NOTIFICATION: The Technology Channels will be discontinued on July 31.
Click here to download complimentary copies of Fastmarkets RISI’s pulp and paper newsletters.

 

PPI

BRUSSELS, Jan. 14, 2013 (RISI) -Energy has historically been a major component of an integrated pulp and paper mill's overall operating cost structure. As energy costs have rapidly escalated over the last five years, how well a mill positions itself to manage this spend can be a major determinant in its long-term viability.Click here to read Part I.

Process benefits: Burnt toast

Once the Nalco team has developed a comprehensive understanding of the utilities area through thermodynamic modeling and the benchmarking exercise has been completed, attention then shifts towards the mill's pulping and papermaking processes.

A team comprised of Nalco process experts and mill staff utilize this information to develop hypotheses regarding the utilities area and how any changes within the utilities might impact the process area. Often the process benefit of a change initiated in the utility area can be much greater than the energy benefit.

Conversely, the Nalco team is able to review and assess the process area against their internal benchmarks and field experience from other mill operations and suggest changes to improve the process area. The energy impact is then calculated using the TM. An example of this approach is discussed later in this paper.

In one EO project an analysis of the liquor cycle indicated significant opportunities. For a karft pulp mill, the concentrated black liquor represents a large and inexpensive energy source. The organic portion of black liquor is combustible and provides energy to produce steam in the recovery boiler, which in turn helps power the mill. The inorganic portion is noncombustible and represents the pulping chemicals that the mill recovers to recycle as pulping liquor. The higher the organic proportion, the higher the heating value of the black liquor fuel. The data analysis found that the higher heating value (HHV) averaged 5,852 BTU/lb. When compared with other similar mill operations it was noted that an HHV of 6,000 BTU/lb should be a conservative target. There are two main reasons for this reduction in thermal capacity of the returning black liquor. The first is that the recovery furnace is not reducing the sulfur as efficiently as it should be. The result is that a higher proportion of inert sodium sulfate is recirculating with the liquor, Fig. 4.

Figure 4 - Liquor cycle: Lower recovery furnace reduction efficiency leads to increased Na2SO4 or deadload in the returning liquor

This slight depression and liquor heating value means that other purchased fuels must be used to provide the mill's thermal demands for production requirements. This has the modest financial impact of reducing the amount of wood fuel purchased in the summer months but has a much more dramatic impact on natural gas consumption in the winter months, Table 1.

Table 1 - The purchased fuel impact of a depressed liquor heating value

Further liquor cycle process analysis indicated that the causticizing efficiency was 4- 6% below industry benchmarks, Fig. 5. This is expressed as sodium carbonate which is part of the inorganic smelt of the recovery furnace not being converted to working sodium hydroxide needed for pulping. As with the sulfur situation described earlier, inert sodium carbonate remains in the white liquor supply in the pulping area and the recovery furnace and is not helpful to either.

The presence of the sodium carbonate deadload not only depresses the HHV of the black liquor but also combines with sodium sulfate to form burkeite scale in the evaporators.

Scale formation in the evaporators hampers their ability to produce high solids black liquor for combustion in the recovery boiler. Liquor moisture content is the single largest factor of the many factors influencing recovery boiler efficiency. In this particular case, it was determined that existing liquor solids averaged 67.5% solids as compared with an industry benchmark of 72%.

The projected financial impact of these identified process improvements was in excess of $3,500,000 per year.

Figure 5 - Liquor cycle: Lower causticizing efficiency leads to increased Na2CO3 or deadload in the returning liquor which depresses the black liquor HHV

Conclusions

Optimizing an integrated pulp and paper mill's energy costs is a complex endeavor requiring a multitude of technical skills from a variety of disciplines. Multiple projects have illustrated how the Nalco EO approach serves to complement both internal mill investigations and external conventional energy firm's management efforts. It is also clear that although a very similar protocol to determining energy cost-reduction is used, the strategies and the solutions that emerge are vastly different for each mill. PPI

Pulp & Paper Internationalis FREE to qualified subscribers.Click hereto find out more.

Managing the overlap - Part II

Posted in: Bio-Insight 01/13/2013 - 21:22

BRUSSELS, Jan. 14, 2013 (RISI) -Energy has historically been a major component of an integrated pulp and paper mill's overall operating cost structure. As energy costs have rapidly escalated over the last five years, how well a mill positions itself to manage this spend can be a major determinant in its long-term viability.Click here to read Part I.

