by Claire Cowan

Exploring the opportunities and challenges of using agricultural residue

TALK ABOUT BIOMASS opportunities for Ontario producers is mounting as the regulation that will end the use of coal in the province’s power plants looms.

By the end of 2014, Ontario’s four coal-fired power plants will need to find a new purpose and some say that biomass could be their new lease on life.

Ontario Power Generation (OPG) is currently exploring the feasibility of replacing the coal it currently burns for energy at the Atikokan, Nanticoke, Lambton and Thunder Bay power plants with forest and agricultural based biomass.

Research documents that it is possible to burn agricultural residue such as corn stover and wheat shorts, to create energy. Through a Request for Expressions of Interest exercise and testing at all four facilities, OPG is trying to determine whether or not biomass could extend the life of their power plants.

“We have learned from the European experience, where co-firing biomass with coal has been successful for a number of years. But with the December 31, 2014 mandate, we started to look at fueling these plants with 100 percent biomass,” says Bob Osborne, Director of Public Affairs in OPG’s Fossil Fuels Division.

COAL OR BIOMASS: WHICH FUEL IS BETTER?
The government mandate to end the burning of coal in Ontario sprung from serious environmental and health concerns associated with the fossil fuel. According to the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario, the province’s independent environmental watchdog as appointed by the Legislative Assembly, burning coal at power plants is a major contributor to acid rain, smog, other harmful environmental emissions and adverse human health effects such as respiratory illnesses.

Biomass, on the other hand, is considered a carbon neutral alternative to coal. Agricultural residue and forest products are considered neutral because they absorb as much greenhouse gases (GHG) while they are growing as they emit during combustion.

Although agricultural residue may be carbon neutral, OPG does not expect to produce as much energy as it used to by burning coal.

“We are not looking for a one-to-one change over from coal to biomass,” explains Ted Gruetzner, Manager of Media Relations for OPG. They do not expect to produce as much energy with biomass as with coal.

“Last year, the coal-fired power plants produced about 23 terawatt-hours of electricity, 14 percent of Ontario’s electricity consumption. With biomass, we expect to produce about two to three terawatt-hours,” says Gruetzner.

The rest of the energy lost from eliminating coal would be made up with other renewable power sources such as wind, solar and hydroelectricity.

But biomass could still play an important role in Ontario’s power generation capabilities. Although OPG does not expect it to produce as much energy as coal once did, its ability to be produced on an as-needed basis gives it an advantage that other renewable options lack. Biomass also has the added advantage of utilizing coal-fired power plants that have already been built and paid for by Ontario taxpayers.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR ONTARIO PRODUCERS
Using biomass for energy in Ontario could potentially create a new market for Ontario producers. “OPG wants two to three million metric tonnes of dried pelletized biomass. It’s a massive market opportunity,” Gord Surgeoner told Ontario corn, wheat, soybean and coloured bean growers at their joint conference in March.

However, Surgeoner, President of Ontario Agri-Food Technologies, also warns that there is a long way to go before agriculture could fulfill OPG’s needs. “Somewhere in between we need the conversion plants. To me, that’s one of the main things we need for the next generation of agriculture, we need infrastructure.”

In order for agricultural residue to be burned at any of the four coal-fired power plants, it needs to be condensed into pellet-form. Osborne says that, “in terms of the development of agricultural pellets, OPG is looking to the expertise in the agricultural sector. We recognize that there is great potential out there and we look forward to working with people to make this happen.”

AGRONOMIC CHALLENGES
In addition to infrastructure challenges, there are also concerns about removing agricultural residue from the field. Agricultural residue is not a waste product. Although corn residue currently has little to no market value, leaving residue in the field helps build organic matter and maintain soil structure and fertility. Taking too much residue from the field may have adverse effects on soil health.

“Currently in Ontario, we have very little research on how much residue can be removed from the field while still maintaining long-term productivity of the land. Those levels depend on a lot of different variables like soil type, rotation, and tillage systems,” says Crosby Devitt, Manager of Research and Innovation at the OCPA.

However, due to increasing opportunities for biomass in Ontario, researchers are starting to look into the implications and opportunities for producers.

“There is a lot of interest in figuring out how producers could benefit from burning biomass in Ontario’s power generating plants,” continues Devitt. “We have been talking with researchers from OMAFRA and the University of Guelph to get the ball rolling on finding answers to a lot of the current unknowns.”