Ed Lewis, Senior Deputy Director “Blending/Comparing Energy Produced By A Microturbine And Other Generation Devices At A Colorado Hog Farm “Blending/Comparing Energy Produced By A Microturbine And Other Generation Devices At A Colorado Hog Farm” “5 th Annual Microturbine Application Workshop” January 26, 2005 Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Office of Energy Management and Conservation Overview Serves people of Colorado through the demonstration and education of viable, real-world energy solutions Federally funded; No Colorado tax dollars Founded in 1977

Colorado Pork, LLC. Lamar, CO Started production in October of 1999 A typical breed-to-wean CAFO with approx 6,300 sows & 1,200 gilts Built to be both an energy- & water-efficient CAFO AD is the only one on a Colorado Farm. It is currently one of only around 40 in the US. Approx. another 70 are being built.

The biogas powers a Capstone 30 kW MT and/or a modified natural gas internal combustion, 80 kW reciprocating engine attached to a generator set A 65 kW refurbished Vestas E-15 wind turbine is currently blending wind-powered electricity with that produced from biogas A 55 kW STM Power Stirling engine is on site and in the process of being added to the biogas stream for demonstration purposes

STM Power Stirling Engine Capstone MT Caterpillar Recip, IC Engine Vestas Wind Turbine

66% methane (with approximate BTU value of 661 per cubic foot) 31% CO2 0.6% H2S (6,000ppm) Compares to 100ppm to 300ppm for human & cattle wastes Biogas primary constituents*: *Approximate figures

Electrical Consumption Recip engine and MT produce approx 30% of farm’s kWh Colorado Pork pays approx $3,500 for electricity/month Other local hog CAFOs of equivalent size pay between $10,000 - $11,000 per month

Additional Equipment Required For The MT General Filters: ~$400 Desiccant Dryers: ~$4,000 Refrigerated Dryer: ~$4,000 Fully-Automated Mixing Valve: ~$2,000 (*) Roots Meter (Gas input readings): ~ $3,000 (*) (*) Also required for digester or other electrical generating equipment

Additional Equipment Required For The MT (cont’d) Compressor:~$4,800 Heat Exchanger: ~$12,000 Totalizer:~$2,800 (*) Total system cost: ~ $60,000 ** ** Total demo cost: > $100,000

Powerhouse and Generation Equipment

MT Problems Treating high H2S content of gas (due largely to extremely high sulfate count in water) Types of treatment considered: At-the-well additive to bind up the sulfates (H2O analysis showed elemental sulfates to be 63% above Fed. Safe Drinking Water Act) Scrubbing the gas Drying and lowering dew point of the gas Overcoming corrosion of internal parts of equipment contacted by the gas “Original” equipment affected: Heat exchanger: (Added cost of original ~ $10,000) Compressor (Added cost of original ~ $5,000) “New” equipment used to replace original equipment required the use of 316 stainless steel on internal surfaces contacted by biogas.

MT Pluses When Compared To Recip Engine MT: Is easier to maintain and operate Has better emissions Is generally quieter (high-pitched whine at 97K rpm) Is somewhat more efficient For other than foul gas, has a much smaller footprint

Emissions Performance (lb/kWh) Power Command NOxCOCH4SO2THCNH3CO2 30kW Capstone24kW Not Tested3.61 Rated at20kW Not Tested kW15kW Not Tested3.9 45kW Above Range Caterpillar Rated at38kW0.006Above Range Above Range Not Tested kW30kW0.002Above Range Above Range Not Tested2.21 USEPA Environmental Technology Verification Test

CHP Heat and Power Performance Power Command Net PowerNetHeatThermalTotal Delivered (kW) PowerRecoveryEfficiencyCHP Efficiency(10³ BTU/hr)(%)System (%) Efficiency (%) 30kW Capstone24kW Rated at20kW kW15kW kW Caterpillar Rated at38kW kW30kW USEPA Environmental Verification Test (cont’d)

MT Minuses When Compared To Recip Engine MT: For foul gas, costs too much for required additional equipment, unless multiple units are ganged together Internal parts, particularly the fuel valve, can’t handle foul gas as readily Has far fewer technicians familiar with troubleshooting them or making repairs and technicians who can work on them are far removed from the facilities where the MTs are located Are generally much less familiar to the on-site operators, which makes the learning curve longer and steeper Likely will have a relatively lengthy maturation period before they reach acceptance and serviceability parity

Microturbine Technology is Very New to Agriculture For example, just three years ago, Colorado Pork MT was: 1st in the world to use biogas on a hog farm 1st in the Americas to use biogas in an active agricultural setting Have since been showing up in numerous agricultural settings around the US and many other parts of the world.

Other OEMC MT Projects University of Colorado at Boulder - Capstone 30 kW CHP Natural gas fired Heats Recreation Center Pool Powers the pool’s pumps With what appears to be enough additional heat and power, plans are to pick up the center’s other pool Used by engineering school students to learn about this technology Total system cost: ~$75,000

Other OEMC MT Projects: Idalex Coolerado Ingersoll Rand 70 kW Bowman Power 80 kW Colorado Dept. Of Labor & Employment Base load, CHP project Combines two MTs for direct comparisons Demonstrates effects of supplying chilled air to MTs’ intakes Expect to approach or reach full power requirement of facility

Plug Power GenCore 5kW UPS Bowman Power 80 kW Other OEMC MT Projects: Denver, Colorado, Police Station Base Load, CCHP Project Using MT Backup Fuel Cell Power For Critical Systems Switching Backup By Fuel Cell Between MT And Grid Total cost unknown (in design phase), expect it to be ~$150,000

For More Information Colorado Governor’s Office of Energy Management and Conservation 225 East 16 th Avenue, Suite 650 Denver, CO Website: Phone: (303) / (800) Fax: (303)