Process benefits: Burnt toast

Once the Nalco team has developed a comprehensive understanding of the utilities area through thermodynamic modeling and the benchmarking exercise has been completed, attention then shifts towards the mill's pulping and papermaking processes.

A team comprised of Nalco process experts and mill staff utilize this information to develop hypotheses regarding the utilities area and how any changes within the utilities might impact the process area. Often the process benefit of a change initiated in the utility area can be much greater than the energy benefit.

Conversely, the Nalco team is able to review and assess the process area against their internal benchmarks and field experience from other mill operations and suggest changes to improve the process area. The energy impact is then calculated using the TM. An example of this approach is discussed later in this paper.

In one EO project an analysis of the liquor cycle indicated significant opportunities. For a karft pulp mill, the concentrated black liquor represents a large and inexpensive energy source. The organic portion of black liquor is combustible and provides energy to produce steam in the recovery boiler, which in turn helps power the mill. The inorganic portion is noncombustible and represents the pulping chemicals that the mill recovers to recycle as pulping liquor. The higher the organic proportion, the higher the heating value of the black liquor fuel. The data analysis found that the higher heating value (HHV) averaged 5,852 BTU/lb. When compared with other similar mill operations it was noted that an HHV of 6,000 BTU/lb should be a conservative target. There are two main reasons for this reduction in thermal capacity of the returning black liquor. The first is that the recovery furnace is not reducing the sulfur as efficiently as it should be. The result is that a higher proportion of inert sodium sulfate is recirculating with the liquor, Fig. 4.

Figure 4 - Liquor cycle: Lower recovery furnace reduction efficiency leads to increased Na2SO4 or deadload in the returning liquor

This slight depression and liquor heating value means that other purchased fuels must be used to provide the mill's thermal demands for production requirements. This has the modest financial impact of reducing the amount of wood fuel purchased in the summer months but has a much more dramatic impact on natural gas consumption in the winter months, Table 1.

Table 1 - The purchased fuel impact of a depressed liquor heating value

Further liquor cycle process analysis indicated that the causticizing efficiency was 4- 6% below industry benchmarks, Fig. 5. This is expressed as sodium carbonate which is part of the inorganic smelt of the recovery furnace not being converted to working sodium hydroxide needed for pulping. As with the sulfur situation described earlier, inert sodium carbonate remains in the white liquor supply in the pulping area and the recovery furnace and is not helpful to either.

The presence of the sodium carbonate deadload not only depresses the HHV of the black liquor but also combines with sodium sulfate to form burkeite scale in the evaporators.

Scale formation in the evaporators hampers their ability to produce high solids black liquor for combustion in the recovery boiler. Liquor moisture content is the single largest factor of the many factors influencing recovery boiler efficiency. In this particular case, it was determined that existing liquor solids averaged 67.5% solids as compared with an industry benchmark of 72%.

The projected financial impact of these identified process improvements was in excess of $3,500,000 per year.

Figure 5 - Liquor cycle: Lower causticizing efficiency leads to increased Na2CO3 or deadload in the returning liquor which depresses the black liquor HHV

Conclusions

Optimizing an integrated pulp and paper mill's energy costs is a complex endeavor requiring a multitude of technical skills from a variety of disciplines. Multiple projects have illustrated how the Nalco EO approach serves to complement both internal mill investigations and external conventional energy firm's management efforts. It is also clear that although a very similar protocol to determining energy cost-reduction is used, the strategies and the solutions that emerge are vastly different for each mill. PPI

Pulp & Paper Internationalis FREE to qualified subscribers.Click hereto find out more.

Read more

BRUSSELS, Jan. 7, 2013 (RISI) -The elusive goal of a refinery with biomass as a feedstock has moved a step closer to reality, thanks to technology developed by the Gas Technology Institute (GTI) of Des Plaines, IL,and Houston-based Catalytic Research Institute (CRI).Read Part I here.

Demaline says there are various things to look at when considering a feedstock. Elemental analysis provides a hydrogen to carbon atomic ratio which correlates with both the liquid fuel yield and liquid fuel quality; a higher ratio predicts better yields and fuel properties. For example, the H/C ratio for wood is 1.4, equal to or lower than other feedstocks studied such as micro algae (1.7), macro algae (1.6), lemna (1.5), corn stover (1.5) and bagasse (1.4)

With wood as the feedstock, yield of the liquid hydrocarbon is 28 wt% using the current generation of catalysts. With each new generation, yield is expected to increase. Also, the boiling point curve can be moved, which allows one to shift the ratio of the product one produces, e.g, more gasoline or more diesel.

