rgvsg renewable energy project
Post on 31-Dec-2015
58 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
RGVSG RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECT
Presentation prepared by
INTRODUCTION
RGVSG proposes to construct a $23.8 million Clean Energy and Clean Air Project
The Project will involve partial funding from the North American Development Bank (NADB)
Certification by the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) is required
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Project needs to result in a net reduction in the emission of air pollutants
The Upgraded Facility should utilize all of the bagasse for on-site energy production with excess energy available that can be sold
Improve efficiency for existing needs and for future expansion of Mill capacity
BACKGROUND
RGVSG Mill has been in existence since 1973 and employs 188 full-time personnel (approximately 565 personnel during the grinding season)
The RGVSG Cooperative has a membership of 127 sugar growers and is the only Cane Sugar Mill in the State of Texas
BACKGROUND
Project is located 2 ½ miles west of the City of Santa Rosa on Hwy 107
The RGVSG members actively farm up to 47,000 acres of sugar cane (3% of the arable land in RGV) yet provides almost 12% of the GDP in the RGV ($75M/Yr)
PROJECT HISTORY
RGVSG contracted with Schaffer & Associates in 1998 to conduct planning and design work for a two-phase expansion of the Mill
Schaffer & Associates were the original design engineers in 1972 when the Mill was constructed
Phase 1 includes Bagasse & Boiler Upgrade
Phase 2 includes Boiler House Upgrades
PROJECT HISTORY
C-K Associates were contracted by the RGVSG in 2000 to complete the air emissions report, computer modeling and permit applications for the Air Quality Permit
In 2002 RGVSG determined that due to market conditions and past performance, funding for the $23.8 million Project would be sought to implement the design of the Phase 1 Mill Expansion
PROJECT HISTORY
RGVSG contacted NADB to request partial funding under the new mandate program by NADB
Turner Collie & Braden Inc. (TC&B) was contracted by the RGVSG to coordinate and prepare the required Project Certification Documents for BECC approval
NADB contracted Pollutech International Limited to complete the technical review on behalf of the NADB
SUGAR MILL PROCESS
The proposed Mill Operation is 200 operating days based on 100% new boiler capacity and a maximum of 70% old boiler capacity
Plant was originally designed for 7,500 tcd (tons of cane per day) which has been upgraded to 10,000 tcd and will remain at this capacity for the Project
Potential to expand to 15,000 tcd with the implementation of Phase 2 Improvements in the future and change in US Quota (Farm Bill)
SUGAR MILL PROCESS
General Process of Operation includes…- receipt and weighing of cane at the mill
- washing of raw cane to remove soil- heavy duty shredding to prepare for milling- milling (7 mills in tandem) to remove 95% of sugar juice in cane- sugar juice limed and heated for contaminant removal- clarification of heated and limed juice- clarified juice to pre-heaters to produce concentrated syrup- concentration of syrup in vacuum pans to form crystalline sugar- batch centrifugation to separate sugar from liquor (molasses)- storage of crystalline sugar in the sugar warehouse
Receipt of Cane at Mill
Washing/Shredding of raw cane
Milling of Cane (7 mills in tandem)
Heating/Evaporation
Separation of Sugar/Molasses
Storage of Raw Sugar
Storage of Molasses
Bagasse Handling/Storage Area
PROCESS FLOW CHART
MASS BALANCE SUMMARY
NOTE: WATER MAKES UP THE REMAINING 48% LOST TO PROCESS & EVAPORATION
Component Percent of Cane
5 Year Average (%)
Production Data
(tons/year)
Raw Cane 100 1,600,000
Sugar 9.85 157,571
Molasses 3.7 59,283
Bagasse 30 480,296
Filter Mud 6.1 97,642
Cane Wash Sand 1.2 19,192
Ash 1.36 21,823
Air Emissions 0.03 471
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project includes…- conversion of all bagasse conveyors to fully automated belt conveyors
- expansion and upgrade of the bagasse storage building
- conversion of the boiler building to handle the modified bagasse conveyor system
