encon bv finalreport

National Energy Policy Office

(NEPO)

FINAL REPORT

Thailand

Biomass-Based PowerGeneration and

Cogeneration WithinSmall Rural Industries

BLACK & VEATCH (THAILAND)November 2000

0

Table of Contents

1.0 Executive Summary (Thai Version).....................................................................1-1

2.0 Executive Summary..............................................................................................2-1

2.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................2-1

2.1.1 Study Objective......................................................................................2-1

2.1.2 Study Scope of Work.............................................................................2-1

2.1.3 Biomass Energy Overview.....................................................................2-2

2.1.4 Small Power Producers (SPP) Program Overview................................2-3

2.2 Thailand Biomass Resource Assessment........................................................2-3

2.3 Candidate Technologies..................................................................................2-6

2.3.1 Biomass Fuel Concerns..........................................................................2-6

2.3.2 Thermochemical Conversion Options....................................................2-6

2.4 Candidate Facility Selection...........................................................................2-6

2.4.1 Identification and Screening of Candidate Facilities.............................2-7

2.4.2 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Development.........................2-7

2.4.3 Data Collection......................................................................................2-7

2.4.4 Preliminary Assessment.........................................................................2-8

2.5 Facility Feasibility Studies..............................................................................2-8

2.6 Promotion of Biomass in Thailand’s Energy Future....................................2-14

2.6.1 Black & Veatch Comments on the SPP Program Regulations............2-14

2.6.2 Other Factors Impacting Biomass Project Development.....................2-14

2.6.3 Incentives.............................................................................................2-15

3.0 Introduction...........................................................................................................3-1

3.1 Study Objective...............................................................................................3-1

3.2 Study Scope of Work......................................................................................3-1

3.2.1 Task Details............................................................................................3-2

3.2.2 Activities by Task..................................................................................3-4

3.3 Biomass Energy Overview..............................................................................3-6

3.3.1 Modern Biomass Applications...............................................................3-6

3.3.2 Biomass Energy in Thailand..................................................................3-8

3.3.3 Small Power Producers Program Overview...........................................3-9

4.0 Thailand Biomass Fuel Resource Assessment (Task 1.1)....................................4-1

4.1 Fuel Supply Overview....................................................................................4-1

4.2 Rice Husk........................................................................................................4-6

4.3 Palm Oil Residues...........................................................................................4-8

4.4 Bagasse..........................................................................................................4-11

November 7, 2000 TC-1 Final Report

4.5 Wood Residues.............................................................................................4-13

4.6 Corncob.........................................................................................................4-16

4.7 Cassava Residues..........................................................................................4-18

4.8 Distillery Slop...............................................................................................4-21

4.9 Coconut Residues..........................................................................................4-23

4.10 Sawdust.......................................................................................................4-26

5.0 Identification of Candidate Technologies (Task 1.7)............................................5-1

5.1 Biomass Fuel Concerns...................................................................................5-1

5.2 Thermochemical Conversion Options.............................................................5-1

5.2.1 Mass Burn Stoker Boiler........................................................................5-2

5.2.2 Stoker Boiler..........................................................................................5-2

5.2.3 Bubbling Fluidized Bed.........................................................................5-2

5.2.4 Circulating Fluidized Bed......................................................................5-3

5.2.5 Gasification............................................................................................5-3

5.2.6 Conversion Options Conclusion............................................................5-4

5.3 Emission Controls...........................................................................................5-6

5.3.1 Nitrogen Oxide Control.........................................................................5-6

5.3.2 Particulate Emissions Control................................................................5-7

6.0 Identification and Screening of Candidate Facilities (Task 1.2 & Task 1.3)........6-1

6.1 Identification Process......................................................................................6-1

6.2 Screening of Candidate Facilities....................................................................6-1

7.0 Development of a Memorandum of Understanding (Task 1.4)............................7-1

7.1 Potential Project Owners.................................................................................7-1

7.1.1 Facility Owner........................................................................................7-1

7.1.2 Developer...............................................................................................7-1

7.1.3 Advisor...................................................................................................7-2

7.2 Generic MOU..................................................................................................7-2

8.0 Candidate Facility Data Collection (Task 1.5)......................................................8-1

9.0 Preliminary Assessment of Selected Facilities (Task 1.6)....................................9-1

10.0 Feasibility Study Summary Results (Task 2)....................................................10-1

10.1 Facilities Studied.........................................................................................10-1

10.2 Study Assumptions.....................................................................................10-3

10.3 Summary Results........................................................................................10-4

10.3.1 Sommai Rice Mill Co., Ltd................................................................10-6

10.3.2 Sanan Muang Rice Mill Co., Ltd.......................................................10-7

10.3.3 Thitiporn Thanya Rice Mill Co., Ltd.................................................10-7


10.3.4 Plan Creations Co., Ltd......................................................................10-8

10.3.5 Chumporn Palm Oil Industry Plc.......................................................10-8

10.3.6 Karnchanaburi Sugar Industry Co., Ltd.............................................10-9

10.3.7 Woodwork Creation Co., Ltd...........................................................10-10

10.3.8 Mitr Kalasin Sugar Co., Ltd.............................................................10-11

10.3.9 Liang Hong Chai Rice Mill Co., Ltd...............................................10-11

10.3.10 Southern Palm Oil Industry (1993) Co., Ltd..................................10-12

11.0 Presentation of Study Results to Facility Owners (Task 3.1 and Task 3.2)......11-1

11.1 Sommai Rice Mill Co., Ltd.........................................................................11-1

11.2 Sanan Muang Rice Mill Co., Ltd................................................................11-2

11.3 Thitiporn Thanya Rice Mill Co., Ltd..........................................................11-3

11.4 Plan Creations Co., Ltd...............................................................................11-4

11.5 Chumporn Palm Oil Industry Plc................................................................11-4

11.6 Karnchanaburi Sugar Industry Co., Ltd......................................................11-6

11.7 Woodwork Creation Co., Ltd......................................................................11-7

11.8 Mitr Kalasin Sugar Co., Ltd........................................................................11-8

11.9 Liang Hong Chai Rice Mill Co., Ltd..........................................................11-9

11.10 Southern Palm Oil Industry (1993) Co., Ltd...........................................11-10

12.0 SPP Program Regulations Review....................................................................12-1

12.1 SPP Program Regulations Overview..........................................................12-1

12.1.1 Basis for the SPP Program.................................................................12-1

12.1.2 Least Cost Planning and the SPP Regulations...................................12-2

12.1.3 SPP Regulations.................................................................................12-2

12.2 Current Status of the SPP Program.............................................................12-7

12.3 Black & Veatch Comments on Current Regulations..................................12-9

12.3.1 Capacity and Energy Payments..........................................................12-9

12.3.2 Contract Term..................................................................................12-10

12.3.3 Comments on EGAT Regulations....................................................12-10

12.4 Conclusion................................................................................................12-12

List of Tables

Table 2-1 Most Viable Biomass Fuels in Thailand a..................................................2-4

Table 2-2 Facility Summary......................................................................................2-9

Table 4-1 Most Viable Biomass Fuels.......................................................................4-2

Table 4-2 Comparison of Thailand Biomass Fuel Supply Studiesa...........................4-4

Table 4-3 Rice Husk Characteristics..........................................................................4-6

Table 4-4 Palm Oil Residue (EFB, Fiber, Shell) Characteristics...............................4-9

Table 4-5 Bagasse Characteristics...........................................................................4-11


Table 4-6 Wood Residue Characteristics.................................................................4-14

Table 4-7 Corncob Characteristics...........................................................................4-16

Table 4-8 Cassava Residue Characteristics..............................................................4-19

Table 4-9 Distillery Slop Characteristics..................................................................4-21

Table 4-10 Coconut Residue Characteristics...........................................................4-24

Table 4-11 Sawdust Characteristics.........................................................................4-26

Table 5-1 General Technical Compatibility Ratings (L-Low, M-Medium, H-High) for

Various Fuels and Boiler Types.............................................................5-4

Table 5-2 Steam Generator Technology Comparison for Different Plant Sizes 5-5

Table 5-3 Steam Generator Technology Ash Characteristics Comparison 5-6

Table 10-1 Summary of Financial Analyses 10-6

Table 10-2 Summary Results of Proposed New Power Facilities..........................10-14

Table 10-3 Summary Results of Proposed Facility Modifications........................10-15

Table 10-4 Summary Results of Proposed New Power Facilities.........................10-16

Table 11-1 Summary Results Sommai Rice Mill Facility.......................................11-1

Table 11-2 Summary Results Sanan Muang Rice Mill Facility..............................11-2

Table 11-3 Summary Results Thitiporn Thanya Rice Mill Facility........................11-3

Table 11-4 Summary Results Plan Creations Facility............................................11-4

Table 11-5 Summary Results Chumporn Palm Oil Facility....................................11-6

Table 11-6 Summary Results Karnchanaburi Sugar Industry Facility....................11-7

Table 11-7 Summary Results Woodwork Creation Facility....................................11-8

Table 11-8 Summary Results Mitr Kalasin Sugar Facility......................................11-9

Table 11-9 Summary Results Liang Hong Chai Facility.......................................11-10

Table 11-10 Summary Results Southern Palm Oil Facility...................................11-11

Table 12-1 Power Purchases from Small Power Producers as of February 2000....12-8


List of Figures

Figure 2-1. Aggregate Potential Net Electric Capacity From Most Viable Residues

And Candidate Facility Locations.........................................................2-5

Figure 3-1. Fresh Oil Palm Bunch At A Thailand Palm Oil Mill..............................3-7

Figure 3-2. Harvesting Of Rubber From A Parawood Plantation..............................3-8

Figure 3-3. Industrial Energy Use In Thailand..........................................................3-9

Figure 4-1. Aggregate Potential Net Electric Capacity From Most Viable Residues..4-

3

Figure 4-2. Rice Husk Distribution............................................................................4-7

Figure 4-3. Palm Oil Residue Distribution..............................................................4-10

Figure 4-4. Bagasse Distribution.............................................................................4-12

Figure 4-5. Parawood Residue Distribution.............................................................4-15

Figure 4-6. Corncob Distribution.............................................................................4-17

Figure 4-7. Cassava Residue Distribution................................................................4-20

Figure 4-8. Distillery Slop Distribution...................................................................4-22

Figure 4-9. Coconut Residue Distribution...............................................................4-25

Figure 10-1. Candidate Facility Locations...............................................................10-2

Figure 10-2. Baht/Us$ Daily Average Interbank Exchange Rate............................10-3

Figure 10-3. Typical Biomass Power Plant Configuration......................................10-5

Figure 12-1. Variation In Sugarcane Output Between 1993 And 1999.................12-11

List Of Annexes

Annex 1 Rice Husk

Annex 2 Palm Oil Residues

Annex 3 Bagasse

Annex 4 Wood Residues

Annex 5 Corncob

Annex 6 Cassava Residues

Annex 7 Distillery Slop

Annex 8 Coconut Residues

Annex 9 Biomass Questionnaire Form

Annex 10 MOU Form


1.0 Executive Summary รายงานฉบั�บัยอ

สารบั�ญ

1.1 บัทน�า 1-2

1.1.1วั�ตถุ�ประสงค์�1.1.2ขอบัขายการศึ�กษา1.1.3ภาพรวัมของพลั�งงานชี!วัมวัลั1.1.4โค์รงการร�บัซื้$%อไฟฟ(าจากผู้+,ผู้ลั-ตรายเลั/ก

1-21-21-31-3

1.2 การประเม-นแหลังชี!วัมวัลัในประเทศึ 1-4

1.3 เทค์โนโลัย!3ท!3เหมาะสม1.3.1ข,อพ-จารณาเก!3ยวัก�บัเชี$%อเพลั-งชี!วัมวัลั1.3.2ทางเลั$อกการเปลั!3ยนพลั�งงานทางเค์ม!เป5นพลั�งงานค์วัามร,อน

1-61-61-6

1.4 การค์�ดเลั$อกโค์รงการ1.4.1การสรรหาแลัะค์�ดเลั$-อกโค์รงการ1.4.2บั�นท�กค์วัามเข,าใจ1.4.3การรวับัรวัมข,อม+ลั1.4.4 การประเม-นผู้ลัเบั$%องต,น

1-61-61-71-71-7

1.5 การศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,อยางลัะเอ!ยด 1-8

1.6 การสงเสร-มพลั�งงานชี!วัมวัลัในอนาค์ต1.6.1 ค์วัามค์-ดเห/นตอระเบั!ยบัการร�บัซื้$%อไฟฟ(า ฯ1.6.2องค์�ประกอบัอ$3นๆท!3ม!ผู้ลักระทบัตอการพ�ฒนาโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลั1.6.3ส-3งจ+งใจ

1-111-11

1

1-121-12

รายลัะเอ!ยดตาราง ตาราง 1-1 ศึ�กยภาพการน�าชี!วัมวัลัในการน�ามาผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(า ตาราง 1-2 สร�ปข,อม+ลัท!3ส�าค์�ญของแตลัะโค์รงการ

1-41-14

รายลัะเอ!ยดร+ปภาพ

ร+ปท!3 1-1 แสดงจ�งหวั�ดท!3ศึ�กยภาพในการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าแลัะสถุานท!3ต� %งของโค์รงการท!3ได,ศึ�กษา

ค์วัามเป5นไปได,ท�%ง 10 โค์รงการ

1-5


1.1 บัทน�า

รายงานการศึ�กษาโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลัของภาค์อ�ตสาหกรรมชีนบัทขนาดเลั/ก ได,จ�ดท�าโดย บั.แบัลั/ค์แอนด� วั-ชีชี� (ประเทศึไทย) จ�าก�ด ตามข,อก�าหนดของส�าน�กงานค์ณะกรรมการนโยบัายพลั�งงานแหงชีาต- (สพชี.) ค์ลัอบั

ค์ลั�มสาระ- ส�าค์�ญตางๆ ของพลั�งงานชี!วัมวัลัแลัะผู้ลั สร�ปการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,ของโรงชี!วัมวัลั 10 แหง รายงานฉบั�บัยอน!%กลัาวัถุ�งข,อค์-ดเห/นท!3ส�าค์�ญ แลัะผู้ลัการศึ�กษาซื้�3งประกอบัด,วัยค์วัามเป5นมา การประมาณ

หา ศึ�กยภาพชี!วัมวัลัแตลัะชีน-ด เทค์โนโลัย!3ท!3เหมาะสม ผู้ลัสร�ปการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,โรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลั แลัะการสง- เสร-มการใชี,พลั�งงานหม�นเวั!ยนในอนาค์ตของประเทศึไทย

1.1.1 วั�ตถุ�ประสงค์� วั�ตถุ�ประสงค์�หลั�กของการศึ�กษาค์$อ พ�ฒนาโค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลัให,เป5นแหลังพลั�งงานไฟฟ(าของ

ประเทศึแหลังหน�3ง รวัมถุ�งน�าชี!วัมวัลัมาเป5นเชี$%อเพลั-งผู้ลั-ตไอน�%าแลัะไฟฟ(าเพ$3อใชี,ในอ�ตสาหกรรมของ ตนเอง ซื้�3งเป5นการก�าจ�ดชี!วัมวัลัในเวัลัาเด!ยวัก�น แลัะผู้ลัด!อ!กประการหน�3งค์$อลัดการน�าเข,าเชี$%อเพลั-ง

ฟอสซื้-ลัจากตาง- ” ประเทศึ เป(าหมายเฉพาะของการศึ�กษาน!%ค์$อ ทบัทวันสถุานภาพพลั�งงานชี!วัมวัลัในประเทศึไทย ศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,ในการกอสร,างโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลั ในภาค์อ�ตสาหกรรมชีนบัทขนาดเลั/กจ�านวัน

10 แหง เพ$3อประมาณหาศึ�กยภาพในการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าแลัะไอน,า แสดงผู้ลัวั-เค์ราะห�ทางด,านการเง-น เพ$3อให,เจ,าของโค์รงการสามารถุต�ดส-นใจในการด�าเน-นโค์รงการ

ตอไป ชีวัยเหลั$อเจ,าของโค์รงการสามารถุเร-3มโค์รงการได, แลัะเข,ารวัมในโค์รงการร�บัซื้$%อไฟฟ(าจากผู้+,ผู้ลั-ต

ราย- เลั/กของการไฟฟ(าฝ่;ายผู้ลั-ตแหงประเทศึไทย(กฟผู้.)

1.1.2 ขอบัขายการศึ�กษา

การศึ�กษาได,แบังออกเป5น 3 ข�%นตอน ด�งน!% ข�%นตอนท!3 1 รวับัรวัมข,อม+ลัแลัะศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,เบั$%องต,น

ข�%นตอนน!%เป5นการรวับัรวัมข,อม+ลัแลัะศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,เบั$%องต,น เพ$3อหาชี!วัมวัลัชีน-ดใดท!3ม! ศึ�กยภาพ เป/ นเชี$%อเพลั-ง อ�ตสาหกรรมหร$อโรงงาน แลัะเทค์โนโลัย!3ท!3เหมาะสมก�บัโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลั ตลัอด

จนถุ�งการ- รางบั�นท�กค์วัามเข,าใจระหวัางสพชี. ก�บัเจ,าของชี!วัมวัลั แลัะทบัทวันระเบั!ยบัการร�บัซื้$%อไฟฟ(าจากผู้+,ผู้ลั-ตรายเลั/ก

ข�%นตอนท!3 2 ศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได, บั. แบัลั/ค์แอนด�วั-ชีชี�ฯได,ศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,ในการกอสร,างโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลั จ�านวัน 10 แหง (ใชี,

เชี$%อเพลั-งอาท-เชีน แกลับั ชีานอ,อย เศึษไม, ฯลัฯ) ซื้�3งกระจายอย+ท� 3วัท�กภาค์ของประเทศึ รายงานของการ- ศึ�กษาฯน!%ได,แนบัไวั,ตางหาก ซื้�3งม!ห�วัข,อหลั�กๆ ค์$อผู้ลัการศึ�กษาด,านเทค์น-ค์ เศึรษฐก-จ การเง-น การ

พาณ-ชีย� เศึรษฐก-จส�งค์ม สภาพแวัดลั,อม กฎหมาย แลัะ การเม$อง ข�%นตอนท!3 3 ชีวัยเหลั$อเจ,าของโค์รงการในการพ�ฒนาโค์รงการ

บั. แบัลั/ค์แอนด�วั-ชีชี�ฯได,เสนอผู้ลัการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได, แลัะชีวัยเหลั$อในการพ�ฒนาโค์รงการ เบั$%อง ต,นตอเจ,าของโค์รงการ พร,อมก�นน!%ได,จ�ดท�าค์+ม$อการพ�ฒนาโค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลัส�าหร�บัผู้+,ผู้ลั-ต

เอกชีนรายเลั/กเพ$3อเป5นแนวัทางในการด�าเน-นโค์รงการตอไป

1.1.3 ภาพรวัมของพลั�งงานชี!วัมวัลั

ประมาณ 12 % ของพลั�งงานของโลักมาจากพลั�งงานชี!วัมวัลั เชีน ขยะ วั�สด�เหลั$อใชี,ทางการเกษตร

ม+ลัส�ตวั� แลัะพ$ชีให,พลั�งงานบัางชีน-ด1 ในประเทศึอ�ตสาหกรรมเชี$%อเพลั-งเหลัาน!% ได,ถุ+กน�ามาผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าแลัะไอน�%าใชี,ในอ�ตสาห- กรรมขนาดใหญ ( เชีนโรงงานกระดาษ แลัะ โรงงานน�%าตาลั เป5นต,น) ตรงก�นข,ามก�บัประเทศึก�าลั�ง

พ�ฒนาสวันใหญ ใชี,ชี!วัมวัลัเป5นเชี$%อเพลั-งในการห�งต,มแลัะอ�ตสาหกรรมขนาดเลั/กซื้�3งย�งไมม!ประส-ทธิ-ภาพ แลัะสร,าง

1 “World Energy Council, Renewable Energy Resource: Opportunities and Constraints 1990-2020, 1993”

3

มลัภาวัะตอสภาพ- แวัดลั,อม แตการเพ-3มข�%นของรายได,แลัะอ�ตสาหกรรมจะเป5นต�วัผู้ลั�กด�นให,ม!การใชี,เทค์โนโลัย!3ชี!วั มวัลัท!3ม!ประส-ทธิ-ภาพ มากข�%นแลัะสะอาดข�%น

ถุ,ามองในด,านเศึรษฐศึาสตร� เชี$%อเพลั-งชี!วัมวัลัเส!ยเปร!ยบัเชี$%อเพลั-งฟอสซื้-ลั แตถุ,าน�าเร$3องการท�าลัายสภาวัะ- แวัดลั,อมมารวัมด,วัย เชี$%อเพลั-งชี!วัมวัลัม!ข,อได,เปร!ยบั กลัาวัค์$อ เชี$%อเพลั-งชี!วัมวัลัม!ค์วัามหนาแนนน,อยกวัา

ให,พลั�งงาน น,อยกวัา ม!น�%าหน�กเบัากวัาเชี$%อเพลั-งฟอสซื้-ลัแลัะยากในการจ�ดการกวัา แตเชี$%อเพลั-งชี!วัมวัลัม!ข,อด!ด,าน ส-3งแวัดลั,อม ค์$อ ม!ข�%นใหมท�กป? ไมกอให,เก-ดสภาวัะเร$อนกระจก (การเผู้าไหม,ของชี!วัมวัลัให,ก@าซื้ค์าร�บัอนไดออกไซื้ด�

ไมเก-นกวัาท!3พ$ชี ได,ด+ดซื้�บัไวั,ระหวัางการเจร-ญเต-บัโต) ม!ก�ามะถุ�นน,อยกวัา(จ�งท�าให,เก-ดก@าซื้ซื้�ลัเฟอร�ไดออกไซื้ด�น,อยกวัา) แลัะอ�ณหภ+ม- เผู้าไหม,ต�3ากวัา(ชีวัยลัดก@าซื้ไนโตรเจนออกไซื้ด�ได,มากกวัา) อยางไรก/ตามประโยชีน�เหลัาน!%จะ

เก-ดข�%นได,ตอเม$3อชี!วัมวัลั ถุ+กใชี,ไปอยางม!ประส-ทธิ-ภาพแลัะไมสร,างมลัภาวัะตอสภาพแวัดลั,อมเทาน�%น ด,วัยเหต�ผู้ลัน!% ค์วัรน�าเทค์โนโลัย!ใหมๆ ท�นสม�ยมาทดแทนของเด-ม

ในประเทศึไทยม!การใชี,ประโยชีน�จากชี!วัมวัลัเป5นแหลังพลั�งงานในอ�ตสาหกรรมโดยเฉพาะในชีนบัท แลัะ ภาค์การเกษตร เชีนโรงงานน�%าตาลั โรงส!ข,าวั โรงสก�ดน�%าม�นปาลั�ม แลัะอ�ตสาหกรรมไม,ยางพารา แปรร+ป ถุ�งแม,

พลั�งงานชี!วัมวัลัม!อ�ตราเพ-3มข�%น 8 % ตอป? แตย�งถุ$อวัาน,อยกวัาอ�ตราการเพ-3มข�%นของการใชี,พลั�งงานโดยรวัม

สวันแบัง การใชี,พลั�งงานชี!วัมวัลัท!3ถุ+กใชี,ในอ�ตสาหกรรมต�%งแต พ.ศึ. 2528 ถุ�ง พ.ศึ. 2540 ได,ลัดลัง อยางตอเน$3องจาก 46% เป5น 25% ส-3งท!3นาสนใจค์$อ เม$3อเก-ดวั-กฤตเศึรษฐก-จป?พ.ศึ. 2540 การใชี,

พลั�งงานในอ�ตสาหกรรมท�%งหมดม!ส�ดสวันลัดลังแต สวันแบังพลั�งงานชี!วัมวัลักลั�บัเพ-3มข�%นเป5น 28 %

1.1.4 โค์รงการการร�บัซื้$%อไฟฟ(าจากผู้+,ผู้ลั-ตรายเลั/ก

อ�ตสาหกรรมขนาดเลั/กท!3เก!3ยวัข,องก�บัการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าจากชี!วัมวัลั สามารถุขายไฟฟ(าท!3เหลั$อให,แก กฟผู้. ตาม ระเบั!ยบัการร�บัซื้$%อไฟฟ(าจากผู้+,ผู้ลั-ตรายเลั/ก โค์รงการน!%ร -เร-3มโดยค์ณะกรรมการนโยบัายพลั�งงานแหงชีาต-แลัะ

ด�าเน-น- การโดยร�ฐวั-สาหก-จด,านไฟฟ(า (กฟผู้ . กฟน . แลัะกฟภ .) ประโยชีน�ท!3ได,ร�บัค์$อเป5นการอน�ร�กษ�เชี$%อเพลั-ง ฟอสซื้-ลั ลัดการ น�าเข,าเชี$%อเพลั-ง ประหย�ดเง-นตราตางประเทศึ แลัะท�าให,แหลังผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(ากระจายต�วัออกไป จ�ดม�ง

หมายของโค์รงการ น!%ค์$อให,ตระหน�กวัาผู้ลัประโยชีน�ภายนอกด�งกลัาวั ม!ผู้ลัท�าให,ต,นท�นของผู้+,ซื้$%อไฟฟ(าไมส+งกวัา ต,นท�นจากแหลังอ$3นๆ

โค์รงการการร�บัซื้$%อไฟฟ(าจากผู้+,ผู้ลั-ตรายเลั/กด�งกลัาวัม!เง$3อนไขหลัายประการค์$อ ก�าหนดปร-มาณร�บัซื้$%อไม

เก-น 60 เมกกะวั�ตต� ( อาจส+งถุ�ง 90 เมกกะวั�ตต�ในบัางพ$%นท!3 ) กฟผู้ . เป5นผู้+,ร �บัซื้$%อแตผู้+,เด!ยวั แลัะการ

จายเง-นม! 2 แบับั แบับัแรก จายเฉพาะค์าพลั�งงาน - (Non firm) แบับัสองจายท�%งค์าพลั�งงานแลัะพลั�ง

ไฟฟ(า (Firm) ซื้�3งต,องท�าส�ญญาซื้$%อขาย - 525 ป? แลัะม!เง$3อนไขอ$3นๆเพ-3มเต-มอ!ก ถุ�งแม,แบับัสองจะ

ท�าให,ผู้+,ผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าม!รายได,ท!3แนนอน แตม!เพ!ยง 3 ใน 24 รายเทาน�%น ของจ�านวันโค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลั

ท�%งหมด2 นอกจากน!%,ม!เพ!ยง 68. % หร$อ 101 เมกกะวั�ตต� จาก 1491 เมกกะวั�ตต�

ท!3มาจากพลั�งงานนอกร+ปแบับั 3

1.2 การประเม-นแหลังชี!วัมวัลัในประเทศึ

บั. แบัลั/ค์แอนด�วั-ชีชี�ฯได,ศึ�กษาชี!วัมวัลั 9 ชีน-ดค์$อ แกลับั กากอ,อย กากปาลั�ม เศึษไม, กาบัมะพร,าวั ซื้�ง ข,าวัโพด สาเหลั,า กากม�นส�าปะหลั�ง แลัะข!%เลั$3อย ส-3งท!3ได,ศึ�กษาค์$อปร-มาณค์งเหลั$อ การกระจายต�วั ก�าลั�งการผู้ลั-ต

การค์าดการณ�- ผู้ลัผู้ลั-ตในอนาค์ต อ�ตสาหกรรมท!3เก!3ยวัข,อง ราค์า แลัะค์วัามเหมาะสมท!3จะน�ามาเป5นเชี$%อเพลั-งเพ$3อผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(า

ตาราง 1-1 แสดงข,อม+ลัศึ�กยภาพของชี!วัมวัลัท!3น�ามาใชี,ในการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(า ม! แกลับั กากอ,อย กากปาลั�ม

แลัะ เศึษไม,(รวัมข!%เลั$3อย) เชี$%อเพลั-งอ$3นๆไมได,ระบั�ในท!3น!% ได,ตรวัจสอบัแลั,วัพบัวัาไมเหมาะสมหลัายเหต�ผู้ลัด,วัยก�นค์$อ

2 NEPO Website, www.nepo.go.th/power/pw-spp-purch00-02-E.html3 Arthur Anderson, “Thailand Power Pool and Electricity Supply Industry Reform Study- Phase 1 Final Report,”

Volume 5, March 1, 2000.

4

http://www.nepo.go.th/

ซื้�ง- ข,าวัโพด แลัะกาบัมะพร,าวัโดยท�3วัไปอย+กระจ�ดกระจายยากแกรวับัรวัม เหมาะเป5นเชี$%อเพลั-งเสร-มไมเหมาะเป5นเชี$%อ- เพลั-งหลั�กในการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(า สวันกากม�นส�าปะหลั�งแลัะสาเหลั,าม!ค์วัามชี$%นส+งไมค์อยเหมาะน�ามาเป5นเชี$%อเพลั-ง

ตาราง 1-1

ศึ�กยภาพของชี!วัมวัลัในการน�ามาผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าแกลับั กากปาลั�ม กากอ,อย เศึษไม,

ปร-มาณผู้ลัผู้ลั-ต, ลั,านต�น/ป?ปร-มาณชี!วัมวัลัเหลั$อใชี,, ลั,านต�น/ ป? *ค์าค์วัามร,อนส+งส�ด, ก-โลัจ+ลัส�/กก.อ�ตราการก-นเชี$%อเพลั-ง, ต�น/เมกกะวั�ตต�-ป?**ปร-มาณไฟฟ(าท!3ผู้ลั-ตได,, เมกกะวั�ตต�

202.3-3.7

14,100

9,800234-375

2.20.41-0.74

10,80014,05033-53

502.25-3.5

10,00014,100160-248

5.81.8

10,00015,500

118

หมายเหต�:* หลั�กเกณฑ์�ในการประเม-นปร-มาณชี!วัมวัลัแตลัะชีน-ดม!ด�งน!%

แกลับั - ประเม-นจากโรงส!ข,าวัท!3ม!ขนาดก�าลั�งผู้ลั-ต 100 ต�นข,าวัเปลั$อก/วั�นข�%นไป กากปาลั�ม - ประเม-นจากโรงงานสก�ดน�%าม�นปาลั�มด-บัท!3ได,มาตรฐาน จ�านวัน 17 โรง ประกอบัด,วัย

กะลัาไฟเบัอร�แลัะ ทะลัายเปลัา

กากอ,อย - ประเม-นจากโรงงานผู้ลั-ตน�%าตาลัทราย จ�านวัน 46 โรง เศึษไม, - ประเม-นจากเศึษไม,แลัะข!%เลั$3อยของโรงเลั$3อยไม,ท�3วัๆ ไป แลัะโรงงานแปรร+ปไม,ยางพาราแลัะจาก จ�านวัน

ปลัายไม,ของสวันยางพารา** ประเม-นจากก�าลั�งการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าท!3 85%

ศึ�กยภาพในการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าจากชี!วัมวัลัท!3ได,ศึ�กษามา โดยรวัมอย+ระหวัาง 779 ถุ�ง 1,043 เมกกะ วั�ตต� ค์าท!3ได, ค์�านวัณจากปร-มาณชี!วัมวัลัท!3เหลั$อ แลัะไมได,เผู้$3อในกรณ!ท!3ม!การปร�บัปร�งเพ-3มประส-ทธิ-ภาพเค์ร$3องจ�กร

ท!3ผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าใน ปEจจ�บั�น(เชีนโรงงานน�%าตาลั) ร+ป 1-1 แสดงการกระจายต�วัของปร-มาณชี!วัมวัลั 4 ชีน-ด จ�งหวั�ด ท!3ม!ศึ�กยภาพผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าส+ง ค์$อ ส�ราษฎร�ธิาน! ส�พรรณบั�ร! กาญจนบั�ร! นค์รสวัรรค์� นค์รราชีส!มา อ�ดรธิาน!

