On 19/04/2012 5:00 AM, [email protected] wrote:
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Gasification digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Knoef et al's proposed criteria (Peter& Kerry)
Hi Pete,
A few comments below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 10:00:14 +1000
From: Peter& Kerry<[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Knoef et al's proposed criteria
Message-ID:<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 18/04/2012 5:00 AM, David Coote wrote:
Whoever first gets a small-scale gasifier up that meets Knoef et al's
proposed criteria on whether or not a gasification technology is
commercial could do very well.
David,
You are quite right about the numerous "enormous amount of small-scale
biomass assets dotted around the countryside" and the 1500tonnes/yr is
typical, on a 2500hr/yr duty cycle approximating their normal working
days this equates to around 600kg/hr or for arguments sake a nominal
500kWe system. You will find that in practice that this cannot be
connected to the grid in the majority of locations where this resource
is available, (even at the a nominal 150-200kWe rating if running 24/7)
so unless there is a on-site power requirement at this level it is still
no go. This is the reality we rudely discovered when we first built a
reliable system capable of this scale. In fact even where the grid
infrastructure can support it we have found utilities over here
extremely reluctant.
It does seem to be very much a matter of having all your technical
details available in the form they want so that you can demonstrate that
you will disconnect from the grid when it's down, your power quality
will be good etc It's simple now to get PV's - up to 100kWe anyway -
connected to the grid in Oz as the regulators/utilities are comfortable
with the technical issues. 20 years ago this was definitely not the
case. When I suggested to the Vic regulator in the mid-90's that we
should follow the US lead with PURPA the response was decidedly not
favorable. Now we have getting on for 1 million rooftop PV installations
in Oz. If you have new kit you can expect to have to jump through some
hoops.
As for supplying in to the grid as against supplying a co-located demand
on a levelised energy cost basis you will struggle in Australia to
compete against large coal fired stations producing electricity at a few
cents/kWh receiving perhaps 5-6c/kWh to supply into the grid. If you can
supply a co-located load that's paying the utility for power at, say,
10c-25c/kWh your economics start to look a lot better. If you start
bidding to supply into the grid to meet peak loads the price can be a
lot better but you will be on the hook to supply that power. Or to hedge
your supply which will cost you.
The point is benchmarks such as Knoef's in the end have limited value
because they assume in the first instance that the barrier to deployment
is technical centred only on the gasifier, when in fact it is only when
this is overcome that a lot of different and new barriers become
apparent.
My reading of the Workshop report is that Knoef et al were suggesting
those as minimum criteria for consideration as a commercial technology.
Obviously there are other considerations beyond these minimum criteria
that may influence the uptake of a technology.
Regards
David
_______________________________________________
Gasification mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
[email protected]
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_lists.bioenergylists.org
for more Gasifiers, News and Information see our web site:
http://gasifiers.bioenergylists.org/