- installation of a new high efficiency boiler
- new condensate storage tank
- rebuilt 6,000 KW turbine generator
New Bagasse Handling System
Necessary to remove limitations on the delivery of the primary fuel source for the boilers
Significantly reduce or eliminate the need and associated costs of the front end loaders and operators
New Boiler
The addition of a new boiler to increase steam capacity by 300,000 lbs/hr for total capacity of 800,000 lbs/hr (60% increase)
A wet scrubber and mechanical dust collector to reduce air emissions
Since the Plant only needs 540,000 lbs/hr to operate, existing boilers are operating at reduced capacity (reduced air emissions from both existing and new boilers)
TURBINE GENERATOR
New Boiler will be coupled with a Topping Steam Turbine (already purchased) and a new 6000 KW Turbine Generator
Will bring installed power to 11,000 KW
Will enable the Plant to produce energy for operation and export (sell) excess energy
PROJECT BENEFITS
Reduction in use of fossil fuels through the implementation of a renewable energy source through production of 11 MW leaving 5 MW for sale
Eliminates the need for purchase of 1.7 MW of outside energy that will be available for use by others
A 42% reduction in total mass of air pollutants
Increased level of service to RGVSG members
PROJECT COSTS
Source: NADB Pollutech Report
Note: Payback does not show any cost recovery from the sale of power
Process Upgrade
(10,000 tcd)
Capital Cost Annual Cost Savings
Payback Period
(years)
Bagasse Handling $6,442,532 $247,478 26.0
Boiler Upgrades
And Turbine Generator $17,384,405 $1,853,120 9.4
Total Upgrade $23,826,937 $2,100,598 11.3
PLANT POWER BALANCE
Year Natural Gas Purchased
Electricity Purchased
Purchased
MW
Average Day
Total Demand
MW
Bagasse Power
MW
Grid Power
- Sale
+ Purchase
1998 Mft3 160,332
$438,278
KW 6,942,600
$423,731
2,042 hrs
3.40 MW
239,211 tby
0.12 MW +3.40 MW
1999 Mft3 228,638
$536,114
KW 8,354,400
$486,289
2,939 hrs
2.85 MW
346,033 tby
0.12 MW +2.85 MW
2000 Mft3 268,171
$701,962
KW 8,841,600
$550,183
2,485 hrs
3.56 MW
316,836 tby
0.13 MW +3.56 MW
2001 Mft3 324,482
$2,005,955
KW 17,906,400
$1,363,775
4,076 hrs
3.80 MW
457,573 tby
0.13 MW +3.80 MW
2002 Mft3 23,210
$52,723
KW 10,661,592
$697,058
3,936 hrs
2.71 MW
457,573 tby
0.14 MW +2.71 MW
Typical Day 6 MW 4.3 MW +1.7 MW
Future KW 0
$0
3,600 hrs
0 MW 6 MW 11 MW - 5 MW
PLANT POWER SUMMARY
Note: based on 24/hr day, 150 days per year (3,600 hours/year)
Source: NADB Pollutech Report, January 2003
Operating Capacity Supply
(kw/hr)
Demand
(kw/hr)
Deficit (-)
Excess (+)
(kw/hr)
Power Purchased ($0.051/kw)
Power Sold
($0.025/kw)
Current production (10,000 tcd)
11,000 6,000 +5,000 $450,000
Bonus for reduce grid draw
+1,700 $312,120
AIR QUALITY
The RGVSG expect to receive the draft permit from the TCEQ for the Mill Operations – issuance of final permit within 60 days after public comment period (Consolidated Permit No. 114)
The RGVSG is defined as a “major stationary source” under the Federal Clean Air Act
The RGVSG also has a Cane Burning Permit
AIR QUALITY
RGVSG is permitted for…- 2,490.4 tpy CO
- 0.54 tpy SO2
- 233.2 tpy Nox
- 222.08 tpy CO- 443.88 tpy VOC
As a result, the RGVSG Mill is subject to PSD Regulations (Prevention of Significant Deterioration) thus must conduct analysis of BACT
AIR QUALITY
The proposed air quality permit limits the operation of the existing boilers at 70% capacity and the new boiler at 100% capacity (note power required for 10,000 tcd results in 29% capacity for old boilers)
The reduction in total air emissions for the upgraded facility results from the reduced operation of the existing boilers and increased efficiency of the new boiler
PSD EVALUATION
Growth Analysis – No additional air emissions from off-site growth Air Quality Impact Analysis – modeling analysis adequately
evaluates the total ground level concentrations of NO2 from improvements
Soils/Vegetation Analysis – the projected NO2 concentrations are below the standards and significant level thus no adverse impact
Visibility Impairment Analysis – plant is located in sparsely populated area with no scenic vistas or airports thus no impairment