ก�าแพงเพชีร กระบั!3 ตร�ง แลัะ นค์รศึร!- ธิรรมราชี รวัมก�นแลั,วัประมาณ 300 เมกกะวั�ตต�

5

ร+ปท!3 1-1 แสดงจ�งหวั�ดท!3ม!ศึ�กยภาพการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าแลัะสถุานท!3ต� %งของโค์รงการท!3ได,ศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได, ท�%ง 10 โค์รงการ

6

จ.ร,อยเอ/ด

จ.กาฬส-นร� �จ.ขอนแกน

จ.นค์รสวัรรค์�จ.ก�าแพงเพชีร

จ.อ�ท�ยธิาน!

จ.ชี�มพร

จ.ส�ราษฎร�ธิาน!

จ.กระบั!3

จ.ตร�ง

1.3 เทค์โนโลัย!3ท!3เหมาะสมห�วัข,อน!%พ-จารณาเทค์โนโลัย!3หลัายแบับัท!3สามารถุน�าไปใชี,ก�บัโค์รงการชีน-ดน!%

1.3.1 ข,อพ-จารณาเก!3ยวัก�บัเชี$%อเพลั-งชี!วัมวัลัประสบั การณ�ท!3ผู้านมาพบัวัา เชี$%อเพลั-งชี!วัมวัลัท�กชีน-ดสามารถุน�ามาเผู้าโดยใชี,เทค์โนโลัย!3การเผู้าไหม,ตางๆ

ได, ถุ,าค์�ณสมบั�ต-ของชี!วัมวัลัได,ม!การวั-เค์ราะห�แลัะพ-จารณาอยางถุ+กต,องเพ$3อใชี,ในการออกแบับั เชี$%อเพลั-งชี!วัมวัลัเม$3อเปร!ยบัเท!ยบัก�บัถุานห-น ม!ค์วัามหนาแนนน,อยกวัา ให,พลั�งงานค์วัามร,อนต�3ากวัา แลัะม!

ค์วัามย�งยากในการขนสง นอกจากน!%ข!%เถุ,าย�งม!สวันประกอบัของอ�ลัค์าไลัน� ซื้�3งกอให,เก-ดตะกร�น การจ�บัต�วัเป5นก,อน แลัะการท�าให,ทอน�%าในหม,อน�%าชี�าร�ดเส!ยหาย ถุ,าเป5นข!%เถุ,าแกลับัม!ลั�กษณะค์ลั,ายทรายลัะเอ!ยดท�าให,เก-ดการก�ดกรอน

ได, ปEญหาเก!3ยวัก�บัสารอ�ลัค์าไลัน�แตกตางก�นไปแลั,วัแตชีน-ดของชี!วัมวัลั การแก,ไขท!3ด!ท!3ส�ดต,องอาศึ�ยประสบัการณ� เชีน โอกาสท!3ข!%เถุ,าจ�บัต�วัเป5นก,อน แม,วัาสามารถุตรวัจสอบัได,โดยการน�าชี!วัมวัลัมาวั-เค์ราะห�ค์�ณสมบั�ต-กอนก/ตาม

การลัด- อ�ณหภ+ม-เผู้าไหม,ลังชีวัยได,เชีนก�น

1.3.2 ทางเลั$อกการเปลั!3ยนพลั�งงานทางเค์ม!เป5นค์วัามร,อนม!เทค์โนโลัย!3หลัายระบับัท!3ใชี,เผู้าไหม,ชี!วัมวัลัได,ด!ด�งน!%

Mass burn stoker boiler Stoker boiler (stationary sloping grate, traveling

grate, and vibrating grate) Fluidized bed boiler (bubbling and circulating) Gasification with combustion in a close-coupled

boiler Pulverized fuel suspension fired boiler

แตลัะเทค์โนโลัย!3ท!3กลัาวัมาน!%สามารถุใชี,ได,ก�บัชี!วัมวัลัท�กชีน-ด แตจะม!ข,อด! ข,อเส!ย แตกตางก�นออกไป Sto

ker boiler เป5นท!3น-ยมมากท!3ส�ด แตไมใชีด!ท!3ส�ด ยกต�วัอยางเชีน แกลับัจะเผู้าไหม,ได,ด!ใน Fluidized b

ed แลัะ Gasifier เพราะ อ�ณหภ+ม-เผู้าไหม,ต�3าชีวัยลัดการจ�บัต�วัเป5นก,อนของข!%เถุ,า เตาเผู้าแบับั Stoker แลัะ - Suspension firing สามารถุใชี,ได,แต ต,องระวั�งให,การจ�บัต�วัเป5นก,อนของข!%เถุ,าม!น,อยส�ด โดยท�3วัไป

Fluidized Bed เป5นทางเลั$อกท!3ด!ท!3ส�ดเพราะสามารถุใชี, ก�บัเชี$%อเพลั-งท!3ม!ค์วัามชี$%นส+ง แลัะม!หลัายขนาด

Suspension firing ไมเหมาะก�บัชี!วัมวัลัเป5นสวันใหญเพราะต,องน�ามา- ยอยกอน

Gasification อาจเป5นทางเลั$อกท!3นาสนใจ แตต-ดปEญหาในด,านการยอมร�บัทางเทค์น-ค์แลัะการค์,า

การศึ�กษาน!%ได,แนะน�า Stoker boiler เพราะม!ใชี,แพรหลัาย ราค์าถุ+ก แลัะประส-ทธิ-ภาพพอสมค์วัร

14. การค์�ดเลั$อกโค์รงการ

บัทน!%กลัาวัถุ�งการสรรหาแลัะค์�ดเลั$อกโค์รงการ การรวัมลังนามในบั�นท�กค์วัามเข,าใจ การรวัมรวัมข,อม+ลั แลัะ การประเม-นผู้ลัค์วัามเป5นไปได,เบั$%องต,นของโค์รงการท!3ได,ค์�ดเลั$อกมา เพ$3อการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,อยางลัะเอ!ยดตอ

ไป

1.4.1 การสรรหาแลัะค์�ดเลั$อกโค์รงการ ในการสรรหาโค์รงการ ทางค์ณะผู้+,ศึ�กษาได,ต-ดตอสมาค์มตางๆท!3เก!3ยวัข,องก�บัอ�ตสาหกรรมการเกษตร

ตลัอด- จนแหลังผู้ลั-ตชี!วัมวัลั โดยการออกแบับัสอบัถุามแลัะต-ดตอโดยตรงเพ$3อสอบัถุามข,อม+ลัแหลังผู้ลั-ตชี!วัมวัลั แลัะค์วัาม สนใจในเร$3องโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลั แนวัทางเบั$%องต,นในการค์�ดเลั$อกม!ด�งน!% ปร-มาณเชี$%อเพลั-งท!3ม!เหลั$ออย+เพ!ยงพอท!3จะผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าได, ม!ปEญหาในการก�าจ�ดชี!วัมวัลั แลัะค์วัามต�%งใจในการพ�ฒนาโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลั

7

ม!ประสบัการณ�แลัะค์วัามสามารถุในการพ�ฒนาโรงไฟฟ(า ประเด/นท!3ส�าค์�ญประเด/นหน�3งค์$อ ถุ�งแม,เจ,าของโค์รงการจะม!ค์วัามต�%งใจในการพ�ฒนาโค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(า

ชี!วัมวัลั แตเน$3องจากขณะท!3เร-3มการสรรหาโค์รงการเก-ดภาวัะเศึรษฐก-จตกต�3า ผู้+,สนใจหลัายรายไมพร,อมท!3จะลังท�นใน โค์รงการขนาดใหญโดยเฉพาะในธิ�รก-จโรงไฟฟ(าซื้�3งแตกตางจากธิ�รก-จเด-มท!3ท�าอย+ ด,วัยเหต�น!%ทางค์ณะผู้+,ศึ�กษา

ประสบั ค์วัามยากลั�าบัากในการสรรหาผู้+,สนใจรวัมโค์รงการมากกวัาท!3ค์าดค์ะเนไวั,ในตอนแรก

1.4.2 บั�นท�กค์วัามเข,าใจ หลั�งจากค์�ดเลั$อกผู้+,ท!3สนใจในโค์รงการได,แลั,วั ข�%นตอนตอไปเป5นการลังนามบั�นท�ก ค์วัามเข,าใจระหวัาง

สพชี. ผู้+,สนใจหร$อเจ,าของโค์รงการ แลัะบั. แบัลั/ค์แอนด�วั-ชีชี�ฯ สาระส�าค์�ญในบั�นท�กค์วัามเข,าใจระบั�วัาถุ,าผู้ลัการ ศึ�กษา ค์วัามเป5นไปได,ม!ค์วัามเหมาะสมทางด,านเทค์น-ค์ ส-3งแวัดลั,อม แลัะการเง-น (ม!ผู้ลัตอบัแทนตอเง-นลังท�นไมต�3า

กวัา 23 %) เจ,าของโค์รงการต,องพ�ฒนาโรงไฟฟ(าตอไปจนส�าเร/จ ถุ,าไมด�าเน-นตอเจ,าของโค์รงการอาจจะต,อง

ออกค์าใชี,จาย ของการศึ�กษาน!%จ�านวันค์ร�3งหน�3งให,แก สพชี . ถุ,าไมแจ,งเหต�ผู้ลัท!3เพ!ยงพอตอการไมปฏิ-บั�ต-ตามข,อ

ผู้+กพ�นตอสพชี.

อยางไรก/ตามได,ม!ผู้+,สนใจในโค์รงการน!%จ�านวันหลัายราย แตค์�ดเลั$อกเหลั$อเพ!ยง 10 รายด,วัยก�นค์$อ

หจก. โรงส!ข,าวัสมหมาย จ.ร,อยเอ/ด โรงส!ข,าวัสน�3นเม$อง จ.ก�าแพงเพชีร หจก. โรงส!ไฟฐ-ต-พรธิ�ญญา จ.นค์รสวัรรค์� บั. แปลันค์ร!เอชี�3นส� จ�าก�ด จ.ตร�ง บั. ชี�มพรอ�ตสาหรรมน�%าม�นปาลั�ม จ�าก�ด (มหาชีน) จ.ชี�มพร บั. อ�ตสาหกรรมน�%าตาลักาญจนบั�ร! จ�าก�ด จ.อ�ท�ยธิาน! บั. วั+ ,ดเวัอร�ค์ค์ร!เอชี�3น จ�าก�ด จ.กระบั!3 บั. น�า,ตาลัม-ตรกาฬส-นธิ�� จ�าก�ด จ.กาฬส-นธิ�� บั. โรงส!เลั!ยงฮงไชีย จ�าก�ด จ.ขอนแกน บั. ท�กษ-ณอ�ตสาหกรรมน�%าม�นปาลั�ม (1993) จ�าก�ด จ.ส�ราษฎร�ธิาน!

1.4.3 การรวับัรวัมข,อม+ลั ข�%นตอนตอไปทางค์ณะผู้+,ศึ�กษาจะขอข,อม+ลั รายลัะเอ!ยดตางๆจากเจ,าของโค์รงการ เชีน ประเภทของ

อ�ตสาห- กรรม ชีน-ดของชี!วัมวัลั ปร-มาณท!3ม!อย+ ค์วัามแนนอนของผู้ลัผู้ลั-ต แลัะลั�กษณะอ$3นๆของชี!วัมวัลั ซื้$3งเป5น ต�วัก�าหนดขนาด แลัะร+ปแบับัโรงไฟฟ(า สามารถุน�ามาวั-เค์ราะห�ค์วัามเป5นไปได,เบั$%องต,น แลัะผู้ลัประโยชีน�ทางอ,อมท!3 เจ,าของโค์รงการ ได,ร�บั นอกจากน!%ย�งม!ข,อม+ลัประกอบัเพ-3มเต-มอ!กค์$อ แหลังน�%า ขบัวันการผู้ลั-ต แผู้นผู้�งโรงงาน แผู้นท!3ต� %งโรงงาน จ�านวัน พน�กงาน วั-ธิ!การก�าจ�ดของเส!ยในปEจจ�บั�นเป5นอยางไร ค์าใชี,จายค์าไฟฟ(า จ�านวันชี�3วัโมง

ท�างานตอวั�น ค์วัามต,องการใชี,- ไอน�%าแลัะโค์รงการขยายงานในอนาค์ต เป5นต,น

1.4.4 การประเม-นผู้ลัเบั$%องต,น จากข,อม+ลัเบั$%องต,น ค์ณะผู้+,ศึ�กษาเด-นทางไปด+สถุานท!3ผู้ลั-ตชี!วัมวัลั ซื้�3งจะเป5นสถุานท!3เด!ยวัก�บัโรงไฟฟ(า

ทบัทวันข,อม+ลัท!3ม!อย+ แลักเปลั!3ยนข,อม+ลัก�บัผู้+,ปฏิ-บั�ต-งานแลัะรวับัรวัมข,อม+ลัอ$3นๆท!3เก!3ยวัข,องก�บัโรงไฟฟ(า เพ$3อน�ามาประ- เม-นผู้ลัค์วัามเป5นไปได,เบั$%องต,นวัาค์วัรสร,างโรงไฟฟ(าใหมหร$อปร�บัปร�งโรงไฟฟ(าท!3ใชี,อย+ในปEจจ�บั�น แลัะพบัวัา

ท�%ง 10 โค์รงการ ม!ค์วัามเหมาะสมท!3จะด�าเน-นการศึ�กษาอยางลัะเอ!ยดตอไป

1.5 การศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,อยางลัะเอ!ยด ในห�วัข,อน!%ได,สร�ปผู้ลัของการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,ท�%ง 10 โค์รงการ แลัะการน�าเสนอผู้ลัของการศึ�กษา

ตอ เจ,าของโค์รงการ ร+ป 1-1 แสดงถุ�งสถุานท!3ต� %งของท�%ง 10 โค์รงการแลัะตาราง 1-2 แสดงถุ�งผู้ลัสร�ป ข,อม+ลัท!3ส�าค์�ญท�%ง 10 โค์รงการ

8

เน$3องจากระยะเวัลัาการศึ�กษาค์อนข,างใชี,เวัลัานาน ท�าให,สมมต-ฐานสองข,อของรายงานการศึ�กษาค์วัาม เป5น ไปได, 4 โค์รงการแรก จะแตกตางก�บัรายงานการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได, 6 โค์รงการหลั�งค์$ออ�ตราแลักเปลั!3ยน

แลัะ ต,นท�นโค์รงการ ท�%งน!%ในการศึ�กษา 4 โค์รงการแรกเร-3มเด$อนม-ถุ�นายน 2541 ซื้�3งอย+ในชีวังวั-กฤตทางการ เง-น อ�ตราแลัก เปลั!3ยนเง-นม!ค์วัามผู้�นผู้วันตลัอดเวัลัา ก�าหนดไวั,ท!3 43.53 บัาท/ เหร!ยญสหร�ฐ จากน�%นอ�ตรา

แลักเปลั!3ยนได,ลัดลังมา เร$3อยๆ จนถุ�ง 37.15 บัาท/ เหร!ยญสหร�ฐ ซื้�3งได,น�ามาใชี,ในการศึ�กษา 6 โค์รงการหลั�ง ประการท!3สองในสวันของต,นท�นโค์รงการ ต,นท�นของ 6 โค์รงการหลั�ง ส+งกวัา 4 โค์รงการแรกเพราะ

ได,ม!การเปลั!3ยนแปลังแหลังผู้+,ผู้ลั-ตอ�ปกรณ� เค์ร$3องม$อ เค์ร$3องจ�กร จากฝ่E3 งแปซื้-ฟIค์ (เชีนประเทศึจ!น) เป5น ย�โรปแลัะสหร�ฐอเมร-กา ซื้�3งม!ราค์าแพงกวัา ท�าให,ต,นท�นโค์รงการส+งข�%น

6 โค์รงการหลั�งม!ขนาดเลั/กกวัาเด-ม เป5นผู้ลัให,ม!ต,นท�นตอหนวัยส+งข�%น

ผู้ลัการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,สร�ปวัาท�%ง 10 โค์รงการม!ค์วัามเหมาะสมท�%งทางด,านเทค์น-ค์แลัะส-3งแวัดลั,อม

ใน 10 โค์รงการน!%ม!ท� %งโค์รงการสร,างใหม แลัะโค์รงการปร�บัปร�งเค์ร$3องจ�กรเด-มประกอบัด,วัยโรงไฟฟ(าท!3ใชี,แกลับั

4 โค์รง การ เศึษไม, 2 โค์รงการ กากปาลั�ม 2 โค์รงการ แลัะกากอ,อย 2 โค์รงการ นอกจากน!%ย�งม!ชี!วัมวัลัอ$3นๆ

อ!กเป5นเชี$%อเพลั-ง เสร-มค์$อ กาบัมะพร,าวั ก@าซื้ชี!วัภาพ แลัะซื้�งข,าวัโพด ขนาดก�าลั�งการผู้ลั-ตอย+ระหวัาง 1.9 ถุ�ง

8.8 เมกกะวั�ตต� แลัะใน สวันการวั-เค์ราะห�ทางด,านการเง-น ได,ม!การเปลั!3ยนต�วัแปรตางๆ เชีน เพ-3มขนาดโรงไฟฟ(า จนถุ�ง 30 เมกกะวั�ตต� แลัะ ก�าหนดวัาไอน�%าท!3ผู้ลั-ตเพ-3มม!ม+ลัค์าโดยเฉพาะโรงงานน�%าม�นปาลั�ม เป5นต,น เพ$3อด+แนวั

โน,มของผู้ลัตอบัแทนการเง-นวัา เปลั!3ยนไปอยางไร ผู้ลัการศึ�กษาแลัะค์วัามเห/นของเจ,าของแตลัะโค์รงการได,สร�ปไวั,ตามรายลัะเอ!ยดข,างลัางน!%

หจก. โรงส!ข,าวัสมหมาย

โค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(าโรงส!ข,าวัสมหมาย เป5นโค์รงการใหม ต�%งอย+ท!3จ. ร,อยเอ/ด ปEจจ�บั�นโรงส!ข,าวัสม หมาย ได,ขยายก�าลั�งการผู้ลั-ตเป5น 1,300 ต�นข,าวัเปลั$อก/ วั�น จ�งม!แกลับัเหลั$อจากการส!ข,าวั

100,000 ต�น/ ป? สามารถุ น�ามาผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าได, 10 เมกกะวั�ตต� ( ส�ทธิ- 8.8 เมกกะวั�ตต�) ผู้ลัการ ศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,สร�ปวัา ม!ค์วัาม เหมาะสมท�%งทางด,านเทค์น-ค์ ส-3งแวัดลั,อมแลัะการเง-น ( ผู้ลัตอบัแทนตอเง-นลังท�น 32.6 %)

ผู้ลัของการศึ�กษาฯได,น�าเสนอตอเจ,าของโรงส!ข,าวัสมหมาย ซื้�3งได,ต�ดส-นใจด�าเน-นโค์รงการตอโดยได, รวัมท�นก�บับั. ผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(า จ�าก�ด (มหาชีน) ปEจจ�บั�นอย+ในข�%นตอนประกวัดราค์าหาผู้+,ร �บัเหมาท�าการกอสร,าง โค์รงการ

โรงส!ข,าวัสน�3นเม$อง โค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(าโรงส!ข,าวัสน�3นเม$องจะเป5นโค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(าใหมต�%ง อย+ในโรงส!ข,าวัสน�3นเม$อง จ.

ก�าแพงเพชีร ม!ก�าลั�งการผู้ลั-ต 250 ต�นข,าวัเปลั$อก/ วั�น ม!แกลับัเหลั$อจาการส!ข,าวั 13,800 ต�น/ป? แลัะเม$3อรวัม ก�บัสวันของโรงส!ใกลั,เค์!ยง อ!ก 5 โรง ประมาณ 65,200 ต�น/ ป? สามารถุน�ามาผู้ลั-ต

ไฟฟ(าได, 9.1 เมกกะวั�ตต� ( ส�ทธิ- 8.0 เมกกะวั�ตต�) ผู้ลัการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,สร�ปวัาม!ค์วัามเหมาะ สมท�%งทางด,านเทค์น-ค์ ส-3งแวัดลั,อม แลัะการเง-น ( ผู้ลัตอบัแทนตอเง-นลังท�น 25.5 %)

ผู้ลัของการศึ�กษาฯได,น�าเสนอตอเจ,าของโรงส!ข,าวัสน�3นเม$อง ซื้�3งม!ค์วัามสนใจมากแลัะต,องการรวัม ท�น ก�บัน�กลังท�นท!3สนใจ ท!3จะท�าโค์รงการ

หจก. โรงส!ไฟฐ-ต-พรธิ�ญญา โค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(าโรงส!ไฟฐ-ต-พรธิ�ญญาเป5นโค์รงการใหมต�%งอย+ท!3 จ. นค์รสวัรรค์� โรงส!ไฟฟ(าฐ-ต-พร

ธิ�ญญาม!ก�าลั�งการผู้ลั-ต 500 ต�นข,าวัเปลั$อก/ วั�น ม!แกลับัเหลั$อจากการส!ข,าวั 27,600 ต�น/ ป? แลัะ เม$3อรวัมก�บั สวันของโรงส!ใกลั,เค์!ยง อ!ก 7 โรง ประมาณ 51,400 ต�น/ ป? สามารถุน�ามาผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(า

9

ได, 9.1 เมกกะวั�ตต� ( ส�ทธิ- 8.0 เมกกะวั�ตต�) ผู้ลัการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,สร�ปวัาม!ค์วัามเหมาะสมท�%ง ทางด,านเทค์น-ค์ ส-3งแวัดลั,อม แลัะ การเง-น ( ผู้ลัตอบัแทนตอเง-นลังท�น 26.4 %)

ผู้ลัของการศึ�กษาฯได,น�าเสนอตอเจ,าของโรงส!ไฟฐ-ต-พรธิ�ญญา ซื้�3งม!ค์วัามสนใจแลัะพร,อมท!3จะลังท�น ก�บัน�กลังท�นภายนอก อยางไรก/ตามทางเจ,าของโรงส!แสดงค์วัามก�งวัลัเพราะโรงไฟฟ(าน!%ต,3 องพ�3งพาแกลับั

จาก โรงส!อ$3น

บั. แปลันค์ร!เอชี�3นส� จ�าก�ดโค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(าบั. แปลันค์ร!เอชี�3นส� เป5นโค์รงการใหม ต�%งอย+ท!3จ. ตร�ง บั. แปลันค์ร!เอชี�3นส� ผู้ลั-ต

ของ- เลันเด/กโดยใชี,ไม,ยางพาราเป5นวั�ตถุ�ด-บั ม!เศึษไม, เหลั$อประมาณ 4,000 ต�น/ ป? แลัะเม$3อรวัมก�บั

เศึษไม,จาก โรงเลั$3อยใกลั,เค์!ยง แลัะจากสวันยางพารา เป5น 134,000 ต�น/ ป? สามารถุน�ามาผู้ลั-ต ไฟฟ(าได, 10 เมกกะวั�ตต� ( ส�ทธิ- 8.8 เมกกะวั�ตต�) ผู้ลัการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,สร�ปวัาม!ค์วัามเหมาะ

สมท�%งทางด,านเทค์น-ค์ แลัะส-3งแวัด- ลั,อม แตด,านการเง-นม!ผู้ลัตอบัแทนตอเง-นลังท�น 7.95 % ถุ,า โค์รงการน!%ขยายให,ใหญข�%น เชีนประมาณ 28

เมกกะวั�ตต� ผู้ลัตอบัแทนตอเง-นลังท�นจะส+งข�%นเป5น 38.5 % ผู้ลัของการศึ�กษาฯได,น�าเสนอตอเจ,าของโค์รงการ ซื้�3งม!ค์วัามสนใจมากแตม!ค์วัามสนใจลังท�นโรง

ไฟฟ(า ชี!วัมวัลัขนาดเลั/ก (2 เมกกะวั�ตต�) ขณะน!%อย+ระหวัางการขอราค์าของโค์รงการจากผู้+,จ�าหนายอ�ปกรณ�อย+

บั. ชี�มพรอ�ตสาหรรมน�%าม�นปาลั�ม จ�าก�ด (มหาชีน) โค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(าบั. ชี�มพรอ�ตสาหรรมน�%าม�นปาลั�ม เป5นโค์รงการปร�บัปร�งโรงไฟฟ(าเด-ม ต�%งอย+ท!3

จ. ชี�มพร บั. ชี�มพรอ�ตสาหรรมน�%าม�นปาลั�ม เป5นโรงสก�ดน�%าม�นปาลั�มด-บั แลัะน�%าม�นปาลั�มบัร-ส�ทธิ-J ม!โรง ไฟฟ(า ขนาด 3.5 เมกกะวั�ตต� แตผู้ลั-ตได,จร-ง 2.4 เมกกะวั�ตต� ใชี,กากปาลั�มค์$อ กะลัา ไฟเบัอร� ทะลัาย

เปลัาแลัะก@าซื้ ชี!วัภาพเป5นเชี$%อเพลั-ง จากการศึ�กษาพบัวัาถุ,าน�าเชี$%อเพลั-งจากภายนอกมาเสร-ม ค์$อ กาบั มะพร,าวั แลัะกะลัา- ปาลั�มจากโรงงานอ$3น จะผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าได,ถุ�ง 3.7 เมกกะวั�ตต� แลัะถุ,าต-ดต�%งก�งห�นไอน�%า

แบับัม!ค์อนเดนเซื้อร� ตอจากก�งห�นปEจจ�บั�นแลัะปร�บัปร�งระบับับั�าบั�ดน�%าด! เป5นต,น จะผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าได,ส+งถุ�ง

5.4 เมกกะวั�ตต� ขายไฟฟ(า แกภายนอกได,ประมาณ 2.5 เมกกะวั�ตต� ผู้ลัการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,สร�ปวัาม!ค์วัามเหมาะสมท�%งทางด,านเทค์น-ค์ ส-3งแวัดลั,อม แลัะการเง-น

ม!ผู้ลั- ตอบัแทนตอเง-นลังท�น 20.4 % ถุ,ารวัมผู้ลัประโยชีน�ท!3ได,ร�บัจากการผู้ลั-ตไอน�%าท!3เพ-3มข�%น

ท�าให,ก�าลั�งการผู้ลั-ต เพ-3มมากข�%นด,วัย ผู้ลัตอบัแทนตอเง-นลังท�นจะส+งข�%นเป5น 39 ถุ�ง 69 % ตามค์า ไอน�%า 5 ถุ�ง 15 US ดอลัลัาร�ตอ- ต�น

ผู้ลัของการศึ�กษาฯได,น�าเสนอตอเจ,าของโค์รงการซื้�3งม!ค์วัามสนใจมาก แตม!ค์วัามเป5นหวังค์วัามผู้�น- ผู้วันของราค์ากะลัาปาลั�มท!3ซื้$%อจากภายนอก อยางไรก/ตามทางบั. ชี�มพรฯ ม!โค์รงการท!3จะขยายก�าลั�งการ

ผู้ลั-ต ในอนาค์ต ซื้�3งจะต,องท�าการปร�บัปร�งท�%งระบับัการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าแลัะไอน�%า

บั. อ�ตสาหกรรมน�%าตาลักาญจนบั�ร! จก.โค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(าบั. อ�ตสาหกรรมน�%าตาลักาญจนบั�ร! เป5นโค์รงการปร�บัปร�งโรงไฟฟ(าเด-ม ต�%งอย+ท!3จ.

อ�ท�ยธิาน! บั. อ�ตสาหกรรมน�%าตาลักาญจนบั�ร!เป5นโรงงานผู้ลั-ตน�%าตาลั ซื้�3งต,องใชี,ท�%งไอน�%าแลัะไฟฟ(าเพ$3อ การ ผู้ลั-ต ก�าลั�งการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าส+งส�ดในปEจจ�บั�น 17.5 เมกกะวั�ตต� เน$3องจากในขบัวันการผู้ลั-ตม!ไอน�%า

แลัะไฟฟ(า เหลั$ออย+จ�านวันหน�3ง ม!กากอ,อยเหลั$อเม$3อเสร/จส-%นฤด+การผู้ลั-ต แลัะม!ซื้�งข,าวัโพดเหลั$อมากมาย ใน จ. อ�ท�ยธิาน! ส-3งเหลัาน!%เม$3อน�ามารวับัรวัมจะผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าได, 2 เมกกะวั�ตต� ( ส�ทธิ- 1.85 เมกกะวั�ตต�)

ประมาณ 6 เด$อน โดย ต,องท�าการปร�บัปร�ง แลัะเพ-3มเต-มเค์ร$3องจ�กรบัางสวัน ผู้ลัการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,สร�ปวัาม!ค์วัามเหมาะสมท�%งทางด,านเทค์น-ค์ ส-3งแวัดลั,อมแลัะการเง-น (ผู้ลั

ตอบัแทนตอเง-นลังท�น 18.9 %) จากการศึ�กษาเพ-3มเต-มพบัวัา ถุ,าม!การเพ-3มประส-ทธิ-ภาพหม,อน�%าท�%ง

5 ชี�ด จะ ท�าให,ม!กากอ,อยเหลั$อเพ-3มข�%น ซื้�3งสามารถุทดแทนซื้�งข,าวัโพดได,โดยไมต,องซื้$%อ ผู้ลัตอบัแทนตอ เง-นลังท�น เพ-3มข�%นเป5น 27.5 %

10

ผู้ลัของการศึ�กษาฯได,น�าเสนอตอเจ,าของโค์รงการ ซื้�3งม!ค์วัามสนใจมากแลัะต,องการท!3จะด�าเน-น โค์รงการ ตอไป

บั. วั+ ,ดเวัอร�ค์ค์ร!เอชี�3น จ�าก�ด โค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(า บั. วั+ ,ดเวัอร�ค์ค์ร!เอชี�3น เป5นโค์รงการใหม ต�%งอย+ท!3จ. กระบั!3 บั.วั+ ,ดเวัอร�ค์ค์ร!เอชี�3น

เป5น โรงเลั$3อยไม,ยางพารา ม!เศึษไม,เหลั$อประมาณ 31,680 ต�น/ ป? หลั�งขยายก�าลั�งการผู้ลั-ตแลัะเม$3อ รวัมเศึษไม, จากโรงเลั$3อยใกลั,เค์!ยง แลัะจากสวันยางพารา อ!ก 23,000 ต�น/ ป? สามารถุน�ามาผู้ลั-ต

ไฟฟ(าได, 3.55 เมกกะวั�ตต� ( ส�ทธิ- 3.1 เมกกะวั�ตต�) ผู้ลัการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,สร�ปวัาม!ค์วัาม เหมาะสม ท�%งทางด,านเทค์น-ค์ แลัะส-3งแวัด- ลั,อม แตด,านการเง-นม!ผู้ลัตอบัแทนตอเง-นลังท�น 4.4 %

ถุ,าโค์รงการน!%ขยายให,ใหญข�%น เชีน ประมาณ 30 เมกกะวั�ตต� ผู้ลัตอบัแทนตอเง-นลังท�นจะส+งข�%นเป5น 25 % ผู้ลัของการศึ�กษาฯได,น�าเสนอตอเจ,าของโค์รงการ ซื้�3งขอศึ�กษารายลัะเอ!ยดเพ-3มเต-มกอน

ต�ดส-นใจ

บั. น�า,ตาลัม-ตรกาฬส-นธิ�� จ�าก�ด โค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(า บั. น�า,ตาลัม-ตรกาฬส-นธิ�� เป5นโค์รงการต�%งโรงไฟฟ(าใหม ต�%งอย+ในบัร-เวัณโรงน�%าตาลั

ปEจจ�บั�นท!3จ. กาฬส-นธิ�� บั. น�า,ตาลัม-ตรกาฬส-นธิ�� ใชี,กากอ,อยท!3เหลั$อ 76,000 ต�น/ ป? สามารถุน�ามา ผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(า โดยใชี,หม,อน�%าแรงด�นส+ง ได, 6.1 เมกกะวั�ตต� ( ส�ทธิ- 5.6 เมกกะวั�ตต�) ในสวันของโรง

ไฟฟ(าปEจจ�บั�น ย�งด�าเน-น- การอย+โดยผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าแลัะไอน�%าใชี,ในการผู้ลั-ตน�%าตาลั ผู้ลัการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไป ได,สร�ปวัาม!ค์วัามเหมาะสม ท�%งทางด,านเทค์น-ค์ ส-3งแวัดลั,อมแลัะการเง-น (ผู้ลัตอบัแทนตอเง-นลังท�น

13.3 %) แนวัทางศึ�กษาอ!กทางหน�3ง ถุ,าด�ดแปลังแลัะเพ-3มเต-มเค์ร$3องจ�กรบัางสวันของโรงน�%าตาลั ปEจจ�บั�นจะสามารถุผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าได, 3.2 เมกกะวั�ตต� แตผู้ลัตอบัแทนตอเง-นลังท�นเพ-3มข�%นเป5น 46 %

ผู้ลัของการศึ�กษาฯได,น�าเสนอตอเจ,าของโค์รงการซื้�3งม!ค์วัามสนใจมาก แลัะพร,อมท!3จะด�าเน-น โค์รงการ ตอไป

บั. โรงส!เลั!ยงฮงไชีย จ�าก�ด โค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(าโรงส!เลั!ยงฮงไชีย เป5นโค์รงการใหม ต�%งอย+ท!3จ. ขอนแกน โรงส!เลั!ยงฮงไชีย เป5น

โรง- ส!ข,าวั ม!แกลับัเหลั$อจาการส!ข,าวั 33,000 ต�น/ ป? สามารถุน�ามาผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าได, 3.8 เมกกะวั�ตต� ( ส�ทธิ- 3.3 เมกกะ- วั�ตต�) ผู้ลัการศึ�กษาค์วัามเป5นไปได,สร�ปวัาม!ค์วัามเหมาะสมท�%งทางด,านเทค์น-ค์ แลัะ

ส-3งแวัดลั,อม แตผู้ลัตอบั- แทนตอเง-นลังท�นเทาก�บั 7.6 % ถุ,าม!การขยายก�าลั�งการผู้ลั-ตเพ-3มข�%นเป5น

13.4 เมกกะวั�ตต� ผู้ลัตอบัแทนตอเง-น ลังท�นเพ-3มข�%นเป5น 29 % ผู้ลัของการศึ�กษาฯได,น�าเสนอตอเจ,าของโรงส! ซื้�3งขอศึ�กษารายลัะเอ!ยดเพ-3มเต-ม

บั. ท�กษ-ณอ�ตสาหกรรมน�%าม�นปาลั�ม (1993) จ�าก�ด จ.ส�ราษฎร�ธิาน!โค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(าบั. ท�กษ-ณอ�ตสาหกรรมน�%าม�นปาลั�ม เป5นโค์รงการใหม ต�%งอย+ท!3 จ.ส�ราษฎร�ธิาน!

