pellet mill magazine - july/august 2016

JULY/AUGUST 2016

www.biomassmagazine.com/pellets

Stacked for Success Swedish Pellet Market Maintains Momentum Page 26

Plus:Improving Motor

Efficiency 6

AND: Industry-Leading

LegislationPage 22

2770 Welborn StreetPelham, AL 35124 205-663-5330 www.processbarron.com

Bulk Materials HandlingSolid Fuel Receiving, Storage, & DeliveryFuel Storage and Metering BinsCircular & Traveling Screw ReclaimersScrew & Drag Reclaim SystemsFuel Screening & Hog TowersCustom Belt, Screw, & Drag ConveyorsComplete Turnkey Systems

Air & Gas HandlingCentrifugal FansFan Balancing & Vibration AnalysisDampers – Control & IsolationExpansion Joints – Fabric & MetalMechanical Dust CollectorsDuctwork & StacksEconomizers & Air HeatersBulk Materials Handling

JULY/AUGUST 2016 | PELLET MILL MAGAZINE 3

Contents »

JULY/AUGUST 2016 | VOLUME 6 | ISSUE 4

FEATURES16 EQUIPMENT

Taming the Power-Hungry Beast For decades, the efficiency of new motors has been regulated by federal law, and this year minimum efficiency standards were broadened to a variety of new motors. By Ron Kotrba

22 REGULATION Perennial BattlesAdvocacy efforts continue to push against restrictive public policy and regulation, with incremental progress in this year’s exertion for the pellet fuel and broader biomass industries. By Katie Fletcher

26 INTERNATIONAL Sweden’s Strong SuitForssjö Pellets is a sterling example of the fleet of pellet plants that produce the bulkof the country’s annual volume, capitalizing on its goal of efficiently utilizing all of its inbound material. By Tim Portz

Pellet Mill MagazineAdvertiser Index24

32

15

20

29

21

13

19

9

11

5

25

2

10

12

14

28

31

Andritz Feed & Biofuel A/S

Astec, Inc.

Biomass Magazine Webinar Series

Bliss Industries, Inc.

BRUKS Rockwood

CPM Global Biomass Group

EBM Manufacturing

FLAMEX Inc.

Haver & Boecker USA

Industrial Bulk Lubricants (a Dansons company)

International Biomass Conference & Expo 2017

NDC Technologies Ltd

ProcessBarron

PRODESA

Trinity Packaging Corporation

Uzelac Industries

Vecoplan LLC

Wood Pellet Association of Canada

04 EDITOR’S NOTEOn Our BehalfBy Tim Portz

05 INDUSTRY EVENTS06 TESTING GROUNDS

Optimizing Efficiency Through Quality Management By Chris Wiberg

07 HEATING MATTERSWhen Good Intentions Become CounterproductiveBy Charlie Niebling

08 INDUSTRIAL INSIGHTWhat’s Next for the UK?By Seth Ginther

10 BUSINESS BRIEFS12 NEWS30 MARKETPLACE

ON THE COVER SWEDISH PELLETS: Forssjӧ Pellets produced 43,000 tons of pellets from sawmill residues in 2015. Pellets not sold in bulk are bagged in 35-pound bags, carrying the national blue and yellow colors of Sweden. PHOTO: TIM PORTZ

4 PELLET MILL MAGAZINE | JULY/AUGUST 2016

On Our BehalfThis issue of Pellet Mill Magazine will likely

find many producers in the final stages of an annual summer slowdown. If the conversations we’ve had with producers are any indication, this summer’s slowdown will likely be a little longer than others, because many producers are sitting on significant carryover inventory from last year. Producers are also wondering how much inventory their customers might be sit-ting on and how that will impact the ordering activity as retailers begin to lay in their early fall items, including wood pellets. Last year was a disappointment for the industry and hopes are high that a La Niña cycle will bring at the very least a more normal heating season and, opti-mistically, a colder-than-normal winter to make

up for last year. We’re looking forward to attending and reporting on the upcom-ing Pellet Fuels Institute Annual Conference, and we’ll be asking producers about retailer inquiries and ordering activity while we’re there.

Anyone who has worked in the renewable energy sector generally and the wood pellet sector specifically understands how important public policy is to in-dustry growth and stability, a notion underscored multiple times in this issue. If you ever wondered if you’re getting value out of your annual dues to the trade associations you belong to, I can’t recommend Associate Editor Katie Fletcher’s page-22 story “Perennial Battles” enough. Since I began working in the biomass space eight years ago, I’ve been hearing about the challenge that producers of renewable thermal energy have in getting policy parity with other renewables. For-tunately, trade associations like the Biomass Thermal Energy Council and the Pellet Fuels Institute maintain constant pressure on our elected officials to recognize the significance of thermal energy and the importance of building policies that rec-ognize the contributions renewable thermal energy solutions like wood pellets can make toward renewable portfolio and greenhouse gas emissions goals.

After reading Fletcher’s story, read the story about my visit to Sweden and Forssjö Pellets, a production facility not too far from Stockholm. In the 1970s, the use of wood pellets in Sweden was nonexistent despite a robust wood products sector which generated plenty of feedstock. The oil crisis and price hikes in that de-cade got the ball rolling for the industry, but a tax on carbon dioxide gave rise to the pellet industry the country has today, whereby nearly 90 percent of the country’s heating needs are met with wood waste and wood pellets. Sweden’s broad use of woody biomass now illustrates how vital continued policy advocacy is in unlocking and growing markets.

Tim PortzVICE PRESIDENT OF CONTENT & EXECUTIVE [email protected]

EditorialPRESIDENT & EDITOR IN CHIEF

Tom Bryan [email protected]

VICE PRESIDENT OF CONTENT & EXECUTIVE EDITORTim Portz [email protected]

SENIOR EDITORRon Kotrba [email protected]

ASSOCIATE EDITORKatie Fletcher [email protected]

CONTRIBUTING EDITORAnna Simet [email protected]

NEWS EDITORErin Voegele [email protected]

COPY EDITOR Jan Tellmann [email protected]

ArtART DIRECTOR

Jaci Satterlund [email protected]

GRAPHIC DESIGNERLindsey Noble [email protected]

Publishing & SalesCHAIRMAN

Mike Bryan [email protected]

CEOJoe Bryan [email protected]

VICE PRESIDENT OF OPERATIONSMatthew Spoor [email protected]

SALES & MARKETING DIRECTORJohn Nelson [email protected]

BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORHoward Brockhouse [email protected]

SENIOR ACCOUNT MANAGERChip Shereck [email protected]

ACCOUNT MANAGERJeff Hogan [email protected]

CIRCULATION MANAGER Jessica Tiller [email protected]

MARKETING & ADVERTISING MANAGERMarla DeFoe [email protected]

Editorial Board MembersT.J. Morice, Marth Companies Stan Elliot, Pacific Coast Pellets

Thomas Plaugher, Appalachian Wood PelletsChad Schumacher, Superior Pellet Fuels

Lori Hamer, Hamer Pellet FuelKelli Curran, Curran Renewable EnergyDerek Nelson, Forest Business Network

Subscriptions to Pellet Mill Magazine are free of charge—distributed quarterly—to Biomass Magazine subscribers.To subscribe, visit www.BiomassMagazine.com or you can send your mailing address to Pellet Mill Magazine Subscriptions, 308 Second Ave. N., Suite 304, Grand Forks, ND 58203. You can also fax a subscription form to 701-746-5367. Back Issues & Reprints Select back issues are available for $3.95 each, plus shipping. Article reprints are also available for a fee. For more information, contact us at 866-746-8385 or [email protected]. Advertising Pellet Mill Magazine provides a specific topic delivered to a highly targeted audience. We are committed to editorial excellence and high-quality print production. To find out more about Pellet Mill Magazine advertising opportunities, please contact us at 866-746-8385 or [email protected]. Letters to the Editor We welcome letters to the editor. Send to Pellet Mill Magazine Letters to the Editor, 308 2nd Ave. N., Suite 304, Grand Forks, ND 58203 or email to [email protected]. Please include your name, address and phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity and/or space.

TM

Please recycle this magazine and removeinserts or samples before recycling

COPYRIGHT © 2016 by BBI International

« Editor's Note


Industry Events »

LARGEST BIOMASS CONFERENCE IN THE WORLD

2016 Pellet Fuels Institute Annual ConferenceJuly 24-26, 2016The Omni Grove Park InnAsheville, North CarolinaThe PFI Annual Conference highlights the various applications of densified biomass, as well as trends and best practices within the densified biomass industry. It attracts a broad range of individuals from the public and private sectors, academia, and local, state and national governments from North America and beyond. The conference features two days of educational sessions as well as industry exhibits, extensive networking opportunities and a golf tournament.

206-209-5277 | www.pelletheat.org/pfi-annual-conference

Christianson & Associates’ Biofuels Financial ConferenceOctober 17-18, 2016Hyatt Regency MinneapolisMinneapolis, MinnesotaProduced by Christianson & Associates and organized by BBI International, this year’s Biofuels Financial Conference is focused on the best ways to explore new options in today’s changing ethanol and biodiesel industries. By understanding risks associated with various technology and marketing initiatives, and by exploring various options for making the best use of capital and resources, we’ll learn how to create a well-managed plan for growth and change—a plan that maximizes profitability while ensuring future stability and meeting the expectations of all stakeholders.

866-746-8385 | www.biofuelsfinancialconference.com

6th Annual Exporting Pellets ConferenceNovember 6-8, 2016Fontainebleau Miami Beach HotelMiami, FloridaJoin us in Miami for USIPA’s 6th Annual Exporting Pellets Conference. This is the only U.S. conference sponsored by the industrial wood pellet industry for the industrial wood pellet industry. The conference provides the opportunity to network with executives and professionals from across the industry. Scheduled speakers and panelists include all major European utilities, major U.S. producers, and experts in all areas of the supply chain.

