groups from Finland, Sweden, and Canada that provide project development services. As more experience is gained in putting together bioen- ergy projects, it makes sense to take advantage of that knowledge and avoid past mistakes. Several speakers stressed the importance of us- ing proven equipment and technology to avoid failures and develop good projects as success- ful demonstrations. “The new stuff will be de- veloped later,” says Jouko Parviainen of Wenet (Wood Energy Network), Finland. An example of a highly successful project in eastern Finland was presented by Dominik Röser of Metla (Finnish Forest Research Insti- tute). The Eno Energy Co-op uses local bio- mass resources to provide district heating for the municipality. According to Metla, about 52% of forest in Finland is privately owned and supplies 80–90% of wood used by the forest industry. After several years of planning, the co-op began in 1999 with just 12 members. It now owns two and operates three combustion plants supplying district heating and boasts 51 members. It is one of the most visited projects in the European Union as a successful model of district heating, says Röser. The project result- ed in cost savings by replacing more expensive oil heating and created jobs in the community. A Swedish example of efficient biomass use was provided by Christofer Rhén of Green- Exergy, which designs and commissions com- bined heat, power, and pellet (CHPP) plants. Two reference plants have been producing CHPP in Sweden since 1996 and 2008, respec- tively. Adding pellet production to combined heat and power (CHP) results in greater effi- ciencies of energy use, even with wet biomass, says Rhén. He estimates efficiencies at 35% for electricity alone, 88% for CHP, and up to 98% for CHPP. Up-and-coming showcase technologies and projects provide examples of where the bioenergy industry can go, but unless a person is indepen- dently wealthy, capital investment and financ- ing are a second key consideration. A show of hands elicited by Reg Renner of Atticus Financial indicated that various participants were actively seeking financing for equipment and other costs. However, a second show of hands, or rather of no hands, revealed the absence of people looking to finance bioenergy projects. “Preparing a project to apply for financing is like training for the Olympics,” says Renner. Focus, a coach and team, equipment, timelines, and preparation aren’t just for world-class ath- letes, he says. They can go a long way towards showing a potential financier that the project can be successful and profitable. “You must prepare to approach an inves- tor like you’d prepare for a job interview,” says Corey Keith of Keith & Associates. “Make sure you do your homework.” He emphasises that a clear, simple, targeted approach is best and that potential investors will want to know that worst-case scenarios can be addressed success- fully. A realistic valuation of the enterprise is critical. Keith notes that most applicants on the Canadian television show Dragon’ s Den fail to hook an investor because they value their com- pany at way more than it’s worth. There’s enough biomass available in Canada to support many more projects, be they wood pellet plants, biorefineries, community heat and power, or industrial CHPP. The cost of ac- cessibility is the limitation. In Europe, people are willing to pay more for wood energy be- cause they value it as more environmentally responsible than fossil energy, says Röser. Bio- mass and bioenergy must also become more valuable in Canada to support the domestic industry’s expansion. • 24 CanadianBIOMASS NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2009
Canadian Biomass November/December 2009: Page 24