Demaline explains that a refinery takes crude oil and separates it by boiling point, a process known as distillation or fractionation. Successively heavier products are collected by boiling at higher temperatures, the liquids are then produced by condensing the vapors it to get the various products. The boiling points increase as one goes from gasoline to jet fuel and then finally diesel .

Catalysts are the key to translating distillation and fractionation into a biorefinery, Demaline states. The pilot plant at GTI is now running a third generation catalyst while work on the fourth generation is underway at the Bangalore laboratory. Demaline says one benefit of the fourth generation catalyst will be to increase the diesel yield and cetane. Cetane is to diesel what octane is to gasoline; the more cetane, the higher the performance.

Diesel engines are currently more popular than gasoline everywhere outside of the US. Demaline points out that increasingly stringent regulations expected from the US government concerning greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, could push US auto manufacturers to increase mileage per gallon, through all means that they may have at their disposal, with a key one being diesel engines in passenger automobiles, which is already becoming more popular in North America.

"We hope to get to a point where someone comes up with a feedstock and says they want to produce only diesel so then we would develop a catalyst system to do just that," Demaline adds. "We have standard catalysts which are versatile for multiple feeds and then we have custom catalysts designed for specific types of feedstock and products desired."

The GTI pilot plant achieved a continuous feed rate of 50 kg/day in September 2011

Pilot results encouraging

Work started in a laboratory-scale unit at GTI. All the products emerged together and were then distilled and used for a feedstock qualification.

In September 2011, an automated 50-kg feed/day continuous pilot plant output was achieved at GTI.

The pilot plant is being used to confirm earlier yield estimates at smaller scale and confirm catalyst life. Thus far, Demaline says that all concerned are very pleased with the pilot plant's performance, which has been in continuous operation since
March 2012.

The pilot plant also allows CRI to produce fuels in sufficient quantity to start fuel qualification. The US Environmental Protection Agency has to look at the product as it relates to various standards, such as ASTM as well as the European equivalents. The toughest specification is for jet fuel. Demaline says the process can take three to six months.

What will all this cost? In the US, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) is involved with estimating process economics from a broad spectrum of biomass processes under similar economic conditions. NREL examined a 2,000-ton/day design of wood (received at 50% moisture dried in situ to 10%). The plant design takes the hot flue gases from the HMU to dry the incoming biomass, which frees all the heat generated by the process to go back to, for example, the paper machine.

Using a "greenfield" site, total installed equipment (TIC) cost was estimated at the time of the study to be US$112 million of which the HMU is the most expensive single piece at approximately 45% of the total.

Total capital investment (TCI) was estimated to be $232.8 million. In 2012 dollars, minimum sales price to provide overall IRR of 10% on top of 60% financed at 8% was calculated to be $1.76/gal with wood at $71.97 per dry ton. Feedstock accounted for 55% of the operating cost.

To achieve a 10% IRR on a $232.8-million investment, Demaline says the study suggested a company would need a selling price of $1.76/gal. If the unit was integrated with a refinery and did not need to purchase the HMU, using refinery hydrogen instead, a selling price of $1.49/gal would be needed to achieve 10% IRR.

He says that a pulp and paper company might be positioned to spend less than the full $232.8 million, and might be able to reduce costs to as low as $112 million. Demaline adds that these numbers have no subsidies attached, but some are available in the current market . He also points out that the reformulated blendstock for oxygenate blending (RBOB), i.e., gasoline, has been running about $3/gal in recent months.

Look to Europe

Demaline says a pulp and paper producer would under the current business model buy a license from CRI for the technology (based on annual design production) and a fee for the engineering design. That firm could own and operate the plant or perhaps enter into a joint venture with another pulp and paper producer or even a refinery. CRI started talking with pulp and paper producers about 24 months ago .

Actually, the first interest in joint ventures came from some refineries. "They don't know how to source, handle or treat the biomass, but they can do the rest, which a pulp and paper producer can't," Demaline explains. But, to be cost effective, the biomass should be available within a 75- to 100-mile radius.