804-775-5894 | www.theusipa.org/conference

2017 International Biomass Conference & ExpoApril 10-12, 2017Minneapolis Convention CenterMinneapolis, MinnesotaOrganized by BBI International and produced by Biomass Magazine, this event brings current and future producers of bioenergy and biobased products together with waste generators, energy crop growers, municipal leaders, utility executives, technology providers, equipment manufacturers, project developers, investors and policy makers. It’s a true one-stop shop―the world’s premier educational and networking junction for all biomass industries.

866-746-8385 | www.biomassconference.com


Optimizing Efficiency Through Quality Management BY CHRIS WIBERG

As you are probably aware, EPA’s New Source Perfor-mance Standard for residential wood heaters requires pellet stove manufacturers to test their stoves to assure that the emissions are below regulated limits. As part of this regula-tion, EPA has stipulated that the fuel used to conduct the emissions test must be produced under a licensing agreement with an approved quality certification program, which in-cludes the Pellet Fuels Institute Standards Program, ENplus and CANplus. Once testing is complete, stove manufactur-ers are required to incorporate language into their owner’s manual specifying which fuel(s) are approved for use in the stove. The consumer is then required to buy only the speci-fied fuel(s) or risk having the warranty considered void. It is ultimately this language that has put a regulatory onus upon producers of wood pellets to adopt these quality certification programs so that consumers will have compliant fuel to burn in any stove produced under the EPA’s NSPS.

Irrespective of EPA’s regulation, adoption of these qual-ity certification programs brings great value to wood pellet producers in that they require a quality management plan that is intended to assure consistent product quality that complies with the grade criteria published for each grade. If imple-mented correctly, a well-designed quality management plan should also target increased production efficiency to opti-mize tonnage produced with the least amount of customer complaints or other product performance related issues. By optimizing throughput while minimizing product perfor-mance issues, the cost of these quality certification programs can be largely offset.

To date, I have had the pleasure of working with over 50 wood pellet production facilities within the U.S. and Canada to help develop their quality management plans. Most have been in conjunction with either a PFI Standards Program or ENplus certification, however several others have been for supplying power companies overseas. Regardless of the intended market or certification program, the quality man-agement plan requirements are very similar. The following examples are specific components that I have found to be critical to optimizing overall plant efficiency regardless of which market or certification program you plan to partici-pate in.

First and foremost, develop robust monitoring pro-cesses for your incoming feed materials. This includes fiber supply agreements that specifically define what is considered acceptable or unacceptable. Strong vigilance is needed to assure consistently compliant materials are received and to prevent inappropriate materials or contaminants from get-ting into the fiber. In addition, raw materials should be tested if they are questionable. This is most critical for producers that accept materials from a large number of suppliers where

the wood pellet producer is not in direct control of the fiber in advance of receiving it. It is most advantageous if the test-ing can occur at the production site so quick decisions can be made to accept or reject the material.

Be sure your quality management plan reflects strong processes for monitoring your production data, equipment operating parameters, all maintenance and inspections. The main idea is to develop monitoring, inspection and main-tenance practices that limit the amount of nonconforming product that could possibly be produced. As an example, if your screen plugs, a frequent inspection of the screen or running a fines test after the screen assures that only a small amount of production would need to be recovered if a prob-lem is discovered. Conversely, if regular checks are not con-ducted then hundreds or even thousands of tons can be pro-duced out of spec resulting in great effort to fix the problem. The best monitoring programs should focus on developing checks and inspections that assure non-conformance issues never exceed a single shift.

Invest in a robust on-site laboratory and take the time to confirm that all testing, sampling and sample preparation procedures are being conducted properly. To date, most of the production sites I visit are not performing tests correctly or the sampling and sample prep does not generate accurate test results. When first getting started, monitor as frequent-ly as needed to assure a high level of confidence that your production is within spec (even multiple times per shift if necessary). As you gain confidence in your ability to control various parameters, you can reduce your internal testing over time, but always keep at least a minimal amount of monitor-ing every shift.

If you adopt one of the quality certification schemes referenced in the EPA’s NSPS (PFI Standards Program, EN-plus or CANplus), you will already have the basis for a qual-ity management plan that can achieve what I have outlined above. Sure, these quality certification programs cost money, however, there are cost savings as well, and the implemen-tation of a well-designed quality management plan can and should result in better overall production efficiency, more consistent product quality, reduced consumer complaints and, hopefully, a better bottom line for the producer. In time, if enough producers adopt these programs, improved prod-uct performance as well as consumer confidence should be realized industrywide.

Author: Chris WibergLab Director, Timber Products

Inspection/Biomass Energy Lab218-428-3583

[email protected]

« Testing Grounds


Heating Matters »

Sometimes well-intended incentives can become counter-productive de facto regulations. Let me explain what I mean in the context of efforts here in the Northeast to spur market adoption of modern wood heating.

Advocates of modern wood heating have worked very hard to encourage state energy agencies to consider incentives for modern pellet boilers. These agencies have supported solar thermal, geothermal and a host of renewable electricity technol-ogies, so it has seemed logical to extend policy support for pel-let boilers to help these states make clear, measurable progress toward broad renewable energy targets. It took time, but these agencies have come around to the importance of supporting modern wood heating.

New Hampshire was the first state to promulgate a wood pellet boiler rebate program, initially for homeowners, and then for commercial building owners. The program specified a high output efficiency requirement, minimum volume of bulk pellet storage and full automation of fuel feed.

Maine followed suit with similar technical requirements. The two state programs have been very successful because they made it relatively simple for folks to apply and they kept techni-cal requirements reasonable. They have collectively helped to support nearly 1,000 home, business, school and municipal in-stallations.

Vermont started slowly but has come on strong in the past year, with rebate levels and straightforward program guidelines that should have a real market impact. Massachusetts started with a pilot program and now has a fully implemented residen-tial rebate program, with a much-anticipated commercial pro-gram due out very soon.

These programs all set a high technology bar. The results are compelling: millions of gallons of imported oil displaced, strong incentives for private investment in bulk wood pellet delivery trucks and double-digit annual growth in wood pellet central heating. In short, these programs are helping to build a market.

Then there is New York. Efforts over several years by the New York Bioenergy Association and others finally resulted in Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s announcement in 2014 of “Renewable Heat New York,” a multiyear, multimillion-dollar initiative to support residential and now commercial installation of modern wood pellet boilers. Advocates were elated to see this high-level recognition. Cuomo spoke of the important role this technol-ogy could play in economic development and reducing depen-dence on imported fossil heating fuels.

Sadly, as designed and implemented by the New York State Energy Research and Development Agency, the program has been very slow on the uptake, despite offering rebates of up to

45 percent of the installed capital cost. This is largely because it insisted on such unnecessarily stringent technical requirements and administrative hoops and hurdles for installers that systems that meet the requirements actually cost more to install with the rebate than an advanced system that does not have to meet the requirements without a rebate.

NYSERDA is, first and foremost, a research and develop-ment (R&D) agency, with a respected track record of research into understanding the performance of wood-burning technol-ogy. For this, it should be commended. Its capable researchers understand what constitutes best-in-class technology for mod-ern wood heating.

The problem is pushing the very leading edge of R&D results does not necessarily align with delivery of real world pro-grams to catalyze market adoption. The market is not ready for unnecessarily stringent requirements and associated costs, with or without rebates. Without meaningful market penetration, modern wood heat cannot and will not reach scale where unit costs will start to come down—such as what has happened so dramatically with solar PV.

By delegating the implementation of Renewable Heat New York to a R&D agency, Cuomo’s potential for this initia-tive has largely been squandered. Efforts by advocates to urge NYSERDA to better align this program with marketplace reali-ties have been mostly met with indifference.

In this time of low fossil-fuel heating prices, folks won’t install pellet boilers without the rebate, and they won’t install them with the rebate because technical and administrative re-quirements are beyond the capacity of this nascent market to embrace. The result—no market growth at all in New York state, the largest heating oil-consuming state in the country.

In this way, a well-intentioned initiative, Renewable Heat New York, has become a de facto regulation. Fossil energy prices will not stay low forever. I hope that as conventional heating costs come up again, NYSERDA will sit down with its colleagues from other northeastern states and progressive industry leaders and revisit its technical and administrative re-quirements, drop its guard a bit, and allow a phased approach that will help build some market penetration.

Author: Charlie NieblingConsultant and Partner

Innovative Natural Resource Solutions LLC 603-965-5434

[email protected]

When Good Intentions Become CounterproductiveBY CHARLIE NIEBLING


What’s Next for the UK? BY SETH GINTHER

On June 23rd, in an unprecedented and historic move, the U.K. voted to leave the European Union by a vote of 52 to 48 percent. Prime Minister David Cameron resigned shortly after the results were tallied and markets faltered at the initial shock. While it is too early to know the full impli-cations of this action, we do have some understanding of how the U.K. will begin to unwind its relationship with the EU and what this might mean for export/import industries like ours.

The legal mechanism that triggers exit discussions and negotiations is Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. The Treaty sets out the process—first, the U.K. must formally notify the EU of intent to leave, then a deal must be negotiated on phasing out of EU-funded programs, relocation of EU of-fices in the U.K., and on government services ranging from food safety to environment. The negotiation period must be completed within two years. The negotiated deal will need to be approved by 65 percent of the members of European Parliament (20 of 27 members). Until the U.K. negotiates this pathway to formally depart the EU, there will be no change in operations or trade and EU law will still apply.

