applying for funding to support the proj-ect’s construction. The aim is to market torrefied pellets in Canada for co-firing in coal-fired power plants, and then grow the market, says Murray. Next-generation cellulosic ethanol technologies are also advancing towards commercial demonstration, says Gordon Q u a i a t t i n i , p re s i d e n t o f t h e C a n a d i a n Renewable Fuels Association. “We’ve had a number of positive developments,” he notes. For example, Quebec-based Enerkem and Ontario-based Greenfield Ethanol’s joint waste-to-ethanol project is now under construction in Edmonton, Alberta. It will be the first full commercial-ization scale-up of Enerkem’s technology, which involves gasification of the feed-s t o c k a n d re a c t i o n o f t h e re s u l t i n g s y n g a s with catalysts to produce ethanol or other chemicals. The technology platform “will provide opportunity for forestry residue as w e l l a s a g r i c u l t u re re s i d u e t o b e t h e f e e d -stock,” says Quaiattini. Other cellulosic ethanol technologies such as those based on fermentation, how-ever, will likely remain most economical with agricultural biomass, suggests Rob-erts. It’s more cost effective to modify grain ethanol plants to include a cellulosic com-ponent from agricultural residues because o f s h a re d i n f r a s t r u c t u re a n d f e e d s t o c k o p -portunities. “Cellulosic ethanol may be one of a series of products that we produce out of a biorefinery, but I don’t expect us to have pure production facilities that just do cellulosic ethanol from woody biomass,” he says. Finally, although popular in Scandina-via and elsewhere in Europe, small-scale community heat and combined heat and power projects have received only a little attention in Canada. However, Bradley expects to see several community proj-ects start in Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia in 2011, which would help to showcase the technology. Visits to Scandi-navia and Europe led by Canbio have al-lowed participants to scope out technolo-gy and bring back ideas for future projects, he says. policy pros & cons Without an overriding impetus for bioen-ergy, however, its uptake in Canada will lag. “We haven’t got a national energy policy, we haven’t got a national carbon policy, we don’t know where the federal gov-er nment’s going to go on climate change re g u l a t i o n s . S o t h e p r i c i n g o f c a r b o n , t h e economic advantage of moving away from fossil fuels, is all basically speculation on (future) gover nment policy. That’s a huge stumbling block,” says Lazar. R o b e r t s a g re e s : “ A b i g i m p e d i m e n t i s the lack of clarity, especially at the na-tional level, and I would say outside of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , i n t h e re g u l a t o r y t re a t -ment and pricing of carbon.” There’s no telling when this problem might be re m e d i e d , a s t h e c u r re n t C a n a d i a n g o v e r n -ment seems content to wait and follow the United States’ lead. P e rh a p s t h e o n l y b r i g h t s p o t o n t h e b l e a k n a t i o n a l e n e rg y p o l i c y l a n d s c a p e h a s b e e n t h e i n t ro d u c t i o n o f a n a t i o n a l r e -newable fuel mandate for blending etha-nol or biodiesel in transportation fuels, a p o l i c y t h a t “ b u i l d s o n a n u m b e r o f p ro -v i n c i a l s t a n d a rd s t h a t h a v e b e e n i n e ff e c t for some time,” says Quaiattini. “With the m a n d a t e s c o m i n g i n t o e ff e c t — b o t h t h e 5% ethanol (on December 15, 2010) and t h e n t h e 2 % re n e w a b l e d i e s e l m a n d a t e i n 2 0 1 1 — t h a t p ro v i d e s t h e r e g u l a t o r y p l a t -f o r m t h ro u g h w h i c h c o m p a n i e s c a n k n o w t h a t t h e C a n a d i a n m a r k e t i s g o i n g t o re -q u i re t h i s f u e l . T h e y c a n m a k e i n v e s t m e n t decisions based on that certainty,” he says. “We won’t have next-generation renew-able fuels in Canada if we don’t build a solid foundation based on first-generation technology and first-generation feed-s t o c k . ” Q u a i a t t i n i a l s o s t re s s e s i t w i l l b e c r i t i c a l t o e n s u re t h a t f u t u re re n e w a b l e f u -els mandates include specific cellulosic or n e x t -g e n e r a t i o n re q u i re m e n t s . Elsewhere in energy policy, it has been up to individual provinces to step up and fill the void, and there have been some no-table advances. For example, a few prov-inces have introduced feed-in tariffs for renewable energy, and British Columbia has called specifically for power from biomass. However, incentives for combined heat and power have not yet been introduced, notes Bradley, which would be a more efficient use of biomass than power alone and could give it an edge over other renewables. Changes to boiler regulations in Brit-ish Columbia have also increased oppor-tunities for bioenergy. The requirement for small power projects to have a steam engineer on site at all times has been cost-prohibitive for some, even though newer technology provides remote moni-19th European Biomass Conference and Exhibition From Research to Industry and Markets ICC Berlin International Congress Center Berlin Germany Conference 6-10 June 2011 Exhibition 6-9 June 2011 Abstracts to be submitted by 31 January 2011 www.conference-biomass.com Canadian BIOMASS adv_54x254mm.indd 1 15 18/01/2011 10.15.58
Canadian Biomass January/February 2011: Page 15