บั. ท�กษ-ณฯ เป5นโรงสก�ดน�%าม�นปาลั�มด-บั จากการศึ�กษาพบัวัาถุ,าน�าเชี$%อเพลั-งเฉพาะกะลัาแลัะไฟเบัอร� รวัม ท�%ง ก@าซื้ชี!วัภาพจากบัอบั�าบั�ดน�%าเส!ยท!3จะสร,างในอนาค์ตจะสามารถุผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าได,ถุ�ง 7.0 เมกกะวั�ตต�

( ส�ทธิ- 6.2 เมกกะวั�ตต�) โดยโรงไฟฟ(าขนาด 0.88 เมกกะวั�ตต�ท!3ม!อย+ จะค์งไวั,เพ$3อเป5นแหลังผู้ลั-ต ส�ารอง ผู้ลัการศึ�กษา ค์วัามเป5นไปได,สร�ปวัาม!ค์วัามเหมาะสมท�%งทางด,านเทค์น-ค์ ส-3งแวัดลั,อม แลัะการเง-น

(ผู้ลัตอบัแทนตอเง-นลัง- ท�น 11.6 %)จากการศึ�กษาเพ-3มเต-มพบัวัาถุ,ารวัมผู้ลัประโยชีน�ท!3ได,ร�บัจากการขยายก�าลั�งการผู้ลั-ตในอนาค์ต

การน�า ทะลัายปาลั�มเปลัามาใชี,แลัะหาเชี$%อเพลั-งเสร-มอ!กจ�านวันหน�3ง จะผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าเพ-3มข�%น 28.3 เมกกะ วั�ตต� แลัะผู้ลั- ตอบัแทนตอเง-นลังท�นจะส+งข�%นเป5น 25 % ผู้ลัของการศึ�กษาฯได,น�าเสนอตอเจ,าของโค์รงการซื้�3งม!ค์วัามสนใจเพราะม!โค์รงการขยายก�าลั�งการ ผู้ลั-ต ในอนาค์ต ซื้�3งจ�าเป5นต,องปร�บัปร�งระบับัการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าแลัะไอน�%าในปEจจ�บั�น

11

1.6 การสงเสร-มพลั�งงานชี!วัมวัลัในอนาค์ต ตามท!3ได,กลัาวัมาแลั,วั โรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลัในโค์รงการผู้+,ผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าเอกชีนรายเลั/ก ม!ส�ดสวันก�าลั�งการผู้ลั-ต

น,อย- มาก แลัะสวันมากม!การท�าส�ญญาซื้$%อขายแบับั Non-firm ม!สาเหต�หลัายประการ สวันหน�3งเก!3ยวัข,อง ก�บัระเบั!ยบัการ ร�บัซื้$%อไฟฟ(าจากผู้+,ผู้ลั-ตรายเลั/ก เฉพาะการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าจากพลั�งงานนอกร+ปแบับั ฉบั�บัมกราค์ม พศึ.

2541 ของกฟผู้. ด�ง รายลัะเอ!ยดตอไปน!%

1.6.1 ค์วัามค์-ดเห/นตอระเบั!ยบัการร�บัซื้$%อไฟฟ(าฯ ค์าพลั�งไฟฟ(าแลัะพลั�งงานไฟฟ(าท!3จายให,แกโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลัท!3ม!ส�ญญาแบับั Firm ค์�านวัณจากต,นท�น

ท!3หลั!ก- เลั!3ยงได,ในระยะยาวัของโรงไฟฟ(าใชี,น�%าม�นเป5นเชี$%อเพลั-ง ซื้�3งโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลัไมสามารถุแขงข�นได,ตามหลั�กทาง

เศึรษฐศึาสตร� ตอไปน!% เน$3องจากเชี$%อเพลั-งชี!วัมวัลัอย+กระจ�ดกระจาย โรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลัจ�งม!ขนาดเลั/ก ( ประมาณ 5-30

เมกกะ วั�ตต�) ซื้�3งเม$3อเปร!ยบัเท!ยบัก�บัโรงไฟฟ(าใชี,น�%าม�นเป5นเชี$%อเพลั-ง โรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลัจะม!ต,นท�นการ กอสร,าง ส+งกวัา

การจายค์าพลั�งงานไฟฟ(าอ,างอ-งก�บั ค์าค์วัามส-%นเปลั$องในการใชี,เชี$%อเพลั-งเพ$3อผู้ลั-ตพลั�งงานไฟฟ(า

(Net plant heat rate) ก�าหนดไวั,เทาก�บั 8,600 บั!ท!ย+/ก-โลัวั�ตต�-ชีม. ซื้�3งใชี, ส�าหร�บัโรงไฟฟ(าพลั�งค์วัามร,อน แต ส�าหร�บัโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลั บัวักก�บัเทค์โนโลัย!3ท!3ท�นสม�ย ต�วัเลัขด�ง

กลัาวัจะส+งกวัามากจ�งไมสามารถุแขง ข�นก�บัโรงไฟฟ(าท�3วัไปได,

1.6.2 องค์�ประกอบัอ$3นๆท!3ม!ผู้ลักระทบัตอการพ�ฒนาโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลั นอกจากระเบั!ยบัการร�บัซื้$%อไฟฟ(าฯย�งม!องค์�ประกอบัเหต�ผู้ลัอ$3นๆอ!กท!3ท�าให,โรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลัใน

ประเทศึไทย ท!3ท�าส�ญญาซื้$%อขายไฟฟ(าแบับั Firm ก�บักฟผู้. ม!เพ!ยง 2-3 ราย แลัะสาเหต�ท!3โรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลั ในประเทศึไทยม!น,อยค์$อ

ราค์าของพลั�งงานไมสะท,อนถุ�งต,นท�นทางส�งค์ม เชีน มลัภาวัะทางอากาศึ การปลัอยก@าซื้ค์าร�บัอนได- ออกไซื้ด� ผู้ลักระทบัตอส�งค์มแลัะเศึรษฐก-จ แลัะการน�าเข,าเชี$%อเพลั-งจากตางประเทศึ

น�กลังท�นแลัะหร$อผู้+,ให,ก+,เง-นเน,นท!3จะลัดค์วัามเส!3ยงโค์รงการมากกวัาการบัร-หารค์วัามเส!3ยง โดยท�า ส�ญญาจ�ดหาเชี$%อเพลั-งในระยะยาวั ซื้�3งค์อนข,างยากท!3จะประสบัผู้ลัส�าร/จ

เจ,าของชี!วัมวัลัสวันใหญไมค์�,นเค์ยธิ�รก-จการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(า จ�งม!ค์วัามก�งวัลัท!3จะม!การลังท�นขนาดใหญใน ธิ�รก-จท!3ตนเองไมถุน�ด

ค์าใชี,จายเบั$%องต,นในการพ�ฒนาโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลั ม!ค์าใกลั,เค์!ยงก�บัโรงไฟฟ(าขนาดใหญ ท�%งๆท!3ก�าลั�ง การ ผู้ลั-ตน,อยกวัามาก

จากเหต�ผู้ลัด�งกลัาวัข,างต,น ท�าให,การก+,เง-นของโค์รงการโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลัม!ค์วัามย�งยาก แลัะม!ค์าใชี,จายท!3ส+ง- กวัาโรงไฟฟ(าท�3วัๆไป ผู้ลัลั�พธิ�ค์$อโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลัท!3สร,างข�%นใหมไมสามารถุผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าขายในอ�ตราเด!ยวัก�บัโรง

ไฟฟ(า ปEจจ�บั�นได,

1.6.3 ส-3งจ+งใจ มาตรการจ+งใจตางๆได,น�ามาใชี,ท�3วัโลัก เพ$3อการสน�บัสน�นแหลังพลั�งงานชี!วัมวัลัแลัะพลั�งงานทดแทนอ$3นๆ

ในสวันของประเทศึไทย นอกจากการเพ-3มค์าพลั�งไฟฟ(าแลัะพลั�งงานไฟฟ(าแลั,วั ค์วัรม!มาตรการอ$3นมาเสร-มอ!กด�งน!% ต�%งเป(าหมาย 10 ป?ข,างหน,าส�าหร�บัการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าจากพลั�งงานนอกร+ปแบับั จ�ดต�%งแผู้นการชีวัยเหลั$อ เพ$3อสงเสร-มการพ�ฒนาโรงไฟฟ(าท!3ใชี,พลั�งงานนอกร+ปแบับัมากข�%น “ ” สงเสร-มการใชี,พลั�งงานนอกร+ปแบับัเป5นพลั�งงาน ส!เข!ยวั เพ$3อให,สาธิารณะชีนสน�บัสน�น

รวัมม$อก�บัอ�ตสาหกรรมท!3ม!ศึ�กยภาพส+ง ( เชีน โรงงานน�%าตาลั ) ในการเพ-3มประส-ทธิ-ภาพเค์ร$3องจ�กร แลัะ สน�บัสน�นให,ม!การผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(าจากชี!วัมวัลัมากข�%น

ศึ�กษาทางเลั$อกอ$3นๆเก!3ยวัก�บักลัไกการจ�ดหาแหลังเง-นก+,ระยะยาวั อ�ตราดอกเบั!%ยต�3า ส�าหร�บัโรงไฟฟ(าชี!วัมวัลั

12

การให,ส-3งจ+งใจใดๆ ค์วัรอย+ในกรอบัของการแขงข�นเสร!ในการผู้ลั-ตไฟฟ(า แลัะม!ค์วัามย�ดหย�นเพ!ยงพอตอ สภาพของตลัาดท!3ม!การเปลั!3ยนแปลังอย+เสมอ

สพชี. ม!ค์วัามส�าเร/จในการรณรงค์� การสน�บัสน�นพลั�งงานนอกร+ปแบับั โดยม!โค์รงการต�%งเป(าหมายการ ผู้ลั-ต ไฟฟ(าจากพลั�งงานนอกร+ปแบับั 300 เมกกะวั�ตต� แลัะจ�ดหาเง-นชีวัยเหลั$อไวั,จ�านวันหน�3ง โดยน�ามาจาก

กองท�นน�%าม�น โค์รงการด�งกลัาวัจะเปIดให,ม!การแขงข�นอยางเสร! ซื้�3งถุ$อวัาเป5นข�%นตอนส�าค์�ญของการน�าไปส+เป(า หมายของนโยบัาย ด,านพลั�งงานในระยะยาวัของประเทศึ

13

ตาราง -12สร�ปข,อม+ลัท!3ส�าค์�ญของแตลัะโค์รงการ

รายงานค์วัามก,าวัหน,าค์ร�%งท!3 2 รายงานค์วัามก,าวัหน,าค์ร�%งท!3 3

โค์รงการ โรงส!สมหมาย

โรงส!สน�3นเม$อง

โรงส!ฐ-ต-พร บั.แปลันฯ บั.ชี�มพรฯ บั.กาญจน

บั�ร!ฯบั.วั+ ,ดเวัอร�

ค์ฯบั.ม-ตร

กาฬส-นธิ��โรงส!เลั!ยง

ฮงไชีย บั.ท�กษ-ณฯ

ธิ�รก-จ โรงส!ข,าวั โรงส!ข,าวั โรงส!ข,าวั ผู้ลั-ตภ�ณฑ์�ไม,

โรงส!ข,าวั น�%าตาลั โรงเลั$3อยไม,ยางฯ

น�%าตาลั โรงส!ข,าวั โรงส!ข,าวั

ลั�กษณะโค์รงการ ใหม ใหม ใหม ใหม ปร�บัปร�ง ปร�บัปร�ง ใหม ใหม ใหม ใหมปร-มาณชี!วัมวัลัท!3เหลั$อ, ต�น/ป? 98,670 13,800 27,600 4,000 89,100 20,834 31,680 76,000 33,000 73,500

ปร-มาณชี!วัมวัลัท!3ใชี,, ต�น/ป? 86,900 79,000 79,000 134,000 111,860 34,216 54,000 76,000 33,000 73,500

ชีน-ดของชี!วัมวัลั แกลับั แกลับั แกลับั เศึษไม,ยางพารา

กากปาลั�ม, ก@าซื้ชี!วัภาพ

กากอ,อย, ซื้�ง

เศึษไม,ยางพารา

กากอ,อย แกลับั กากปาลั�ม, ก@าซื้

พลั�งงานค์วัามร,อน, จ-กะจ+ลัส�/ป? 1,225,868

1,113,900

1,113,900

1,380,200

1,564,0

00b406,980 510,300 725,040 465,300 1,072,9

32b

อ�ตราการใชี,พลั�งงานค์วัามร,อนส�ทธิ-, ก-โลัจ+ลัส�/ก-โลัวั�ตต�- ชีม.

18,708 18,708 18,708 21,015 49,500c 47,205 c

d

21,900 17,400 18,700 21,700e

พลั�งไฟฟ(าส�ทธิ-, ก-โลัวั�ตต� 8,800 8,000 8,000 8,800 4,550 1,850 3,100 5,600 3,300 6,200

พลั�งไฟฟ(าท!3ขายกฟผู้., ก-โลัวั�ตต� 8,800 8,000 8,000 8,800 2,520 1,850 3,100 5,600 3,300 5,366

ปร-มาณไอน�%า, ต�น/ชีม. ไมม! ไมม! ไมม! ไมม! 31.85 ไมม! ไมม! ไมม! ไมม! 13.9e

ราค์าโค์รงการโดยประมาณ, ลั,านเหร!ยญสหร�ฐ

9.71 9.27 9.27 10.59 5.0 1.95 8.65 13.4 9.73 14.6

ผู้ลัตอบัแทนโค์รงการ, % 32.6 25.5 26.4 7.95 20.4 18.9 4.4 13.3 7.6 11.6

ผู้ลัตอบัแทนโค์รงการ ท!3อ�ตราแลักเปลั!3ยน43 ฿/US$, %

– – – – 15.8 15.9 2.1 9.8 5.1 8.4 ผู้ลัตอบัแทนโค์รงการ เม$3อลัดต,นท�น 20

%, %– – – – 29.4 26.7 8.5 20.1 12.6 17.9

ผู้ลัตอบัแทนโค์รงการ กรณ!ทางเลั$อกอ$3นๆ, %

– – – 38.5 39-69 27.5 25 46 13-29 13-25 หมายเหต� :

a บั. ชี�มพรฯใชี,เชี$%อเพลั-ง กากปาลั�ม ( กะลัา, ไฟเบัอร� แลัะทะลัาย) , ก@าซื้ชี!วัภาพ แลัะกาบัมะพร,าวั สวันบั. ท�กษ-ณ ใชี,กากปาลั�ม ( กะลัา แลัะ ไฟเเบัอร�) แลัะก@าซื้ชี!วัภาพ

14

b บั. ชี�มพรฯ ใชี,ก@าซื้ชี!วัภาพ 6000000, , ลับั.เมตร/ ป? สวันบั. ท�กษ-ณ ใชี, 3570000, , ลับั.เมตร/ป? c อ,างอ-งจากประส-ทธิ-ภาพของโรงไฟฟ(าในโรงงานปEจจ�บั�น d รวัมสวันท!3เป5นก�าลั�งไฟฟ(าสวันเก-นของโรงงานน�%าตาลัชีวังเปIดห!บั e เป5นค์าโดยเฉลั!3ย เน$3องจากอ�ตราการใชี,ม!การเปลั!3ยนแปลังตามฤด+กาลั

15

2.0 Executive Summary

2.1 Introduction

This Executive Summary and Final Report have been prepared by Black & Veatch

according to the Terms of Reference for the Thailand Biomass-Based Power Generation

and Cogeneration within Small Rural Industries study. This study has been

commissioned by the National Energy Policy Office (NEPO) of Thailand. The report

presents many aspects related to biomass energy and includes summaries of biomass

power plant feasibility studies done for ten sites in Thailand.

The Executive Summary presents key concepts and findings of the study and

includes discussion of the study background, resource assessment, technologies, facility

selection, feasibility study summaries, and promotion of renewables in Thailand’s future.

2.1.1 Study Objective

The ultimate objective of this study is to develop biomass-based power generation

as a source of electricity in Thailand. Using biomass agricultural residues in power

generation and cogeneration schemes have the benefits of helping the involved facility to

be self-sufficient in meeting its own electricity and process heat demands, while

eliminating the problem of waste disposal. Developing the biomass energy resource will

also benefit Thailand’s economy because it helps the country to become less dependent

on imported fossil fuels. The specific goals of this study are as follows:

To review the existing status of biomass fuels in Thailand.

To conduct feasibility studies on 10 small rural industries in order to

assess their potential for biomass-based power generation and

cogeneration.

To demonstrate the financial viability of biomass-based power

generation or cogeneration at the facilities in order to encourage

investment decisions of the owners towards implementing the projects.

To assist the facilities to implement power generation and

cogeneration, and to enter EGAT’s SPP Program.

2.1.2 Study Scope of Work

In support of the objective given above, three main study tasks were identified as

outlined below:

Task 1 Data Collection and Prefeasibility Study

This task included preliminary work in support of the feasibility studies.

Black & Veatch collected data and conducted prefeasibility studies to identify

potential fuels, facilities, and technology for biomass-based power generation

January 5, 2001 1 Final Report

or cogeneration. A standard Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between

NEPO, the facility owner/developer, and Black & Veatch was developed and

the regulations of the SPP program were reviewed.

Task 2 Feasibility Studies

Black & Veatch performed feasibility studies for ten power plants burning

biomass fuels (rice husks, bagasse, wood, etc.) at sites throughout Thailand.

The feasibility studies are contained in a separate report to the Final Report.

The studies assess feasibility in the following areas: technical, economic,

financial, commercial, socioeconomic, ecological, juridical, and political.

Task 3 Assist Development of Biomass-Based Power Generation

Owners were presented the results of their respective feasibility studies and

then assisted in initial project implementation activities. A handbook was

developed outlining the procedure for entering the SPP program, including all

responsibilities and performance standards for the SPP.

2.1.3 Biomass Energy Overview

About 12 percent of the world's energy comes from the use of biomass fuels,

which include items as diverse as residential yard waste, manure, agricultural residues,

and dedicated energy crops.1 In industrialized nations, bioenergy facilities typically use

biomass fuels in large industrial cogeneration applications (pulp and paper production,

sugar cane milling, etc.). Conversely, developing nations largely rely on biomass for

rural cook stoves or small industries. Such applications are relatively inefficient and

dirty. Increasing industrialization and household income are driving the economies of

developing nations to implement cleaner and more efficient biomass technologies.

Environmental concerns may help make biomass an economically competitive

fuel. Because biomass fuels are generally less dense, lower in energy content, and more

difficult to handle than fossil fuels, they usually do not compare favorably to fossil fuels

on an economic basis. However, biomass fuels have several important environmental

advantages. Biomass fuels are renewable, and sustainable use is greenhouse gas neutral

(biomass combustion releases no more carbon dioxide than absorbed during the plant’s

growth). Biomass fuels contain little sulfur compared to coal (reduced sulfur dioxide

emissions) and have lower combustion temperatures (reduced nitrogen oxide emissions).

However, unless biomass is efficiently and cleanly converted to a secondary energy form,

the environmental benefits are only partially realized, if at all. For this reason, efficient,

modern biomass utilization must be favored over traditional applications.

The use of biomass as an energy source is widely practiced throughout Thailand

industries, particularly in rural and agricultural areas. Major industrial users of biomass

energy include sugar cane milling, rice milling, palm oil production, and the wood

products industry. Although biomass energy use has been increasing at 8 percent annual

1 World Energy Council, “Renewable Energy Resources: Opportunities and Constraints 1990-2020,” 1993.


growth recently, this rate has not been as fast as the overall growth in industrial energy

use. Consequently, the share of biomass energy used in industrial processes has steadily

dropped from 46 percent in 1985, to 25 percent in 1996. Interestingly, although overall

industrial energy use declined when the financial crisis started in 1997, use of agricultural

and wood residues actually climbed, increasing the share of biomass energy to 28 percent.

2.1.4 Small Power Producers (SPP) Program Overview

Small rural industries engaged in biomass power production may sell excess

generation back to the grid through the SPP program. The SPP program was initiated by

the National Energy Policy Council and is implemented by Thailand electricity

authorities (EGAT, PEA, MEA). Benefits of the program include conservation of fossil

fuels, reduced fuel imports, conservation of foreign hard currency, and distributed

generation. The intent of the program is to realize these external benefits, yet result in a

direct cost to ratepayers that is no higher than supplying electricity without SPP projects.

The SPP regulations establish several conditions for purchases from SPPs. These

include a purchased capacity limitation of 60 MW (up to 90 MW in certain locations) and

the stipulation that EGAT be the sole purchaser of electricity. Payments to the SPP can

consist of an energy-only payment for electricity delivered (kWh) or an energy and a

capacity payment. Capacity payments are made for contracts that are 5 to 25 years

(“firm”) and that meet certain other requirements. Although capacity payments provide

substantial revenue to power projects, only three out of the 24 biomass projects accepted

so far into the SPP program receive such payments.2 Furthermore, only 6.8 percent

(101 MW) of the total SPP capacity connected to the EGAT system (1,491 MW) involves

waste or renewable resources.3

2.2 Thailand Biomass Resource Assessment

Black & Veatch conducted a biomass fuel supply review for Thailand. The

review investigated nine types of biomass as possible fuel for power and cogeneration

plants: rice husk, oil palm residues, bagasse, wood residues, corncob, cassava residues,

distillery slop, coconut residues, and sawdust. Availability, distribution, production rates

and forecasts, involved industries, prices, and the general suitability of the fuels for power

production were assessed. This section provides a summary of the investigation.

Table 2-1 provides basic information on the most viable fuels identified: rice

husk, palm oil residues, bagasse (from sugar cane milling), and wood residues. Other

fuels examined are not considered as viable for various reasons. Corncobs and coconut

2 NEPO website, www.nepo.go.th/power/pw-spp-purch00-02-E.html3 Arthur Anderson, “Thailand Power Pool and Electricity Supply Industry Reform Study-Phase 1 Final

Report,” Volume 5, March 1,2000.


http://www.nepo.go.th/pw-spp-purch00-02-E.html

residues are generally left scattered, making collection difficult. They are suitable

supplementary fuels but are not a significant source of energy for power generation.

Because of their high moisture content, cassava residues and distillery slop are not likely

to find widespread implementation as fuels.

Table 2-1

Most Viable Biomass Fuels in Thailand

Fuel Rice huskPalm Oil Residues

BagasseWood

Residues

Source output, 106 tonne/yr 20 2.2 50 5.8

Available residue, 106 tonne/yr a 2.3-3.7 0.41-0.74 2.25-3.5 1.8

Higher heating value, kJ/kg 14,100 10,800 10,000 10,000

Fuel consumption, tonne/yr/MW b 9,800 14,050 14,100 15,500

Aggregate power generation potential, MW 234-375 33-53 160-248 118

Notes:a Each biomass was estimated based on the following assumptions.

Rice-husk –Based on rice mills of capacity minimum 100 tonnes of paddy/day.Palm Oil Residues – Based on the 17 crude palm oil extracting facilities. Residues consist

of shells, fibre, and empty fruit bunch.Bagasse – Based on the 46 Sugar mills.Wood Residues – Included discarded processed wood and sawdust from general sawmills

and parawood processing facilities and small logs from parawood plantation forest.b A uniform 85 percent capacity factor is assumed in this study.

Aggregate power generation potential from all residues surveyed in this study

ranges from 779 to 1,043 MW. This value is for residues not already in use and does not

account for generation gains by increases in existing process or power generation

efficiency (e.g., sugar cane milling). Figure 2-1 shows distribution of capacity

developable from the four most viable fuels. The most promising provinces account for

about 300 MW of developable capacity and include Suratthani, Suphan Buri,

Kanchanaburi, Nakhon Sawan, Nakhon Ratchasi, Udon Thani, Kamphaeng Phet, Krabi,

Trang, and Nakhon Sri Thammarat.


Figure 2-1. Aggregate Potential Net Electric Capacity from Most Viable Residues and Candidate Facility Locations.


Roi EtRoi Et

KalasinKalasinKhon KaenKhon Kaen

Nakorn SawanNakorn Sawan

Uthai ThaniUthai Thani

ChumpornChumporn

Surat ThaniSurat Thani

KrabiKrabi

TrangTrang

Kamphaeng PhetKamphaeng Phet

2.3 Candidate Technologies

This section discusses the various technology considerations applicable for the

candidate facilities included in this project.

2.3.1 Biomass Fuel Concerns

Experience has shown that biomass fuels can be successfully burned by all of the

major combustion technologies provided that characteristics of the biomass have been

properly evaluated and accounted for in the design. Compared to coal, biomass fuels are

generally less dense, have a lower energy content, and are more difficult to handle. In

addition to these concerns, the ash of biomass fuels usually has high levels of alkali

components, which can cause slagging, fouling, and tube wastage. The ash of some

biomass fuels is also highly abrasive (notably rice husks). The problems associated with

alkali materials vary widely between different fuels and are best determined through

experience, although slagging potential can be determined by analysis of fuel properties

to a limited extent. Lower combustion temperatures reduce slagging significantly.

2.3.2 Thermochemical Conversion Options

Proven conversion systems for burning biomass fuels include the following:

Mass burn stoker boilers.

Stoker boilers (stationary sloping grate, travelling grate, and vibrating

grate).

Fluidized bed boilers (bubbling and circulating).

Gasification with combustion in a close-coupled boiler.

Pulverized fuel suspension fired boilers.

Each of these technologies has advantages and disadvantages, and all have been

commercially proven with biomass. Stoker boilers are widely in use but are not always

the most appropriate choice. For example, rice husks are most easily fired in fluidized

beds or gasifiers because the lower operation temperatures reduce the risk of slagging.

Stokers and suspension-fired units may also be used, but precautions should be taken to

minimize slagging potential. Fluidized beds are good choices in general because they can

tolerate wide variations in fuel moisture and size. Suspension firing is not suitable for

most biomass fuels because they are usually difficult to grind. Gasification may be a

suitable choice, but lacks widespread technical and commercial acceptance.

Due to their widespread availability, relatively low cost, and reasonable

efficiency, stoker boilers were recommended for the facilities studied in this report.

2.4 Candidate Facility Selection

Candidate facility selection involved identification and screening of candidate

facilities, development of MOUs, data collection, and preliminary assessment of

promising sites for full feasibility study.


2.4.1 Identification and Screening of Candidate Facilities

To identify potential sites, the study team contacted various agro-industrial

associations, approached sites that generate large amounts of residues, and developed a

questionnaire to solicit facility information and interest in project development. Initial

site selection guidelines for identification of suitable facilities included:

Availability of biomass supply for power generation or cogeneration.

Biomass disposal concerns and the intention to develop a power plant.

Capability and experience of the facility owner(s) in developing power

plants.

One of the most important aspects in site selection was owner willingness to

proceed with a power project. Because of the downturn in the economy, many facilities

were uncomfortable with making large investments, especially in power generation, a

field outside their regular business. For this reason, the study team had more difficulty

than expected locating candidate facilities.

2.4.2 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Development

Having identified potential sites and established a desire in the facility owners to

proceed with the study, the next step in the process was to develop a MOU between the

owner, NEPO, and Black & Veatch. The MOU outlines the commitment of the owner to

pursue development of a biomass power facility if the feasibility study determines the

proposed facility to be technically, environmentally, and financially viable. Through

execution of the MOU, it is understood that NEPO is financing the study under the

assumption that the facility owner will pursue further development of a viable project or

refund half the cost of the study unless acceptable reasons are provided to NEPO in

writing. The MOU defines the internal rate of return (IRR) for determining financial

viability at 23 percent.

The study team eventually received signed MOUs from each of the ten facilities:

Sommai Rice Mill Co., Ltd. Facility in Roi Et Province

Sanan Muang Rice Mill Co., Ltd. in Kamphaeng Phet Province

Thitiporn Thanya Rice Mill Co., Ltd. in Nakorn Sawan Province

Plan Creations Co., Ltd. in Trang Province

Chumporn Palm Oil Industry Plc., in Chumporn Province

Karnchanaburi Sugar Industry Co., Ltd. in Uthai Thani Province

Woodwork Creation Co., Ltd. in Krabi Province

Mitr Kalasin Sugar Co., Ltd. in Kalasin Province

Liang Hong Chai Rice Mill Co., Ltd. in Khon Kaen Province

Southern Palm Oil Industry (1993) Co., Ltd. in Surat Thani Province

2.4.3 Data Collection

Following identification and initial screening of prospective facilities, Black &

Veatch provided detailed data requests to facility owners. Data requests were facility


specific and were used to help Black & Veatch identify the optimal configuration of the

power facility, evaluate project feasibility, and identify other benefits of the project. Of

particular importance was the quantity of biomass fuel available to the project, reliability

of supply, and other characteristics of the fuel. Other information collected included

water resource data, process descriptions, plant layouts, maps, labor requirements, current

waste disposal practices, cost of electricity purchases, process steam needs, hours of

operation, and plans for future expansion.