The leaders of the Leave campaign have portrayed an air of calm in order to ease uncertainties, indicating that Ar-ticle 50 will not be invoked and the EU will not be formally notified of the U.K.'s decision to leave until a new prime minister is put in place in early September. Party politics within the Conservative Party have evolved quickly as various members position themselves for a run for prime minister over the summer.

Response from the EU has been mixed with Commis-sion President Jean-Claude Juncker calling for a quick end to what was “never a tight love affair,” whereas German Chan-cellor Angela Merkel has said there is no need for nastiness and anticipates the U.K. exit can be done in an amicable, busi-nesslike manner. Conversations at the EU level will continue over the summer until a new U.K. prime minister is elected.

U.K. residents have also shown a mixed response to the outcome of the vote. There have already been media re-ports of regret among some Leave voters citing a lack of understanding of the full ramifications of this vote. The ex-tent to which these feelings are pervasive remains to be seen. A majority of Scotland residents voted to remain in the EU and there are some calling for another referendum vote to separate Scotland from the U.K. and rejoin the EU as a new member state. Similar sentiment has been seen in Northern Ireland.

There are still many unanswered questions: Will EU cli-mate targets remain intact or will the U.K. develop its own? Will these negotiations distract the European Commission from its work on a bioenergy policy for post-2020? Will we see a domino effect across Europe with other countries that are skeptical of remaining in the EU?

As for the pellet industry, Drax Power remains commit-ted to biomass and Amber Rudd, head of the U.K. Depart-ment of Energy and Climate Change, has publicly declared that the U.K.’s energy priorities remain the same—energy security, low energy bills and a low-carbon energy infrastruc-ture.

We anticipate the U.K. will remain the largest importer of U.S.-produced wood pellets, and we stand ready to con-tinue to make the case for biomass as an affordable, base-load, low-carbon energy solution—both inside and outside the EU.

Author: Seth Ginther Executive Director

U.S. Industrial Pellet Association804-771-9540

[email protected]

« Industrial Insight


PEOPLE, PRODUCTS & PARTNERSHIPSBusiness BriefsFecon adds regional manager

Fecon Inc. has added Devin Cham-bers as regional man-ager of its Mid-South region, covering Texas, Louisiana and Okla-homa. Chambers has more than a decade of territory management

experience. He is also experienced in the development and implementation of sales and marketing strategies, dealer recruitment and development, sales and service training, and direct sales.

Rural Energy earns certification U.K.-based Rural Energy has completed

the combined-heat-and-power design and installation training course from Bosch Com-mercial and Industrial. The course was com-prised of two days of training and means the biomass specialist is now a certified technol-ogy partner of Bosch, a manufacturer of heating and cooling products.

UK official appointed Alex Chisholm has been appointed

as the new permanent secretary for the U.K. Department of Energy and Climate Change. Chisholm previously served as chief executive of the Competition and Markets Authority.

UNTHA adds team memberUNTHA has add-

ed Andreas Senkbeil to its team. Senkbeil has worked in the waste management sector for the past four years and will be responsible for the company’s growth in the Asian Pacific market, including Thailand, Singapore, Ko-rea, Japan, Malaysia, China and Australia.

WPAC appoints president

Michele Rebiere resigned as president of the Wood Pellet Association of Canada in May, citing a need to focus on her role as chief financial officer of Viridis Energy as the company pursues the sale of its busi-ness. She served on the organization’s board for five years, and spent one year as president. WPAC has appointed former Vice President Rene Landry as presi-dent. He will assume the role until the next general meeting of the membership is held in September. Landry is director of pellet opera-tions for Nova Scotia-based Shaw Resources, which operates two plants in Atlantic Canada.

PFI qualifies new facilities under standards program

The Pellet Fuels Institute has announced the qualification of pellet fuel manufacturer Northeast Wood Products Jasper LLC of Jasper, Tennessee, into the PFI Standards Program. New England Wood Pellet also got its Allegheny plant in Youngsville, Pennsylva-nia, added to the program. Georgia Biomass of Waycross, Georgia, and Smith Flooring of Mountain View, Missouri, are two more recently qualified additions. The PFI Standards Program now represents 15 pellet manufactur-ing companies with a combined 24 facilities.

Chambers

Technology Partners: Carlyne Parillon, Rural Energy senior design engineer (left); Paul Clark, Rural Energy managing director; Jonathan Mann, Rural Energy estimating and bid manager; Carl Arntzen, Worcester Bosch managing director; Kevin Agutter, Rural Energy business development managerPHOTO: RURAL ENERGY

Senkbeil

Rebiere

Landry


SBP approves PwC as certification body

The Sustainable Biomass Partnership has announced PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Canada has become the third SBP-ap-proved certification body. PwC has provided evidence that it meets the SBP requirements regarding its existing accreditations and has demonstrated sufficient resources and competence to manage the SBP certifica-tion scheme under the SBP Framework, which enables producers of woody biomass to demonstrate that they source their raw material responsibly and that the material complies with regulatory requirements, in-cluding sustainability requirements, applicable to power generators burning woody biomass to produce energy. PwC has been approved for certification of biomass producers in the U.S. and Canada. These producers typically include pellet or woodchip mills and the biomass supply chain.

Enviva Forest Conservation Fund announces awards

The Enviva Forest Conservation Fund has announced the recipients of its 2016 grants. The fund, established by Enviva Holdings LP and administered by the U.S. Endowment for Forestry and Communities, is awarding $500,000 in 2016 to preserva-tion and conservation programs that span more than 2,000 acres of environmentally sensitive bottomland and wetland forests in North Carolina and Virginia. The four awards were made to the Nature Conser-vancy North Carolina Chapter, the Triangle Land Conservancy, the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, and the Nature Conservancy Virginia Chapter.

Doosan Babcock wins contractU.K.-based energy engineering firm

Doosan Babcock has been awarded a multimillion-pound contract to deliver the combustion and emissions systems for the biomass conversion of Lynemouth power station near Newcastle in the U.K. The power station’s three 140 MW coal boil-ers are being converted to biomass. Under terms of the contract, Doosan Babcock will

deliver the complete scope of boiler works, including the modification of mills and elec-trostatic precipitators, and the replacement of fans, a low-NOx combustion system and ash-handling systems. Once complete, the plant will consume approximately 1.4 million metric tons of sustainable wood pellets per year for the next 10 years.

UNTHA announces new shredderAustrian-based UNTHA has an-

nounced a new electric-drive shredder. The UNTHA XR shredder has been designed and engineered to increase capacity, profit-ability and safety levels in the wood recycling and biomass market. A slow-speed, high-torque drive allows the XR to consistently process up to 40 metric tons of wood per hour. The system significantly minimizes dust levels, which reduces the risk of fire. It is available as either a static or mobile solu-tion. Trials have shown that the XR pro-duces fines as low as 5 percent. As a result, the shredder yields up to 20 percent more saleable biomass material per ton than other solutions, often without the need for any ad-ditional screening systems.

Rural Energy adds team memberRural Energy has

boosted its in-house design capabilities with the addition of Car-lyne Parillon as senior design engineer. In her role, Parillon will inter-pret client briefs and be responsible for con-cept and detailed designs of energy centers. She has more than seven years of experience designing district heating systems.

Business Briefs

SHARE YOUR INDUSTRY NEWS: To be included in the Business Briefs, send information (including photos and logos, if available) to Business Briefs, Pellet Mill Magazine, 308 Second Ave. N., Suite 304, Grand Forks, ND 58203. You may also email information to [email protected]. Please include your name and telephone number in all correspondence.

Parillon

Pellet News

Northeast Wood Products LLC com-menced pellet production late last year at its retrofitted 120,000-ton-per-year pellet plant in Jasper, Tennessee. Now, poised for ramp up, the company is waiting on the sidelines until the market rebounds.

Guy Mozzicato, president of NWP, said some modifications are being done to the feed system at the Jasper plant to fix dust is-sues. Some adjustments are also underway to contain fugitive fiber. “Aside from that, the plant is ready to function at its designed capac-ity of 120,000 tons per year,” Mozzicato said. He added extensions are in place to house ad-ditional pellet mills. “Basically, the entire infra-structure is there,” he said. “Given the market conditions—the strength of the dollar, the soft demand for the export markets—we’re just seeing where heating oil goes this year and where temperatures go. We’re all dressed and ready to play, we are just sitting on the bench right now.”

As of May, the plant was operating on a restricted level. “We have a well-trained crew there that’s functioning, but instead of run-ning the anticipated number of hours, we’re running at a fraction of that,” Mozzicato said.

Tennessee plant operational, waiting to ramp up production

Advanced Torrefaction Systems LLC recently collaborated with Idaho National Laboratory to test a catalytic oxidation technology that aims to ad-dress problems that have hampered the development of torrefaction plants.

Highly volatile gases, mainly car-bon monoxide (CO) and a wide range of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), are produced during the torrefaction process. Those gases contain significant energy that is wasted if not beneficially utilized. ATS’s patented TorreCat tech-nology uses an oxidation catalyst to com-bust volatile gases and convert them to an inert gas stream of carbon dioxide,

nitrogen and steam. The inert gas can be used as an industrial heat source. When cooled, it can also be used in down-stream processes.

ATS worked with the INL to design and install an oxidation catalyst in INL’s torrefaction system in Idaho Falls, Idaho. Two rounds of tests were performed at different temperature levels. Tyler Westover, an INL engineer who oversaw the experiment, said that “the tests were successful and the catalyst destroyed CO and VOCs below detection levels. In addition, the inert gas stream from the catalyst was successfully used directly in the reactor as a heat source.”