One excellent model, Demaline says, could be a site where a mill has shut one or two large paper machines. This would mean that the wood supply is available. Another model might involve a company that may want to reconfigure a mill site that has been mothballed. "We would not go to a world-scale mill and ask to co-locate unless the owner knew the feedstock was available. We will always defer to the biomass owner because they know what's available."

Scales up to 2,000 dry tons feed/day are possible as single trains. For wood, a company must look for sources greater than 500 tons per day to be economic, the larger the better. "When we talk with a producer, we ask what they can sustainably provide as a feedstock," Demaline says. "We've been told from 500 to 1,500 tons/day on a co-location basis, i.e., a brownfield site." The 2,000-ton/day model cited previously refers to a greenfield site.

Demaline believes the first commercial scale plant fed by wood might be built outside of North America. "It will take the one at commercial scale and then you'll see many. The first will be in a mature market with good access to feedstock."

In summary, Demaline says it is important to remember that the IH2technology provides more than high quality transportation fuel range renewable hydrocarbons, but also renewable CO2, high-pressure steam/power, char ( which can be combusted to recover more energy), and water that can be sent back to the HMU. The process produces little waste and all of the hydrogen needed in the process can be self-generated from the incoming biomass.

Demaline says other benefits that distinguish IH2from other biorefinery processes include: feedstock flexibility; attractive economics (low capex and operating expenses); both stages are exothermic; it integrates existing technology; fungible high-purity hydrocarbon products made that replace the "whole barrel", i.e. the products are not specific to one fuel.

In the near future, CRI is expecting completion of a contracts for front end engineering and design for a 5-ton/day demonstration plant. And, work is about to start on the design for commercial-scale plants of 500 and 1,000 tons/day. A commercial-scale reactor would be about 65 ft high and 9 ft in diameter. The numbers should be in by 1Q 2013 and Demaline hopes basic engineering on the first site would begin early in 2014. The plan is for the first commercial-scale site using IH2technology to begin in early to mid 2016.

Catalysts are the key for using biomass as fuel - Part II

Posted in: Chemicals 01/07/2013 - 01:31

BRUSSELS, Jan. 7, 2013 (RISI) -The elusive goal of a refinery with biomass as a feedstock has moved a step closer to reality, thanks to technology developed by the Gas Technology Institute (GTI) of Des Plaines, IL,and Houston-based Catalytic Research Institute (CRI).Read Part I here.

Demaline says there are various things to look at when considering a feedstock. Elemental analysis provides a hydrogen to carbon atomic ratio which correlates with both the liquid fuel yield and liquid fuel quality; a higher ratio predicts better yields and fuel properties. For example, the H/C ratio for wood is 1.4, equal to or lower than other feedstocks studied such as micro algae (1.7), macro algae (1.6), lemna (1.5), corn stover (1.5) and bagasse (1.4)

With wood as the feedstock, yield of the liquid hydrocarbon is 28 wt% using the current generation of catalysts. With each new generation, yield is expected to increase. Also, the boiling point curve can be moved, which allows one to shift the ratio of the product one produces, e.g, more gasoline or more diesel.

Demaline explains that a refinery takes crude oil and separates it by boiling point, a process known as distillation or fractionation. Successively heavier products are collected by boiling at higher temperatures, the liquids are then produced by condensing the vapors it to get the various products. The boiling points increase as one goes from gasoline to jet fuel and then finally diesel .

Catalysts are the key to translating distillation and fractionation into a biorefinery, Demaline states. The pilot plant at GTI is now running a third generation catalyst while work on the fourth generation is underway at the Bangalore laboratory. Demaline says one benefit of the fourth generation catalyst will be to increase the diesel yield and cetane. Cetane is to diesel what octane is to gasoline; the more cetane, the higher the performance.

Diesel engines are currently more popular than gasoline everywhere outside of the US. Demaline points out that increasingly stringent regulations expected from the US government concerning greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, could push US auto manufacturers to increase mileage per gallon, through all means that they may have at their disposal, with a key one being diesel engines in passenger automobiles, which is already becoming more popular in North America.

"We hope to get to a point where someone comes up with a feedstock and says they want to produce only diesel so then we would develop a catalyst system to do just that," Demaline adds. "We have standard catalysts which are versatile for multiple feeds and then we have custom catalysts designed for specific types of feedstock and products desired."

