 MWs

Costs$1,100-1,300 ($/kW)

Major suppliersCat, Jenbacher, Waukesha, Deutz

2121

Small Internal Combustion Engine

AdvantagesFunction on low input landfill gas pressure (<1 psig)

DisadvantagesSimilar to larger IC engines

Man EO826E, Lean Burn, 55kW

MAN E2842 LE302 Lean Burn, 315 kW

2222

Small Internal Combustion Engine

Sizing55-800 kW

CostsNot easily available, expected to be lower than microturbine capital and O&M costs

Major suppliersMAN, LFG Specialties

2323

Turbines: Gas, Steam, and Combined Cycle

AdvantagesCorrosion resistantLow O&M costsSmall physical sizeLower NOx emissions

DisadvantagesInefficient at partial loadHigh parasitic loads, due to high gas compression requirements

2424

Turbines: Gas, Steam, and Combined Cycle

Sizing1-10MWs

Costs$1,200-1,700 ($/kW)

Major suppliers: Cat, Fairbanks-Morse

2525

MicroturbinesAdvantages

Low emissions Multiple fuel capabilityLight weight/small sizeFuel pretreatment not requiredLower maintenance costs

DisadvantagesLow efficienciesPrimarily tested for natural gas applicationsLess proven technology

2626

MicroturbinesSizing

30-250 kW

CostsEquipment Costs: $1,200-$2,000 ($/kW)Installed Costs: $2,200 - $3,500 ($/kW)Maintenance Costs: $0.01-0.015 ($/kW)

Allied Signal Parallon 75

2727

Emerging TechnologiesStirling External Combustion Engine

AdvantagesLower emissionsReliable, scalable, fewer moving parts

DisadvantagesLimited track record of performance

2828

Emerging TechnologiesStirling External Combustion Engine (Continued)

Sizing25 - 55 kW

CostsO&M approximately 0.8 cents/kWCapital Cost - limited information, demonstration project in Michigan should provide more detailed costs

2929

Emerging TechnologiesOrganic Rankine Cycle Engine

AdvantagesProvides up to 225 kW electrical powerFree fuel - waste heat poweredNo additional emissionsLow life-cycle cost

DisadvantagesNew unproven technology for LFG

3030

Alternate Fuels

High-Btu Upgrade

Vehicle Fuels LNG/CNG

3131

Alternate Fuels –High-Btu Upgrades

TechnologyGas is purified from 50% to 97% or 99% methaneRemoval of Carbon dioxide is primary step

AdvantagesInject treated product into pipelineReduction in use of fossil fuelsReduce local ozone pollution

DisadvantagesMust meet strict standards of pipelineCostly technology Limited track record of performance

3232

Alternate Fuels –High-Btu Upgrades

SizingEconomical for large scale only

CostsCapital Costs for 2000 cubic ft/min. system range from $3 million to $4 millionO&M costs range from $0.82 to $1.12 per MMBtu

3333

Alternate Fuels - Vehicle FuelCompressed landfill gas (CNG)

Liquefied landfill gas (LNG) -CryoEnergy®

Bio-Diesel

3434

Alternate Fuels- Vehicle FuelAdvantages

LNG/CNG price lower than diesel fuel costReduction in use of fossil fuelsReduce local ozone pollution

DisadvantagesVery small percentage of alternative-fuel vehicles Vehicle conversion costsLimited track record of performance

CostsRetrofit vehicles = $3,500 to $4,000 per vehicleFueling station = $1,000,000 Fuel price = $0.48 to $1.26 per gallon

3535

California OpportunitiesCurrently there are close to 80 landfill gas energy projects operational, with additional 5 projects under construction.A total of 280 MW of energy being produced.There are an additional 43 candidate landfills around the state with estimated project potential of 50 MWs of energy.Microturbines

11 operational projects in California, utilizing over 50 microturbine unitsGenerating 2,710 kW of power

3636

SummaryMany ways to beneficially utilize LFGAvailable niche technologies range from research and development stage units to commercially available systemsTechnologies exist for low and high volumes of LFG productionSelection of technology is project specific

3737

Summary, continued….

Key Selection considerations include:

Environmental performanceReliabilityAccuracy of assumptionsPermitting issues – emissionsCost