ATS, INL test oxidation catalyst

IMPROVING TORREFACTION: Representatives of Advanced Torrefaction Systems (left) monitor a test of an oxidation catalyst designed to make torrefaction safer, cleaner and more efficient. PHOTO: IDAHO NATIONAL LABORATORY


Pellet News »

In May, U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit delayed oral arguments on the U.S. EPA’s Clean Power Plan. Oral arguments were originally scheduled to be heard June 2 by a panel of three judges, but will now go en banc, or before a full 11-judge panel bench Sept. 27. The new court date is expected to speed up the case’s final resolution, as the los-ing party would likely have appealed for an en banc hearing.

The Clean Power Plan aims to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030. The EPA published the rulemaking for the plan in the Federal Register in October 2015. Several lawsuits were filed in response to the CPP, including one signed by 24 states. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court granted a request to delay implementation of the CPP until the legal challenge field in the lower challenges are resolved.

Also in May, the EPA announced it is deferring action on a petition for re-consideration regarding the treatment of biomass in carbon pollution standards for new, modified and reconstructed electric-generating units pending “further ongoing consideration of the underlying issue of whether and how to account for biomass when cofiring with fossil fuels.”

Court delays Clean Power Plan oral arguments

The U.K.-based Port of Tyne has an-nounced plans to start building new facilities to handle, store and transport wood pellets for Lynemouth Power Ltd. following its con-version to biomass. Under the agreement, the port will handle, store and transport up to 1.8 million metric tons of pellet annually.

According to the port, construction has

begun on its estate at the Tyne Dock in South Shields to build a 75,000 metric ton storage facility, three enclosed conveyors and transfer towers, three silos, a rail loading silo and other works. The Port of Tyne is contributing £13 million ($18.99 million), with the majority of the investment being made by LPL.

“We have been at the forefront of de-

veloping expertise and facilities to handle the renewable fuel, wood pellets, and I am delighted that LPL have chosen the Port of Tyne as a key partner in this significant devel-opment,” said Andrew Moffat, CEO of the Port of Tyne

Port of Tyne secures agreement to handle pellets for Lynemouth facility

Lynemouth signs investment contract with UK government for biomass conversion

European Commission opens in-depth investigation on UK government’s support of biomass conversion

European Commission approves state aid for Lynemouth conversion

Lynemouth facility burns its last coal

JUN2014

FEB2015

DEC2015

DEC2015

JAN2016

Subsidiary of Energetický a prumyslový holding buys Lynemouth plant from RWE Supply and Trading


« Pellet News

A recent report on Vermont’s clean energy industry has deter-mined the state has the highest number of per-capita clean energy jobs in the nation. The wood ener-gy industry is among the clean en-ergy industry segments addressed in the report.

The analysis determined wood energy firms employ 1,542 full-time-equivalent workers across the component subsectors of logging, wood fuels, including chips, pellets and firewood, combustion systems

and power stations. These business-es are mostly small, with 84 percent reporting only five or fewer perma-nent employees.

Chip and pellet firms were found to employ more workers per firm and attribute more revenue to wood energy activities when com-pared to the overall wood energy average. Only 64 percent of these employers reported five or fewer permanent employees, with 58 per-cent reporting that all of their rev-enue is attributable to wood energy.

Vermont report features wood energy employment data

Though a Potlach, Idaho, pellet plant project announced last spring by Centennial Renewable Energy hasn’t yet come to fruition, the project is still alive and working to overcome final hurdles.

The company plans to develop a pellet plant on 48 of 135 acres on the site of the Potlatch Lumber Co. timber plant, which was built in the early 1900s and shuttered in 1979.

“The Potlatch mill was one of the largest in the country… It was turned into a brownfield site in 1981, and nothing has operated there since,” said CRE CEO Rick Fawcett. “It was a mill town, everything was owned by Potlatch, and it’s been severely economically depressed ever since.”

The current plant design is for roughly 175,000 to 200,000 tons of pellets per year, but Fawcett said it isn’t likely CRE will operate on that scale. “The reason for that is there isn’t enough water at the location,” he explains.

The project is expected to utilize Andritz’s SteamEx black pellet technology. “If we do the steam explosion pellets—and that’s what our per-mit was submitted as—we’ll have to descope the project down to meet the availability of water,” Fawcett said.

Black pellet project in Idaho works to overcome challenges

Vermont wood energy primary activity, 2016 A firm that harvests wood for energy 53%A firm that installs, maintains or repairs wood combustion systems 42%A firm that produces chip and pellet fuel products 4.2%A firm that sells and distributes wood fuel 0.4%

SOURCE: VERMONT PUBLIC SERVICE DEPARTMENT

The Right Choice In Drying for over 30 Years.

Uzelac Industries is a leading manufacturer of Rotary Drying Systems, with systems operating internationally. Our systems are employed to convert many di�erent products into marketable by-products in many di�erent industries.

Biomass Biosolids Meat Processing FertilizerWood Pellets Municipal Sludge Cattle & Hog Blood Ammonium SulfateWood Chips Industrial Sludge Meat and Bone Sulfate of PotassiumWood Shavings DAF Solids Feather Meal Salts Agricultural Poultry Manure Egg Shells Potash

Our systems convert these products into: FUEL, FEED SUPPLEMENTS AND FERTILIZER Uzelac Industries Systems are Engineered for E�ciency - Designed for Longevity

www.uzelacind.com

Uzelac Industries6901 Industrial Loop,Greendale, WI USA 53129

p: 414-529-0240 | f: 414-529-0362


A German-designed Wittus pellet stove has been named winner of the third Pellet Stove Design Challenge, an event coordinated by the Alliance for Green Heat and this year hosted by the U.S. DOE’s Brookhaven National Lab. The competition aims to promote in-novation in wood and pellet heating.

The Wittus Pellwood, distributed by a New York company, is an innova-tive prototype that can burn both pel-lets and cordwood, achieving very low

emissions of less than half a gram per hour, according to John Ackerly, presi-dent of the Alliance for Green Heat.

A stove made by Seraph Indus-tries, the smallest U.S. pellet stove man-ufacturer, won second place, consis-tently burning under 1 gram per hour, and has innovative features to help and encourage the consumer to keep the stove operating well.

Pellet Stove Design Challenge winner announced

A HOT COMPETITION: Niels Wittus (left) and René Bindig of Team Wittus are congratulated on their win by Alliance for Green Heat staff. PHOTO: ALLIANCE FOR GREEN HEAT

Pellet News »

Wood Resources International’s North American Wood Fiber Review has reported North American overseas pellet exports in-creased for the third-consecutive quarter dur-ing the final three months of 2015, increasing 7 percent from the prior quarter and reaching more than 1.7 million tons.

During the fourth quarter of last year, Canadian exports increased 17 percent when compared to the previous quarter, with ship-ments to both Europe and Asia increasing.

In the U.S., exports from the industrial pel-let sector in the South are all flowing to Europe, primarily to the U.K. Newly operating facilities in the South helped exports from Gulf ports to increase by nearly 70 percent between the sec-ond quarter of 2015 and the final quarter of the year. However, shipments to Europe have fallen during the first quarter of this year. The NAWFR predicts the decrease is a temporary pause caused by lower demand in Europe due to the unusually warm winter.

For the full year, pellet exports reached 6.1 million tons, 2 percent higher than 2014 and nearly four times higher than 2010.

North American pellet exports continue to increase


« Equipment

New federal regulations went into effect June 1 that require motor manufacturers to produce an even broader scope of more efficient designs for the U.S. industrial market.

BY RON KOTRBA

POWER-HUNGRY BEAST

GREEN MACHINES: WEG produces electrical motors of all sizes and for all applications, including the three models shown here, which surpass NEMA-premium standards by two efficiency bands. The company calls these SuperPremium motors. PHOTO: WEG ELECTRIC CORP.

The amount of energy consumed by electrical motors in the U.S. is staggering. The U.S. DOE reports that, in 2006, the total

annual energy consumption from motor-driven equipment in the U.S. industrial, commercial, residential and transportation sectors combined was approximately 1,431 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh), or more than 38 percent of the total U.S. electrical energy use. In 2006, motor-driven systems in the industrial sector consumed roughly 632 bil-lion kWh/year, or 44 percent of all motor-driven system energy use. This industrial sector motor use equates to about 17 per-cent of the total U.S. electrical energy use.

Within the industrial sector, more than 62 percent of the total electrical energy use is for motor-driven equipment.

More recent data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration show nearly half of the electricity consumed in the manufacturing sector is used to power mo-tors for fans, pumps, conveyors, compres-sors, and, of course, wood pellet presses, along with all the ancillary equipment that help prepare feedstock, feed the presses and package the final product for delivery.

At Indeck Ladysmith’s 90,000-ton wood pellet mill in Wisconsin, maintenance manager Kristoffer Zimmerman says the plant is stacked with motors of all sizes and

styles performing a variety of functions throughout the mill. All the motors used at Indeck Ladysmith are Marathon Electric Manufacturing Corp.’s XRI brand, Zim-merman says, and the most powerful is 600 horsepower to run the microwood chipper. “The chipper draws 200 amps when noth-ing’s going through it,” Zimmerman says.

The microchipper makes smaller than typically sized wood chips, which are then fed into a hopper before moving to one of two hammer mills. Zimmerman says the smaller-sized chips are desirable because they put less load on the hammer mills. “Our microchipper normally needs 1,200 horsepower, but we have a unique torque

Taming the


Equipment »

converter that allows it to slip under heavy load,” he says.

The mill has two Bliss Industries Elimi-nator 4460 hammer mills, a wet and a dry, each powered by a 500-horsepower motor.

Three Andritz LM26-2 wood pellet presses—each equipped with a 480-volt, 3-phase, 400-horsepower motor draw-ing 420 amps a piece—are the extrusion workhorses of the Indeck Ladysmith mill. Zimmerman says the plant can run all three pellet presses together or individually, and for R&D purposes, Indeck Ladysmith has the ability to put different-sized dies in each of the machines with different compression ratios.