Area Impacts – the plant is located 1,110 km from the closest Class 1 Area (Big Bend) thus no impact (>100 km separation)
PROJECTED EMISSIONS
1 – Actual reported emissions based on stack testing of October 20012 – Projections from Pollutech Analysis – Boilers #1 to # 4 at 34%, new Boiler at 90%
Current Emission
Rate (tpy)1
Old Boilers at 34% Cap
(tpy)
New Boiler at 90% Cap
(tpy)
Total Plant Emissions2
Emissions Change
(tpy)
Emissions Change
(%)
CO 2458 1091 229 1320 -1138 -46.3
SOx 2.1 0.9 0.01 0.91 -1.2 -55.3
Nox 482 214 225 439 -43 -9.0
PM10 385 171 27 198 -187 -48.6
VOC 157 70 9 79 -78 -50.0
Total 3484 1547 489 2036 -1448 -41.6
CROP BURNING
In addition to the Air Quality Permit for the Plant, the RGVSG also has a Crop Burning Permit under Order 94-35
The cane burning is authorized only until such time that an alternative method of harvesting becomes technologically practicable and economically reasonable and which would not require outdoor cane burning
CROP BURNING
Permit was developed through input of the “Sugarcane Burning Task Force” which included the Sierra Club
There are a number of conditions that must be met that include…- RGVSG shall report each year on program to stimulate development of harvesting methods that eliminate outdoor burning- Submission of a comprehensive map of burn areas prior to harvesting- A series of preharvest burning conditions that limits burns to specific times and conditions and maximum number of acres per day in
each quadrant (200 acres)- RGVSG was required to monitor cane burn for a 1 year period after
permit was issued in 1994 by an environmental firm for PM10 emissions before, during and after burns to set the baseline.
CROP BURNING
RGVSG is continuing to evaluate alternative technologies to cane burning at this time
This past year the RGVSG reported that almost 30% of the cane was “green harvested” and that they project this to increase in the future
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
TC&B has provided an environmental assessment of the project in support of the Step 2 Report
These findings are summarized below:- Air Quality impacts are significantly reduced - Project promotes the use of renewable energy sources- Project reduces reliance on fossil fuels- There are no water/wastewater issues, Plant is effectively
Zero Discharge although a Discharge Permit is in effect
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
RGVSG has a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan with proactive monitoring
Cumulative Impacts are positive to the environment
Positive socioeconomic impact through short-term impacts due to construction and long-term due to increased sustainability and efficiency
RGVSG is proactive towards environment as evidenced by P2 Site Assistance Visit/Small Business Compliance Audit/TCEQ Pilot EMS Program
BECC CRITERIA
BECC CRITERIA COMPLIANCE
Alternative Analysis
International Treaties and Agreements
Human Health and Environment
Compliance with State and Federal Regulations
Environmental Impact Assessment
Technical Feasibility
Appropriate Technology
Operation and Maintenance Plan
Design Regulations and Standards
Financial Feasibility
Community Participation Plan
PROJECT STATUS
Currently, the design has been completed for the Phase 1 and Phase 2 Expansions with some portions of Phase 1 already being bid with analysis of contractor bids
RGVSG is seeking certification approval by the BECC in March 2003
The Step 2 Report and Technical Evaluation by NADB will be completed by February 3, 2003
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Project approval on March 27, 2003
Completion of PPA and Loan Closings in late 2003/early 2004
Completion of Bagasse Handling Facilities in 2004
Completion of Boiler/Generator Facilities by April 2005 (12 months lag time from order to delivery of boiler)
PUBLIC COMMENT
Remember to sign the attendance log and survey If you do not wish to speak, written comments may be
submitted to:
Rio Grande Valley Sugar Growers, Inc.
P.O. Box 459
Santa Rosa, Texas 78593
Attention: Jack Nelson, President Comments will be accepted up to February 3, 2003
top related