The GTI pilot plant achieved a continuous feed rate of 50 kg/day in September 2011

Pilot results encouraging

Work started in a laboratory-scale unit at GTI. All the products emerged together and were then distilled and used for a feedstock qualification.

In September 2011, an automated 50-kg feed/day continuous pilot plant output was achieved at GTI.

The pilot plant is being used to confirm earlier yield estimates at smaller scale and confirm catalyst life. Thus far, Demaline says that all concerned are very pleased with the pilot plant's performance, which has been in continuous operation since
March 2012.

The pilot plant also allows CRI to produce fuels in sufficient quantity to start fuel qualification. The US Environmental Protection Agency has to look at the product as it relates to various standards, such as ASTM as well as the European equivalents. The toughest specification is for jet fuel. Demaline says the process can take three to six months.

What will all this cost? In the US, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) is involved with estimating process economics from a broad spectrum of biomass processes under similar economic conditions. NREL examined a 2,000-ton/day design of wood (received at 50% moisture dried in situ to 10%). The plant design takes the hot flue gases from the HMU to dry the incoming biomass, which frees all the heat generated by the process to go back to, for example, the paper machine.

Using a "greenfield" site, total installed equipment (TIC) cost was estimated at the time of the study to be US$112 million of which the HMU is the most expensive single piece at approximately 45% of the total.

Total capital investment (TCI) was estimated to be $232.8 million. In 2012 dollars, minimum sales price to provide overall IRR of 10% on top of 60% financed at 8% was calculated to be $1.76/gal with wood at $71.97 per dry ton. Feedstock accounted for 55% of the operating cost.

To achieve a 10% IRR on a $232.8-million investment, Demaline says the study suggested a company would need a selling price of $1.76/gal. If the unit was integrated with a refinery and did not need to purchase the HMU, using refinery hydrogen instead, a selling price of $1.49/gal would be needed to achieve 10% IRR.

He says that a pulp and paper company might be positioned to spend less than the full $232.8 million, and might be able to reduce costs to as low as $112 million. Demaline adds that these numbers have no subsidies attached, but some are available in the current market . He also points out that the reformulated blendstock for oxygenate blending (RBOB), i.e., gasoline, has been running about $3/gal in recent months.

Look to Europe

Demaline says a pulp and paper producer would under the current business model buy a license from CRI for the technology (based on annual design production) and a fee for the engineering design. That firm could own and operate the plant or perhaps enter into a joint venture with another pulp and paper producer or even a refinery. CRI started talking with pulp and paper producers about 24 months ago .

Actually, the first interest in joint ventures came from some refineries. "They don't know how to source, handle or treat the biomass, but they can do the rest, which a pulp and paper producer can't," Demaline explains. But, to be cost effective, the biomass should be available within a 75- to 100-mile radius.

One excellent model, Demaline says, could be a site where a mill has shut one or two large paper machines. This would mean that the wood supply is available. Another model might involve a company that may want to reconfigure a mill site that has been mothballed. "We would not go to a world-scale mill and ask to co-locate unless the owner knew the feedstock was available. We will always defer to the biomass owner because they know what's available."

Scales up to 2,000 dry tons feed/day are possible as single trains. For wood, a company must look for sources greater than 500 tons per day to be economic, the larger the better. "When we talk with a producer, we ask what they can sustainably provide as a feedstock," Demaline says. "We've been told from 500 to 1,500 tons/day on a co-location basis, i.e., a brownfield site." The 2,000-ton/day model cited previously refers to a greenfield site.

Demaline believes the first commercial scale plant fed by wood might be built outside of North America. "It will take the one at commercial scale and then you'll see many. The first will be in a mature market with good access to feedstock."

In summary, Demaline says it is important to remember that the IH2technology provides more than high quality transportation fuel range renewable hydrocarbons, but also renewable CO2, high-pressure steam/power, char ( which can be combusted to recover more energy), and water that can be sent back to the HMU. The process produces little waste and all of the hydrogen needed in the process can be self-generated from the incoming biomass.

Demaline says other benefits that distinguish IH2from other biorefinery processes include: feedstock flexibility; attractive economics (low capex and operating expenses); both stages are exothermic; it integrates existing technology; fungible high-purity hydrocarbon products made that replace the "whole barrel", i.e. the products are not specific to one fuel.