The plant also employs a few smaller, variable frequency drive motors sized at 25 horsepower or less. “The pellet presses are fed by an auger and a surge bin,” Zimmer-man says. “We have a variable frequency drive motor to feed the presses, so we can change the feed rate.” A sawdust burner that heats the dryer also uses a variable frequency drive motor. The motor that blows the sawdust into the burner adjusts how much material to feed in based on the temperature of the product coming out. “After the wood comes out of the dryer, we look at that temperature,” Zimmerman says. “There’s a 15-minute response time to change the feed rate and therefore the tem-perature of the fire.”

All the motors in the facility are alter-nating current (AC), save one. The facility uses a small direct current (DC) motor in its stretch wrapping machine that palletizes 40-pound bags of wood pellets onto 1-ton pallets. Patrick Standley, business manager of paper and forest products at Baldor Electric Co., a member of the ABB group, says DC motors are common in the paper industry, often in legacy machinery. “DC requires more maintenance,” Standley says. “Most people have moved toward AC mo-tors.”

RegulationsThe Marathon XRI motors, such as

those utilized at Indeck Ladysmith, are rated NEMA-premium. NEMA is the Na-tional Electrical Manufacturers Association, and its standards are adopted by the federal government to establish efficiency regula-tions.

For more than three decades the effi-

ciency of new motors has been regulated by federal law. The Energy Policy and Con-servation Act of 1975 required U.S. DOE to establish the most stringent standards that are both technologically feasible and economically justifiable, according to EIA, and to periodically update these standards as technology and economics evolve. Leg-islation has increased the federal minimum motor efficiencies requirements over the past two decades, covering motors both manufactured and imported for sale in the U.S. The Energy Policy Act of 1992 set minimum efficiency levels for all motors up to 200 horsepower purchased after October 1997. The U.S. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, famous in the biofu-els world as the legislation in which the sec-ond and current version of the renewable fuel standard (RFS2) was passed, updated the EPAct standards starting December 2010 to what’s called NEMA-premium, including 201 to 500 horsepower motors. EISA assigns minimum, nominal, full-load efficiency ratings according to motor sub-type and size.

Beginning June 1, an updated standard established by DOE in 2014 is broaden-ing the minimum efficiency of a variety of new motors sized at 1 horsepower and up. “When regulations first moved to NEMA-premium, there were exceptions that didn’t necessarily make sense,” says Dale Basso,

NEMA vice chairman and WEG Electric Corp.’s low-voltage motors product man-ager. “There are things in the NEMA-pre-mium requirements today that were not in the regulations in 2010—things like foot-less motors. It didn’t make sense really why those were exempt. So we were building two designs, one for footless and another for footed. But when the Round 2 changes came into effect this June, they moved that and other stuff into the regulations.”

Round 2 regulations, also called the Integral Horsepower Rule, include motors sized as low as 1 horsepower and incorpo-rate “almost everything except things like special shafts,” Basso says.

The new rule doesn’t mean motors that do not meet NEMA-premium standards cannot be used or sold, but rather manu-facturers cannot produce new motors for sale in the U.S. after June 1 that do not meet the new efficiency standards. “Customers can still sell product if they have it on the shelves,” says Jason Carbone, a territory ac-count manager for WEG. “They just can’t build noncompliant product for sale in the U.S. anymore.”

Below the NEMA-premium rating is what’s referred to as high-efficiency. A NE-MA-premium rating is two efficiency bands above a high-efficiency rating, according to Basso. Another way to express this is to say that two efficiency bands higher than high-

BELLY OF THE BEAST: Induction motors turn electrical energy into mechanical movement and consist of electromagnetic stators, rotors and winding. PHOTO: WEG ELECTRIC CORP.


efficiency makes 20 percent fewer losses. The difference between each efficiency band, which is a fixed, nameplate assign-ment, is 10 percent loss. “You can’t do a 96 percent or 96.1 percent efficient motor,” Basso says. “But 96.2 is an efficiency band, and 95.8 is the next one down.”

DOE’s analyses estimate lifetime sav-ings for electric motors purchased over the 30-year period that begins in the year of compliance with new and amended stan-dards to be 7.0 quadrillion Btu. The an-nualized energy savings—0.23 quadrillion Btu—is equivalent to 1 percent of total U.S. industrial primary electricity consumption in 2013.

Inner WorkingsInduction motors are rather basic

creations that turn electrical energy into mechanical movement. Induction motors consist of a stator, which is the stationary component and made of electromagnetic iron or steel layers magnetized with copper winding and 2, 4, 6 or 8 paired poles, says Joe Hanna, marketing development man-ager for Toshiba International Corp. The stator features a bored center so the rotor—the rotating portion of the motor—can fit inside. The stack length of the motor is de-termined by how many layers of laminated, stamped steel are in the construction of the stator and rotor, Standley says. The rotor too is outfitted with electromagnets with paired poles facing toward the stator poles. As the alternating current electricity pass-es through the copper winding, the stator poles alternate and the rotor poles move to

catch up. This happens several times a sec-ond and creates mechanical rotation energy to power almost anything needed.

Hanna says Toshiba designs its me-dium-voltage motors differently than the standard design. “We have a form-wound design,” he says. “It’s not just standard wire. We use multiple wires and we put them all together and wrap with a certain insulation, like a cable. The cost of our form-wound designed motors is higher than the standard induction line.”

Standley says the way manufacturers such as Baldor make motors more efficient revolves around material quality, contents and stack length. “It’s about the ability to cool,” he says. When a motor is rated at 96.2 percent efficient, it means 96.2 percent of the electricity consumed is converted to me-chanical energy, while the other 3.8 percent is lost as excess heat or friction. Therefore, the ability of a motor to keep cool means less loss to heat and greater efficiency.

When motors wear out, Standley says many industrial facilities have what’s called throw-away horsepower, meaning mo-tors less than a designated horsepower are replaced while those that are higher are rewound, or otherwise repaired. “In re-winding a motor, you can lose efficiency in the process,” he says. “And if a motor is rewound several times, it’s not going to be close to the original efficiency.” While many of these larger motors in the field have a 20-plus year lifespan, certain wear items such as bearings and seals have shorter lifes-pans. “If you choose to repair, you need to replace the bearings and seals,” Standley

says. “And they need to be greased in day-to-day operations. Lube,” or the lack of, “is the biggest failure point,” he says.

Application, PaybackHanna says when choosing a motor

for a particular application, it’s important to look at the situation from all different angles. “One is the power line and what’s available for the motor to start,” he says. “The second is amps draw. We say, based on the application, we expect the motor to draw 200 amps. Then we look at voltage, load type, starting conditions, load inertia and how you are going to start the motor in order to select the right motor and design for that application. But it always depends on the voltage and the power line coming in.”

Load capability is a relationship of speed and torque. “Horsepower equals torque times speed divided by a constant,” Standley says.

The power factor, a function of load, is important too, Basso says. Power factor is the ratio of the actual electrical power dis-sipated by an AC circuit to the product of the root mean square values of current and voltage. The difference between the two es-sentially represents wasted power. “When it goes down, the load goes down,” Basso says. “If you have a bad power factor, it looks like a bigger number than it is, so you size the equipment to match the kilovolt amps supplied to them. So you’re not just looking at kilowatts.” He says a lousy power factor can adversely affect power bills. A good power factor, or the proper utilization of the electricity supplied through proper planning and equipment sizing, will ben-efit the plant and the utility. “You have a choice when buying a motor,” Basso says. “If you know you’ll only be running at 75 percent load, don’t worry about oversizing it.” What’s more important is the power factor, he says. “If you’re trying to size it close to the horsepower, then you need to look at load and size,” Basso explains. “Ev-eryone has their own philosophy on how to operate, but if you size it right at the horsepower needed, there’s the risk of shut-ting down.” He says if a larger motor than the load requires is bought and installed, it costs more but, on the plus side, it will stay cooler and will have a longer life. And less load on an oversized motor shouldn’t affect

PULVERIZING POWER: Andritz hammer mills, shown here, are used in wood pellet plants for the production of uniform, fine wood particles for pelleting in the presses. PHOTO: ANDRITZ


Equipment »

FLAMEX® systems can be customized to address the

fire hazards inherent in your process:Spark Detection & Suppression to eliminate sparks emanatingfrom rotary dryers andhammermills.

Automatic Deluge Systems fordust collectors, bins and silos.

“Hot Particle” Detectors to detect overheated pelletsfrom pelletizers and coolers.

High Speed Abort Gatesand Backdraft Dampers for material handling andclean air ducting.

Let us help you lower risks, increase productivity and comply with regulations.

the efficiency. “Motors are pretty efficient throughout a wide range,” Basso says. “If it’s 95 percent efficient at full load, then it should be 95 percent efficient at half load.”

Mike Curci, capital sales manager for biomass equipment at Andritz, a pellet press manufacturer, says when sizing equip-ment, the goal is to be as efficient as pos-sible. “We look at mass balance, the mate-rials coming and the quality specifications required for offtake, and we have a formula we put all this information into,” Curci says. “Then we make adjustments, for example, cap-ex vs. op-ex. Op-ex is important be-cause it can save money over a long period of time. There are a number of factors. But we size it up to get the most efficient result possible.”

When Indeck Ladysmith sizes motors for various applications, Zimmerman says it’s a series of trials and errors with sugges-tions from the manufacturer. “When we change a motor, we usually go with same horsepower,” he says. “I have a spare for every motor here. When buying new, we might up the service factor to 1.15 or 1.25.” A 1.25 service factor means a motor rated

at 10 horsepower can operate at 12.5 horse-power in short intervals as needed. He says buying NEMA-premium motors vs. older, high-efficiency models doesn’t cost that much more. “If I had a failure and didn’t have a spare, I would upgrade to a more ef-ficient motor,” Zimmerman says. “I’m not going to get a cheap, less-efficient motor to replace it with. It’s a process of continually upgrading our facility.”

