GAS-L: Shipping biomass

["Thomas Reed" <tombreed@home.com>]

Deal all:

I'm sure that Tom Miles could say this better than I can, but here goes.

In land shipping there is typically a road limit.  Some products are weight
limited - steel trucks are very low.

Some products are volume limited.  Chip trucks are as tall as allowed under
bridges.

Somewhere at a density of about 1-2 tons/m3 these two limitations meet.
That is what we would hope for in biomass densification.

I hope Tom Miles can tighten up these specs....

Yours truly,      TOM REED

tombreed@home.com; www.woodgas.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Weststeijn A" <A.Weststeijn@epz.nl>
To: "Ian Bywater" <bywateri@caverock.net.nz>; "Edward S. Lipinsky"
<edlipinsk@sprynet.com>; "Tom Reed" <tombreed@home.com>; "'= Jim Arcate'"
<arcate@msn.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 4:17 AM
Subject: RE: Shipping densified TW


> Gentlemen,
>
> It may sound a bit far out, this idea of shipping pre-prepared biomass
over
> long distances, however...
> (some of you I might have told this before)
>
> .....what actually IS already being DONE these days is shipping sawdust
wood
> pellets  (the small type) from the west coast of British Columbia through
> the Panama Canal all the way across the Atlantic to Sweden.
> Sweden....you say....that country known for its endless sea of trees?
> Yes, Sweden.
> And it pays for them.
> This is public knowledge, by the way.
>
> And you can bet that this did not go unnoticed in my country (you know, of
> the wooden shoes, the wind mills and the finger in the dike etc), either.
> No kidding.
>
> Years ago we already commissioned studies to investigate the potential and
> price level of shipping biomass overseas (blue water).
> Charcoal came out ahead on a transportation price per GigaJoule basis (the
> only thing a fuel buyer is interested in, really).
>
> From the steam coal trade it is known that the moment the fuel is in the
> bulk carrier, the actual distance is not so overriding anymore. An extra
> "sea day" is not adding that much. Price levels are seriously impacted by
> handling in the ports (both loading and unloading) as well as inland
> transportation (both feeding and delivering).
> The international oil and grain trades will give other examples.
> Perhaps the wool trade from Australia has examples as well.
> (not to forget the historic guyana fertilizer trade from Chile to Europe
> around Cape Horn, with windjammers, till very late in the 20th century,
due
> to the very low transportation prices involved)
>
> So, as far as the size and shape of compacted TW goes (for overseas
> delivery):
> perhaps the costs of port handling and inland transportation are as much
> (over even more) impacted by the fysical shape and density, than the
actual
> blue water transportation.
> And certain shapes and densities might certainly help in easier and
cheaper
> "collecting" TW from a multitude of smaller production facilities.
> Just a thought.
>
> I once did a study with people from the baltic countries where we were to
> use old, written off, junky seacontainers as cheap packaging. Loading
those
> standing them up on end (with the doors obviously pointing up) and
emptying
> by simply tipping them over.
> Just like coal railroad cars are sometimes turned over in one piece.
>
> Some "best situated ports" might be able to handle containers, but not
bulk.
> Handling bulk, by the way,  is not that cheap unless you have a steady
flow
> of material. Otherwise too many "down days per month" make the price per
ton
> skyrocket.
>
> My advice:
> look closely at the inland transportation and port handling costs in the
> total transportation and handling cost equation.
>
> best regards,
> Andries
>
> > ----------
> > Van: Jim Arcate[SMTP:arcate@msn.com]
> > Verzonden: dinsdag 30 oktober 2001 6:50
> > Aan: Ian Bywater; Andries Weststeijn (EPZ); Edward S. Lipinsky; Tom Reed
> > Onderwerp: Densified TW
> >
> > Hello my friends:
> >
> > My recent message to Peter Davies in Australia included:
> >
> > I wonder if conventional baling (e.g., as used for shipping dried paper
> > pulp) would work for TW.  For example, ship TW bales from N.Z. to
Holland
> > for cofiring with coal for power generation.
> >
> > Reply from Peter:
> >
> > Yes,  I believe it is possible.  Terry Dixon (SRI) told me that they had
> > worked out how to make "binderless' bagasse bales through pre-heating
> > prior to pressing.
> >
> > Peter said earlier:  SRI in Queensland successfully made "ribbon
> > bales"using the sugar cane presses with hot bagasse.  The ribbon bales
> > were 4' wide by 2" thick with a density of around 1000kg/m3.
> >
> > Note:  SRI = Sugar Research Institute  http://www.sri.org.au/home1.html
> >
> > Jim
> >
> > PS: I have known Peter since mid 1999 when he, Thomas Stubbing and I
> > worked on Transnational Technology's TW proposal to the New York State
> > Energy Research & Development Authority.
> >
> > Peter is doing a lot re. packaged firewood, torrefaction of sawdust
> > briquettes, etc. He is also interested in heat treated lumber as
> > ThermoWood.
> >
> > The following is from  "A National Approach to Firewood Collection and
Use
> > in Australia", bold by Jim Arcate.
> >   _____
> >
> > CASE STUDY: Managing native forest for firewood - Neikah, Colinton NSW
> >
> > Neikah is 2522 ha property at Colinton, 70 km south of Canberra, owned
by
> > a family partnership of three brothers - Richard, David and Peter
Davies.
> > Peter and his wife Kerry manage the native forest on the property. The
> > property has annual rainfall of 500-600 mm.
> >
> > In the past the property was primarily managed for grazing, which left a
> > legacy of noxious weeds, pests animals and soil erosion problems. Peter
> > and Kerry found that managing their native forest addressed many of
these
> > problems, improving environmental values of the property and
diversifying
> > their income.
> >
> > Today the property is largely timbered with regrowth dry sclerophyll
> > forest and open woodland.  The property is 60 per cent managed native
> > forest, 16 per cent agriculture with the remaining 24 per cent
maintained
> > especially for conservation.
> >
> > Firewood is the most important forest product from the property. Others
> > include round fencing timber, mulch and other sawn timber products.
Peter
> > and Kerry are also experimenting with producing compressed sawdust
> > briquettes.
> >
> > The property is well situated to take advantage of the market for
firewood
> > in Canberra. Peter and Kerry have also been able to take advantage of
the
> > ACT Government's firewood strategy that requires firewood merchants to
> > offer firewood sourced from a range of species to assist the transition
> > away from box, ironbark and other vulnerable woodland species.
> >
> > Based on research trials, Kerry and Peter believe the sustainable level
of
> > annual wood production to be in the order of 1.0-1.5 tonnes per ha
> > providing a total of 1500 to 2700 dry tonnes per annum from their 1500
ha
> > of managed native forest. At the wholesale firewood price in Canberra of
> > $90 per tonne, this constitutes return of $90-$135 per ha.
> >
> >   _____
> >
> >
> >
> >
>


-
Gasification List Archives:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/gasification/current/

Gasification List Moderator:
Tom Reed, Biomass Energy Foundation,  Reedtb2@cs.com
www.webpan.com/BEF
List-Post: <mailto:gasification@crest.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gasification-help@crest.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gasification-unsubscribe@crest.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gasification-subscribe@crest.org>

Sponsor the Gasification List: http://www.crest.org/discuss3.html
-
Other Gasification Events and Information:
http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/bioam/
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/gasref.shtml
http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/biomass-info/