2.4.4 Preliminary Assessment

When review of this information indicated a favorable potential for development,

facility site visits were arranged to perform a preliminary assessment of the selected

facility. The assessment was accomplished through review of the existing facilities,

discussions with the staff, and gathering of other pertinent facility information.

Each assessment addresses the facility’s potential for power plant development or

modification. None of the assessments completed identified any obvious development

problems that would preclude further investigation in a feasibility study.

2.5 Facility Feasibility Studies

This section summarizes the feasibility studies for the ten facilities and the

presentations made to facility owners. Figure 2-1 shows the location of the facilities and

Table 2-2 summarizes results of the studies.

Due to the length of the project and other factors, two major assumptions were

changed during the course of the study. These are the exchange rate for financial

evaluation and the capital cost basis. Because the study commenced near the start of the

financial crises, the Baht to US dollar exchange rate has fluctuated significantly over the

course of this study. Evaluation of the first four sites was initially issued in June 1998

and used an exchange rate of 43.53 Baht/US$. Since that time the exchange rate has

dropped significantly. The financial analysis for the last six sites reflects this drop and

assumes an exchange rate of 37.15 Baht/US$.

Secondly, there is an overall increase in project costs for facilities. This increase

is due to two factors.

Assumed equipment sourcing changed from Pacific Rim (e.g. Chinese)

suppliers to higher cost European and US suppliers. These suppliers

provided higher cost information.

The last six sites were smaller resulting in higher specific costs due to

economies of a scale.


Table 2-2 Facility Summary

FacilitySommai Rice Mill

Sanan Muang

Rice Mill

Thitiporn Thanya

Rice Mill

Plan Creations

Chumporn Palm Oil

Karnchan-aburi

Sugar Mill

Woodwork Creation

Mitr Kalasin

Sugar Mill

Liang Hong Chai Rice Mill

Southern Palm Oil

Facility type Rice mill Rice mill Rice mill Wood products

Palm oil mill

Sugar mill Wood products

Sugar mill Rice mill Palm oil mill

New plant or modifications? New New New New Mods. Mods. New New New New

Residue available from facility, t/yr 98,670 13,800 27,600 4,000 89,100 20,834 31,680 76,000 33,000 73,500

Total residue use, t/yr 86,900 79,000 79,000 134,000 111,860 34,216 54,000 76,000 33,000 73,500

Residue type Rice husk Rice husk Rice husk Wood waste

Palm oil res. othersa

Bagasse, corncob

Wood waste

Bagasse Rice husk Palm oil res. othersa

Annual heat available, GJ/yr 1,225,868 1,113,900 1,113,900 1,380,200 1,564,000b 406,980 510,300 725,040 465,300 1,072,932b

Net plant heat rate, kJ/kWh 18,708 18,708 18,708 21,015 49,500c 47,205c d 21,900 17,400 18,700 21,700e

Net plant output, kW 8,800 8,000 8,000 8,800 4,550 1,850 3,100 5,600 3,300 6,200

Output sold to EGAT, kW 8,800 8,000 8,000 8,800 2,520 1,850 3,100 5,600 3,300 5,366

Cogeneration? Steam flow, tonne/hr No No No No Yes, 31.85 No No No No Yes, 13.9e

Est. total project cost, US$ mil 9.71 9.27 9.27 10.59 5.0 1.95 8.65 13.4 9.73 14.6

IRR (base case), percent 32.6 25.5 26.4 7.9 20.4 18.9 4.4 13.3 7.6 11.6

IRR at 43.5 Baht/US$ exchange rate – – – – 15.8 15.9 2.1 9.8 5.1 8.4

IRR at 20% reduced capital cost – – – – 29.4 26.7 8.5 20.1 12.6 17.9

IRR for alternative study (see writeup)

– – – 38.5 39-69 27.5 25 46 13-29 13-25

Notes:a Chumporn Palm: palm oil residues (fiber, shells, empty fruit bunch), biogas, coconut husks; Southern Palm: palm oil residues (fiber and shells only), biogas.b Chumporn Palm: includes biogas use of 6,000,000 m3/yr (136,000 GJ/yr); Southern Palm: includes biogas use of 3,570,000 m3/yr (80,682 GJ/yr).c Based on existing power facility performance information considering proposed modifications.d Includes credit for surplus power generated by the existing sugar mill during the on-season.e Average value. Southern Palm Oil requires varying amounts of process steam depending on the season.


Based on the assumptions noted in each study, the results of the studies indicate

that all ten of the candidate facilities are technically and environmentally viable. A

variety of biomass fuels were examined in the studies including rice husk (4 facilities),

wood waste (2), palm oil residues (2), and bagasse (2) as primary fuels and coconut husks

(1), biogas (2), and corncobs (1) as supplementary fuels. Both entirely new power

facilities and modifications to existing plant power facilities were examined.

The power outputs examined ranged from 1.9 MW to 8.8 MW net for the base

case analyses. In support of financial sensitivity analyses, some preliminary

investigations were done for facilities sized up to 30 MW. Cogeneration of steam was a

very significant design factor for the two palm oil mills and played a lesser role for the

other facilities. In general, the studies found relatively few technical or environmental

obstacles.

In base case analyses, the financial viability of the facilities was mixed. Three of

the facilities identified (Sommai, Sanan Muang, and Thitiporn Thanya rice mills)

surpassed the financial IRR hurdle of 23 percent in the base case analyses. Black &

Veatch investigated alternative scenarios aimed at improving the financial rating of the

other facilities. These studies, which are preliminary in nature, indicate that several

factors could change to raise the IRR above 23 percent for these projects. In some cases,

such as simply accounting for the value of cogenerated steam at the Chumporn Palm Oil

Mill, the improvement in IRR can be dramatic and is compelling from an investment

standpoint.

The results of the studies for each site and owner reaction to the studies are briefly

discussed below.

Sommai Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Sommai Rice Mill Co., Ltd. located in

Roi Et. After an expansion that would raise the facility milling capacity to 1,300 tonnes

of paddy per day, it is estimated that 100,000 tonne/year of rice husk could be available

for power production. The proposed rice husk power plant would have a gross output of

10.0 MW (8.8 MW net). The feasibility study concludes that the proposed development

is technically, environmentally, and financially viable (IRR of 32.6 percent).

The study results were presented to the facility owner who decided to pursue

further project development. The development is proceeding well as a joint venture

between Sommai and EGCO (Electricity Generating Plc.), and has reached the step at

which a contractor is being selected to provide engineering, procurement, and

construction services for the project.

Sanan Muang Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Sanan Muang Rice Mill Co., Ltd. in

Kamphaeng Phet. Rice husk from the 250 tonne paddy per day mill would be


supplemented with husks from five other area mills. Total husks available for power

production are estimated to be 79,000 tonne/year. The proposed power plant would have

a gross output of 9.1 MW (8.0 MW net). The study concludes that the proposed

development is technically, environmentally, and financially viable (IRR of 25.5 percent).

The study results were presented to the facility owner. The owner is interested in

further project development through a joint venture with other interested investor(s).

Thitiporn Thanya Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Thitiporn Thanya Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

located in Nakorn Sawan. Rice husk from the 500 tonne paddy per day mill would be

supplemented with husks from seven other area mills. Total husks available for power

production are estimated to be 79,000 tonne/year. The proposed power plant would have

a gross output of 9.1 MW (8.0 MW net). The study concludes that the proposed

development is technically, environmentally and financially viable (IRR of 26.4 percent).

The study results were presented to the facility owner who is interested in further

project development through a joint venture with interested investor(s). However, the

owner has exhibited some hesitancy since the plant would depend on outside fuel sources.

Plan Creations Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Plan Creations Co., Ltd. parawood

processing plant located in Trang. Only about 4,000 tonne/year of wood waste would be

available from the facility. Additional residues could be obtained from other area mills

and a large forestry residue collection operation. Total wood waste would be about

134,000 tonne/year, which is sufficient to power a facility with a gross output of

10.0 MW (8.8 MW net). The feasibility study concludes that the proposed development

is technically and environmentally viable, but financially marginal (IRR of 7.95 percent)

in the base case analysis. If a larger facility could be built, the project may be more

viable. Black & Veatch investigated the economics at a plant size of 28 MW and found

that the IRR would increase to 38.5 percent at this size. The owner was presented the

study results but is interested in implementation of a small (about 2 MW) system at the

site. At present the owner is soliciting project price information from a vendor.

Chumporn Palm Oil Industry Plc.

Power facility modifications were studied at the Chumporn Palm Oil Industry Plc.

palm oil mill located in Chumporn. Preliminary technical and economic analysis found

that combustion of additional fuels using existing equipment for power generation up to

3.7 MW is viable. The fuels used include facility wastes of palm shell, fiber, and empty

fruit bunch (EFB); biogas produced by the processing facility; and coconut husk and

additional palm shell procured from the surrounding area. In addition, modifications to

the facility to allow greater power production were studied. The configuration selected


utilizes a low pressure condensing turbine to capture and generate power from the exhaust

of the existing back pressure steam turbine, a condenser to recover turbine and process

exhaust steam, an improved makeup water treatment system, and other modifications.

The average gross plant output under this configuration would be approximately 5.4 MW

(3.0 MW increase over the current capacity).

The feasibility study concluded that the proposed development is technically and

environmentally viable, and financially viable under certain conditions (base case IRR of

20.4 percent). The new power plant will allow CPOI to operate at a higher palm oil

production capacity because of increased steam cogeneration. It was found that inclusion

of this benefit would make the project very attractive financially (IRR ranging from 39 to

69 percent for steam value of 5 to 15 US$/tonne, respectively).

Study results were presented to the facility, who generally concurred with the

study but expressed some concern over recent fluctuations in the price of outside

supplementary fuel. The facility would like to expand their processing capabilities in the

near future. This will likely require some sort of upgrade to the power and steam

systems.

Karnchanaburi Sugar Industry Co., Ltd.

Power facility modifications were studied at the Karnchanaburi Sugar Industry

Co., Ltd. located in Uthai Thani. The sugar mill currently operates a cogeneration facility

with a maximum gross electrical output of 17.5 MW. Depending on the steam needs of

the sugar mill, there is unused and unsold electrical capacity averaging about 455 kW at

the plant. In addition, excess bagasse and/or supplemental corncobs could be burned in

the off-season to provide power to the grid on a firm basis. The combination of the

excess existing power production, excess bagasse fuel, and supplemental corncob fuel can

provide a total of 1,850 kW net (capacity factor: 53.2 percent). Minor plant modifications

and new equipment additions would be required. The feasibility study concludes that the

proposed development is technically and environmentally viable, and financially viable

under certain conditions (IRR of 18.9 percent). Additional analysis found that increases

in sugar milling efficiency would allow enough bagasse to be produced so that

combustion of supplemental corncob fuel would not be required. The IRR under this

scenario increases significantly to 27.5.

Study results were presented to the facility owner who is interested and agreed to

further development.

Woodwork Creation Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Woodwork Creation Co., Ltd. parawood

processing plant located in Krabi. A total of 31,680 tonne/yr of wood residue will be

available at the facility after an upcoming expansion. In the base case analysis, a small

amount of fuel from the surrounding are is used, bringing the total fuel consumption to


54,000 tonne/year and allowing a plant with a gross output of 3.55 MW (3.1 MW net).

The analysis for this case was financially marginal (IRR of 4.4 percent). If a larger

facility (about 30 MW) could be built at the site or in the area, more favorable economics

would be achieved. Black & Veatch estimates an IRR of 25 percent that at this size,

subject to the assumptions presented in the full report. The study results are under further

consideration by the owner.

Mitr Kalasin Sugar Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Mitr Kalasin Sugar Co., Ltd. sugar mill

located in Kalasin. The high pressure boiler for the proposed power plant would be

fueled with 76,000 tonne/yr of excess bagasse produced by the sugar mill. The new

power plant would have a gross output of 6.1 MW (5.6 MW net) and would operate year-

round. The existing power facility (16.4 MW gross) would remain and would supply the

processing operations with the required steam and power. The feasibility study concludes

that the proposed development is technically and environmentally viable, but financially

marginal (base case IRR of 13.3 percent). An alternative option utilizes the existing

equipment with minor additions and modifications to produce about 3.2 MW. This

preliminary option has a much higher IRR of 46 percent. Both options were presented to

the facility, which is considering further development.

Liang Hong Chai Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Liang Hong Chai Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

located in Khon Kaen. Liang Hong Chai owns two rice mills that together could supply

approximately 33,000 tonne/yr of rice husk for power production. This level of residue

would allow a power plant of 3.8 MW gross (3.3 MW net). At this size, the financial

feasibility of the site is marginal (IRR of 7.6 percent). If a larger facility (about

13.4 MW) could be built at the site, more favorable economics would be achieved. Black

& Veatch estimates an IRR of 29 percent that at this size, subject to assumptions

presented in the full report. The study results are under further consideration by the

owner.

Southern Palm Oil Industry (1993) Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Southern Palm Oil Industry (1993) Co.,

Ltd. mill located in Surat Thani. The boiler for the proposed power plant would be fueled

with fiber, shells, and biogas produced by the processing facility. The power plant would

have a gross output of 7.0 MW (6.2 MW net) and would generate process steam. The

existing power facility (880 kW) would remain and would be used for backup purposes.

The feasibility study concludes that the proposed development is technically and

environmentally viable, but financially marginal (IRR of 11.6 percent) in the base case.


However, due to increased steam production, the new power plant will allow

SPOI to operate at a higher palm oil production capacity. If this benefit is included in the

financial analysis and a larger plant size (28.3 MW) is assumed, significantly higher

financial returns are attainable. Black & Veatch estimates that IRR of about 25 percent

are possible under this scenario.

The study results were presented to the facility owner. Although the financial

performance of the power project is marginal under base case assumptions, the facility

would like to expand their palm oil processing capabilities in the near future. This will

likely require some sort of upgrade to the mill power and steam systems.

2.6 Promotion of Biomass in Thailand’s Energy Future

As discussed previously, the percent of biomass capacity in the SPP program is

small and mostly contracted on a non-firm basis. Black & Veatch feels that there are

several reasons for this relating to the current SPP program regulations (dated

January 1998) and other factors.

2.6.1 Black & Veatch Comments on the SPP Program Regulations

The present SPP regulations for biomass were established for payment of capacity

and energy based on the long-term avoided cost of electricity from a fuel oil plant.

However, biomass plants cannot be economically competitive on this basis:

Due to dispersed fuel, most biomass plants are small (about 5-30 MW)

compared to fuel oil based plants. Thus, the capital cost per megawatt of a

biomass power plant is usually higher than that for fuel oil power plants.

The fixed rate for the energy payment is based on the net plant heat rate

for a combined cycle power plant, which is 9,070 kJ/kWh (8,600 Btu/kWh).

Even with leading edge technology, biomass plants cannot achieve this level

of efficiency and are thus less competitive.

2.6.2 Other Factors Impacting Biomass Project Development

Owing to the existing regulations and other factors, very few biomass power

plants have sold electricity to the grid through firm contracts. Other reasons for the lack

of biomass-based power generation in Thailand include:

Energy prices do not reflect external social costs such as air pollution,

carbon dioxide emissions, socioeconomic impacts, fuel imports, etc.

Investors or lenders would like to minimize biomass fuel supply risk

simply by establishing long term supply contracts, but these are very difficult

to achieve. Alternative methods of risk management are often not explored.

Host facilities are often not familiar with the power generation business

and are wary of making large investments in businesses outside their core

experience.


In addition to relatively high specific capital costs, development costs for

biomass plants are similar to larger plants, even though the capacities are

much smaller.

The combination of high up-front capital costs, unfamiliar technology, and

unmanageable fuel supply risk, makes financing of biomass projects more difficult and

expensive than conventional energy plants. The result is that those plants that are built

may not be able to produce electricity at rates as low as conventional technologies.

2.6.3 Incentives

A variety of incentive measures have been implemented around the world to

encourage biomass and other renewable energy sources. Beyond direct increases in

capacity and energy prices, Thailand should examine several measures:

Set a target for biomass and other renewable power plant generating

capacity for the next 10 years.

Establish a competitive subsidy scheme to encourage development of new

renewable energy power plants.

Promote marketing of biomass and other renewable energy sources as

“green” energy to encourage public support of projects.

Collaborate with specific high potential industries (e.g., sugar cane

milling) to promote higher efficiency plants and expanded biomass power

generation.

Investigate alternative funding mechanisms to provide long-term loans

with low interest rates to biomass projects.

Any incentive offered should be cognizant of the liberalization of the electricity

supply industry and flexible enough to respond to changing market conditions.

NEPO has begun a successful campaign to promote renewable energy. This effort

will be further strengthened by the recent commissioning of an initiative to subsidize up

to 300 MW of renewable energy projects through the Energy Conservation Promotion

Program (ENCON) fund. The capacity, which will be bid on a competitive basis, will be

an important step to further the long-term energy policy goals of Thailand.


3.0 Introduction

This Final Report has been prepared by Black & Veatch according to the Terms of

Reference (TOR) for the “Biomass-Based Power Generation and Cogeneration Within

Small Rural Industries” study commissioned by the National Energy Policy Office

(NEPO) of Thailand. NEPO is promoting the use of biomass, such as wood waste,

bagasse, rice husks, and oil palm residues, as fuel for electricity and steam production in

small rural industries. The benefits of this policy include reduction of petroleum imports,

conservation of natural resources, and strengthening of rural economies. Under the Small

Power Producers (SPP) program, electricity generated by such plants can be sold to the

Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT). NEPO has commissioned Black &

Veatch to perform a study of biomass power and cogeneration projects and to prepare this

Final Report to summarize the results of the project. This report presents many aspects

related to biomass energy and includes summaries of ten biomass power plant feasibility

studies done for sites around Thailand.

This section of the report provides a description of the study objective, scope of

work, and approach. The section also includes a brief overview of biomass energy.

3.1 Study Objective

The ultimate objective of this study is to develop biomass-based power generation as a source of electricity in Thailand. Using biomass agricultural residues in power generation and cogeneration schemes have the benefits of helping the involved facility to be self-sufficient in meeting its own electricity and process heat demands, while eliminating the problem of waste disposal. Developing the biomass energy resource will also benefit Thailand’s economy because it helps the country to become less dependent on imported fossil fuels. The specific goals of this study are as follows:

To review the existing status of biomass fuels in Thailand. To conduct feasibility studies on 10 small rural industries in

order to assess their potential for biomass-based power generation and cogeneration.

To demonstrate the financial viability of biomass-based power generation or cogeneration at the facilities in order to encourage investment decisions of the owners towards implementing the projects.

To assist the facilities to implement power generation and cogeneration, and to enter EGAT’s SPP Program.

3.2 Study Scope of Work

This subsection details the scope of work for the project.


3.2.1 Task Details

Task 1 – Data Collection and Prefeasibility Study

1. Review the existing status of biomass fuels in Thailand, including types, availability,

production rates, forecasts, and the specific industry involved. Review the potential

of each type of biomass resource for electricity generation, the prices of each type of

biomass resource in the existing market, and other uses of the biomass resources.

Geographical location of the biomass resources is also important.

2. Gather background information regarding the existing small rural industries

producing agricultural residues which can be used as biomass fuels in Thailand.

Review technical aspects of the industries including the process energy requirements

and energy consumption. Review the standards and regulations of the Small Power

Producers Program.

3. Locate a minimum of 10 facilities which have potential for biomass-based power

generation or cogeneration. Touch base with personnel of the identified facilities in

order to initiate a working relationship.

4. Develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The MOU will commit the

facility owners to pursue project implementation if the project provides to be

commercially viable. The Consultant should seek to sign MOUs with 10 facilities.

Projects with MOUs will have the highest priority for subsequent feasibility studies.

5. Conduct detailed data collection of the 10 facilities which have signed MOUs. This

may include field surveys of the actual site. The data collected in this step will be

used in the detailed feasibility study of Task 2, therefore the data should include

technical, economic, and ecological information.

6. Evaluate the collected data and make preliminary assessment of biomass-based power

generation and cogeneration in specific small rural industries. Complete other

appropriate pre-feasibility tasks.

7. Compile a list of local and/or foreign suppliers of biomass-based power generation

and cogeneration equipment. Locate contractors capable of installation of the

equipment. Obtain prices of the equipment, installation costs, operations and

maintenance costs, etc.

Task 2 – Feasibility Study

The tasks to be undertaken are identical for each of the 10 small rural industries

which are capable of implementing biomass-based power generation or cogeneration

projects and have signed MOUs. A project to be suitably evaluated is the to be placed

within the system to which it belongs, and therefore, the evaluation is to consider the

interrelationships of the project and the other natural and socioeconomic components of

the project system. The basic components of a detailed feasibility study are:

1. Technical Feasibility: Determine the present status and future prospects of the local

technological capacity, and requirement for foreign technology. Conduct preliminary


designs. Assess human and material requirements. Evaluate topographical and

geological conditions, etc.

2. Economic Feasibility: Establish costs and benefits related to the project from an

overall economic and social point of view. Assess indirect effects and evaluate the

project economic attractiveness.

3. Financial Feasibility: Establish costs and benefits related to the project from the point

of view of the beneficiary of the project. Assess the financial attractiveness through

the use of financial indicators. Establish a financing plan for the project. Assess the

past financial performance of the beneficiary of the project and potential for future

sound financial performance.

4. Commercial Feasibility: Assess the status and prospects for the project product(s) to

meet demands of the current market. Survey the suitability of commercial systems for

distribution of the project product(s), and of the systems to supply raw materials and

other inputs.

5. Socioeconomic Feasibility: Evaluate the effects of the project with regard to the

society involved, for instance creation or reduction of employment, etc.

6. Ecological Feasibility: Asses the impacts and benefits of the project to the ecological

environment. Check standards on ecological pollution.

7. Juridical Feasibility: Check existing laws and other juridical constraints, and

obligations favoring (or discouraging) the development and operation of the project.

8. Political Feasibility: Evaluate the regional and sectoral planning, policy, and

objectives. Determine whether the project implementation is consistent with relevant

sectoral/energy policies.

Task 3 – Assist Facility Owners to Invest in Biomass-Based Power Generation and

Cogeneration

Once biomass-based power generation and cogeneration has proved to be feasible,

the next step is to assist the facilities to implement the project. The details of this work

are as follows:

1. Present the results of the feasibility studies to the respective facility owner. The

presentation should emphasize how implementing cogeneration can help the owners

save operation costs by producing electricity on-site and negating the cost of

disposing biomass residue.

2. Demonstrate the commercial viability of implementing biomass-based power

generation and cogeneration to the facility owners. This includes briefing the owners

on EGAT’s SPP Program, and how owners can sell excess electricity back to the grid.

Substantial economic and financial data should be presented to the owners in order to

persuade them to invest in cogeneration projects are their facilities.

3. Produce a handbook for facility owners in Thai and English explaining the procedure

for entering EGAT’s SPP Program, including all relevant implications concerned such


as commercial and juridical aspects. The handbooks should also identify financing

sources for the project implementation.

3.2.2 Activities by Task

This section describes the task activities undertaken by Black & Veatch

(corresponding sections of this report are given to the right of the task title). Details on

these tasks are provided in the Detailed Work Plan and Methodology document prepared

by Black & Veatch.

Task 1 Data Collection and Prefeasibility Study

Black & Veatch collected data and conducted prefeasibility studies to identify

potential fuels, facilities, and technology for biomass-based power generation

or cogeneration. The following subtasks were performed.

Task 1.1 Status of Fuel Supply Section 4

The existing status of biomass fuels in Thailand was reviewed. Fuels reviewed

included rice husk, palm oil residues, bagasse, wood residues, corncobs,

cassava residues, distillery slop, coconut residues, and sawdust. Availability,

location, production rates, forecasts, industries involved, prices, and the general

suitability of the fuel for power production were assessed.

Task 1.2 Identification of Candidate Facilities Section 6 and 12

Candidate industries and specific facilities with good potential for biomass

power generation were identified (Section 6). Such facilities included rice

mills, sugar mills, palm oil mills, etc. This task also reviewed the regulations

and requirements of the SPP program (Section 12).

Task 1.3 Screening of Candidate Facilities Section 6

A screening approach was used to select ten preferred facilities for further

analysis. A key consideration in light of the economic crisis was owner

willingness to proceed with the project.

Task 1.4 Development of a Memorandum of Understanding Section 7

A generic Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was developed. The MOU

commits facility owners to pursue project implementation in the event the

project proves to be financially viable. An MOU was signed with each of the

ten selected facilities and is included with the site feasibility studies.

Task 1.5 Detailed Data Collection for Selected Facilities Section 8

Site visits followed by continued dialog were used to collect data from the

selected facilities for use in the feasibility studies.

Task 1.6 Preliminary Assessment of Selected Facilities Section 9

Black & Veatch made a preliminary evaluation of each of the biomass facilities

based on data collected in Task 1.5. Topics covered generally included current

operations, power potential, proposed facility features, environmental aspects,


socioeconomic aspects, economic aspects, and elevation and climatological

data. In addition, a conclusion is provided for each of the preliminary

assessments that indicates whether a full feasibility study of the proposed

power plant is warranted.

Task 1.7 Identification of Candidate Technologies Section 5

Technologies appropriate for biomass power plants were characterized. This

characterization takes into account potential fuels and plant size range. A list

of relevant equipment vendors was produced.

Task 2 Feasibility Studies

Black & Veatch performed a feasibility study for each of the ten sites for which

an MOU had been signed. The feasibility studies are available as separate

documents. The feasibility studies consider the interrelationship of the project

with all surrounding systems. The basic components of each feasibility study

are:

Technical Feasibility

Economic Feasibility

Financial Feasibility

Commercial Feasibility

Socioeconomic Feasibility

Ecological Feasibility

Juridical Feasibility

Political Feasibility

Task 3 Assist Development of Biomass-Based Power Generation

Owners were given the results of their respective feasibility studies and then

assisted in initial project implementation activities. The following subtasks

were performed.

Task 3.1 Presentation of Feasibility Study Results to Facility Owners Section 11

Representatives of Black & Veatch made presentations to facility owners for

each of the facilities found to be viable.

Task 3.2 Develop Owner Understanding of Project Benefits Section 11

In addition to making the presentation above, Black & Veatch presented and

explained the financial results of the project pro forma and the benefits and

regulations of the SPP program to the facility owners.

Task 3.3 SPP Program Handbook Preparation

Black & Veatch has prepared a handbook outlining the procedure for entering

the SPP program, including all responsibilities and performance standards for

the SPP. The Handbook itself is issued concurrently with the Final Report.


3.3 Biomass Energy Overview

Biomass has been used by human civilization as a primary energy source for more

than 1 million years. Today, about 12 percent of the world's energy comes from the use

of biomass fuels.4 In industrialized nations, bioenergy facilities typically use waste fuels

such as residue from pulp and paper production in large scale power and process steam

applications. Conversely, developing nations have largely relied on biomass to provide

fuel for rural cook stoves. These stoves are relatively inefficient and dirty. Increasing

industrialization and household income are driving the economies of developing nations

to implement cleaner and more efficient biomass technologies.

Biomass is any material of recent biological origin. Biomass fuels include items

as diverse as residential yard clippings, manure, urban wood waste, and dedicated energy

crops. Compared to coal, biomass fuels are generally less dense, have a lower energy

content, and are more difficult to handle. With some exceptions, these qualities generally

make biomass fuels economically disadvantaged compared to fossil fuels.

Environmental concerns may help make biomass an economically competitive

fuel. Unlike fossil fuels, biomass fuels are renewable and do not contribute to greenhouse

gas emissions. Biomass combustion releases no more carbon dioxide (CO2) than the

plant absorbed during its growing cycle and which would be released during the biomass

natural decay process. Fossil fuel combustion releases CO2 into the atmosphere that has

been stored for centuries under the surface of the earth. Biomass fuels contain little sulfur

compared to coal, resulting in decreased production of sulfur dioxide (SO2). They also

have lower combustion temperatures that help reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions.

However, unless biomass is efficiently and cleanly converted to a secondary

energy form, the environmental benefits are only partially realized, if at all. For this

reason efficient, modern biomass utilization must be favored over traditional applications.

3.3.1 Modern Biomass Applications

Besides such simple changes as improved cook stoves, modern biomass

technology has many applications throughout the world. Three of these applications are

distributed generation, utility plants, and industrial cogeneration.

3.3.1.1 Distributed Generation. There are many situations where the development

of small, modular distributed generators can be more economical than investing in

expensive transmission and distribution systems. One possible scenario is the use of an

anaerobic digester or biomass gasifier coupled with an engine-generator to provide gas,

heat, and electricity at the village scale.

4 World Energy Council, “Renewable Energy Resources: Opportunities and Constraints 1990-2020,” 1993.


3.3.1.2 Utility Plants. For environmental reasons, utilities are increasingly looking

for renewable resources to add to their generation mix. Biomass is an attractive

renewable option because the technology is well understood and can be baseloaded,

unlike the intermittent output of solar and wind plants. Properly conceived, a biomass

plant can use waste fuels from the surrounding area that are available at low, zero, or even

negative cost (tipping fees). Fuels can consist of urban wood waste, agricultural residues,

and other waste fuels.

3.3.1.3 Industrial Power Generation and Cogeneration. Many agricultural

processing and rural industries have large electrical and thermal demands and a ready

supply of biomass waste fuels. In many cases, these facilities can economically burn the

waste to met at least a portion of their electrical demand and possibly generate process

steam as well. Specific industries with potential include palm oil (Figure 3-1), sugar cane

milling, wood processing (Figure 3-2), and rice milling.

Thailand, which has been an agrarian country for most of its history, has

widespread agricultural and rural industry that could benefit from modern application of

biomass technologies. Biomass energy use in Thailand is discussed in the next section.

Figure 3-2. Fresh Oil Palm Bunch at a Thailand Palm Oil Mill.


Figure 3-3. Harvesting of Rubber from a Parawood Plantation.

3.3.2 Biomass Energy in Thailand

The use of biomass as an energy source is widely practiced throughout Thailand

industries, particularly in rural and agricultural areas. Out of 754 industries surveyed in

recent study, 71 percent still use fuelwood as a source of energy.5 Figure 3-3 shows

industrial energy use and the amount of industrial energy derived from two biomass

types: fuelwood and agricultural residues. This figure also plots the fraction of total

industrial energy use derived from biomass sources.

Use of biomass as an energy source has not been rising as fast as total industrial

energy use. For this reason, the share of biomass energy used in industrial processes has

steadily dropped from 46 percent in 1985, to 25 percent in 1996, despite averaging

8 percent annual growth over the period. Although overall industrial energy use declined

in 1997 with the financial crisis, use of agricultural and wood residues actually climbed,

increasing the share of biomass energy to 28 percent. The increase was nearly entirely

due to an almost 25 percent surge in fuelwood consumption. This increase in fuelwood

consumption underscores its importance as a locally available inexpensive fuel.

5 Panyathanya, W., S. Rawiwan, S. Benjachaya, “A Survey of Industrial Fuelwood Consumption in

Thailand,” 1993.


0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997

Year

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Fuelwood

Crop residues

Total Industry

Biomass Share of Total Industry

Figure 3-3. Industrial Energy Use in Thailand.6

As Thailand’s economy recovers, the share of biomass energy used in industry is

likely to continue falling even though overall use of biomass as a primary energy source

will likely rise. In either case, biomass use could be reduced even while maintaining

electrical capacity growth if modern, efficient biomass energy conversion systems were

widely adopted. Properly implemented policy encouraging sustainable and efficient use

of biomass fuels will benefit Thailand in several ways. Benefits include reduced

dependency on foreign energy sources, strengthening of rural economies through creation

of local fuel markets and jobs, and addition of renewable baseload power with minimal

environmental impact. Regardless of policy, biomass will continue to be heavily relied

on in many industries such as sugar cane and palm oil milling.