While buying a more efficient motor may cost a little more upfront, there is a payback in lower energy use. Carbone says the initial purchase price of the motor is only 2 percent of the total ownership costs. Standley says though it depends on energy costs and how much more efficient a new motor replacement is, payback from efficiency savings can be pretty quick. “Some are in months, and some are in years,” he says. Hanna says while a new Toshiba NEMA-premium motor may cost $30,000, even a 1 percent efficiency increase could net payback in 5 to 7 years to the user. “The average life of a motor is 25 to 30 years,” Hanna says. “Some are in the field for 40 or 50 years. It will run as long as you maintain and take care of it.”

In addition to a more efficient motor paying for itself through less energy usage, some states and utilities provide rebates or financial incentives to purchase new, higher-efficiency designs. “It varies state to state and by the local power provider,” Curci says. “Pellet plants are very big cus-tomers to power plants. And there are some benefits to being more efficient in the U.S. when it comes to offtake agreements in the EU in terms of a lower carbon footprint. Anytime a pellet plant can become more efficient and reduce its carbon footprint, it drives money toward the bottom line. It’s an important step.”

Standley says prior to government guidelines, utilities all over the country were paying customers to buy more efficient mo-tors. “It’s the low-hanging fruit,” he says. “They don’t want to have to build more power stations.”

In Ladysmith, Wisconsin, Zimmerman says Indeck Ladysmith’s utility provides in-centives to help pay for 50 percent of the project costs in moving to variable frequen-cy drive motors.


PLANNING YOUR NEXT PROJECT?Bliss Industries has the experience combined with 21st century technologies for your size-reduction or pelleting needs. Call today!

Bliss Industries, LLC is a leading manufacturer of pelleting, cooling and size reduction equipment. Founded in 1981, Bliss Industries maintains a reputation of manufacturing the most e�cient, reliable and well-built equipment in the industry.

Developed from a design concept proven worldwide, the range of Pioneer Pellet Mills continues to expand. Overall reliability, maximum e�ciency, ease of operation and maintenance combine to provide lower operating costs to each owner. With the ability to provide a wide range of die sizes, die speeds and drive power, Bliss can more than meet your requirements for high quality at a reasonable cost.

Bliss Industries, LLCP.O. Box 910 • Ponca City, Oklahoma U.S.A. 74602Phone (580) 765-7787 • Fax (580) 762-0111Internet: http://www.bliss-industries.comE-mail: [email protected] Industries Worldwide.

Proudly Manufactured in the USA

Beyond NEMA-premiumThough NEMA-premium regulations

went into full force June 1, manufacturers are providing motors that surpass these standards.

“WEG makes some models that are two more efficiency bands above NEMA-

premium,” Basso says. “We call it Super-Premium.” The downside, he says, is that it’s a Design A. Different motors with the same nominal horsepower may have differ-ent start current, torque curves, speeds and other variables. NEMA classifies motor de-signs into A, B, C and D. With WEG’s De-

sign A SuperPremium, Basso says the pur-chaser should review their starter and cable sizing before installing so it doesn’t present problems since it draws more current. “The plant may already have Design A, but they have to know,” he says. “You can’t go blind-ly into it or you may trip the breakers since it’s got a high starting torque.”

Also, direct-drive permanent magnet motors that eliminate the rotor and its in-herent losses are advances that will help move motor technology forward into even further efficiencies, Basso adds. And unlike conventional induction motor technology, which usually requires larger sizes for in-creased efficiencies, direct-drive permanent magnet motors can gain efficiencies while decreasing in size.

Standley says efficiency in conventional motor technology is close to being tapped out. “At 95-plus percent efficiency, how much more can you drive out?” he asks. “New technologies in construction material or ways to remove friction forces are con-stantly being reviewed.”

Baldor recently announced a new hy-

STYLISH POWER: Toshiba’s line-up includes the Dura-Bull medium-voltage product (larger) and the EQP Global low-voltage motor. PHOTO: TOSHIBA INTERNATIONAL CORP.

« Equipment

Your Partner in Productivity

brid motor design with performance two to four efficiency bands above NEMA-premium. “Using advanced technology, which combines the starting attributes of an induction cage with permanent magnets, the new RPM XE platform can provide substantial energy savings and performance for most centrifugal load applications,” the company states. “The motor starts like a traditional Design B induction motor and pulls into true synchronous speed and operates as a true synchronous machine. Laminated finned frame construction also contributes to power density and enhanced thermal performance by providing greater heat dissipation, which results in cooler op-eration and longer motor life.”

What’s next for government regula-tion in motor efficiency, Basso says, is im-proving entire systems, not just the motors themselves. DOE analysis shows that more than 70 percent of the total potential mo-tor system energy savings is estimated to be available through system improvements by reducing system load requirements, reduc-ing or controlling motor speed, matching

component sizes to the load, upgrading component efficiency, implementing better maintenance practices and downsizing the motor when possible.

“The motor industry is not glitzy, it’s not high-tech,” Standley says. “But we’re constantly looking for ways to improve.”

Author: Ron KotrbaSenior Editor, Pellet Mill Magazine

[email protected]

HYBRID EFFICIENCY: Baldor’s new RPM XE motor exceeds NEMA-premium efficiency standards through the use of hybrid technology. PHOTO: BALDOR ELECTRIC CO.


Whether on the road toward complying with new regulation or championing for equal consideration in policy, the pellet industry persists in its ongoing conviction.

BY KATIE FLETCHER

Perennial Battles Broad acceptance of the U.S. pellet in-

dustry will only take hold if advocacy at all levels of government continues with the aim of protecting industry

from restrictive public policy and regulation. It takes the right policies to promote recognition of energy savings and efficiencies that biomass, as a fuel, can provide. Meanwhile, regulating emis-sions and standardizing fuel quality are needed to mature the industry. Overall, lobbying for work-able standards, policies and regulations helps up-hold pellet fuels’ viability and deter opposition to its use.

Legislative and regulatory priorities exist at all levels of government. Incentive development for the production or usage of thermal energy, including assistance for district energy and com-bined-heat-and-power (CHP) biomass projects is underway, with a few key Northeast states taking the lead. The annual tax parity battle for biomass heating (or cooling) systems wages on. EPA’s par-

ticulate matter (PM) 2.5 emissions standards con-tinue to evolve, and clarity is being sought within EPA’s New Source Performance Standards for residential wood heaters. A host of other legis-lative initiatives and government programs con-sume the effort by industry associations to further the U.S. pellet industry. At the same time, there is ongoing work to promote the concept of bio-mass carbon neutrality in EPA emissions regula-tion, like the Clean Power Plan.

Parity Plight On the federal front, the focus remains on

expanding the same preferential tax consider-ation and incentives to making heat with pellet fuel, and biomass generally, as other renewable energy technologies. “That’s been BTEC’s (Bio-mass Thermal Energy Council) primary play for years—the perennial battle for equal consider-ation,” says Charlie Niebling, consultant and part-ner with Innovative Natural Resource Solutions

LLC. Niebling spends time in the policy arena on behalf of his principal client, New England Wood Pellet LLC.

The Biomass Thermal Utilization Act is policy BTEC and other industry advocates have lobbied for, which adds high-efficiency biomass thermal technologies to the list of renewable energy technologies that currently benefit from investment tax credits (ITCs) under Section 25D (residential) and Section 48 (commercial/indus-trial) of the tax code. This investment credit cur-rently applies to solar thermal and geothermal technologies, but not to biomass thermal. Under the legislation, a 30 percent tax credit for high-efficiency, residential biomass heating equipment and a two-tiered ITC of 15 or 30 percent would be available, depending on operating efficiencies for commercial and industrial biomass systems. This spring, opportunity arose for inclusion of the BTU Act in legislation being considered by the U.S. Senate in conjunction with the Federal


REGULATION »

Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act. At the time, negotiations were continuing over a package of energy tax provisions that would be rolled into a “manager’s amendment” and voted on. “We initially made it in, but then the whole tax package fell apart,” says Patrick Rita, president of Orion Advocates. “We are looking at the next round—FAA expires July 15. However, this will likely be a year-end deal.”

Niebling believes although the energy tax title got scuttled, “We made some pretty signifi-cant progress nonetheless, and I’m hoping as we move to the end of the year, and probably after the election, during the lame-duck session, that congress will move to take up extension of vari-ous tax provisions including, possibly, reconsid-eration of adding high-efficiency biomass heating equipment to the tax code.”

According to Rita, the good news is that BTU Act provisions are now part of the discus-sion of “extenders” that need to be addressed. No credits exist for biomass thermal systems, other than the stove credit in Sec. 25C, so Rita says technically it’s not an extender, but, nevertheless, it would be a 30 percent ITC for the entire installed cost. “It’s a big deal,” Rita says.

A few other positive provisions were in-cluded in the recent Senate passage of S. 2012, the Energy Policy Modernization Act. The amendment introduced by Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) calls on EPA, as well as the Agriculture and Energy departments, to craft a coordinated policy on bio-mass that reflects "the carbon neutrality of forest bioenergy." Senate and House energy leaders will meet in hopes of forging some sort of agreement on how to proceed with a conference process on competing energy bills. The House passed its ver-sion of the energy bill, H.R. 8, in December. “The biomass carbon neutrality provision and the lan-guage that we got included adds thermal energy (from biomass, solar and geothermal) to the list of pathways federal agencies can use to meet their renewable energy procurement obligations,” Rita explains. “Right now, only electricity qualifies.” He adds that through the BTU Act and this provision in the energy bill, thermal energy is put on equal footing with electricity.