In the near future, CRI is expecting completion of a contracts for front end engineering and design for a 5-ton/day demonstration plant. And, work is about to start on the design for commercial-scale plants of 500 and 1,000 tons/day. A commercial-scale reactor would be about 65 ft high and 9 ft in diameter. The numbers should be in by 1Q 2013 and Demaline hopes basic engineering on the first site would begin early in 2014. The plan is for the first commercial-scale site using IH2technology to begin in early to mid 2016.

Read more

BRUSSELS, Jan. 7, 2013 (RISI) -Modern Karton Sanayi Ticaret AS in Corlu, just outside Istanbul, is the leading lightweight containerboard producer in Turkey and among the top six containerboard producers in Europe.

Modern Karton recently optimized PM 4. Changes in stock preparation and refining now allow operators to maximize a range of mixed waste grades and get much improved runnability on the machine due to cleanliness and a reduction in stickies.

Ramazan Tekin, Modern Karton’s project manager for the PM 4 optimization (left), Bulent Sendag, agent for AFT (center), and Ilhan Koyunlu

Modern leap forward

A decisive move was made in 1998 with the beginning of a new age of containerboard production in Turkey, when Modern Karton led the way with the startup of PM 3, a 200,000-tonne/yr high-performance containerboard machine. Included in the delivery was a 100% recycled fiber stock preparation system to feed the hungry machine.

According to Ali Íhsan Aras, technical coordinator for parent company Eren Holding, "PM 3 propelled us into modern papermaking. Our portfolio of brown and white top grades was able to meet high European standards. We not only seized higher market share in our home market, but we gained business throughout Europe and the Middle East."

This success led to the launch of PM 4 in 2008, a machine which produces about 400,000 tonnes/yr of 70-120 g/m2testliner and corrugating medium. Soon, Modern Karton will break ground for PM 5 which will add considerable lightweight grade capacity.

Eren Holdings' Osman Tamer, investment leader, says, "Turkey's growth in manufacturing consumes a considerable amount of our output, but we have also gained a stronger position in export markets. Our reputation for quality output is feeding our steady growth. And, our environmental stewardship ensures sustainability in support of major brands."

New AFT FINEBAR fillings are installed in the conical refiners on PM 3 and PM 4 at Modern Karton for increased fiber strength and reduced energy consumption

Overcoming operational difficulties

Back in 2008 when PM 4 came on line, Modern Karton began to expand relationships with global and local branders. The company had the infrastructure in place from collection-through-converting to move ahead rapidly. However, even though it was meeting customer needs, PM 4 had runnability issues, primarily due to stock cleanliness, which did not go away easily. Difficulties with the stock preparation equipment were making machine efficiency and productivity a challenge, requiring considerable ongoing maintenance.

Ramazan Tekin, production manager for PM 3 and former stock preparation manager for PM 4, says, "Stock prep was the primary bottleneck. Our maintenance team had to open up the screens several times a day to manually take away the clumps of fiber that were plugging the cylinders. Stickies were passing to the machine. Our OCC fractionation and fine screens had to be taken down for thorough cleaning every two weeks. Adding to this problem, we had to take PM 4's refiners offline. We were not able to achieve the gains in strength with these units and could only meet our customers' specifications with expensive starch and chemicals."

"Roping and plugging at the pulper were commonplace," continues Ilhan Koyunlu, production manager for PM 4. "We had too much unscheduled downtime for maintenance just to keep operating, and even then at considerably lower throughput than was our target. Energy consumption was too high. We had to make a strategic change."

AFT screen cylinders and rotors solved the “rope build-up” issue in Modern Karton’s stock preparation system. The use of AFT wear components prevented stickies from passing to the paper machine – increasing runnability significantly

Strategic change leads to major improvement

Modern Karton called upon Aikawa Fiber Technologies (AFT) for help with the stock preparation issues. Bulent Sendag, AFT's representative in Turkey, made the initial contact.

"AFT components can be fitted to all types of screens," says Sendag. "They produce cylinders, rotors, and plates for many major OEMs, so they have both a scientific and a practical knowledge of the stock preparation processes."

AFT specialists began an intensive study to determine the root cause of the stock preparation runnability problems. Two specific tools, AFT's SimAuditTMprocess simulation and a mechanical audit, were used in the analysis.

SimAuditTMis a proprietary process simulation tool which reveals in detail the potential for optimizing existing processes and sizing equipment. The mechanical audit determined the condition of the wear components to help AFT recommend a more effective maintenance program.