3.3.3 Small Power Producers Program Overview

Small rural industries engaged in power production from biomass may sell their

excess energy generation back to the electrical grid through the Small Power Producers

(SPP) Program. The SPP program was initiated by the National Energy Policy Council

and implemented by the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT),

Metropolitan Electricity Authority (MEA), and Provincial Electricity Authority (PEA).

The SPP program was initiated based on the conclusions of the National Energy Policy

Council that:

6 Extracted from the Regional Wood Energy Development Programme in Asia (RWEDP) biomass energy

use database located at: http://www.rwedp.org/cgi-bin/consumptionQuery.pl.


“generation from non-conventional energy, waste or residual fuels and cogeneration increases efficiency in the use of primary energy and by-product energy sources and helps to reduce the financial burden of the public sector with respect to investment in electricity generation and distribution.”

The national and external benefits of the SPP program include the conservation of

fossil fuels, reduced fuel imports, conservation of foreign hard currency, and distributed

generation benefits. The intent of the program is to realize these external benefits, yet

result in a direct cost to ratepayers that is no higher than the alternative of supplying

electricity without SPP projects.

The SPP regulations establish several conditions for purchases from SPPs. These

include a purchased capacity limitation of 60 MW (up to 90 MW in certain locations) and

the stipulation that EGAT be the sole purchaser of electricity. Payments to the SPP can

consist of an energy-only payment for electricity delivered (kWh) or an energy and a

capacity payment. No capacity payments are made for contracts with a term of less than

5 years (“non-firm” contracts). In order to receive capacity payments (given under “firm”

contracts) the SPP must meet certain criteria (for example, contract length of 5 to

25 years, minimum hours of operation, etc.). Although capacity payments provide

substantial revenue to power projects, only three out of the 24 biomass projects accepted

so far into the SPP program receive such payments. All projects examined in this study

were designed from the outset to qualify for the capacity payments.

Candidate SPPs must file applications for sale of power to EGAT and must

undergo evaluation to be certain the proposed project meets all terms of the SPP program.

Black & Veatch has prepared guidelines to assist developers and facilities entering the

SPP program. These are included in the Development and Construction Handbook of this

study, issued jointly with this Final Report.


4.0 Thailand Biomass Fuel Resource Assessment (Task 1.1)

This fuel supply review investigates nine types of biomass resources as potential

fuel for power and cogeneration plants:

Rice husk

Oil palm residues

Bagasse

Wood residues

Corncob

Cassava residues

Distillery slop

Coconut residues

Sawdust

This section of the Final Report provides updated information on the fuels and

draws conclusions concerning the viability of each biomass fuel. Availability,

distribution, production rates, forecasts, industries involved, prices, and the general

suitability of the fuels for power production are assessed and presented in the following

sections. The section starts with a general overview of the biomass fuel supply situation

in Thailand.

4.1 Fuel Supply Overview

Thailand is a nation rich in agricultural and forestry resources that provide

potential sources for biomass fuel. This study attempted to identify viable biomass fuels

and quantify their attributes. Table 4-1 provides basic information on the most viable

fuels identified: rice husk, palm oil residues, bagasse, and wood residues (including

sawdust). Each of these fuels is associated with a particular industry where they are

produced as byproducts (rice milling, palm oil production, sugar cane milling and wood

products, respectively). Since the fuel is concentrated at the milling site, it is generally

inexpensive – transportation costs are avoided and the resource might otherwise represent

a disposal problem.

The other fuels are not considered as viable for various reasons. Corncobs and

coconut residues are generally left scattered, making collection difficult. They are

suitable supplementary fuels but are not a significant source of energy for power

generation. Because of their high moisture content, cassava residues and distillery slop

are not likely to find widespread implementation as fuels.


Table 4-2

Most Viable Biomass Fuels

Fuel Rice huskPalm Oil Residues

BagasseWood

Residues

Source output, 106 tonne/yr 20 2.2 50 5.8Available unused residue, 106 tonne/yr a 2.3-3.7 0.41-0.74 2.25-3.5 1.8Higher heating value, kJ/kg 14,100 10,800 10,000 10,000Fuel consumption, tonne/yr/MW b 9,800 14,050 14,100 15,500Aggregate power generation potential, MW 234-375 33-53 160-248 118

Notes:a Each biomass was estimated based on the following assumptions.

Rice-husk –Based on rice mills of capacity minimum 100 tonnes of paddy/day.Palm Oil Residues – Based on the 17 crude palm oil extracting facilities. Residues consist

of shells, fibre, and empty fruit bunch.Bagasse – Based on the 46 Sugar mills.Wood Residues – Included discarded processed wood and sawdust from general sawmills

and parawood processing facilities and small logs from parawood plantation forest.b A uniform 85 percent capacity factor is assumed in this study.

Aggregate power generation potential from all residues surveyed in this study ranges from 779 to 1,043 MW. It should be noted that this value is for residues not already in use and does not account for generation gains by increases in existing process or power generation efficiency (e.g., sugar cane milling). As such, the estimates are for incremental capacity and are slightly conservative. Figure 4-1 shows distribution of this capacity in the various provinces. The most promising provinces account for about 300 MW of developable capacity and include Suratthani, Suphan Buri, Kanchanaburi, Nakhon Sawan, Nakhon Ratchasi, Udon Thani, Kamphaeng Phet, Krabi, Trang, and Nakhon Sri Thammarat.

Similar fuel supply studies have been performed by other researchers and organizations. These are compared in Table 4-2.7, 8 The results of these investigations vary widely depending on three primary factors:

Initial assessment of residue source production. Estimates can be based on

crop production, which vary significantly from year to year.

Amount of residue potentially available and ultimately suitable for economic power generation. Some fuels, such as palm oil residues, are concentrated at few sites and are thus easy to collect and highly suitable for power generation. Others, such as rice husk, are scattered over thousands of mills throughout the country and have alternative competitive uses. The viability of this fuel is highly site specific.

7 EC-ASEAN COGEN Program, “Evaluation of Conditions for Electricity Production Based on Biomass,”

August 1998, available at: http://www.nepo.go.th/encon/encon-DANCED.html.8 Charles M. Kinoshita, et al, “Potential for Biomass Electricity in four Asian Countries,” presented at the

32nd Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, 1997.


Figure 4-4. Aggregate Potential Net Electric Capacity from Most Viable Residues.

Table 4-3


Comparison of Thailand Biomass Fuel Supply Studiesa

Industry Rice huskPalm Oil Residues

BagasseWood

Residues

Source output, 106 tonne/yr Rice paddy Fresh fruit bunch Sugar cane WoodBlack & Veatch (average) 20 2.2 50 5.8EC-ASEAN COGEN 22 2.25 50.5b >17b

Kinoshita, et al 20 <1 43 –

Residue produced, 106 tonne/yrBlack & Veatch (average) 4.6 0.97 14.5 3.48EC-ASEAN COGEN 4.8 0.95 14.6b UnknownKinoshita, et ala 5.6 0.31 10.3 –

Available residue, 106 tonne/yrc

Black & Veatch (average) 3.0 0.58 2.88 1.8EC-ASEAN COGEN Program 0.79 0.95 14.6b UnknownKinoshita, et ala 2.77 0.16 5.16 –

Potential power generation, GWh/yrBlack & Veatch (average) 2,270 320 1,520 880EC-ASEAN COGEN 400 350 5,700 UnknownKinoshita, et al 1,261 27 970 –

Capacity factor, percentBlack & Veatch 85 85 85 85EC-ASEAN COGEN 68 63 29 UnknownKinoshita, et al 85 85 30 –

Potential generation capacity, MWBlack & Veatch (average) 305 43 204 118EC-ASEAN COGEN 66 69 1,900 950Kinoshita, et al 170 4 370 –

Notes:a Values in italics are derived. Values in bold are assumed. All residue quantities from

Kinoshita have been converted from dry-basis assuming moisture contents of 10, 30, and 50 percent, for rice husk, palm oil residues, and bagasse, respectively

b There is some uncertainty as to the number used to calculate to the power potential.c Different assumptions are used for residue availability. In general, B&V estimate is for

residues readily collectible and not already in use, COGEN number is for residue “structurally” available, Kinoshita estimate is 50 percent of total production.

Assumptions concerning power conversion efficiency, plant capacity

factor, and operation profile (year-round or seasonal). These factors affect

the potential energy production (MWh) and the associated plant capacities

(MW).

As an example of the differences that can arise, the specific case of bagasse-based

power generation, one of the most promising fuels, is examined. Black & Veatch

assumed that production of sugar cane, the source of bagasse, would average about

50 million tonnes per year. This assumption is based on the production target set by the

Thailand government. Actual production has varied from 37.8 to 58 million tonnes


(average 49.4) over the period from 1993 to 1999. Kinoshita assumed production of

43 million tonnes, whereas COGEN used the value for 1994/95 of 50.5 million tonnes.

The percent bagasse residue produced from the sugar cane was similar for the three

studies: 29, 24, and 29 percent for Black & Veatch, Kinoshita, and COGEN, respectively.

The largest differences between the three estimates arise due to the assumptions

used to determine what percentage of the potential residue is ultimately available for

power production. Black & Veatch assumed that only those residues that are not used

currently at the mills would be available (about 20 percent of the total bagasse). This

estimate does not include upgrades of existing mills to higher efficiency power systems.

Kinoshita and COGEN assume that 50 and 100 percent, respectively, of total bagasse

supply could be used. These assumptions would require replacement or extensive

upgrades to a significant portion of the existing mill systems in Thailand.

To determine the electricity generation potential from the available residues, an

energy conversion efficiency factor is applied. Black & Veatch estimates 527 kWh/tonne

bagasse (TB). This number is equivalent to a net plant heat rate of about 19,060 kJ/kWh

(LHV). Kinoshita and COGEN appear to use estimates of 190 and 333 kWh/TB,

respectively. For reference, the two sugar mills examined for this study currently have

very low conversion efficiencies of about 60 kWh/TB. The higher conversion efficiency

estimated by Black & Veatch is due to the assumption that the bagasse would be used in

dedicated (non-cogeneration) power plants built alongside existing mill systems, which

would be retained to meet process steam and power requirements. The new power

facilities would burn the excess bagasse produced by the mills. Such an arrangement

allows for year-round operation of the power plant to provide firm power to the grid. As

such, Black & Veatch assumed a capacity factor of 85 percent compared to about

30 percent used for each of the other two studies. Ultimately, this results in a smaller

estimate of new capacity of 204 MW for this study. The much higher COGEN program

estimate (1900 MW) is more indicative of the industry potential if most mill power

systems in Thailand are upgraded or replaced. The Kinoshita estimate (370 MW) lies

between the two extremes.

Black & Veatch feels that, given observed reluctance of the sugar mill industry to

develop higher efficiency plants, the estimate prepared for bagasse-based power

generation is a realistic view of the near-term potential. To the extent that sugar mills

migrate towards higher efficiency equipment (which is advisable when plants are

established, relocated, or rehabilitated), the potential for power generation from bagasse

will increase. As there is tremendous potential in this industry, such a transition should

be encouraged.

The following sections present data on availability, distribution, production rates,

involved industries, prices, etc., of nine biomass fuels: rice husk, oil palm residues,

bagasse, wood residues, corncob, cassava residues, distillery slop, coconut residues, and

sawdust.


4.2 Rice Husk

Rice is grown in every region of Thailand including the Southern region. Paddy

production over the period from 1986/87 to 1995/96 has averaged about 20 million tonnes

per year. Despite decreasing planted and harvested area and a strong dependence on

weather, production over the 5 year period from 1992 to 1996 was stable. The

government has targeted a 1 to 2 percent increase in production through increased yield

while maintaining nearly the same planted area.

Rice husk is produced during paddy milling. Information on this resource is given

in Table 4-3. Based on milling statistics, rice husk constitutes about 23 percent of the

paddy weight. Potential residue availability by province is shown in Figure 4-2.

Assuming an annual paddy production of 20 million tonnes and a residue collectivity of

50 to 80 percent, the availability of this resource is estimated at 2.3 to 3.68 million tonnes

per year. Based on a heating value of 13,500 kJ/kg and the preceding assumptions,

aggregate power generation potential from rice husk ranges from 234 to 375 MW.

Rice husk has been used as fuel for power plants in Thailand. There are currently

four power plants with the ability to burn rice husk accepted into the EGAT SPP program.

The total capacity of the plants is 66.8 MW. Some of the plants burn other biomass fuels

(e.g., wood chips) with the rice husk. Three of the plants are contracted to sell power to

EGAT on a firm basis. Plans to develop other rice husk based power plants have stalled

since the financial crisis began.

Most of the 40,000 rice mills located in Thailand are small and are not suited for

power production from their own supply of rice husk. However, there are 215 mills with

capacities ranging from 100 to 2,000 tonnes of paddy per day. Five of these mills are

Table 4-3

Rice Husk Characteristics

Source industry Rice mills, ~40,500 mills in country

Source of biomass Rice paddy

Source output, tonne/yr 20,000,000 (avg. 1986-1995)

Supply forecast Slightly increase, 1 to 2 percent per year

Biomass production rate, percent of source 23

In process use, percent of source negligible

Total biomass supply, percent of source 23

Biomass collectivity, percent of supply 50-80

Total biomass availability, tonne/yr 2,300,000-3,680,000

Higher heating value, kJ/kg 14,100

Fuel consumption, tonne/yr/MW 9,800

Aggregate power generation potential, MW 234-375

Price, Baht/tonne 50-100

Other uses Soil conditioner, fuel, brick making


Figure 4-2. Rice Husk Distribution.


large and have capacities over 1,000 tonne/day. Because of the limited number of large

mills, it may be necessary to build central power plants fed with husks from several mills

in the surrounding area. This concept was shown to be technically and economically

feasible for two sites evaluated in this study: Sanan Muang, a 250 tonne/day mill, and

Thitiporn Thanya, a 500 tonne/day mill.

In conclusion, in combination with appropriate technology and sufficient quantity,

rice husk is a viable fuel for power plants. Detailed study of specific sites and the

surrounding area is required to ensure adequate fuel supply and long-term availability.

Additional information on rice husk as a potential biomass fuel is available in

Annex 1.

4.3 Palm Oil Residues

Palm oil is produced throughout tropical regions of the world from oil palm trees.

In Thailand, oil palm trees are grown mainly in the Southern region in Krabi, Surat Thani,

Chumporn, and Satun. In 1995, about 886,000 rai were harvested producing 2.17 million

tonnes. Oil palm production has been increasing rapidly (22 percent per year over the

period form 1987 to 1995), and future annual growth rates are predicted to be 10 to 15

percent. This will be achieved through increased productivity and harvested area.

Fresh fruit bunches (FFB) harvested from oil palm trees are the raw material for

the palm oil industry. FFB consist of fruit stems, commonly known as empty fruit

bunches (EFB), and fruits, which contain crude palm oil, fiber, and nuts. The nut portion

of the fruits contains a shelled kernel, which can be further processed to produce palm

kernel oil. Solid residues (EFB, fiber, and shells) account for about 44 percent of the FFB

weight. Properties of the solid residues are given in Table 4-4. Potential residue

availability by province is shown in Figure 4-3.

In general, palm oil mills use the solid byproducts (primarily shells and fiber) of

the processing operations to provide steam to mill operations. The fuels are typically

burned in low pressure watertube boilers. Some mills also include back pressure steam

turbines for cogeneration of electricity and diesel generators for backup power

production. In general, production of steam and electricity is not given much economic

value by mill owners, and overall system efficiencies are poor. Biogas produced by

anaerobic treatment of mill effluents may be used as fuel, but this is not common practice.

In addition, oil palm trees at the end of their useful production life might be used as fuel.

These trees otherwise represent a disposal problem. There are no known power facilities

utilizing this resource.


Table 4-4

Palm Oil Residue (EFB, Fiber, Shell) Characteristics

Source industry Palm oil mills

Source of biomass Fresh fruit bunches

Source output, tonne/yr 2,176,000 (1995)

Supply forecast 10 to 15 percent growth per year

Biomass production rate, percent of source 44 (EFB: 23-25; Fiber: 11-15, Shell: 6-8)

In process use, percent of source 10-20

Total biomass supply, percent of source 24-34


Total biomass availability, tonne/yr 470,000-740,000

Higher heating value, kJ/kg 8,400-18,250 (avg. ~10,800)




Other uses Fertilizer

Assuming an annual FFB production of 2.2 million tonnes, the availability of this

resource is estimated at 470 to 740 thousand tonnes per year. Based on an average

heating value of 10,800 kJ/kg and the preceding assumptions, power generation potential

ranges from 33 to 53 MW. This figure does not include any contribution from biogas

produced by treatment of mill effluent, old age palm trees, or palm fronds. In addition,

the figure does not consider improvements to existing mill power systems.

A study by Songkla University indicates that there are 52 palm oil mills in

Thailand. Of this number only about 20 percent have cogeneration systems, ranging from

less than 1 MW to 3.5 MW in electrical capacity. There are currently no palm oil mills

enrolled in the SPP program. A 40 MW plant was proposed, but plans did not materialize

after the financial crisis.

In conclusion, palm oil residues are a proven fuel for cogeneration plants.

Cogeneration at new facilities, in addition to modernization and expansion of existing

facilities, appears viable. Combustion of EFB and other process residues will allow for

significantly larger plants that can benefit from economies of scale. Nevertheless,

detailed site-specific study is required to ascertain the viability of individual projects.

Additional information on palm oil residues as a potential biomass fuel is

available in Annex 2.


Figure 4-3. Palm Oil Residue Distribution.


4.4 Bagasse

Bagasse is the fiber residue remaining after sugar cane has been processed to

remove the sugar laden juice. In Thailand, sugar cane is grown primarily in the Central

region with some production in the Northern and Northeast regions. Annual production

of sugar cane over the period from 1985 to 1996 was about 40 million tonnes. During

this period, production grew at an average rate of 13.7 percent per year. The government

has set a target annual production of 50 million tonnes. Sugar milling is seasonal and

only lasts 4 to 5 months. During the off-season, mill maintenance is performed.

Sugar mills require large amounts of steam and electricity to process sugar cane.

Sugar mills burn bagasse to provide the steam for these operations. (Bagasse properties

and distribution are given in Table 4-5 and Figure 4-4, respectively.) The steam drives

cane shredders, mills, and other mechanical drive turbines. The steam is also passed

through back pressure turbine generators for cogeneration of electricity. Turbine exhaust

steam is used for sugar juice heating and evaporation. The high demand for steam and

large quantities of bagasse may result in excess electricity production. Fourteen sugar

mills have entered the SPP program to sell excess power to EGAT on a non-firm basis.

Based on milling statistics, bagasse constitutes 28 to 30 percent of the cane.

Because of the large amount of bagasse used for steam and power supply, typically

7 percent of the cane weight remains as excess. Assuming an annual cane production of

50 million tonnes, the annual availability of this resource is estimated at 2.25 to

3.5 million tonnes. Based on a heating value of 10,000 kJ/kg, power generation potential

from the excess bagasse ranges from 160 to 248 MW. Significant additional capacity

could be obtained through upgrades of existing mill power systems.

Table 4-5

Bagasse Characteristics

Source industry Sugar mills

Source of biomass Sugar cane

Source output, tonne/yr 50,000,000 (as planned)

Supply forecast Stable

Biomass production rate, percent of source 28-30

In process use, percent of source 23

Total biomass supply, percent of source 5-7


Total biomass availability, tonne/yr 2,250,000-3,500,000 (excess only)



Aggregate power generation potential, MW 160-248 (existing excess bagasse only)


Other uses Production of medium density fiber board, fuel


Figure 4-4. Bagasse Distribution.


Because it is viewed as a waste product, bagasse generally has low economic

value to mill owners in Thailand. For this reason, mill power systems are typically

inefficient and do not attempt to conserve bagasse. Mills can employ many methods to

increase bagasse production, and reduce steam and power requirements. These

approaches could allow a mill to build sufficient bagasse supply to operate a power plant

year-round and sell to EGAT on a firm basis as an SPP. (Alternatively, other fuels could

be burned during the off-season.) This approach is not currently taken. Although there

are fourteen sugar mills accepted into the SPP program, all are scheduled to sell power on

a non-firm basis. Contracted sales to EGAT total 70.5 MW.

Various approaches can be taken to upgrade mills to allow for power export to the

grid. These range from simple upgrades to sell existing excess capacity to the grid (on-

season operation), to development of new central power plants with associated mill

processing improvements (year-round operation). The condition and age of existing mill

power equipment, as well as the willingness of the mill owner to invest capital in a power

project, is a strong factor in the approach taken. Options must be assessed at each site to

determine the most viable alternative. In general, improvements can usually be made.

Additional information on bagasse as a potential biomass fuel is available in

Annex 3.

4.5 Wood Residues

Wood residues include chips, bark, and sawdust produced within various wood

processing industries including sawmills, furniture factories, and other industries (e.g.,

toys, packing cases, crates, etc.). Excluding parawood from rubber tress, in-country wood

production in Thailand has decreased dramatically from about 2,000,000 m3 in 1988, to

35,000 m3 in 1995. The deficit has been made up with imports of raw saw logs and

processed wood. From 1991 to 1995, wood imports averaged about 3.7 million m3 or

2.6 million tonnes annually; processed wood was about 55 percent of total imports. A

major source of domestic wood is parawood from old age para-rubber trees. An IFTC

marketing study estimates that parawood production averages about 4.57 million m3 or

3.2 million tonnes annually. Unlike the other wood resources, parawood production is

relatively stable. It is planted largely in the Southern region as shown in Figure 4-5.

Processing of parawood, saw logs, and processed wood occurs at sawmills and

production plants and is accompanied by residue production of 30 to 60 percent (average

53 percent). There are more than 400 sawmills and 400 parawood factories in Thailand.

The aggregate properties of residues produced in these industries are given in Table 4-6.


Table 4-6

Wood Residue Characteristics

Source industry Sawmills, production plants

Source of biomass Saw logs, parawood trees, processed wood

Source output, tonne/yr 5,800,000

Supply forecast Fluctuating

Biomass production rate, percent of source 53 (average)



Biomass collectivity, percent of supply 60

Total biomass availability, tonne/yr 1,836,000



Aggregate power generation potential, MW 118


Other uses Fuel, particle board, charcoal

Based on a residue percentage of 53 percent and a collectivity of 60 percent, the

annual availability of this resource is estimated at 1.84 million tonnes. Based on a

heating value of 10,000 kJ/kg, power generation potential from wood residues is about

118 MW. There are currently five power plants with the ability to burn wood residues

accepted into the EGAT SPP program. The total capacity of the plants is 120 MW. Most

of the plants burn other biomass fuels (e.g., rice husk, black liquor) with the wood. Two

of the plants are contracted to sell power to EGAT on a firm basis. The largest of the five

is a 56.7 MW plant located at a paper mill. The plant is owned by Advance Agro, Plc.

Wood combustion for power production is well understood. In the U.S., there is

about 7,000 MW of installed wood power capacity. However, in Thailand, alternative

uses compete strongly for wood residues. These include fuel for domestic heating and

cooking, charcoal production, and particle board production. Because of these alternate

uses, the fuel supply of any proposed power plant will have to be examined in detail.

Additional information on wood residues as a potential biomass fuel is available

in Annex 4.


Figure 4-5. Parawood Residue Distribution.


4.6 Corncob

Corn plants are the source of corncob, which remains after the ear is milled to

remove the corn seed. Corn is grown mainly in the Northern region (about 48 percent),

with the remainder grown primarily in the Central and Northeast regions. Annual

production of corn over the period from 1986 to 1996 was about 3.88 million tonnes. The

government has set a target for increased corn production through increased planted area

and productivity. Accordingly, it is expected that production will increase at about

5 percent annually. Generally, corn is grown in two crops per year. The growing season

is 90 to 110 days.

Corn is mostly milled using portable milling machines at locations around the

plantations. Thus, most of the residue (corncob) is left scattered in the field, posing

collection difficulty. A small portion is processed in milling shops located in provinces

that grow the crop. Based on milling statistics, corncob constitutes about 25 percent of

the corn seed weight. Further information on corncob as a potential biomass resource is

given in Table 4-7. Potential residue availability by province is shown in Figure 4-6.

Based on a residue percentage of 25 percent and a collectivity of 50 percent, the

annual availability of this resource is estimated at 500,000 tonnes. Based on a heating

value of 15,000 kJ/kg, power generation potential from corncobs is estimated at 54 MW.

It is believed that there are currently no power plants burning corncob accepted into the

EGAT SPP program. However, there is a cogeneration plant fired with corncob in Lop

Buri. In addition, one of the sugar mills examined in this study has used corncobs a

supplemental fuel in the past. The corncobs were fed directly into the sugar mill boiler

without need for chipping or grinding.

Table 4-7

Corncob Characteristics

Source industry Corn milling/agriculture

Source of biomass Corn


Supply forecast 5 percent increase per year





Total biomass availability, tonne/yr 500,000





Other uses Furfuryl alcohol, fertilizer, fuel


Figure 4-6. Corncob Distribution.


Based on experience with corncobs it appears to be a viable fuel. However,

collection of large enough quantities to support a central power plant would likely be

difficult and costly. The most likely role for corncobs will be as a supplementary fuel.

This concept was examined in the feasibility study for Karnchanaburi Sugar Industry Co.,

Ltd.

Additional information on corncobs as a potential biomass fuel is available in

Annex 5.

4.7 Cassava Residues

Cassava, the source of tapioca, is a bushy tropical plant producing starch-rich

tubers (the underground portion of the plant). In Thailand, cassava is produced mainly in

the Northeast region, with some production in the Central and Northern regions.

Production of cassava roots over the period from 1987 to 1995 has averaged about

20 million tonnes per year. Production has been decreasing slightly due to competitive

export market conditions.

Cassava is processed to make to make two major products: tapioca pellets and

starch/flour. Approximately 75 to 80 percent of cassava production is exported (primarily

as pellets). The remainder is consumed in country. Direct use of cassava as fuel for

power generation is not economically viable because the present cost is too high

compared to other alternative fuels. However, production of tapioca starch produces

waste tapioca skin (peelings) and slurry that could be potential low cost fuels.

Information on these residues is given in Table 4-8. Based on milling statistics, slurry

production is about 30 percent of the raw cassava weight, while skin production is 5 to

10 percent. Potential residue availability by province is shown in Figure 4-7. Tapioca

starch factory capacity is about 7 million tonnes in terms of raw cassava. Based on this

level of production and a collectivity of 90 to 100 percent, total residue availability is

2.5 to 2.8 million tonnes per year.

Laboratory tests of skin and slurry samples reveal that they have high moisture

contents of 67 and 83 percent, respectively. Dry heating values were measured at 15,100

and 15,500 kJ/kg, respectively. In order to utilize cassava residues as fuel, a moisture

separation or drying process would be necessary. This would imply additional cost and

overall efficiency loss. Based on a reduction in moisture content to 40 percent, it is

estimated that heating values would be around 9,150 kJ/kg. Using the residue availability

given above, power potential from this resource is estimated at 75 to 84 MW.


Table 4-8

Cassava Residue Characteristics

Source industry Tapioca starch factory

Source of biomass Cassava



Biomass production rate, percent of source 40 (Slurry: 30; Skin: 10)




Total biomass availability, tonne/yr 2,520,000-2,800,000 (67-83 percent moisture)

Higher heating value, kJ/kg 9,150 (dried to 40 percent moisture)

Fuel consumption, tonne/yr/MW 17,100 (average at 40 percent moisture)


Price, Baht/tonne Slurry: 100-200; Skins: 250-300

Other uses Slurry: alcohol, pellet admixture; Skins: fertilizer

Slurry waste may be used for alcohol production or as an admixture for pellet

production. The skins are normally left to decompose as fertilizer. The prices of cassava

wastes vary by location and quantity available and range from 100 to 300 Baht/tonne.

Limited information is available on the use of cassava wastes as a boiler fuel. Because of

the high moisture content, the residues would require drying before use in a boiler. More

research is required to determine if such a scheme is feasible, both technically and

economically.

Additional information on cassava residues as a potential biomass fuel is available

in Annex 6.


Figure 4-7. Cassava Residue Distribution.


4.8 Distillery Slop

Distillery slop (also known as spent wash, molasses distiller's solubles, dunder, or

stillage) is a waste product of liquor production from sugar cane molasses. Thirteen

distilleries are located throughout Thailand with the greatest concentration in the Central

region. Most of the distilleries have capacities of 12 to 16 million liters of 100 percent

alcohol per year, with one, located in Pathum Thani having a capacity of 56 million liters

per year. Total liquor production in Thailand has averaged 750 million liters (about

30 percent alcohol) recently. It is expected that production will increase slightly due to

the introduction of competition in the liquor industry.

The properties of distillery slop are given in Table 4-9. Distribution throughout

the provinces is shown in Figure 4-8. Distillery slop consists of organic substances

including yeast, ammonia phosphate, and molasses residue. Because of the high organic

content, direct discharge of slop into waterways would pollute the water. Thus, distillery

slop requires treatment before disposal is allowed. Modern technology is available for

treatment and includes: evaporation followed by incineration, use of an upflow anaerobic

sludge blanket, and use of an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket followed by activated

sludge. However, these techniques are expensive for distillery owners to implement.

Current recommended practice for the disposal of distillery slop is to contain it in a

closely monitored evaporation pond. When the slop dries, it looks like a solid slurry and

can be used as fertilizer. In Thailand, there have been long term experiments on the direct

use of unconcentrated slop as fertilizer for rice paddy. Encouraging increases in rice

yield have been observed.

Table 4-9

Distillery Slop Characteristics

Source industry Whiskey distillery factory

Source of biomass Whiskey

Source output, liter/yr 750,000,000

Supply forecast Slightly increase

Biomass production rate, percent of source* 48 (300 percent x 16 percent)


Total biomass supply, percent of source* 48


Total biomass availability, tonne/yr* 356,000-396,000

Higher heating value, kJ/kg* 15,500

Fuel consumption, tonne/yr/MW* 7,700

Aggregate power generation potential, MW* 46-52

Price, Baht/tonne No commercial value

Other uses Fuel, fertilizer*Values are for concentrated distillery slop (1.35 percent moisture).


Figure 4-8. Distillery Slop Distribution.


Production of each liter of liquor produces about 3 liters of distillery slop. Based

on an annual liquor production of 750 million liters, about 2,250 million liters of slop are

produced annually. However, due to high moisture content, the slop must be

concentrated before it can be used to fuel a boiler. It is estimated that about 16 percent of

the distillery slop would be available in a concentrated form suitable for use as fuel.

Thus, about 360,000 m3 of concentrated slop is available annually (approximately

396,000 tonne/yr). Assuming a nearly dry (moisture: 1.35 percent) heating value of

15,500 kJ/kg, power generation potential is estimated to be 46 to 52 MW. It needs to be

emphasized that this estimate is based on the indicated moisture content. In order to

utilize distillery slop as fuel, a moisture separation or drying process would be necessary.

This would imply additional cost and overall efficiency loss.

At least one distillery is equipped with an evaporation and incineration process

that uses evaporated slop as fuel for incinerators. Slop produced in the distillation

process has a solids content of about 16 percent. The diluted slop is passed through an

evaporator system in order to concentrate the slop to a solids content of 60 percent. The

concentrated slop is then burned in the incinerators, which are initially heated using heavy

oil. The incinerators produce process steam for use in the distillery.

As indicated above, distillery slop can be directly used as a fertilizer. In contrast,

use of slop as fuel for steam generation involves installation of expensive evaporation and

steam generation equipment. The amount of slop generated from one or two distillery

plants may not be sufficient to justify the economics of a power plant. Thus, the potential

for power generation for this resource does not appear viable.

Additional information on distillery slop as a potential biomass fuel is available in

Annex 7.

4.9 Coconut Residues

Coconut is grown in every region of Thailand but is concentrated in the Central

and Southern regions, which together produce over 90 percent of the total. Surat Thani,

Prachuap Khiri Khan, and Chumporn are among provinces with the highest production.

Coconut production over the period 1986 to 1995 has averaged about 1.4 million tonnes

per year. Production is relatively stable.