According to a government affairs update released by Pellet Fuels Institute, the conference process will have to begin shortly if leadership has any hope of delivering an energy bill to the presi-dent this year. Congress is set to leave town mid-July for the conventions and will be out through

August. When they return, there will be about five weeks of work in Washington until they recess again to allow for campaigning for the November general election.

Besides an ITC for thermal energy, industry is requesting an extension of Section 45 produc-tion tax credits for renewable thermal energy, as they are set to expire at the end of the year. A similar credit already exists for the production of renewable electricity (Internal Revenue Code, Title 26, Section 45). Thermal renewable energy credits (T-RECs) are also being pushed for inclu-sion in state energy policy frameworks designed to increase generation of renewable energy. As of April, 37 states, plus Washington, D.C., have mandatory renewable portfolio standards (RPS) or state renewable energy goals, and thermal en-ergy is gaining some traction within these. Only two states, New Hampshire and Massachusetts, have a technology neutral T-REC provision in their energy mandates, taking as Niebling says the “full Monty” approach. Still, others are evaluat-ing its inclusion at some level, including Rhode Island, Maine, Vermont, New York, Colorado, New Mexico, Oregon, Wisconsin, Maryland and Indiana. Niebling hopes these efforts are getting states to think more holistically in how they im-plement their RPS programs. “Historically, they have focused on electricity, and New Hampshire and Massachusetts took the plunge with a rather novel concept, but it’s working and it’s helping the utilities and the states meet their renewable energy goals in a way that’s more comprehensive,” he says.

Another policy issue BTEC is seeking par-ity for is within the Bioenergy Program for Ad-vanced Biofuels, section 9005 of the 2014 Farm Bill. According to Niebling, modest incentive payments are given to producers of advanced biofuels, with the principal beneficiaries being manufacturers of liquid biofuels from advanced second-generation processes like cellulosic etha-nol and certain types of biodiesel. He says, USDA defined pellets as an advanced biofuel, but then a policy directive was added reducing the incen-tive to producers if their advanced biofuel makes heat and is in a solid form. “That one could be a real boon to pellet manufactures at a time when all over the country, at least in the domestic heat-ing sector, they are struggling,” Niebling says. “It’s one of these basic equity issues that we’ve been working very hard to get fixed.”

Definition DelayAs someone who has worked in the policy

realm for some time, Niebling says when it comes to policy and regulation, they can intertwine. Sometimes, a regulation that has gone awry needs a policy solution to get it right, and when recog-nizing the carbon beneficial attributes of biomass use for energy, the BTU Act and an inclusive fed-eral definition of biomass can serve as solutions. “This is an example of when the regulatory issue has become so mired in controversy that it really is necessary for the policy makers in Congress to step in and say this is what the policy is going to be and clear up the confusion and the lack of con-sensus,” Niebling explains.

Recognition in the tax code and biomass in-clusion in RPS programs demonstrate progress. Bob Cleaves, president of the Biomass Power As-sociation, says that every state with a mandatory RPS program recognizes biomass as a qualifying resource. Even so, the role of biomass under the Clean Power Plan remains unknown, as does the fate of the CPP itself, pending the upcoming fall election. The CPP has been held up in court fol-lowing a number of lawsuits filed in response to its release in October. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit announced in May that EPA’s CPP oral arguments originally scheduled for June 2 have been pushed back to Sept. 27. The case was to go before a three-judge panel, but will now instead go en banc, or before a full 11-judge bench. It is believed from both those in opposi-tion and support of the CPP that the new court date will speed up the case’s final resolution, as it is likely that the losing party would appeal for an en banc hearing anyway. While over half the states have challenged the CPP and ceased work on initial compliance steps—such as completing and submitting state implementation plans (SIP) that would have been due by September—others have stated they are still moving forward, and the EPA has stood firm on its stance that the CPP rules are legal and believes it will withstand chal-lenges. “From the folks I am talking to, a number of states are proceeding with the assumption that biomass will ultimately be a compliance option,” Rita says. “I think a number of pellet producers are watching developments closely.” He adds that for coal-fired utilities that are on the bubble, cofir-ing with biomass (including pellets) is an attractive compliance option. “That is why we’re pushing so hard legislatively to mandate that EPA recognize the carbon neutrality of forest-based biomass fu-els if certain conditions are met,” he says.


« REGULATION

Setting the StandardWhile policy work and incentive develop-

ment to promote thermal biomass installations, like pellet stoves and boilers, continues, and the role pellet fuel will have in SIP and RPS pro-grams remains unclear, the pellet industry has been busy promulgating fuel-quality manage-ment programs and working to comply with evolving regulations for residential wood heat-ers and PM emissions.

Last heating season resulted in lots of ex-tra inventory at year’s end, and many producers had to stop production early, due to no second buying from retailers. Chris Wiberg, lab direc-tor with Timber Products Inspection/Biomass Energy Lab, says this slow down led to extra time and a “pretty substantial” increase in the number of calls people were making to en-gage in the PFI Standards Program, perhaps, evidenced by four facilities becoming qualified just this spring, adding to the growing number of 15 pellet manufacturing companies, among them 24 plants. The PFI Standards Program now represents well over 1.5 million tons of annual fuel production—nearly half the total U.S. production of pellet fuels for domestic use. “We’re pleased to see so many fuel manufactur-ers focusing on the quality of their pellets and adopting the PFI standards to help ensure we make good, quality fuels that meet consumer’s expectations,” says Stephen Faehner, outgoing chairman of PFI and president and CEO of American Wood Fibers.

Development of an international fuel standard is also underway. Wiberg is chairman of the U.S. Technical Advisory Group for ISO Technical Committee 238, which is developing international standards for solid biofuels. EN-plus and PFI’s programs are similar in terms of what the plant has to do to fulfill program re-quirements and develop a quality management system, Wiberg says, adding there are many dif-ferences. Testing style is one difference that has proven challenging when developing an inter-national standard. PFI standards are based on the ASTM test methods, whereas ENplus has largely adopted ISO specifications, test meth-ods and definitions. Another big difference is ENplus audits annually, while the PFI program requires monthly audits.

The ISO standards are true international standards, including input from the U.S. and Canada, Wiberg says. The issue, though, is one country one vote. “The U.S. and Canada only qualify as two votes, where you can just count

up the number of European countries,” Wi-berg explains. “Since they were originally written in Europe and adopted for Europe, the number of changes we’ve been able to make have been relatively small in the original document.” He adds, the ISO standards are mostly published, with a few more set for release in the next few months. Both ENplus and CANplus are refer-encing them, but it’s still questionable whether the U.S. will adopt the standards. “Mainly be-cause they are still Eurocentric and a departure from the system currently in use within the U.S., which has been decades in the making,” Wiberg says. “In many ways, the ISO standards are bet-ter. They are much more thought out with how they define biomass, but then they also change the definition of our industry and that’s what people have a hard time doing.”

PFI’s Standard Program does not refer-ence ISO standards, but is referenced as a form of compliance, along with CANplus and EN-plus, in EPA’s NSPS for residential wood heaters revised last February. Besides some downtime at plants due to the unfavorable past heating season, the uptake in certified producers under PFI’s program, coming from Wiberg’s third-party auditor perspective, can be partially at-tributed to this regulation. “In our opinion, the publishing of the NSPS has increased people’s awareness and has resulted in a substantial in-crease in activity in an attempt to comply,” he says. Wiberg believes the bigger driver, however, is the retailers who are starting to request the mark on the bag. “It really is the inquiry by the big box store or hearth store that’s resulting in a substantial increase in activity.”

Faehner agrees that retailers are now start-ing to require it. “As that starts to happen, then I think it’s going to be like dominos, and I’d say that’s where it could pick up some momentum.”

Although the NSPS rule may serve as a positive force driving uptake in PFI’s program, the institute identified quite a few areas in the rule that needed to be addressed. “When the EPA’s NSPS first came out, it had all sorts of irregularities,” Wiberg says. Even so, the NSPS program is published and stove manufactures must comply. “Everybody who is making a pel-let stove had to update their owner’s manuals to specify which fuel(s) could be burned in the stove as well as warranty information associated with burning inappropriate fuels,” he says.

Faehner indicates many of these irregu-larities were due to “some confusing and chal-lenging language.” He says, in large part, the


REGULATION »

problems reside where PFI felt the EPA was overstepping its authority. PFI does not believe EPA has the authority under the Clean Air Act, which governs the NSPS rule, to set stan-dards for pellet fuel, and several requirements are problematic as they are not in line with the best practices known to the industry. These ar-eas include EPA limiting pellet diameters to a fairly narrow window; limiting ash content to 2 percent when PFI utility grade has a maximum of 6 percent; creating an inorganic fines limit when wood pellets are all natural; and including unseasoned wood in the Prohibited Fuel Types listing when many PFI members use green sawdust for feedstock every day. “We continue to convey that we support having clean air and clean fuels, but we have the PFI standards pro-gram that effectively controls fuel quality to help ensure those outcomes” Faehner says.

As a result of these discrepancies, PFI filed a petition for review with the District of Columbia Circuit Court in May 2015. The Hearth Patio & Barbecue Association as well as a masonry heater manufacturer have judicially challenged the rule too. According to Faehner, the EPA has been very focused on the CPP, which has taken an enormous amount of re-sources within the EPA and Department of Justice. “They have prioritized around us, and we keep working with them in good faith,” he says. “We’ve given them four extensions now that they’ve asked for and that the court has granted.”

John Crouch, PFI’s director of public af-fairs, says that the DOJ has asked for a couple of continuances with HPBA’s case as well, which they’ve agreed to. “Our expectation is that our judicial challenge, and presumingly PFI’s as well, will have some kind of resolution, if possible, before the CPP is briefed,” Crouch says.