"When the internal components, rotors and cylinders, allow fiber to build up and plug the screen, there is no way a mill can experience smooth, continuous operation," Sendag explains. "The AFT audits revealed some good news for Modern Karton. The simulation showed that changing out the OEM wear components would allow Modern Karton to regain full capacity, and save energy."

Ali Ihsan Aras, technical coordinator (left) with Osman Tamer, investment leader for Eren Holding, the parent company of Modern Karton. Modern Karton is one of the leading containerboard producers in Turkey and the Middle East. When PM 5 is completed, it will be among the top six producers in Europe

A change for the better

The SimAuditTMrevealed that smaller slots in the screen cylinders and a different rotor design would vastly improve operations. The Modern Karton team was very interested in the recommendation, but was hesitant to make such a change on all the screens. AFT offered a trial on just one screen so Modern Karton could evaluate the results.

At first, AFT delivered a MacroFlowTMcylinder with 0.20 mm slots, because this matched the OEM components. "The mill soon saw that our recommendation might be on-target and that smaller slots would improve stock cleanliness and stickies removal," says Sendag. So the slot size was reduced.

Capacity quickly returned to the targeted level. Stickies were no longer an issue, and energy consumption for that particular screen was cut in half. When the screen was opened after two weeks operation, there was no fiber/reject build-up at all.

That led Modern Karton to change all the rotors in its stock preparation screens to the AFT GHCTMmodel. MacroFlow2 cylinders with 0.15-mm slots are the new standard for PM 4 screens (with the exception of 0.17-mm slots for fractionation and long fiber screening).

Says Koyunlu, "Our maintenance team was able to turn their attention to fine-tuning other aspects of the process instead of babysitting the screens. We were able to improve sheet uniformity as well."

Stock preparation improvements have improved runnability on PM 4 at Modern Karton

Solving the fractionation dilemma

As with most 100% recycled containerboard mills, Modern Karton has fractionation screens for short, medium, and long fibers. Rejects tend to concentrate in the long fiber fraction. It becomes difficult to separate the rejects from the fiber. That is why long fiber treatment is always the most difficult aspect of screening.

"With the AFT rotors and cylinders installed, we were not having the once-familiar stickies problems on the paper machine," comments Tekin. "The improvements in screening meant that we could eliminate rejects recirculation which had a big impact on the cleanliness of the stock to PM 4."

When the stock preparation screens began running smoothly, Modern Karton saw stability return to upstream and downstream processes as well. As Tekin puts it, "Stock preparation screening is now stable. The accuracy and precision of the MacroFlow2 cylinders at the smaller slot sizes have eliminated stickies as an issue for us."

Sendag notes that other issues like flakes can be handled in stock preparation, and prevented from going forward to the paper machine, where they tend to "open up" to become spots or defects in the finished sheet. "We are working now on the fundamentals of pulping AOCC and some other lower-grade local furnishes," he says, "by doing such things as reducing the gap between the pulper rotors and plates. Modern Karton is also considering installing outflow coarse screens to optimize deflaking."

Ilhan Koyunlu regularly checks formation of the sheet, which now has no stickies issues

New refiners end heavy starch doses

Once the quality of fiber from stock preparation was stabilized, Modern Karton decided to restart its refiners, to get the needed strength by properly preparing the fibers rather than relying on costly starch and chemicals.

Says Tekin, "With our stock preparation efficiency at a high level, we installed AFT Finebar®fillings on PM 4's conical refiners." The impact was dramatic. Strength targets were met immediately. Energy consumption dropped, and the mill was able to take its deflaker permanently offline.

The principal difference between Finebar and conventional plate patterns is the ultra-fine bar patterns which permit refining low intensity. This gentle handling not only produces desired strength and freeness, but reduces power consumption considerably.

Notes Tekin, "The Finebar patterns are very effective and the fillings are extremely reliable. We changed out all the fillings so that Finebar is on all our refiners on PM 4. Recently PM 3 began using them as well."

Next stop: Headbox screening

AFT has also been studying the potential to reduce slot sizes in top and bottom sections of Modern Karton's headbox screens. According to the AFT study, slot sizes can likely be reduced, especially for the top layer.