Coconut is either directly consumed or used to produce coconut oil or milk. A

small fraction (less than 1 percent) is exported. Because of the variety of end uses,

processing of coconut is non-uniform. Generally, coconut fiber is a major waste product

and is peeled off by planters in order to reduce transportation costs. Merchants come to

buy the peeled coconut to sell to distributors who will sell to local markets and factories.

In certain areas, the coconut meat is extracted, chipped, and left to dry in the open air.

These chips are sold to factories to make coconut oil.


Table 4-10

Coconut Residue Characteristics

Source industry Coconut plantations, peeling shops and oil mills

Source of biomass Coconut



Biomass production rate, percent of source 47 (Fiber 35; Shell: 12)



Biomass collectivity, percent of supply Fiber: 60; shell 40


Higher heating value, kJ/kg 16,500 (average)



Price, Baht/tonne Fiber: 50; Shell: 500-800

Other uses Fiber: furniture, fertilizer; Shell: fuel, carbon powder

Coconuts are comprised of fiber (35 percent), shell (12 percent), meat

(28 percent), and juice (25 percent). Fiber, shell, and meat residue are the major coconut

residues. Meat residue after extraction of milk is relatively small. Fiber and shell

properties are given in Table 4-10. Distribution of the residues is shown in Figure 4-9.

Based on an annual coconut production of 1.4 million tonnes and assumed collection

levels of 60 percent for fiber and 40 percent for shell, residue availability is

294,000 tonne/yr and 67,200 tonne/yr, respectively. Based on an average heating value

of 16,500 kJ/kg, estimated power generation potential is 43 MW.

Common uses of coconut fiber and coconut shell are as stuffing material for

furniture components and as fuel and carbon powder, respectively.

This review indicates that there is a potential for power generation using coconut

residues. However, collection of an adequate supply for a power plant may be difficult

because the residues are generally widely scattered. The residues may be more aptly used

as a supplemental fuel. To achieve sufficient economies of scale, a coconut oil factory or

group of factories could be a developer for this resource. However, suitability of this type

of supply needs to be studied in detail and on an area-specific basis.

Additional information on coconut residues as a potential biomass fuel is available

in Annex 8.


Figure 4-9. Coconut Residue Distribution.


4.10 Sawdust

Sawdust is produced in wood sawing and milling activities. Section 3.4 indicates

that total wood processed in Thailand is on the order of 5.8 million tonnes per year. This

figure includes domestically produced wood, imported wood, and parawood from old age

rubber trees. Industries involved include sawmills and factories that make wood

products. Section 3.5 indicates there are more than 400 saw mills and more than

400 parawood factories in Thailand.

No statistics were readily available to demonstrate sawdust availability. An

estimate was made based on observations of sawmill operations. A figure of 7 percent in

terms of weight of wood input is considered a reasonable estimate of the sawdust

generated. This number would vary significantly with the number of sawing operations

undergone by a particular piece of wood. Net availability is generally much less because

a significant amount is dispersed in the form of dust, perhaps more than 50 percent.

Table 4-11 summarizes the potential for this biomass fuel. Based on a net

availability of 4 percent, and an assumed collectivity of 95 percent, this resource would

amount to about 220,400 tonne/yr. With a heating value of 10,300 kJ/kg, power

generation potential is about 16 MW. Distributed over the whole country, this potential is

not significant. Because of the limited quantities, dedicated sawdust fired power facilities

are not likely to be viable. However, sawdust could be easily burned with the other wood

wastes that are in relative abundance at wood processing facilities.

Table 4-11

Sawdust Characteristics

Source industry Wood products

Source of biomass Wood


Supply forecast Fluctuating


In process use, percent of source 3








Other uses Joss-stick, fuel, mushroom planting


5.0 Identification of Candidate Technologies (Task 1.7)

Worldwide experience indicates that biomass fuels can be successfully burned by

all of the major combustion technologies currently used in steam generation provided that

characteristics of the biomass have been properly evaluated and accounted for in the

design. This section discusses the various technology considerations as applicable for the

candidate facilities included in this project.

5.1 Biomass Fuel Concerns

Compared to coal, biomass fuels are generally less dense, have a lower energy

content, and are more difficult to handle. In addition to these concerns, the ash of

biomass fuels usually has high levels of alkali components. The alkali components,

typically potassium and sodium compounds such as potassium oxide (K2O) and sodium

oxide (Na2O), cause the ash to remain sticky at a much lower temperature than coal ash.

This increased stickiness creates the potential for substantial slagging and fouling

problems, along with accelerated tube wastage. The ash of some biomass fuels is also

highly abrasive (notably rice husks).

The problems associated with alkali materials in biomass vary widely between

different biomass fuels. To a certain extent, slagging potential can be determined by

analysis of fuel properties. However, the slagging tendency of a particular fuel cannot be

predicted from fuel properties alone. Boiler design and operating conditions (especially

temperature) have a large impact on the nature of deposits. Gasification of high alkali

fuels and subsequent combustion of the gas in the boiler may reduce ash deposition. The

success of this approach depends on maintaining gasification temperatures below

combustion temperatures. Temperatures of 1,400F (760C) and below have been shown

to significantly reduce deposition.9

Common biomass fuels with the highest alkali contents are typically nut hulls, rice

and grain straws, and grasses. The hulls of rice and grains typically have a much lower

alkali content than the straw. Therefore, if a unit will only burn rice husks, some of the

design parameters applied to biomass fuels with much higher alkali material contents may

be relaxed. However, if any rice straw or other local biomass is likely to be included in

the fuel mix in addition to the rice husks, the design parameters discussed should be

strictly applied.

5.2 Thermochemical Conversion Options

There are several proven conversion systems for burning biomass fuels. These

include the following:

Mass burn stoker boilers.

9 Thomas R. Miles, et al, “Alkali Deposits Found in Biomass Power Plants,” April 15, 1995.


Stoker boilers (stationary sloping grate, travelling grate, and vibrating

grate).

Bubbling fluidized bed boilers.

Circulating fluidized bed boilers.

Gasification with combustion in a close-coupled boiler.

Pulverized fuel suspension fired boilers.

5.2.1 Mass Burn Stoker Boiler

Mass burn stoker boilers offer very good fuel flexibility, but these units are

typically larger and more costly than the other types of boilers. This is because mass burn

units have historically been designed to burn unprocessed municipal solid waste (MSW).

MSW can vary significantly in size, heating value, and moisture content, and thus

requires special accommodations in the boiler design. Fuel flexibility and the ability to

accommodate a wide variation in fuel properties are generally not required for biomass

boilers.

5.2.2 Stoker Boiler

Stoker combustion is a proven technology that has been successfully used with

biomass fuels (primarily wood) for many years. In the vibrating grate variety, fuel is fed

through the front wall of the boiler above the grate. Because most biomass readily

devolatilizes, much of the fuel burns in suspension above the grate. Unburned particles

and ash settle on the grate and protect it from the high combustion temperatures. The

vibration of the grate causes ash accumulated on the grate to move toward the discharge

end of the grate where it falls into the bottom ash collection and conveying system.

Because stoker boilers have been in widespread use for many years, local

manufacturers and maintenance companies are available in many countries (including

Thailand). For this reason, capital costs for stoker boilers can be comparatively low.

5.2.3 Bubbling Fluidized Bed

Combustion of biomass fuels in fluidized beds has been commercially applied for

more than 20 years. A bubbling fluidized bed consists of fuel, ash from the fuel, inert

material (sand), and possibly a sorbent (e.g. limestone) to reduce sulfur emissions. The

fluidized state of the bed is maintained by hot air flowing upward through the bed. The

air causes the bed material to rise and separate, and creates circulation patterns throughout

the bed. Because of the turbulent bed mixing, heat transfer rates are very high and

combustion efficiency is good. Consequently, combustion temperatures can be kept low

compared to stoker boilers. This reduces NOx formation and is an advantage with

biomass fuels, because they may have relatively low ash fusion temperatures. Low ash

fusion temperatures can lead to excessive boiler slagging.


Due to the large amount of heat stored in the bed material, the bubbling fluidized

bed has the potential to accommodate a wider range of fuel heating values and moisture

contents than the stoker boiler. This may make them an ideal choice for centrally located

power plants fed with several different biomass residues. However, despite the apparent

acceptance of bubbling bed technology, recent bubbling bed experience in Thailand is

somewhat discouraging.

5.2.4 Circulating Fluidized Bed

Circulating fluidized bed units also offer a high degree of fuel flexibility and

would be a suitable technology for burning biomass. While early circulating fluidized

bed units were in the size range appropriate for most biomass plants (10-50 MW), present

circulating fluidized bed technology is focusing on fossil fueled units of 200 to 300 MW.

Although manufacturers quote small circulating fluidized bed units, these units generally

cost more than other combustion technologies, making them difficult to justify for

biomass plants. Additionally, on a recent 35 MW rice husk power project, one of the

major circulating fluidized bed suppliers declined to bid. The supplier stated that the

technology was not the best approach to burning rice husk or rice straw.

5.2.5 Gasification

Another potential conversion option is gasification. Gasification is typically

characterized as incomplete combustion of a fuel to produce a fuel gas of low to medium

heating value. Gasification lies between the extremes of combustion and pyrolysis

(anaerobic thermal decomposition) and occurs as the amount of oxygen supplied to the

burning biomass is decreased. Combustible constituents in the fuel gas include methane,

carbon monoxide, hydrogen, and some higher hydrocarbons; inert constituents are

primarily nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and water vapor. Depending on the gasification

scheme used, the heating value of the fuel gas generally ranges between 3.7 and

7.5 MJ/Nm3 (100-200 Btu/scf) for direct gasifiers, and between 11 and 17 MJ/Nm3 (300-

450 Btu/scf) for indirect gasifiers. By comparison, natural gas has a heating value of

around 37 MJ/Nm3 (1,000 Btu/scf). Direct gasifiers have been used extensively

worldwide, including over 1 million small vehicles gasifiers used during World War II.

Most development effort is now focussed on generally higher efficiency indirect gasifiers.

Gasification expands the use of solid biomass to include all the uses of natural gas

and petroleum-based fuels, giving it a distinct advantage over combustion. Besides

providing higher efficiency power generation through advanced processes, the fuel gas

can be used for the chemical synthesis of methanol, ammonia, and gasoline. Gasification

is also better suited for providing precise process heat control (e.g., for glass-making).

Energy conversion options for the fuel gas include close-coupled boilers, internal

combustion engines, gas turbines, and fuel cells. Of these, only close-coupled boilers are

considered technically mature for large scale applications.


There are only a few suppliers of proven gasification systems in the world. One

of the most successful fuels gasified is rice husk, which can be troublesome to combust

directly. Several rice husk gasifiers are located in Malaysia.

5.2.6 Conversion Options Conclusion

Although stoker boilers are widely in use, they are not always the most

appropriate technical choice. For example, rice husks are most easily fired in fluidized

beds or gasifiers because the lower operation temperatures reduce the risk of slagging.

Stokers and suspension-fired units may also be used, but precautions should be taken to

minimize the slagging potential. Fluidized beds are good choices in general because they

can tolerate wide variations in fuel moisture content and size. Suspension firing is not

suitable for most of the biomass fuels (except rice husks) due to their higher moisture

contents and densities (which make them more difficult to be ground) compared to non-

biomass fuels. Gasification may be a suitable choice, but lacks widespread technical and

commercial acceptance. A comparison of the capital cost, ash characteristics and fuel

compatabilities of the various combustion technologies are provided in Tables 5-1, 5-2

and 5-3, respectively.

Due to their widespread availability, relatively low cost, and reasonable

efficiency, stoker boilers were recommended for each of the new power facilities studied

in this report.

Table 5-1General Technical Compatibility Ratings (L-Low, M-Medium, H-High)

for Various Fuels and Boiler TypesBoiler Type

Fuel type Stoker Bubbling BedPulverized Fuel

Suspension FiredRice husk M H M

Oil palm residues L M L

Bagasse M H L

Wood chip H H L

Corncob M M L

Cassava residues M M L

Distillery slop* L M L

Coconut residues M M L

*Assuming that the distillery slop has undergone an evaporation process.


Table 5-2

Steam Generator Technology Comparison for Different Plant Sizes

Boiler type

Plant Size1 Stoker2 Bubbling Bed Pulv. FuelSusp. Fired

Gross: 3.4 MW Net: 3.0 MW

Boiler cost (equipment only), $M3 3.6 4.30 4.20

Balance of plant cost over base, $M -- 0.37 0.37

Total cost over base, $M -- 1.07 0.97

Total cost over base, $/kWnet -- 357 323
















Notes

1. 12% auxiliary load assumed in calculating net output.

2. Stoker used as base plant for cost comparisons.3. Values represent approximate costs for European supplied boiler and auxiliaries.


Table 5-3

Steam Generator Technology Ash Characteristics Comparison

Boiler type

Stoker Bubbling Pulverized Fuel Suspension Fired

Fly Ash:

Percent of total ash

Particle size

40

Fine

90

Fine

90

Extra Fine

Bottom Ash:

Percent of total ash

Particle size

60

Coarse

Waste

N/Aa

10

N/Ab

a Bottom ash from bubbling fluidized beds may include scrap metal, rocks, agglomerated bed

material, etc.b Bottom ash from pulverized fuel boilers may be gathered through either a wet or dry collection

system. Particle size is thus not applicable.

5.3 Emission Controls

Emissions of concern from biomass plants include nitrogen oxides and

particulates (sulfur content of biomass is typically very low). Injection of urea or

ammonia (selective non-catalytic reduction) can be used to reduce nitrogen oxide

emissions, while electrostatic precipitators (ESP) or fabric filters (FF) can be used to

control particulate emissions.

5.3.1 Nitrogen Oxide Control

The large majority of biomass boilers rely on selective non-catalytic reduction

(SNCR) for control of nitrogen oxide emissions. SNCR is a commercially available

technology to control NOx emissions from fossil fueled boilers. Rather than a catalyst to

achieve NOx reductions, SNCR systems rely on an appropriate reagent injection

temperature, good reagent-gas mixing, and adequate reaction time. SNCR systems can

use either ammonia (marketed as Thermal DeNOX systems) or urea (marketed as

NOxOUT systems) as a reagent. Ammonia or urea is injected into areas of the steam

generator where the flue gas temperature ranges from 1,500 to 2,200F. It is expected that

the SNCR system would achieve approximately 50 percent NOx reduction, with ammonia

slip between 10 and 15 ppmvd. Lower ammonia slip values can be achieved with lower

reduction capabilities.

The major considerations for the NOx reduction potential of an SNCR system are

1) the boiler temperature profile, as a function of load, and 2) the geometry, which affects

reagent and flue gas mixing. The ideal temperature ranges from 1,500 to 2,200F based

on the inlet concentration of NOx. Injection above the high end of the temperature range

will result in increased NOx emissions. Hydrogen can be injected along with ammonia


(or additives to the urea reagent) to extend the effective range of the SNCR process down

to 1,300F. The specific geometry of each boiler dictates the positioning of reagent

injection lances to ensure relatively good NOx reduction performance with relatively low

ammonia slip.

5.3.2 Particulate Emissions Control

A review of the United States Environmental Protection Agency database shows

that both ESPs and FFs have been used in biomass-fired power plants. A general review

of these two technologies is provided in this section.

ESPs have several advantages over the FFs in biomass applications. ESPs have

low risk potential for fire while the bags in FFs are combustible to varying degrees

depending on the material of the bags. These bags can be set on fire by hot embers

carried over from the boiler. Typically, the ESPs have lower O&M costs since they

operate on lower pressure drop that relates to lower power usage by the fans compared to

the FFs. In addition, the ESPs do not have maintenance costs related to periodic bag

replacement that are inherent in the FFs. Black & Veatch has designed biomass fired

power plants that utilize ESPs as the emission control technology.

FFs hold the advantages of potential capital cost savings and offer greater

flexibility in maintaining emission limits over a wide range of conditions compared to the

ESPs. The capital cost savings are realized in cases when the ash is difficult to collect,

the emission limits are strict, or the ash loading is large. These factors impact the ESP

sizing such that an ESP gets proportionally large as compared to an FF, which is

unaffected by these same parameters. The ESP must be designed for the worst fuel

analysis and flue gas conditions. The FF performance is not as sensitive as the ESP to

changes in operating parameters such as flue gas temperature and flow rate. These

parameters can adversely impact ESP performance to a significant extent.

In summary, the ESPs and the FFs have advantages and disadvantages that may

favor their selection in a given application. The selection of the appropriate control

technology for a biomass project can only be made based upon a comprehensive

evaluation of the specific project design and economic analysis criteria.


6.0 Identification and Screening of Candidate Facilities (Task 1.2

& Task 1.3)

Section 4 and Section 5 of this report established the various biomass fuels and

technologies suitable for further study. Application of these fuels and technologies at

selected sites was investigated for ten facilities. The first step in this process was

identification and screening of candidate facilities, as discussed in this section.

6.1 Identification Process

In parallel with the collection of agricultural biomass data, the study team

contacted various associations of agro-industries to make known to them this feasibility

study of the biomass fired power/generations sponsored by NEPO and conducted by

Black & Veatch. In the beginning, the associations contacted included Federation of Thai

Industries, Sugarcane Factories Association, Thai Rice Mills Association, and Tapioca

Factories Association. The intent was to seek interest of their members in pursuing

development of the biomass projects. The team also approached directly, either in person

or by correspondence, the selected agro-industrial firms or factories which appear to

generate large quantity of residues. The team also developed a questionnaire form for

the facility owners to indicate their interest in development of a biomass fired power plant

and to provide the biomass information. This questionnaire is attached in Annex 9.

The initial site selection guidelines developed for identification of suitable

facilities include the following:

Availability of biomass supply for power generation or cogeneration at

each site.

Biomass disposal concerns and the intention to develop a power plant.

Capability of the facility owner(s) to develop the power plant.

Experience of the facility owner(s) involving power plant development.

6.2 Screening of Candidate Facilities

As it turned out, one of the most important aspects in initial site selection was

owner willingness to proceed with a power project. Because of the downturn in

Thailand’s economy, many facilities were uncomfortable with making large investments,

especially in power generation, a field that is outside of their regular business.

For this reason, the study team had difficulty locating facilities interested in

proceeding with the study process. “Screening” to narrow the field of candidate facilities

to a manageable number was not formally practiced. Practically, facilities screened

themselves by either choosing to pursue this opportunity or to forgo it. Fortunately,

facilities making the decision to proceed were generally well suited for further study.

One of the first milestones in the process through which potential facilities could

advance to a candidate facility was the execution of a Memorandum of Understanding


(MOU) between NEPO, the facility owner/developer, and Black & Veatch. The purpose

of such an MOU is to have a facility-specific document which clearly illustrates the

interest of the facility in pursuing further facility development should the project be both

technically and commercially viable.

With these criteria as a basis, a draft generic MOU was approved by NEPO for

use in early discussions with the potential facilities. A copy of the generic (non-facility

specific MOU) is attached in Annex 10. For further discussion of MOU development see

the next section.

The study team eventually received signed MOUs from each of the following ten

facilities:











Each of the ten facilities for which an MOU was obtained underwent preliminarily

assessment and was approved by NEPO as a Candidate Facility for further screening in a

feasibility study.


7.0 Development of a Memorandum of Understanding (Task 1.4)

Having identified potential sites and established a desire in the facility owners to

proceed with the study, the next step in the process was to develop a Memorandum of

Understanding (MOU) between the owner, NEPO, and Black & Veatch.

In general, the MOU outlines the commitment that the owner intends to pursue

development of a biomass power facility if the feasibility study determines the proposed

facility to be technically, environmentally, and financially viable. The MOU generally

identifies the facility, outlines the essential technical requirements, and defines the

expected “successful” internal rate of return. Through execution of the MOU, it is

understood that NEPO is financing the study under the assumption that the facility owner

will pursue further development or, if this is not the case, then the facility will fund one-

half of the cost of the feasibility study performed for their proposed development unless

acceptable reasons notified to NEPO in writing. This last provision is an insurance

measure that the facility truly has the intent of moving forward with development of their

proposed facility in order for NEPO to fund the feasibility study, or will cover a portion

of the costs if they do not move forward with a technically and commercially viable

project.

7.1 Potential Project Owners

There are three categories of people who might qualify as the “project owner” in

developing the project. These are described in the following sections.

7.1.1 Facility Owner

Facility owners are the owners of biomass residues. A few facility owners could

proceed to develop a project by themselves, but some could not proceed for a variety of

reasons:

Insufficient biomass residue created by their own processing facilities to

fuel a plant of sufficient capacity to be economically feasible.

Lack of experience in initiating and implementing projects of this type.

Lack of financial support for the project.

For these reasons, facilities owners may wish to cooperate with other biomass

suppliers in the area or may team with outside developers or advisors.

7.1.2 Developer

Another possible role is one of a developer. Usually the developer has no

facilities that produce biomass residues but knows how to obtain financial support,

develop a procedure for project implementation, etc. The developer may join the facility

owners to form a project development team.


7.1.3 Advisor

Sometimes a project may be developed through a promoter or an advisor, who

normally has creditability to locate financing sources. Most developers or facility owners

usually have limited capital investment. In order to finance the whole project, they

usually have a financial advisor and developer (or facility owner) who can act as the

project owner/developer.

7.2 Generic MOU

After review of the MOU relationship discussion submitted in the Detailed Work

Plan and Methodology, it was strongly recommended that one standard MOU be used for

each potential project. Black & Veatch believes a separate but standard form for each

facility will best protect NEPO’s interest in future commitments. By utilizing a separate

MOU for each facility, the process is simplified and the commitment is specific to a

potential facility. Therefore, if a developer is pursuing three potential facility

developments, but only one proves to be viable (as shown in the feasibility study results),

there is no doubt that the commitment for each facility stands on its own.

A draft generic MOU was developed. This form has been set up to work for each

potential facility with only minor modifications needed based on the number of

developer/owner(s) and location of the potential facility.

For each of the sites selected for full feasibility study, an MOU was executed prior

to commencement of study work.


8.0 Candidate Facility Data Collection (Task 1.5)

Following identification and initial screening (Task 1.2 and 1.3) of prospective

facilities, Black & Veatch provided detailed data requests to facility owners. Data

requests were facility specific and were used to help Black & Veatch identify the optimal

configuration of the power facility, evaluate project feasibility, and identify other benefits

of the project. Of particular importance was the quantity of biomass fuel available to the

project, reliability of supply, and other characteristics of the fuel (heat content, ash and

moisture content, delivery methods, cost, etc.). When available, detailed historical data

from the facility owner was utilized to develop this information. Other relevant

information collected included process descriptions, plant layouts, maps, labor

requirements, cost of current waste disposal practices, cost of electricity purchases, need

for process steam, hours of facility operation, and plans for future expansion.

In addition, Black & Veatch personnel visited each of the candidate facilities for

further data collection in support of making a preliminary assessment on project viability.

During the site visits, Black & Veatch personnel met with representatives of the candidate

facilities to discuss different aspects (technical, financial, environmental, and

socioeconomic) of the current plant operations and the proposed power project. Facility

tours were conducted after the discussions and photographs were taken of the facilities.

A field reconnaissance report was prepared summarizing the data collected.


9.0 Preliminary Assessment of Selected Facilities (Task 1.6)

The first milestone indicating a mutual interest in developing the site for power

generation/cogenration is through signature of an MOU between NEPO, the facility

Owner/Developer, and Black & Veatch (see Section 6 of this report). Once this milestone

has been accomplished, a cursory review of the information included in the facility survey

questionnaire (consistency of quantity of fuel, quality of fuel, availability of supplemental

fuel, etc.) was performed. When review of this information indicated a favorable

potential for development, facility site visits were arranged to perform a preliminary

assessment of the selected facility. The assessment was accomplished through review of

the existing facilities, discussions with the staff, and gathering of other pertinent facility

information. These steps were followed and site visits were performed by Black &

Veatch personnel between February 1998 and April 1999 for the following ten facilities:

Sommai Rice Mill Co., Ltd. in Roi Et Province




Chumporn Palm Oil Industry Plc. in Chumporn Province






The resulting preliminary assessments for these ten sites were issued to NEPO.

Each preliminary assessment addresses the initial review of a facility’s potential for

power plant development or modification. Topics covered generally include current

operations, power potential, proposed facility features, environmental aspects,

socioeconomic aspects, economic aspects, and elevation and climatological data. In

addition, a conclusion is provided for each of the preliminary assessments that indicates

whether a full feasibility study of the proposed power plant is warranted.

None of the ten assessments completed identified any obvious development

problems that would preclude further investigation in a feasibility study (although

potential difficulties were occasionally identified for further investigation). The ten sites

were fully investigated in feasibility studies as described in the next section of this report.


10.0 Feasibility Study Summary Results (Task 2)

In accordance with Task 2, Black & Veatch prepared a full feasibility study for

ten selected agro-industrial facilities. This section presents the facilities studied, structure

of the feasibility studies, general study assumptions, and the summary results of each

study.

In general, the feasibility studies were performed using the best data available

from the sites. As not all facilities had detailed information readily accessible,

assumptions often had to be made to complete the studies. These assumptions are

identified in the individual study reports.

10.1 Facilities Studied

As discussed in Section 8 of this report, preliminary assessments of the following

ten potential facilities resulted in the recommendation that these sites be considered

candidate facilities and be further investigated through a full feasibility study:











A map showing the location of these candidate facilities is included as Figure

10-1. As can be seen on the map, the facilities are distributed throughout the four regions

of Thailand.


Figure 10-5. Candidate Facility Locations.


10.2 Study Assumptions

Aside from facility specific information, most of the underlying assumptions were

kept the same during the course of the study. There are two exceptions to this: the

exchange rate used in the financial evaluation and the capital cost basis.

As shown in Figure 10-2, the Baht to US dollar exchange rate has fluctuated

significantly over the course of this study. Evaluation of the first four sites was initially

issued in June 1998 and used an exchange rate of 43.53 Baht/US$. Since that time the

exchange rate has dropped significantly. The financial analysis in the last six sites

reflects this drop and assumes an exchange rate of 37.15 Baht/US$. To determine the

effect of the exchange rate movement, sensitivity analyses for each site assessed in the

last six sites were performed at +/-4 Baht/US$ and at the original exchange rate used for

the first four sites.

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

Jan-97 Apr-97 Jul-97 Oct-97 Jan-98 Apr-98 Jul-98 Oct-98 Jan-99 Apr-99 Jul-99 Oct-99 Jan-00

Date

Ex

ch

an

ge

Ra

te,

Ba

ht/

US

$

First 4 Sites – 43.53 Baht/US$

Final 6 Sites – 37.15 Baht/US$

Initial InvestigationsEvaluation Period for

First Four SitesEvaluation Period for

Final Six Sites

Figure 10-2. Baht/US$ Daily Average Interbank Exchange Rate (Source:

http://www.onada.com).

There is an overall increase in project costs for the last six sites relative to the first

four sites. (Tables 10-2, 10-3, and 10-4 at the end of this section contain pricing

information for the sites). This increase is due to two factors. First, total project costs for

the first four sites were developed assuming aggressive international sourcing (including

Chinese manufacturers). Financial sensitivity analyses were performed to provide

information on alternatively sourced equipment. Costs for the last six sites were

developed assuming that equipment with extensive performance records and proven

reliability would be used. This implies that generally higher cost US, European, and


Japanese equipment suppliers would be specified, resulting in higher total project costs.

Second, the first four sites focused on new facilities 9 to 10 MW gross in size, whereas

the last six sites examined new facilities 3.5 to 7 MW gross in size. Economies of scale

are significant in this size range, with specific costs ($/kW) increasing as project size

decreases. The combination of different suppliers with better costing information and

smaller facility size for the base case analyses results in increased project costs ($/kW) for

the last six sites.

It is possible that significant cost reductions could be obtained through aggressive

international sourcing while still maintaining technical acceptability. Therefore, an

additional financial sensitivity analysis was performed for each of the last six sites where

the direct EPC cost was reduced 20 percent from the base case.

10.3 Summary Results

Based on the assumptions noted in each feasibility study, the results of the studies

indicate that all of the ten candidate facilities are technically and environmentally viable.

A variety of biomass fuels were examined in the studies including rice husk (4 facilities),

wood wastes (2), palm oil residues (2), and bagasse (2) as primary fuels and coconut

husks (1), biogas (2), and corncobs (1) as supplementary fuels. Combustion of these fuels

is generally considered proven and stoker grate boilers were specified for all the sites

based on their widespread availability and relatively low capital cost. Both entirely new

power facilities and modifications to existing plant power facilities were examined,

although most studies examined new power facilities. A typical plant configuration for a

new facility is shown in Figure 10-3. The power outputs examined ranged from 1.9 MW

to 8.8 MW net for the base case analyses. In support of financial sensitivity analyses,

some preliminary investigations were done for facilities sized up to 30 MW.

Cogeneration of steam was a very significant design factor for the two palm oil mills and

played a lesser role for the other facilities. In general, the studies found relatively few

technical or environmental obstacles.


FuelPreparation

Fuel Storage

W aste Byproduct(Fuel)

SupplementalFuel from

Surrounding Area

Air

ParticulateControl

Ash

Fuel

Flue Gas

GeneratorPower forExport

AuxiliaryPower

Condenser /Process Use

MakeupW ater

B O I L E R

SteamTurbine

Steam

BoilerFeedwater

Process Steam

Condensate Return

BoilerBlowdown

BiomassFeedstock

Power (from Grid orPower Plant)

S YS TE M B OUNDA RY

S YS TE M B OUNDA RY

POWER PLANT

ProcessingOperations

Figure 10-3. Typical Biomass Power Plant Configuration.

However, the financial viability of the facilities is mixed as demonstrated in

Table 10-1. Only three of the facilities identified (Sommai Rice Mill, Sanan Muang Rice

Mill, and Thitiporn Thanya Rice Mill) surpassed the initial financial internal rate of return

hurdle of 23 percent in the base case financial analyses. (The 23 percent figure is

established in the MOU as the minimum rate of return requiring facility

owners/developers to either proceed with the project or repay NEPO for the cost of the

study.) Black & Veatch investigated alternative scenarios aimed at improving the

financial rating of the remaining facilities. These studies, which are preliminary in

nature, indicate that several factors could change to improve the viability of these

projects. In some cases, such as simply accounting for the value of cogenerated steam at

the Chumporn Palm Oil Mill, the improvement in IRR can be dramatic and is compelling

from an investment standpoint. In other cases, the base case IRR can only be improved

significantly by a combination of several positive factors, some of which would require

aggressive implementation. For this reason, the long term prospects for development at

these sites appears limited.


Table 10-4

Summary of Financial Analyses

FacilityBase Case

IRRAlternative Study IRR

Features of Alternative StudyDevelopment

Status

Sommai Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

32.6 NA NA EPC bid stage

Sanan Muang Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

25.5 NA NA Under further consideration

Thitiporn Thanya Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

26.4 NA NA Under further consideration

Plan Creations Co., Ltd. 8.2 38.5 Larger facility Under further consideration

Chumporn Palm Oil Industry Plc.

20.4 39 to 69 Added revenue to account for avoided steam generation cost

Under further consideration

Karnchanaburi Sugar Industry Co., Ltd.

18.9 27.5 Existing boiler efficiency increase to save bagasse


Woodwork Creation Co., Ltd.

4.4 25 Larger facility, more efficient facility, drier fuel, lower project cost basis ($/kW)


Mitr Kalasin Sugar Co., Ltd.

13.3 46 Modification of existing facility rather than new plant

Development proceeding

Liang Hong Chai Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

7.6 13 to 29 Larger facility, lower project cost basis ($/kW)


Southern Palm Oil Industry (1993) Co., Ltd.

11.6 13 to 25 Added revenue to account for avoided steam generation cost, larger facility


At this time, eight of the ten facilities either are under active development or are

under further consideration by the owners. For any project that proceeds with

development, additional development activities should include detailed evaluations of

fuel supply (quantity, quality, etc.), as well as power facility conceptual design to support

and confirm assumptions in the feasibility study, development of a more detailed project

capital cost estimate with specific vendor pricing on major equipment, and additional pro

forma analyses as new data warrants.