Ultimately, Crouch believes that the rule will improve the use of residential biomass and eliminate the grey area pellet stoves were in, where many weren’t required to be certified un-der the original 1988 NSPS. Under today’s final rule, all pellet stoves will have to meet the same emissions limits as for woodstoves, in the same two-step process. One critical piece Crouch thinks will level the playing field is the inclusion of efficiency, which was never part of the origi-nal NSPS. There was a default efficiency, but EPA now requires that efficiency be measured when a product is certified and the higher heat-ing value reported. “There is no target for it yet, but it will be reported, and over time that will

start to help the industry, both pellet and non-pellet,” Crouch says. “Having this consistent in-formation is going to be helpful for consumers and I think will be helpful for residential pellet stoves as well.”

An area in the NSPS that HPBA considers inappropriate is that there is no transitional pe-riod to the 2020 emissions limit. “A pellet stove that, for instance, was certified at 2.1 grams an hour right now is fine, but on that date they bet-ter all be gone,” Crouch says. Step one for all stoves without current EPA certification sets a PM limit of 4.5 grams per hour of operation for catalytic and noncatalytic stoves. Five years after the effective date of the final rule (2020), step two has the limit of 2 grams per hour for all wood stoves and pellet stoves.

Another EPA regulation continuing to evolve since the ‘80s under the Clean Air Act is the PM 2.5 Standard, which describes particu-late matter that is 2.5 micrometers in diameter and smaller—one-thirtieth the diameter of a human hair. After the EPA establishes or revis-es an air quality standard, the agency follows a process set out in the CAA for designating areas as either attaining or not attaining the standard, based on air quality monitoring data and other factors. “The important thing is that any criteria for ambient air, whether it’s clean or dirty out-side air, the EPA is required to review that in the Clean Air Act and either reaffirm or change it,” Crouch says. “As the science advances, the tendency is for the target number (the defin-ing target for clean air) to get lower and low-er.” He believes this will be an ongoing effort as will change-out programs for wood stoves that have resulted from these emissions stan-dards. “There are approximately 9 million free-standing solid fuel stoves in the U.S. (these are the room heaters, not the furnaces or boilers), and of those approximately two-thirds are un-certified stoves yet to be changed out,” Crouch explains. “There is a lot of room to change out old wood stoves for pellet stoves and anything else cleaner.”

These policies and regulations only brush the surface of issues pellet producers may wish to keep an eye on and industry advocates deem worthy of a perennial battle.

Author: Katie FletcherAssociate Editor, Pellet Mill Magazine

701-738-4920 [email protected]


« International


Sweden’s Strong Suit

International »

Forssjö Pellets exemplifies the Swedish pellet industry, at one time the global leader in pellet production and consumption. STORY AND PHOTOS BY TIM PORTZ

Sweden’s per-capita consumption of wood pellets is more than 20 times that of the United States. If every American consumed as many wood pellets as every Swedish citizen does, pellet consumption in the U.S. would soar to over 60

million tons annually, instantaneously tripling the total global market. As recently as 2007, Sweden was the world’s largest producer and consumer of wood pellets, and tracing the growth of the wood pel-let industry in Sweden is an object lesson in how a combination of public policy and natural resources can be leveraged to completely reimagine and reengineer a country’s energy strategy.

Prior to the oil crisis of 1973, Sweden relied almost exclusively on fossil fuel to meet its energy needs. Nearly 90 percent of the country’s heating needs were met almost entirely by using heating oil. The trend continued through the overnight oil-price hikes in 1979, when the country made a decision to turn dramatically away from oil-derived heating inputs. Coal and woody biomass played nearly equal roles throughout the 1980s. Then, in 1991, Sweden introduced a tax on carbon dioxide emissions becoming one of the first countries in the world to do so. Since then, the use of coal, natural gas and heat-ing oil has fallen steadily, and today those three sources combined represent just over 10 percent of heat inputs, while woody biomass provides the vast majority of the remaining share.

Sweden is roughly the size of California, and nearly 60 percent of it is covered in dense stands of spruce and pine. Not surprisingly then, forestry and the forest products are a cornerstone of the Swed-ish economy generating over 10 percent of the country’s employ-ment and GDP. The widely distributed forest products sector provid-ed fertile ground for a wood-based bioenergy industry to take root,

FULLY INTEGRATED: The Forssjő sawmill and pellet production facility in central Sweden fully utilizes the pine and spruce logs it receives. Whole logs are received and all of the fiber is fully utilized. Bark and hog fuel provide the facility with vital process heat. Chips from the planer are sold for pulp and paper production and the sawdust becomes feedstock for the pellet mill.PHOTO: FORSSJÖ PELLETS


« International

(336) 891-0858 • vecoplanllc.com

and upon the introduction of the carbon dioxide tax, it grew rapidly. Today, Sweden boasts nearly 100 pellet production facilities capable of producing over 2 million tons an-nually. Actual production has held closer to 1.5 million tons per year and Sweden con-tinues to import pellet volumes to meet its annual consumption demand. Around half of the plants in Sweden are quite small, pro-ducers making a couple thousand tons per year. The remainder more closely resemble

the pellet facilities commonly found in the northeastern United States, with production volumes below 100,000 tons per year often collocated with other forest products manu-facturing sites.

Forssjö Pellets near Katrineholm is representative of many of pellet plants in Sweden that generate the bulk of the coun-try’s annual volume. The facility is a wholly owned subsidiary of Group Sandasa Timber AB and is collocated with Forssjö sawmill, a

mill with an annual output of nearly 80,000 cubic meters of sawn pine and spruce. The operation, overseen by the affable Per Ste-negard, prides itself on the full utilization of all of the material that comes into the facility.

“About 50 percent of a harvested tree’s biomass never leaves the forest,” Sten-egard says. “Our goal is to fully utilize the 50 percent that does come into our plant.” Drawing a cross section of a received log on a piece of paper, Stenegard explains how a round log is quickly and efficiently transformed into a more usable rectangular shape within the first four cuts. He explains that these off cuts become clean chips and are ultimately converted into pulp and pa-per. Each log is then measured and evalu-ated by a laser, and a computer identifies the combination of boards that will maxi-mize the log and generate the least amount of waste. As Stenegard talks, logs whisk by and a schematic cartoon of each log and its soon-to-be-yielded boards flash on a nearby computer terminal.

Outside of the cutting room, open-sid-ed sheds with conveyors running over their roofs slowly fill with perfect white wood chips. The waste streams are aggregated by type and Stenegard points out the clean chip bunker, a bunker for bark and at least two different bunkers for sawdust. The sawdust, generated when the log blanks are sawn into the dimensional products, is the raw mate-rial the pellet facility converts into pellets. “About 70 percent of the raw material we use in the pellet facility comes from our own sawmilling operation,” Stenegard says. “We do bring in some additional material and we work with our colleagues in nearby sawmills for the other 30 percent.”

As the bunkers fill, the material is moved to a storage yard, a vast paved sur-face at the facility’s northernmost end. The sawdust is segregated by species and aged before it is converted into wood pellets. “We’ve learned that aging the sawdust is an important step in our process,” Stenegard reports. Once inside, a proprietary blend of spruce and pine is introduced into one of Forssjö’s two Andritz pellet presses. Fin-

International »

ished product is stored in a large A-frame building in slowly growing, mammoth piles. The pellets that are not sold in bulk are bagged in 35 pound bags. The bags are lon-ger and thinner than the bags traditionally used in North America and Forssjö’s bags proudly carry the national colors of Sweden (blue and yellow) and read simply, “Svensk Trapellets” or “Swedish Wood Pellets.”

While the science of pellet produc-tion has changed little since Forssjö began operations in 1995, the business surround-ing servicing pellet customers has changed. “Customers are showing increasing interest in understanding the story of how our pel-lets are made, and how far the material that makes up our pellets has to travel,” he says.

Lately, Stenegard and his team concern themselves with driving efficiency into the storage and delivery side of their operation. To maximize the available trucking assets during the plant’s busiest months, Forssjö is increasingly managing their customer’s pellet inventory levels by utilizing automatic storage bin level detectors. These detectors alert the plant when the customer is able to receive a full truck load of pellets and re-duces the number of partial loads, or multi-stop deliveries, both of which are critical in December, January and February when deliveries are at their annual peak.

Stenegard’s pride in the sawmill and pel-let operation is immediately apparent. In this way, he is representative of Sweden’s broad-er wood bioenergy industry. The country is rich in forest resources and continues to leverage those resources to drive down the carbon intensity of their economy, working toward an ambitious goal of a 40 percent reduction in emissions from 1990 levels by 2020 and no net greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Goals like this are ambitious even by European standards. Still, considering Sweden’s size, its relatively low population, its rich forest resource and commitment to the total utilization of the materials it harvests from them, a bet against Sweden achieving these targets seems ill-advised.

Author: Tim PortzExecutive Editor, Pellet Mill Magazine

[email protected]


« Marketplace

For over 50 years, we have manufactured carbide spout anvils and other carbide tooling for whole-log wood

chippers. We understand how to attach tungsten carbide to steel, using silver brazing alloys, with no braze-joint

failure in high-impact environments.

1-800-647-8440sales@universalwearparts.comwww.universalwearparts.com

TungstenCarbide

BrazeJoint

TECHNOGENIA, THE LEADER IN HARDFACING

We can reduce the wear of numerous tools such as:

• Crushers• Knives• Repairs possible

• Pellet die• Extrusion screw• Cutters

Please do not hesitate to reach us:936-441-4770

[email protected]

BiomassMagazine.com More than 100,000 impressions each month

Contact a knowledgeable account manager today and discuss an advertising plan that fits your business and drives your revenue.(866)[email protected]

pellet mill magazine - july/august 2016

Documents