Value proposition for fuel switching in Lennox and Addington

From MoxyWiki

Contents 1 Value Proposition 2 Context 3 Feedstock 4 Transformations 5 Target Markets 6 Drivers 7 Projects Operational as at 2010 8 Risks 9 Scale 10 Costs 11 References

Value Proposition

The value proposition for fuel switching in Lennox and Addington County in Ontario is one of the case studies to be discussed at the Roundtable Discussion on Attracting Investment in Low Carbon Socioeconomic Development in Kingston, Ontario on 30 October 2010. The problem at hand is to establish if their is a viable business case for Fuel switching in Lennox and Addington.

Context

A new school at Greater Napanee is being planned and it is proposed to use renewable feedstock as fuel to heat the school to support regional self sufficiency.

Feedstock

Examples of potential feedstock are switchgrass; forestry residues; wood pellets and agricultural residue.

Transformations

Options for transformation of fuel include boilers. Two scenarios for switchgrass pellet mills are analysed, one producing a pellet similar to waste wood chips and one a pellet similar wood pellets.

Quantitative consideration is given for a small scale low carbon project and a large scale low carbon project.

Target Markets

A range of potential target markets is covered, including residential Space heating; Institutional, Commercial and Industrial and large scale industrial, such as Lafarge. A specific local buy back opportunity is also included.

Drivers

The drivers for this value proposition range from rural revitalisation to low carbon economy. They focus on sustainability - from corporate, industrial and community perspectives. Economic feasibility and incentives as well as energy costs and building efficiency all impact here, as well as the regional influence of and focus on creative industries and also land capability for agriculture. Community connections affect the influence of all drivers.

Projects Operational as at 2010

Examples of small scale biomass heating projects that are currently operational are given, as is an example of project funding structure.

Risks

The particular challenge of attracting funding without quantitative benefits relating to the ecosystem and social system is apparent. Research on effectiveness of government incentive alternatives is relevant here.

Scale

space heating with respect to energy supply data, energy use and number of residential buildings is considered, as are IC&I and large scale industrial. Energy intensity is relevant to scale.

Costs

Fossil fuel and bioenergy feedstock costs are compared.

References