The first four studies examined building entirely new facilities. Table 10-2 at the

end of this section summarizes the major attributes of these studies. Of the last six

studies, two of the studies examined modifications to existing facility power plants, while

four of the studies examined entirely new power facilities. Table 10-3 summarizes the

results of the two power facility modification studies. Table 10-4 summarizes the results

of the new power facility studies for the last set of sites. (Table 2-2 in the Executive

Summary provides a side by comparison of major facility features for all sites.) The

results of the studies for each site are briefly discussed below.

10.3.1 Sommai Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Sommai Rice Mill Co., Ltd. located in

Roi Et province, Thailand. The Sommai rice mill currently processes about


1,000 tonne/day of rice paddy in two process lines of 700 tonne/day and 300 tonne/day.

An additional process line of 300 tonne/day is under construction. When the facility

expansion is completed, it is anticipated that an average of 98,670 tonne/yr of rice husk

will be generated at the plant.

The feasibility of building a new power plant at the Sommai rice mill facility was

studied. The boiler for the plant would be fueled with rice husk and would generate

steam for use in a turbine generator with a gross output of 10.0 MW. Net plant output is

estimated at 8.8 MW. The feasibility study concludes that the proposed development is

technically, environmentally, and financially viable (IRR of 32.6 percent).

10.3.2 Sanan Muang Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Sanan Muang Rice Mill Co., Ltd. located

in Kamphaeng Phet province, Thailand. The Sanan Muang rice mill currently processes

about 250 tonne/day of rice paddy. Typical operation of a rice mill yields 23 tonnes of

rice husks for every 100 tonnes of rice paddy. Thus, on average about 13,800 tonne/yr of

rice husk is generated at the plant. Additional rice husks are also available from five

facilities in the surrounding area (within 50 km). It is anticipated that a total of about

79,000 tonne/yr of rice husks would be available to fuel the proposed power facility.

The feasibility of building a new power plant at the Sanan Muang facility was




technically, environmentally, and financially viable (IRR of 25.5 percent).

10.3.3 Thitiporn Thanya Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Thitiporn Thanya Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

located in Nakorn Sawan province, Thailand. The Thitiporn Thanya rice mill currently

processes 500 tonne/day of rice paddy. Typical operation of a rice mill yields 23 tonnes

of rice husks for every 100 tonnes of rice paddy. Thus, on average about 27,600 tonne/yr

of rice husk is generated at the plant. Additional rice husks are also available from seven

facilities in the surrounding area (within 50 km). It is anticipated that a total of about

79,000 tonne/yr of rice husks would be available to fuel the proposed power facility.

The feasibility of building a new power plant at the Thitiporn Thanya facility was




technically, environmentally and financially viable (IRR of 26.4 percent).


10.3.4 Plan Creations Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Plan Creations Co., Ltd. parawood

processing plant located in Trang province, Thailand. Plan Creations makes educational

toys from rubber wood (parawood). The residue from the process is a combination of

bark, outer cuts, curfs (from sawing), sawdust (from sanding operations), and discarded

stock (low quality, diseased, discolored, etc.). It is estimated that about 4,000 tonne/yr of

residue will be available at the facility. In order to take advantage of economies of scale,

additional wood resources were sought. About 14,000 tonnes of parawood residue could

be delivered from area manufacturing facilities. An additional 116,000 tonnes could be

obtained by implementing forestry residue collection operations over an area of about

15,000 rais. The total fuel available would then be about 134,000 tonne/yr.

The feasibility of building a power plant at the Plan Creations site was studied.

The boiler for the plant would be fueled with wood residues and would generate steam for

use in a turbine generator with a gross output of 10.0 MW. Net plant output is estimated

at 8.8 MW. The feasibility study concludes that the proposed development is technically

and environmentally viable, but financially marginal (IRR of 7.95 percent).

Following the base case analysis, the study team investigated what factors would

have to change to increase the viability of a power plant at this site. It was found that a

large increase in fuel consumption and plant size would allow an IRR of about

38.5 percent. In the most optimistic scenario analyzed, where about 74 percent

(356,000 tonnes) of all available parawood logging residues from the Trang province are

collected, a power plant of about 28 MW net is possible. The extent to which additional

fuel can be collected at a relatively low cost (320 Baht/tonne) will determine the ability of

the project to achieve the higher rates of return.

10.3.5 Chumporn Palm Oil Industry Plc.

Power facility modifications were studied at the Chumporn Palm Oil Industry Plc.

(CPOI) palm oil mill located in Chumporn province, Thailand. CPOI processes fresh oil

palm to produce crude palm oil, refined palm oil, and palm kernel oil. There are various

biomass residues produced in the process including palm shells, fiber, empty fruit bunch

(EFB), and biogas (to be produced from a new wastewater treatment system). CPOI

currently burns all the solid byproducts of the production process in a power plant located

at the site. The plant produces power and process steam for the operations. The power

plant has an installed maximum capacity of 4.3 MW gross but currently only produces

about 2.4 MW gross (1.9 MW net) on average.

Several modifications were proposed for CPOI to improve efficiency and increase

power output. Preliminary technical and economic analysis found that combustion of

additional fuel up to the current facility capacity (4.3 MW) is viable. Fuels used include

palm shell, palm fiber, EFB, and biogas produced by the expanded processing facility,

and coconut husk fiber and additional shell procured from the surrounding area. Due to


its lower cost, coconut husk is preferred over old age palm trees, which will become a

disposal problem as the palm plantation matures. Major capital improvements required

for this option include a new shredder to prepare the additional EFB and minor upgrades

to the existing interconnection to allow electricity to be sold to the grid.

Additional modifications were selected for further analysis. The final

configuration utilizes a low pressure condensing turbine to capture and generate power

from the exhaust of the existing back pressure steam turbine, a condenser to recover

turbine and process exhaust steam, an improved makeup water treatment system, and

other modifications. The average gross plant output under this configuration would be

approximately 5.4 MW, an increase of 3.0 MW over the existing plant. Peak plant output

will be about 6.4 MW gross. The new configuration would also allow more process

steam to be generated allowing for greater palm oil production capacity.

The feasibility study concluded that the proposed development is technically and

environmentally viable, but financially marginal (base case IRR of 20.4 percent). These

conclusions are based on preliminary assumptions concerning process data, future

production, and equipment requirements and costs. Additional study work and detailed

data collection may be required to determine the optimal plant modifications and

associated financial returns. In addition, the new power plant will allow CPOI to operate

at a higher palm oil production capacity. The value of this benefit was not included in the

base case financial analysis but was evaluated through sensitivity analysis by assigning a

value to the cogenerated steam. It was found that inclusion of this benefit would make

the project very attractive financially (IRR ranging from 39 to 69 percent for steam value

of 5 to 15 US$/tonne, respectively).

10.3.6 Karnchanaburi Sugar Industry Co., Ltd.

Power facility modifications were studied at the Karnchanaburi Sugar Industry

Co., Ltd. (KSI) located in Uthai Thani province, Thailand. KSI mills sugarcane to extract

its juice for the production of sugar. Bagasse is produced as residue in the process. KSI

currently burns a portion of the bagasse in a power plant located at the site to produce

power and process steam for the milling operation. The maximum capacity of the power

plant is 17.5 MW gross. Based on recent statistics, about 21,000 tonnes of excess bagasse

remain at the end of the processing season.

Depending on the steam needs of the processing operations, there is unused and

unsold electrical capacity at the plant. This surplus power could be sold to the grid but is

not currently. During the on-season (about 100 days), the plant could export the excess

power, which is estimated to average about 455 kW. In addition, during both the on and

off-season, excess bagasse could be utilized in existing idle mill power equipment with

the intent to export “firm” power to the grid year-round. To supplement the bagasse

supply, corncobs would be gathered from the surrounding area. The combination of the

excess existing power production, excess bagasse fuel, and supplemental corncob fuel can


provide a total of 1,850 kW net at an annual capacity factor of 53.2 percent. This option

would use the existing factory boilers, turbine-generators, and tie line to PEA. New

equipment required includes interconnection equipment, additional condensing capacity,

and piping and valving upgrades.

The feasibility study concludes that the proposed development is technically and

environmentally viable, and financially viable under certain conditions (IRR of

18.9 percent). These conclusions are based on relatively conservative assumptions

concerning process data, future crop production, and equipment requirements and costs.

Additional study work and detailed data collection may be required to determine the

optimal plant modifications and associated financial returns. Additional analysis found

that increases in sugar milling efficiency would allow enough bagasse to be produced so

that combustion of supplemental corncob fuel would not be required. The IRR under this

scenario increases significantly to 27.5.

10.3.7 Woodwork Creation Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Woodwork Creation Co., Ltd. located in

Krabi province, Thailand. Woodwork Creation makes processed wood sheets from

rubber wood (parawood). Residue produced by the process includes bark, sawdust, and

wood chips. A total of 40,320 tonne/yr of residue will be generated at the facility after an

upcoming expansion. Some of this fuel is used to power an existing steam boiler at the

facility. Limited additional fuel could be purchased from the surrounding area. The total

fuel available to the power facility would be 54,000 tonne/yr.

The feasibility of building a new power plant at the Woodwork Creation site was

studied. The boiler for the plant would be fueled with wood residues and would generate



technically and environmentally viable, but financially marginal (IRR of 4.4 percent).

Following the base case analysis the study team investigated what factors would

have to change to increase the viability of a power plant at this site. It was found that the

following factors, when combined, would allow an IRR of almost 25 percent:

Large increase in base fuel supply (additional 300,000 tonnes).

Reduced moisture content assumption of 40 percent for the additional fuel

(base assumption is 60 percent).

15 percent improvement in net plant heat rate over base assumption.

25 percent decrease in project cost basis over base assumption.

The combination of these assumptions resulted in a plant with a net output of

about 30 MW and a total project cost of about US$1,060/kW. The extent to which the

above requirements can be met will determine the ability of the project to achieve the

higher rates of return. As some of these requirements are fairly aggressive, it may be

difficult to obtain acceptable rates of return at this site.


10.3.8 Mitr Kalasin Sugar Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Mitr Kalasin Sugar Co., Ltd. (MKS)

located in Kalasin province, Thailand. MKS mills sugarcane to extract its juice for the

production of sugar. Bagasse is produced as residue in the process. MKS currently burns

a portion of the bagasse in a power plant located at the site to produce power and process

steam for the milling operation. The maximum capacity of the power plant is 16.4 MW

gross. Based on recent statistics, about 76,000 tonnes of excess bagasse remain at the end

of the processing season.

The study investigated the feasibility of building an entirely new power plant

fueled with the excess bagasse produced by the processing facility. A boiler would

generate steam for use in a turbine generator with a gross output of 6.1 MW. Net plant

output is estimated at 5.6 MW. The existing power facility would remain and would

supply the processing operations with required steam and power. The feasibility study

concludes that the proposed development is technically and environmentally viable, but

financially marginal (base case IRR of 13.3 percent).

An alternative generation option, which involves modification to the existing

power facility rather than construction of a new plant, initially appears more promising

from a financial standpoint. The modifications would allow about 3 MW to be exported

from one of the existing generators at an annual capacity factor of 71 percent (firm basis).

Because of greatly reduced capital requirements, the projected IRR for this case is much

higher, 46 percent. Due to time and budget constraints, this option was only briefly

analyzed; additional study work and detailed data collection would be required to

properly assess this option.

10.3.9 Liang Hong Chai Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Liang Hong Chai Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

(LHC) located in Khon Kaen province, Thailand. LHC owns two rice mills, each of

which currently processes a maximum of 250 tonnes of rice paddy per day or about

75,000 tonnes of paddy per year (150,000 tonnes per year total). The proposed

development would be at the newer facility, which is about 5 km from the old plant. A

total of approximately 33,000 tonne/yr of rice husk will be available for power

production.

The feasibility of building a new power plant at the new LHC facility was studied.

The boiler for the plant would be fueled with rice husk and would generate steam for use

in a turbine generator with a gross output of 3.8 MW. Net plant output is estimated at

3.3 MW. The feasibility study concludes that the proposed development is technically

and environmentally viable, but financially marginal (IRR of 7.6 percent). Following the

base case analysis the study team investigated what factors would have to change to

increase the viability of a power plant at this site. It was found that the following factors,

when combined, would allow an IRR of about 29 percent:


Increase in rice husk supply from 33,000 to 133,000 tonne/yr. Additional

rice husk could be procured from the Nakorn Ratchasima province.

20 percent decrease in project cost basis over base assumption.

The combination of these assumptions resulted in a plant with a net output of

about 13.4 MW and a total project cost of about US$1,550/kW. This additional

investigation appears encouraging and indicates that a rice husk power plant in the area, if

not at this site, might be viable.

10.3.10 Southern Palm Oil Industry (1993) Co., Ltd.

A new power facility was studied at the Southern Palm Oil Industry (1993) Co.,

Ltd. (SPOI) palm oil mill located in Surat Thani province, Thailand. SPOI processes

fresh oil palm to produce crude palm oil. There are various biomass residues produced in

the process including palm shells, fiber, EFB, and biogas (to be produced from a new

wastewater treatment system). SPOI currently burns the shells and fiber in a power plant

located at the site. The plant produces power and process steam for the operations. The

existing power plant has an installed capacity of 880 kW gross. SPOI would like to

expand palm oil production but is limited by the power and steam production of its

existing power plant.

The feasibility of building an entirely new power plant at the SPOI site was

studied. The boiler for the plant would be fueled with fiber and shells produced by the

processing facility (EFB would not be burned). The boiler would generate steam for use

in a turbine generator with a gross output of 7.0 MW. Net plant output is estimated at

6.2 MW. The existing power facility would remain and would be used for backup

purposes. The feasibility study concludes that the proposed development is technically

and environmentally viable, but financially marginal (IRR of 11.6 percent). However,

due to increased steam production, the new power plant will allow SPOI to operate at a

higher palm oil production capacity. The value of this benefit was not included in the

base case financial analysis but was evaluated through sensitivity analysis by assigning a

value to the cogenerated steam. It was found that inclusion of this benefit would not

improve the IRR above the hurdle rate without making other changes to the project. It

was found that the following factors, when combined, would allow an IRR of about

25 percent:

Increase in plant size to 28.3 MW through additional fuel supply from the

surrounding area.

Increase in palm oil mill processing time such that 40,000 tonne/yr of

steam are required over current needs. This might be obtained by increasing

low season operation from 16 hr/day to 24 hr/day. The additional steam is

valued at $10/tonne in the pro forma analysis.

The resulting IRR of 25 percent exceeds the hurdle rate. This indicates that

development of an enhanced cogeneration plant at this site is promising. To fully


establish the financial impact of the modifications, SPOI or an outside developer would

need to investigate this issue further. The investigation would need to consider all

impacts, positive and negative, that the power facility modifications would have on the

processing operations.


Table 10-2

Summary Results of Proposed New Power Facilities

Facility SommaiSanan Muang

Thitiporn Thanya

Plan Creations

General Facility Information

Facility type Rice mill Rice mill Rice mill Wood products

Province Roi EtKamphaeng

PhetNakorn Sawan Trang

Facility annual capacity, tonne/yr 429,000a 60,000 120,000 10,000

Fuel Information

Facility residue type (solid fuels) Rice husk Rice husk Rice husk Wood waste

Ratio of residue to capacity 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.40

Facility residue, tonne/yr 98,670 13,800 27,600 4,000

Reserved residue for mill, tonne/yr 0 0 0 0

Additional residue purchased, tonne/yr 0 65,200 51,400 130,000

Total residue available, tonne/yr 86,900b 79,000 79,000 134,000

Composite heating value (HHV), kJ/kg 14,100 14,100 14,100 10,300

Annual heat input available, GJ/yr 1,225,868 1,113,900 1,113,900 1,380,200

Power Plant Characteristics

Estimated plant capacity factor, percent 85 85 85 85

Boiler efficiency, percent 82 82 82 73

Gross turbine heat rate, kJ/kWh 13,500 13,500 13,500 13,500

Auxiliary power, percent 12 12 12 12

Calculated net plant heat rate, kJ/kWh 18,708 18,708 18,708 21,015

Cogeneration? Steam flow, tonne/hr No No No No

Power Potential

Calculated solid fuel burn rate, tonne/hr 11.7 10.6 10.6 18.0

Calculated total fuel burn rate, GJ/hr 164.6 149.5 149.5 184.9

Calculated gross plant capacity, kW 10,000 9,100 9,100 10,000

Calculated net plant capacity, kW 8,800 8,000 8,000 8,800

Average internal process use, kW 0 0 0 0

"Firm" capacity for sale to grid, kW 8,800 8,000 8,000 8,800

Annual energy sales to grid, GWh 65.5 59.6 59.6 65.5

Economic Aspects

Estimated total project cost, US$ milc 9.71 9.27 9.27 10.59

Estimated total project cost, US$/kWnetc 1,100 1,160 1,160 1,200

Internal rate of return (IRR), percentc 32.6 25.5 26.4 7.95

IRR for “European equipment,” percent 24.6 19.2 20.0 5.1

Notes:a After proposed facility expansion.b Fuel supply limited to keep plant size at 10 MW gross.c Costs based on use of Chinese equipment.


Table 10-3

Summary Results of Proposed Facility Modifications

FacilityChumporn Palm Oil

IndustryKarnchanaburi Sugar

Industry


Facility type Palm oil mill Sugar mill

Province Chumporn Uthai Thani

Facility annual capacity, tonne/yr 270,000a 1,000,000

Fuel Information

Facility residue type (solid fuels)Oil palm fiber, shell, empty

fruit bunchesBagasse

Ratio of residue to capacity 0.33 0.25

Facility residue, tonne/yr 89,100 250,000

Reserved residue for mill, tonne/yr 0 229,166

Additional residue purchased: quantity, tonne/yr

Palm shell and coconut husk: 22,760

Corncobs: 13,382

Total residue available, tonne/yr 111,860 34,216

Composite heating value (HHV), kJ/kg 12,765 11,895

Annual heat input available, GJ/yr 1,564,000b 406,980


Estimated plant capacity factor, percent 82 53.2

Boiler efficiency, percent 70c 72-80c

Auxiliary power, percent 16.1c 8c

Average net plant heat rate, kJ/kWh 49,500c 47,205c d

Cogeneration? Steam flow, tonne/hr Yes, 31.85 No

Power Potential

Average solid fuel burn rate, tonne/hr 15.5 7.3

Average total fuel burn rate, GJ/hr 217.1 87.3

Average gross plant output, kW 5,400 2,000

Average net plant output, kW 4,550e 1,850

Average internal process use, kW 2,030f 0

"Firm" capacity for sale to grid, kW 2,520 1,850

Annual energy sales to grid, GWh 18.1 8.62

Economic Aspects

Estimated total project cost, US$ mil 5.0 1.95

Estimated total project cost, US$/kWnet 1,887 (per additional net kW) 1,054

Internal rate of return (IRR), percent 20.4 18.9

IRR at exchange rate of 43.5 Baht/US$ 15.78 15.94

IRR at 20 percent reduced capital cost 29.41 26.68

IRR for alternative study (see writeup) 39-69 27.5

Notes:a After proposed facility expansion.b Includes biogas use of 6,000,000 m3/yr (136,000 GJ/yr).c Based on existing power facility performance information considering proposed modifications.d Includes credit for surplus power generated by the existing facility during the on-season.e Previous: approximately 1,900 kW average.f Electricity required for milling operations.


Table 10-4

Summary Results of Proposed New Power Facilities

FacilityWoodwork Creation

Mitr Kalasin Sugar Mill

Liang Hong Chai Rice Mill

Southern Palm Oil Industry


Facility type Wood prod. Sugar mill Rice mill Palm oil mill

Province Krabi Kalasin Khon Kaen Surat Thani

Facility annual capacity, tonne/yr 80,640a 1,360,000 150,000 350,000a

Fuel Information

Facility residue type (solid fuels)Wood waste

Bagasse Rice huskOil palm fiber,

shell

Ratio of residue to capacity 0.50 0.27 0.22-0.23 0.21

Facility residue, tonne/yr 40,320 369,000 33,000 73,500

Reserved residue for mill, tonne/yr 8,640 293,000 0 0

Additional residue purchased, tonne/yr 22,320 0 0 0

Total residue available, tonne/yr 54,000 76,000 33,000 73,500

Composite heating value (HHV), kJ/kg 9,450 9,540 14,100 13,500

Annual heat input available, GJ/yr 510,300 725,040 465,300 1,072,932b


Estimated plant capacity factor, percent 85 85 85 90.4

Boiler efficiency, percent 70 77 82 77

Gross turbine heat rate, kJ/kWh 13,500 12,400 13,500 14,680d

Auxiliary power, percent 12 8c 12 12

Calculated net plant heat rate, kJ/kWh 21,900 17,400 18,700 21,700d

Cogeneration? Steam flow, tonne/hr No No No Yes, 13.9d

Power Potential

Calculated solid fuel burn rate, tonne/hr 7.3 10.2 4.4 9.3d

Calculated total fuel burn rate, GJ/hr 68.5 97.4 62.5 135.5d

Calculated gross plant capacity, kW 3,550 6,100 3,800 7,000

Calculated net plant capacity, kW 3,100 5,600 3,300 6,200

Average internal process use, kW 0 0 0 834d e

"Firm" capacity for sale to grid, kW 3,100 5,600 3,300 5,366d

Annual energy sales to grid, GWh 23 42 25 42.5

Economic Aspects

Estimated total project cost, US$ mil 8.65 13.4 9.73 14.6

Estimated total project cost, US$/kWnet 2,800 2,400 2,950 2,350

Internal rate of return (IRR), percent 4.4 13.3 7.6 11.6

IRR at exchange rate of 43.5 Baht/US$ 2.1 9.8 5.1 8.4

IRR at 20 percent reduced capital cost 8.5 20.1 12.6 17.9

IRR for alternative study (see writeup) 25 46 13-29 13-25

Notes:a After proposed facility expansion.b Includes biogas use of 3,570,000 m3/yr (80,682 GJ/yr).c Based on existing power facility performance information.d Average value. SPOI requires varying amounts of process steam depending on the season.e Electricity required for milling operations.


11.0 Presentation of Study Results to Facility Owners (Task 3.1

and Task 3.2)

Before signing MOUs, the facility owners were informed of the merits of using

biomass as fuel for power generation and cogeneration projects including details of the

sale of excess power to EGAT under the SPP program. All of the facility owners were

interested in the potential project benefits and hence signed the MOUs.

Follow-on presentations were made to facilities for which the study results were

positive in order to assist them with project implementation. The following sections

describe the presentation of study results made to each of the facility owners.

11.1 Sommai Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

Among the rice mill facilities studied, Sommai is the largest with a milling

capacity of about 1,000 tonnes of paddy per day. The facility aggregately produces about

87,000 tonnes of rice husk per year. It was determined that Sommai can install up to a 10

MW (gross) plant with an investment of US$11.4 million. The financial return on this

investment (Internal Rate of Return, IRR) is very favorable at about 33 percent. Other

details of the Sommai facility are shown in Table 11-1.

Table 11-5

Summary Results Sommai Rice Mill Facility

Item Result

Gross plant capacity, MW 10

Net plant capacity, MW 8.8

Investment, $US million 11.424

Fuel type Rice Husk

Fuel consumption, tonnes/yr 87,000

Total fuel cost, Baht/tonne 100

Operating hours per year 7446

Revenue from EGAT, million Baht/yr 114

Internal rate of return, percent 33

Source of fuel supply, tonnes/yr

Sommai Rice Mill 87,000

The study team went to present the study results to Mr. Sommai in September

1998 in Roi Et. Mr. Sommai had expressed interest in pursuing project development

further. In the meanwhile, EGCO (Electricity Generating Plc.) was interested in

developing a project of this kind. The study team met to present details of the study to

EGCO. Furthermore, the team made arrangements and escorted the EGCO project

development team several times to meet and discuss possible joint venture development


with Sommai in Roi Et. At present, EGCO has obtained funding support for project

development from OECF of Japan. The development of this facility is proceeding well as

a joint venture with Sommai, and has reached the step at which a contractor is being

selected to provide engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) services.

11.2 Sanan Muang Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

Sanan Muang Rice Mill, with a rice husk supply of 13,800 tonne/yr, is smaller

than Sommai and requires additional rice husk from the surrounding area to make a new

power development viable. Three cases were studied (for details see Table 11-2). These

cases vary in plant generating capacity depending on the quantity of rice husk supply.

Case 1 is a study of a power facility with a capacity of 9.1 MW (gross) supplied by the

facility’s own rice husk and supplemental husk from other rice mills within a 25 km

radius. This case yielded an IRR of 25.5 percent, which is greater than the hurdle rate of

23 percent. Case 2 used rice husk produced from three nearby facilities and resulted in a

5.6 MW generating capacity. Case 3 used only the husk available at Sanan Muang and

resulted in a 1.8 MW generating capacity. Due to economies of scale, Case 2 and 3 do

not have attractive IRRs: 13.70 and 0.54 percent, respectively.

Table 11-2

Summary Results Sanan Muang Rice Mill Facility

Item Case 1 Case 2 Case 3

Gross plant capacity, MW 9.0 5.6 1.8

Net plant capacity, MW 8.0 5.0 1.6

Investment, $US million 10.952 9.640 4.931

Fuel type Rice Husk Rice Husk Rice Husk

Fuel consumption, tonnes/yr 79,000 50,000 13,800

Total fuel cost, Baht/tonne 100-250 100-200 100

Operating hours per year 7,446 7,446 7,446

Revenue from EGAT, million Baht/yr 100 64 20

Internal rate of return, percent 25.52 13.70 0.54


Sanan Muang Rice Mill 13,800 13,800 13,800

Kanutanjakij Rice Mill 16,560 16,560

Nitinun Supakij # 1 Rice Mill 11,040 11,040

Nitinun Supakij # 2 Rice Mill 8,832 8,832

Supachai Rice Mill 22,080

Sawangtavorn Rice Mill 6,624

Since the IRR of Case 1 is greater than the hurdle rate of 23 percent, the study

team presented the results of Case 1 to the facility owner, Mr. Sanan. Mr. Sanan

expressed interest in further project development through a joint venture with another


interested investor. Mr. Sanan did not express much concern about the long term supply

availability of rice husk from the other facilities in the area.

11.3 Thitiporn Thanya Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

Thitiporn Thanya Rice Mill, with a rice husk supply of 27,600 tonne/yr, is smaller

than Sommai and requires additional rice husk from the surrounding area to make a new

power development viable. Three cases were studied (for details see Table 11-3). These

cases vary in plant generating capacity depending on the quantity of rice husk supply.

Case 1 is a study of a power facility with a capacity of about 9.1 MW (gross) supplied by

the facility’s own rice husk and supplemental husk from all other rice mills within a

25 km radius. This case yielded an IRR of 26.4 percent, which is greater then the hurdle

rate of 23 percent. Case 2 used rice husk produced from three nearby facilities and

resulted in a 5.6 MW generating capacity. Case 3 used only the husk available at

Thitiporn Thanya and resulted in a 3.2 MW generating capacity. Due to economies of

scale, Case 2 and 3 do not have attractive IRRs: 14.6 and 7.23 percent, respectively.

Table 11-3

Summary Results Thitiporn Thanya Rice Mill Facility

Item Case 1 Case 2 Case 3



Investment, $US million 10.947 9.680 7.476

Fuel type Rice Husk Rice Husk Rice Husk

Fuel consumption, tonnes/yr 79,000 50,000 27,600

Total fuel cost, Baht/tonne 100-250 100-250 100


Revenue from EGAT, million Baht/yr 100 64 36



Thitiporn Thanya Rice Mill 27,600 27,600 27,600

Ruengthai Rice Mill 3,312 3,312

Wangbau Rice Mill 11,040 11,040

Amnaouypol Rice Mill 8,280 8,280

Hnongyao Rice Mill 3,312

Hnongben Rice Mill 3,312

Hwangdee Rice Mill 13,800

Charoenkij Rice Mill 8,280

The study team presented the study results of Case 1 to the facility owner. The

owner expressed interest in further project development, but noted that his facility would

have to depend on rice husk from other facilities in the area in order to become a viable


project for development. He was very concerned about receiving a guarantee of long

term rice husk availability from other sources. This concern highlights the importance of

long term supply contracts for biomass in development of biomass based power

generation.

11.4 Plan Creations Co., Ltd.

In initial analyses, the feasibility of a new power development at the Plan

Creations site was not found viable, yielding an IRR of 7.95 percent (for details see Table

10-4). The results were unfavorable due to high investment cost relative to the plant size

under study (i.e., economies of scale) and expensive fuel costs. The latter includes

opportunity, collection, transportation, and wood chipping costs.

Black & Veatch investigated alternate scenarios in attempt to improve the project

economics. If a larger facility could be built, the project may be more viable. Black &

Veatch investigated the economics at plant sizes of 18 and 28 MW and found that the IRR

would increase to 28.6 and 38.5, respectively (see Table 11-4). The owner was presented

these new results but is interested in implementation of a small (about 2 MW) system at

the site. At present, the owner is soliciting project price information from a vendor.

Table 11-4

Summary Results Plan Creations Facility

Table Header Result Option 1 Option 2

Gross plant capacity, MW 10 20.9 31.7


Investment, US$ million 12.6 19.1 26.7

Fuel type Wood Waste Wood Waste Wood Waste

Fuel consumption, tonne/yr 134,000 254,000 374,000

Total fuel costs, Baht/tonne 200-450 35-350 35-350


Revenue from EGAT, million

Baht/yr

114 238 360


Source of fuel supply:

Internal: Wood res., tonnes/yr 4,000 4,000 4,000

External: Bark, tonne/yr 14,000 14,000 14,000

Small log, tonne/yr 116,000 236,000 356,000

11.5 Chumporn Palm Oil Industry Plc.

Several modifications were proposed for the Chumporn Palm Oil Industry Plc.

(CPOI) to improve the efficiency and increase power output of the existing power plant.

The final configuration selected includes the following modifications:


Combustion of additional fuel to fully utilize existing boiler and turbine

generator capacity.

Addition of a low pressure condensing turbine to generate power from the

exhaust of the existing back pressure steam turbine.

Recovery of turbine and process exhaust steam through a condenser with

cooling tower.

Improvement of the makeup water treatment system by addition of a

reverse osmosis system.

Table 11-5 presents a summary of the study results. With the selected

modifications, the average gross plant output would be 5.4 MW, or an increase of about

3.0 MW over the existing plant output. Under this configuration, CPOI would be able to

sell about 2.5 MW of power to EGAT on a “firm” basis.

The proposed development would yield a base case IRR of 20.4 percent with an

estimated total project cost of about US$5.8 million. The base case IRR is slightly lower

than the hurdle rate of 23 percent. However, optimistic sensitivity analyses result in IRRs

that are higher than the hurdle rate.

The study team presented and discussed the study results Mr. Suriya, who is the

assistant managing director of the palm oil mill. In general, Mr. Suriya agreed with the

study results but raised a concern on the fluctuating prices of biomass. He pointed out

that the price of oil palm shell has increased from 150 to 400 Baht/tonne since last year.

Additionally, he noted that there might also be a price increase in coconut husk, which

was considered as an inexpensive supplemental fuel in the feasibility study. The study

team explained the sensitivity analysis and suggested to estimate the results of a fuel price

increase through a pro forma model. Mr. Suriya was to look into the details of the study

report and discuss with the facility owner.

It should be noted that the facility would like to expand their processing

capabilities in the near future. This will likely require some sort of upgrade to the mill

power and steam systems similar to that proposed for this study.


Table 11-5

Summary Results Chumporn Palm Oil Facility

Item Result

Gross plant capacity, MW 5.40

Net plant capacity, MW 4.55

Net sold to grid, MW 2.52

Investment, US$ million 5.767

Fuel type Oil palm waste, biogas, and coconut husk

Total fuel cost, Baht/tonne 0-150

Operating hours per year 7,200

Revenue from EGAT, million Baht/yr 34

Internal rate of return, percent 20.4


Internal: Shell, tonne/yr 18,900

Fibre, tonne/yr 32,400

Empty bunch, tonne/yr 37,800

Biogas, cu.m/yr 6,000,000

External: Shell, tonne/yr 18,000

Coconut husk, tonne/yr 4,760

11.6 Karnchanaburi Sugar Industry Co., Ltd.

Four options for developing the Karnchanaburi Sugar Industry were proposed:

1. Use existing excess boiler and turbine capacity to generate additional power for

export on-season, non-firm basis.

2. Add condensing capacity so that a boiler and turbine set can generate additional

power for export on and off-season, firm basis.

3. Add new high-pressure boiler and turbo-generator equipment, using surplus

bagasse for power production year round, firm basis.

4. Develop an entirely new core cogeneration plant utilizing high efficiency boilers

and turbines for power production year round, firm basis.

However, with the owner’s concern of limited capital investment, only two

possible options (options 1 and 2) were left. Option 1, which involves selling excess

power to EGAT on a non-firm basis, is a popular option among the sugar mill facilities.

This option, however, does not fit the purpose of this study, which is to sell excess power

on a firm basis. Option 2 involves adding condensing capacity to generate additional

output for sale to EGAT on a firm basis during the on and off-season. Under this option,

a secondary fuel, corncob, would be required to supplement the bagasse supply.

The results of study are summarized in Table 11-6. The IRR was found to be

18.9 percent with an estimated total project cost of US$2.37 million. Additional analysis


found that increases in sugar milling efficiency would allow enough bagasse to be

produced so that combustion of supplemental corncob fuel would not be required. The

IRR under this scenario increases significantly to 27.5. Study results were presented to

the facility owner who is interested and agreed to further development.

Table 11-6

Summary Results Karnchanaburi Sugar Industry Facility

Item Original Option 2 Increased Efficiency

Gross plant capacity, MW 2.0 2.0

Net plant capacity, MW 1.85 1.85

Investment, US$ million 2.371 2.371

Fuel type Bagasse, corncob Bagasse

Fuel consumption, tonne/yr 34,216 43,333

Total fuel cost, Baht/tonne 50-275 50

Operating hours per year 4,660 4,660

Revenue from EGAT, million Baht/yr 20 20

Internal rate of return, percent 18.9 27.51


Internal: Bagasse, tonne/yr 20,833 43,333

External: Corncob, tonne/yr 13,382 –

11.7 Woodwork Creation Co., Ltd.

In initial investigations, the feasibility of a new power development at the

Woodwork Creations Co. Ltd. site was not found attractive, yielding a low IRR of 4.22

percent (see Table 11-7). Similar to the Plan Creations site, the factors contributing to the

unattractive results were: limited fuel supply and power facility size, high investment cost

relative to the plant size, and relatively expensive fuel costs.

Black & Veatch investigated alternate scenarios in attempt to improve the project

economics. If a larger facility could be built, the project may be more viable. Black &

Veatch investigated the economics at a plant size of 30 MW and found that the IRR

would increase to 24.7.


Table 11-7

Summary Results Woodwork Creation Facility

Item Original Analysis Larger Facility




Fuel type Wood waste Wood Waste


Total fuel cost, Baht/tonne 35-250 35-350


Revenue from EGAT, million Baht/yr 43.6 419

Internal rate of return, percent 4.4 24.7


Internal: Bark, tonne/yr 15,552 15,552

Sawdust, tonne/yr 6,048 6,048

Chip and discards, tonne/yr 10,080 10,080

External: Bark, tonne/yr 11,520 11,520

Small log, tonne/yr 10,800 310,800

11.8 Mitr Kalasin Sugar Co., Ltd.

Similar to the feasibility study of the Karnchanaburi Sugar Mill, four options were

proposed for developing the Mitr Kalasin Sugar Co., Ltd.:

1. Use existing excess boiler and turbine capacity to generate additional power for

export on-season, non-firm basis.

2. Add condensing capacity so that a boiler and turbine set can generate additional

power for export on and off-season, firm basis.

3. Add new high-pressure boiler and turbo-generator equipment, using surplus

bagasse for power production year round, firm basis.

4. Develop an entirely new core cogeneration plant utilizing high efficiency boilers

and turbines for power production year round, firm basis.

Option 1 was not considered because of the non-firm export of power to EGAT.

Option 4, which involves developing an entirely new central power plant, was

disregarded because the existing cogeneration facility is just relocated and does not need

to be replaced. The remaining two options were analyzed in more detail and the study

results are summarized in Table 11-8. Option 2 involves adding condensing capacity so

that a boiler and turbine set can generate 3.2 MW gross power for export on and off-

season on a firm basis. This option was estimated to cost US$2.6 million. Due to time

and budget constraints, this option was only briefly researched. With a new high pressure

boiler and turbine generator, option 3 could generate 6.1 MW gross power but at a larger


investment of US$15.6 million. Option 2 yielded an IRR of 46 percent compared to

13.3 percent for option 3.

The study team presented these results to representatives (coordinators) of the

facility owner. In general, they agree with the option alternatives and the results of study.

They intended to forward the study report to the facility for review and consideration of

implementation.

Table 11-8

Summary Results Mitr Kalasin Sugar Facility

Item Option 2 Option 3




Fuel type Bagasse Bagasse


Total fuel cost, Baht/tonne 0 0


Revenue from EGAT, million Baht/yr 34.3 77.7

Internal rate of return, percent 46 13.3

11.9 Liang Hong Chai Rice Mill Co., Ltd.

The initial feasibility study of building a new power facility at the Liang Hong

Chai Rice Mill Co., Ltd. yielded an IRR of 7.6 percent, which is much lower than the

hurdle rate of 23 percent. The low IRR was due to the high investment cost relative to the

plant size being studied. The latter was limited by the availability of rice husk, which was

obtained only from the two Liang Hong Chai facilities. For the base case analysis, no

other sources of fuel supply were identified in the vicinity of the proposed site. However,

the study team did perform an alternative analysis of a larger size plant supplemented

with rice husk from the Nakorn Ratchasima province. The results of this study are

favorable (see Table 11-9) and indicate that a rice husk based power plant located

somewhere in the area, if not at Liang Hong Chai site, might be feasible.

A summary of study results is presented in Table 10-9. The owner of the facility

was informed of the study results and was given a copy of the report.


Table 11-9

Summary Results Liang Hong Chai Facility

Item Original Option 1 Option 2



Investment, US$ million 11.480 15.0 20.8

Fuel type Rice husk Rice husk Rice husk

Fuel consumption, tonne/yr 33,000 83,000 133,000

Total fuel cost, Baht/tonne 0 0-350 0-350


Revenue from EGAT, million Baht/yr 45.7 116.3 185.6



New rice mill: Rice husk, tonne/yr 16,500 16,500 16,500

Old rice mill: Rice husk, tonne/yr 16,500 16,500 16,500

Nakon Ratchasima rice husks, tonne/yr – 50,000 100,000

11.10 Southern Palm Oil Industry (1993) Co., Ltd.

The feasibility study of building a new power facility at the Southern Palm Oil

Industry (1993) Co., Ltd. yielded a low IRR of 11.6 percent as shown in Table 10-10.

The low IRR is due to high investment cost relative to the plant size studied. The plant

size was restricted by the facility owner’s request of using the fuel supply of the facility

only and by not considering empty fruit bunch as a potential fuel. The proposed plant

generating capacity could be increased by procuring additional fuel sources from another

palm oil facility owned by the company and from other facilities in the area. At larger

sizes, the plant would likely have more favorable economics, as could be determined by

preliminary further study (see Section 9.3.10 and Table 11-10). The study team discussed

the study results with the owner of facility and a copy of the report was provided.

It should be noted that the facility would like to expand their processing

capabilities in the near future. This will likely require some sort of upgrade to the mill

power and steam systems similar to the configuration proposed for this study.


Table 11-10

Summary Results Southern Palm Oil Facility

Item Original Study Larger Facility



Net sold to grid, MW 5.4 28.3


Fuel type Fiber, shell, and

biogas

Fiber, shell, empty

bunch, biogas, and others

Total fuel cost, Baht/tonne 0-200 0-200


Revenue from EGAT, million Baht/year 77 403.5

Internal rate of return, percent 11.6 25

Source of fuel supply (increase over current needs):

Fiber, tonne/yr 38,500 64,500

Shell, tonne/yr 20,000 30,000

Biogas, cu.m./yr 3,570,000 3,570,000

Other residues, tonne/yr 250,000


12.0 SPP Program Regulations Review

This section provides a review of the regulations for the Small Power Producers

(SPP) program. The SPP program was initiated by the National Energy Policy Council

and implemented by the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT),

Metropolitan Electricity Authority (MEA), and Provincial Electricity Authority (PEA).

The objectives of the SPP program are to encourage the participation of SPPs in

electricity generation, promote the use of domestic and renewable energy sources,

promote higher efficiency use of primary energy, and reduce the financial burden of

government investment in the electricity supply industry. The national and external

benefits of the SPP program include the conservation of fossil fuels, reduced fuel imports,

conservation of foreign hard currency, and distributed generation benefits. The intent of

the program is to realize these external benefits, yet result in a direct cost to ratepayers

that is no higher than the alternative of supplying electricity without SPP projects.

Small rural industries engaged in power production from biomass may sell their

excess energy generation back to the electrical grid through the SPP program. However,

as of October 1999, only 6.8 percent of the total SPP capacity connected to the EGAT

system (1,491 MW) involved waste or renewable resources.10 The large majority of the

total capacity is natural gas based cogeneration. In the view of Black & Veatch, there are

several reasons why this is the case, and these will be discussed in this section. First,

however, an overview of the current SPP regulations and status of the program are given.

12.1 SPP Program Regulations Overview

The SPP program was initiated by the National Energy Policy Council and

implemented by the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT), Metropolitan

Electricity Authority (MEA), and Provincial Electricity Authority (PEA). This section

discusses the SPP program and regulations.

12.1.1 Basis for the SPP Program

The SPP Program was initiated based on the conclusions of the National Energy

Policy Council that:

“generation from non-conventional energy, waste or residual fuels and cogeneration increases efficiency in the use of primary energy and by-product energy sources and helps to reduce the financial burden of the public sector with respect to investment in electricity generation and distribution.”

The national and external benefits of the SPP program include the conservation of

fossil fuels, reduced fuel imports, conservation of foreign hard currency, and distributed

10 Arthur Anderson, “Thailand Power Pool and Electricity Supply Industry Reform Study - Phase I Final

Report,” Volume 5, March 1, 2000.


generation benefits. The intent of the program is to realize these external benefits, yet

result in a direct cost to ratepayers that is no higher than the alternative of supplying

electricity without SPP projects.

12.1.2 Least Cost Planning and the SPP Regulations

EGAT’s planning objective is to provide safe, adequate and reliable power

supplies to consumers in the least cost manner. The least cost provision means that when

the utility develops its system expansion plan, it plans to add capacity resources that will

minimize the cumulative present worth of incremental system costs (CPWC) to

ratepayers. Incremental system costs consist of fuel and operating costs, plus incremental

fixed costs associated with capital investments. EGAT periodically updates its least cost

system expansion plan, the current plan is its 1997 Power Development Plan, issued in

December, 1997.

Should a biomass or other renewable generation alternative be able to displace a

part of the incremental capacity and energy in the least cost expansion plan and not

increase the incremental cost of serving load once payments to the biomass facility are

considered, then the plan including the biomass facilities would be preferred. This is

because ratepayers would be no worse off in that their direct costs are no higher than the

identified least cost plan, yet the nation would realize the additional benefits inherent in a

renewable plant. This, in essence, is the logic behind the SPP program. It encourages

biomass and renewable technologies if they are viable at the utility’s avoided cost.

Avoided cost is the cost that the utility would have incurred had it not been for the

purchase of capacity and energy from the (SPP) facility.

12.1.3 SPP Regulations

12.1.3.1 Definition of an SPP. Under the Regulations for the Purchase of Power

from Small Power Producers, an SPP must utilize one of the following as fuel or prime

mover:

Non-conventional energy such as wind, solar, or mini-hydro.

Waste or residues from agricultural or industrial processes.

Garbage or dendrothermal sources for fuel.

Any fuel used for cogeneration provided that certain efficiency standards

are met.

Non-cogeneration use of petroleum, natural gas, coal and nuclear fuels are

specifically excluded except if the thermal energy produced by these fuels is

supplementary and does not exceed 25 percent of the total thermal energy used in

electricity generation each year.


12.1.3.2 Conditions for Purchase. The SPP Regulations establish the following

conditions for purchases from SPPs:

EGAT will be the sole purchaser of electricity.

The total capacity supplied by any SPP shall not exceed 60 MW at the

connection point (90 MW in certain locations).

The SPP must obtain and provide a copy of all required permits within

18 months of the SPP contract and before delivery can begin.

The utility will operate the SPP’s protective system and is able to make

decisions related to system safety. The utility can also require the SPP to

inspect and improve its distribution equipment if it may affect the utility’s

system.

A performance bond is required on the contract signing date, equal to

5 percent of the present value of the total receivable capacity payments. SPPs

receiving capacity payments must also deposit security against early

termination equal to 10 percent of the capacity payment to be received in the

first 5 years of the contract.

SPPs are responsible for the plant interconnection costs and equipment

inspections.

12.1.3.3 SPP Payments. Payments to the SPP can consist of an energy-only

payment for electricity (kWh) delivered or may include an energy and capacity payment.

No capacity payments are made for contracts with a term of less than 5 years. For terms

of 5 to 25 years, capacity payments are equal to EGAT’s long-run avoided cost during the

contracted term.

For SPPs receiving capacity payments, the energy payment is set equal to EGAT’s

long-run avoided energy cost resulting from the SPP purchase. For other SPPs, energy

payments equal EGAT’s short-run avoided energy cost resulting from the purchase.

Energy payments are based on time of day rates for peak, partial peak and off-peak hours.

The regulations also include a minimum take liability on behalf of EGAT, which

guarantees the purchase of power from an SPP of at least 80 percent of the SPP’s

availability. If this amount is not met, it can be made up the following year or else EGAT

will pay the SPP an energy payment for energy not taken.


12.1.3.4 SPP Maintenance and Availability. To receive capacity payments, SPPs

must provide electricity during the months of March through June, and in September and

October, and electricity must be supplied not less than 7,008 hours per year. For biomass

and garbage-burning facilities, the annual hours must be at least 4,672 hours per year and

supply must occur from March through June. A monthly capacity factor of not less than

51 percent is also a condition, with payments for the month reduced if this condition is

not met. SPPs shall be able to reduce power supply during the utility off-peak demand

period to no less than 65 percent of the contracted capacity (40 percent in the eastern gulf

provinces until 2001). In case of notification of need, the facility must be able to generate

with at least 30 minutes advanced notification.

The quality of electricity must also generally conform to the utility’s

synchronization requirements. The SPP regulations also include a number of restrictions

on maintenance. Major overhauls must be approved by EGAT and scheduled at least

6 months in advance and must occur during the off-peak period. Also, the total period of

shut-down for maintenance is limited to 35 days in a 12-month period, although a carry

forward of 45 days is allowed from previous periods.

12.1.3.5 Failure to Perform. Should the SPP be unable to supply at a monthly

capacity factor of at least 51 percent, capacity payments will be reduced by 50 percent

during the month. The capacity payment may also be reduced should the annual

minimum hours of supply not be achieved. Should the SPP be unable to provide output at

the level in the contract, the SPP will be provided 18 months in which to rectify the

situation, thereafter, the contracted capacity will be adjusted to reflect the facility

capability. Deductions in the capacity payment may also occur should the SPP not be

able to respond to dispatch instructions within the allotted time period.

In the event that the SPP wishes to reduce its contracted capacity after at least half

the term has expired, it may do so provided adequate notice (between 1 and 3 years

depending on the reduction of capacity) is given.

Should the SPP terminate the contract before the end of the term, the utility shall

recall the capacity payment equal to the difference between the capacity payment already

received and the capacity payment corresponding to the effective term, plus an additional

penalty of up to 10 percent if terminated within 5 years of the start of the contract.

12.1.3.6 SPP Application Procedure and Evaluation Criteria. Candidate SPPs

must submit a proposal (to the Head Office of EGAT) and be approved into the SPP

program. The application shall include the following:

Evidence of Certificate of Incorporation as a juristic entity and the

Memorandum of Association of such juristic entity.

A layout drawing showing the location of the power plant.

Installation site of the generator.


Description of the electricity generation process.

The proportional amount of thermal energy used in electricity production

with respect to the total amount of energy used in the total thermal process.

Details of the generator(s), Name Plate Ratings and their specifications.

The Single Line Diagram and the Metering and Relaying Diagram for

interconnection to the Power Utility (PU) system.

The electrical capacity and energy to be supplied to the PU system at the

connection point, together with the SPP’s plan for electricity generation and

consumption as well as power consumption of other nearby juristic entities

using power generated by the SPP.

The contracted period during which the SPP shall generate and supply

electricity to the PU system.

The quantity of backup power required by the SPP from the PU.

The number of staff involved with operation of the generating system

together with details on their qualifications and their professional engineering

licenses.

The fuel consumption per year and the average lower heating value of the

fuel used in electricity production and cogeneration.

The evaluation criteria used by EGAT to evaluate the application shall include the

following, and applications should contain this additional information to facilitate the

evaluation:

Appropriateness of Project

Appropriateness of the project with respect to technical and engineering

aspects.

Experience of the SPP (the Bidder), partners, and parent companies.

Financial status and availability of income sources of the project, including

electricity customers and steam customers.

Availability and Appropriateness of Fuels

Reliability of fuel procurement.

Suitability of fuel reservation and fuel transportation.

Appropriateness of Site Location

Appropriateness of the project site location as regards the security of the

power system and the interconnection to the PU system.

Environmental impact and the local public consent, including identifiable

benefits resulting from the project.

Appropriateness of Other Aspects

Date to commence purchasing electricity, which will be based on

precedence in time.

Modifications of the model Electricity Purchase/Sales Contract.

Technical Information


The proportional amount of thermal energy to be used in thermal processes

other than electricity generation in relation to the total energy production.

The proportional amount of the sum of the electricity produced and one

half of thermal energy to be used in thermal processes in relation to the

energy from petroleum and/or natural gas (based on lower heating value).

Details of the power plant design and construction. For example: by

which company is the power plant designed, and has there ever been any

construction resembling the proposed one before?

Schedules of the design period, the equipment delivery, the construction,

and the operation startup.

The date to commence electricity purchasing, which will be part of the

Electricity Purchase/Sales Contract execution.

Heat Balance Diagram.

Information on Location

Whether the SPP (the bidder) is the owner of the land where the power

plant construction will be located or the land is to be rented or furnished by

other means.

Whether the land is in the area where water resources, fuels, and labor as

well as other construction and power generating facilities can be easily

supplied.

Location of the power plant is in relation to power and steam customers,

and to the PU connection point. A layout drawing detailing location and

distance from the power plant should be attached.

Feasibility for future expansion of power generating capacity and plan of

the expansion if the SPP has developed it.

Public relations plans to make known the power plant construction to the

public in the project locality; if the bidder has prior experience in public

relations work, details of the implementation and results accomplished

should be submitted.

Requests for Authorization

Present evidence certifying that requests for authorization to the concerned

authorities have been made for the construction of the generation facility,

and for the generation and supply of electricity, including a study of

environmental impact.

Indicate the period of time during which authorization for construction of

the facility, and for generation and supply of electricity, is expected to be

granted.

Finance and Income

Provide financial statements, (e.g., income statement, balance sheet and

cash flow, including at least three previous annual reports of the bidder


and partners). If the documents cannot be provided, reasons must be given

and other evidence of financial status must be provided so as to enable the

evaluation of the bidder’s financial status and actual ability to operate the

project.

Illustrate the project financing plan.

Provide evidence of the project sponsor’s intention to offer a loan to the

project.

Provide the name list of electricity and steam users, together with the

purchase amount of electricity and steam.

Main Fuel and Procurement of Supplementary Fuels

Provide evidence of fuel procurement, period of securing the fuels,

transportation, transportation routes, and fuel storage.

Plan for the use of supplementary fuels instead of main fuels, including

details of such supplementary fuels procurement.

Specifications of main fuels and supplementary fuels (e.g., gross calorific

value, ash, and sulfur content in the case of coal).

Fuel properties which have impact on the environment and proposed

alleviation measures.

Byproducts and Waste from the Power Plant

Illustrate qualities and characteristics of waste created by the power plant,

and the disposal plan.

If byproducts from the power plant can be of use, what is the use, to whom

they will be delivered or sold, what are the criteria of the purchase

contract, and what will the price be?

Administration and Management

Detailed plan of the administration and management. For example, will

the power plant monitoring be done by the bidder or by sub-contracting

another party to perform the work. In the latter case, who will be

contracted and what will be the principles specified in the hiring contract?

Illustrate the plan for the power plant maintenance.

12.2 Current Status of the SPP Program

Table 12-1 summarizes the status (as of February 2000) of power purchases from

SPPs. Currently there are 40 SPP projects supplying power to the grid. About half (21)

projects are supplying to the grid on a firm basis, and the remainder are supplying on a

non-firm basis. The table also lists the fuel types for the projects accepted into the

program. Of the 40 projects, 24 use biomass or waste as fuel. The number of projects is

encouraging; however, although biomass and waste fuels represent the majority of

projects, they are very small portion of the total SPP electrical capacity. As of

October 1999, only 6.8 percent (101 MW) of the total SPP capacity connected to the


EGAT system (1,491 MW) involved waste or renewable resources.11 Furthermore, only

three out of the 24 biomass projects were accepted into the SPP program on a firm basis.

The rest are to supply power on a non-firm basis and as such do not receive valuable

capacity payments from EGAT. An example of this are bagasse burning sugar mills,

fourteen of which have signed up to supply non-firm power. The sugar mills export their

excess power production when they are milling during the on-season, which is about four

months. To export firm power, the mill power systems would need to operate during the

off-season as well. This would typically require modification to mill power systems and

supplemental fuel if the excess bagasse is not available. Both investigations of sugar

mills for this study recommended changes to allow for year-round export of power on a

firm basis.

Table 12-6

Power Purchases from Small Power Producers as of February 2000

Firm Non-Firm TotalProposals submitted

Number of projects 67 26 93Generating capacity, MW 7,686.81 631.36 8,318.17Sale to EGAT, MW 4,459.90 180.31 4,640.21

Accepted into the program*

Number of projects 30 23 53Generating capacity, MW 3,496.91 591.86 4,088.77Sale to EGAT, MW 1,958.40 175.61 2,134.01Type of fuel**

Waste – 1 1Bagasse – 14 14Paddy husk, wood chips 3 3 6Natural gas 21 1 22Coal 5 2 7Oil 1 – 1Biomass – 1 1Black liquor – 1 1

Contracts signedNumber of projects 30 20 50Generating capacity, MW 3,496.91 556.40 4,053.31Sale to EGAT, MW 1,958.40 149.57 2,107.97

Supplying power to the gridNumber of projects 21 19 40Generating capacity, MW 2,169.43 553.90 2,723.33Sale to EGAT, MW 1,343.40 147.37 1,490.77

11 Arthur Anderson, “Thailand Power Pool and Electricity Supply Industry Reform Study - Phase I Final

Report,” Volume 5, March 1, 2000.


Source: NEPO website, http//www.nepo.go.th/power/pw-spp-purch00-02-E.html.* Excluding Small Power Producers not presented in the Proposal Security and withdraw.** Some plants use more than one type of fuel.

12.3 Black & Veatch Comments on Current Regulations

As discussed in the previous section, the percent of biomass capacity in the SPP

program is small and mostly contracted on a non-firm basis. Black & Veatch feels that

there are several reasons for this relating to the current SPP program regulations (dated

January 1998), as discussed in this section.

12.3.1 Capacity and Energy Payments

The present SPP regulations were established for payment of capacity and energy

generated by a biomass power plant based on the long-term avoided cost of a fuel oil

plant. This concept does not reflect the true nature of biomass power plant for the

following reasons:

The capacities of most biomass power plants are less than 10 MW because

of wide geographical distribution of the fuel. However, the fixed rate for the

capacity payment is based on fuel oil power plants which have capacities up

to 100 MW. Because of the smaller capacity and the effects of economies of

scale, the cost per megawatt of a biomass power plant is normally higher than

that for fuel oil power plants.

Term of Contract

Capacity Payment categorisedby type of fuel

(Baht/kW/month)Natural

GasFuel

Oil/OthersCoal

Greater than 5 years but not exceeding 10 years:




164

204

227

302

203

253

281

374

229

285

317

422

The fixed rate for the energy payment is based on the net plant heat rate

for a combined cycle power plant, which is 9,070 kJ/kWh or 8,600 Btu/kWh.

However, biomass power plants, which are based on the use of steam turbine

thermal cycles, have higher heat rates ranging from 17,800 to 22,000

Btu/kWh. This is due to the lower efficiency of this type of thermal cycle and

the high moisture content and low heating value of biomass fuels. The higher

the plant heat rate, the higher the cost to produce electricity from the plant.

Thus, biomass plants are less energy efficient and more costly to operate than

power plants operating on fossil fuels.


Thus, instead of providing an incentive to power produced from biomass, the SPP

regulations specify energy and capacity payment rates that are two low for biomass plant

owners to obtain investment returns comparable to fossil fuel plants.

12.3.2 Contract Term

One objective of this study was to promote biomass projects that could obtain

long-term (greater than 5 years) firm contracts, which are required to receive capacity

payments. Although capacity payments provide substantial revenue to power projects,

only three out of the 24 biomass projects accepted so far into the SPP program receive

such payments. The primary reason for this is that it is difficult to maintain an assured

and constant supply of biomass for long periods of time. This is due to the following the

reasons:

In general, biomass fuels are a byproduct of some higher value process.

For this reason, the amount of biomass waste generated can fluctuate greatly

depending on such factors as market conditions, crop output, etc.

The value of biomass waste byproducts is low compared to the primary

products (for example, the price of rice husk compared to the price of rice

paddy). Therefore, most biomass producers are not interested in long-term

supply contracts and prefer shorter-term annual contracts.

Most agricultural businesses providing sources of biomass are family

managed. If the second generation is not willing to continue, the business

will be discontinued.

For the above reasons, most potential biomass suppliers are uncomfortable

entering into long-term supply contracts. However, power plant utilities and project

financiers may not be willing to build or lend to biomass facilities unless they have

assurances of adequate fuel supply for the life of the project, which would likely be

twenty years or greater.

12.3.3 Comments on EGAT Regulations

The Black & Veatch study team has comments on specific regulations as

discussed below.

12.3.3.1 Minimum Take Liability

The SPP regulations include specifications on minimum take liability (No. 4, Item

4, page 19/28):

“EGAT will purchase power from the SPP in the amount of no less than 80 percent of the SPP’s availability in a particular year...”

Black & Veatch comment – EGAT should purchase all of the power generated by

the biomass power plants because (1) the plants are time consuming to start up and cannot


vary output easily (they should be considered as base load plants as opposed to peaking

plants); and (2) total biomass power plant capacity is small, and has minimal effect on

the whole grid system.

12.3.3.2 Generation Shortfall (Item K.3 page 9/28)

The SPP regulations include specifications on generation shortfall (Item K.3 page

9/28):

“In case that the SPP is unable to increase its generation for supplying within the duration period in accordance with the PU’s instruction as specified in Item I 1.3, the PU shall pay the SPP capacity payment for that month by deducting 4 percent per day of the capacity rate specified in the PU’s announcement for every day that the SPP is unable to follow the PU’s instruction.”Black & Veatch comment – EGAT should not penalize the biomass power plant

owners if the generation shortfall is caused by fuel shortage. As discussed in the section

on contract terms, fuel supply can be largely uncontrollable. For example, during

construction booms, rice husk is in high demand from brick manufacturers and the price

of rice husk may become too expensive for electricity generation. Fuel supply can also be

greatly affected by hydrological factors. The difference between the maximum and

minimum fuel supply can be up to 50 percent due to climatic variations (see sugarcane

production in Figure 12-1).

Such uncontrollable factors result in investors and lenders who are unwilling to

accept the risk of fluctuating fuel supply and the loss of the capacity payments. The study

team suggests that plant operators have the flexibility to makeup shortfalls without

penalty during periods in which the plant is running again.


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Su

gar

can

e C

rop

Ou

tpu

t, m

illio

n t

on

nes

1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99

Crop Year

Figure 12-6. Variation in Sugarcane Output Between 1993 and 1999.

12.3.3.3 Period of Sale

Certain periods of sale are required to qualify for the firm capacity payments

(Item I.1 page 6/28):

“For the types of generation processes defined under Item B.2, the annual hours must be no less than 4,672 hours per year and generation and sales must include the period of March, April, May, and June.”

Black & Veatch comment – some biomass fuels are seasonal with periods that

conflict with the present regulation requirements. For example, bagasse is available only

from December through April. It is partly for this reason that none of the sugarcane mills

enrolled in the SPP program have firm contracts with EGAT. In order to generate power

during the off-season, mills would either have to conserve bagasse or buy supplemental

fuels.

12.4 Conclusion

Owing to the existing regulations and other factors, very few biomass power

plants have sold electricity to the grid through firm contracts. Other reasons for the lack

of biomass-based power generation in Thailand include:

Energy prices do not reflect external social costs such as air pollution,

carbon dioxide emissions, socioeconomic impacts, fuel imports, etc.


Biomass energy projects suffer from not being in regular competition with

conventional energy sources. For example, power purchase agreements are

often written to favor conventional energy projects and do not consider the

special requirements of renewable energy technologies.

Investors or lenders would like to minimize biomass fuel supply risk

simply by establishing long term supply contracts, but these are very difficult

to achieve. Alternative methods of risk management are often not explored.

Host facilities are often not familiar with the power generation business

and are wary of making large investments in businesses outside their core

experience.

Biomass plants are small compared to conventional energy plants. The

small size and the technology type results in relatively high capital costs.

Furthermore, development costs for biomass plants are similar to larger

plants, even though the capacities are much smaller.

The combination of high up-front capital costs, unfamiliar technology, and

unmanageable fuel supply risk, makes financing of biomass projects more difficult and

expensive than conventional energy plants. The result is that those plants which are built

may not be able to produce electricity at rates as low as conventional technologies, such

as combined cycle plants burning natural gas.

To encourage biomass and other renewable energy sources, governments around

the world have instituted a variety of measures including investment credits, production

subsidies, guaranteed buyback prices, and capacity mandates. Direct increases in

capacity and energy prices in Thailand may not offer the total solution for renewable

energy projects; several measures should be examined:

Set a target for biomass and other renewable power plant generating

capacity for the next 10 years.

Establish a competitive subsidy scheme to encourage development of new

renewable energy power plants.

Promote marketing of biomass and other renewable energy sources as

“green” energy to encourage public support of projects.

Collaborate with specific high potential industries (such as sugar cane

milling) to promote higher efficiency plants and expanded biomass power

generation.

Investigate alternative funding mechanisms to provide long-term loans

with low interest rates to biomass projects (commercial banks normally

provide limited loans with high interest rates).

Any incentive offered to renewables should be should cognizant of the

liberalization of the electricity supply industry and flexible enough to respond to changing

market conditions.


NEPO has begun a successful campaign to promote renewable energy. This effort

will be further strengthened by the recent commissioning of an initiative to subsidize up

to 300 MW of renewable energy projects through the Energy Conservation Promotion

Program (ENCON) fund. The capacity, which will be bid on a competitive basis, will be

an important step to further the long-term energy policy goals of Thailand.


encon bv finalreport

Documents

empty fruit bunch

foreign hard currency

asean cogen kinoshita

modular distributed generators

stationary sloping grate

html arthur anderson

nakhon sri thammarat

making large investments