Modern Karton joins Europe's containerboard giants

01/06/2013 - 14:00

BRUSSELS, Jan. 7, 2013 (RISI) -Modern Karton Sanayi Ticaret AS in Corlu, just outside Istanbul, is the leading lightweight containerboard producer in Turkey and among the top six containerboard producers in Europe.

Modern Karton recently optimized PM 4. Changes in stock preparation and refining now allow operators to maximize a range of mixed waste grades and get much improved runnability on the machine due to cleanliness and a reduction in stickies.

Ramazan Tekin, Modern Karton’s project manager for the PM 4 optimization (left), Bulent Sendag, agent for AFT (center), and Ilhan Koyunlu

Modern leap forward

A decisive move was made in 1998 with the beginning of a new age of containerboard production in Turkey, when Modern Karton led the way with the startup of PM 3, a 200,000-tonne/yr high-performance containerboard machine. Included in the delivery was a 100% recycled fiber stock preparation system to feed the hungry machine.

According to Ali Íhsan Aras, technical coordinator for parent company Eren Holding, "PM 3 propelled us into modern papermaking. Our portfolio of brown and white top grades was able to meet high European standards. We not only seized higher market share in our home market, but we gained business throughout Europe and the Middle East."

This success led to the launch of PM 4 in 2008, a machine which produces about 400,000 tonnes/yr of 70-120 g/m2testliner and corrugating medium. Soon, Modern Karton will break ground for PM 5 which will add considerable lightweight grade capacity.

Eren Holdings' Osman Tamer, investment leader, says, "Turkey's growth in manufacturing consumes a considerable amount of our output, but we have also gained a stronger position in export markets. Our reputation for quality output is feeding our steady growth. And, our environmental stewardship ensures sustainability in support of major brands."

New AFT FINEBAR fillings are installed in the conical refiners on PM 3 and PM 4 at Modern Karton for increased fiber strength and reduced energy consumption

Overcoming operational difficulties

Back in 2008 when PM 4 came on line, Modern Karton began to expand relationships with global and local branders. The company had the infrastructure in place from collection-through-converting to move ahead rapidly. However, even though it was meeting customer needs, PM 4 had runnability issues, primarily due to stock cleanliness, which did not go away easily. Difficulties with the stock preparation equipment were making machine efficiency and productivity a challenge, requiring considerable ongoing maintenance.

Ramazan Tekin, production manager for PM 3 and former stock preparation manager for PM 4, says, "Stock prep was the primary bottleneck. Our maintenance team had to open up the screens several times a day to manually take away the clumps of fiber that were plugging the cylinders. Stickies were passing to the machine. Our OCC fractionation and fine screens had to be taken down for thorough cleaning every two weeks. Adding to this problem, we had to take PM 4's refiners offline. We were not able to achieve the gains in strength with these units and could only meet our customers' specifications with expensive starch and chemicals."

"Roping and plugging at the pulper were commonplace," continues Ilhan Koyunlu, production manager for PM 4. "We had too much unscheduled downtime for maintenance just to keep operating, and even then at considerably lower throughput than was our target. Energy consumption was too high. We had to make a strategic change."

AFT screen cylinders and rotors solved the “rope build-up” issue in Modern Karton’s stock preparation system. The use of AFT wear components prevented stickies from passing to the paper machine – increasing runnability significantly

Strategic change leads to major improvement

Modern Karton called upon Aikawa Fiber Technologies (AFT) for help with the stock preparation issues. Bulent Sendag, AFT's representative in Turkey, made the initial contact.

"AFT components can be fitted to all types of screens," says Sendag. "They produce cylinders, rotors, and plates for many major OEMs, so they have both a scientific and a practical knowledge of the stock preparation processes."

AFT specialists began an intensive study to determine the root cause of the stock preparation runnability problems. Two specific tools, AFT's SimAuditTMprocess simulation and a mechanical audit, were used in the analysis.

SimAuditTMis a proprietary process simulation tool which reveals in detail the potential for optimizing existing processes and sizing equipment. The mechanical audit determined the condition of the wear components to help AFT recommend a more effective maintenance program.

"When the internal components, rotors and cylinders, allow fiber to build up and plug the screen, there is no way a mill can experience smooth, continuous operation," Sendag explains. "The AFT audits revealed some good news for Modern Karton. The simulation showed that changing out the OEM wear components would allow Modern Karton to regain full capacity, and save energy."

Ali Ihsan Aras, technical coordinator (left) with Osman Tamer, investment leader for Eren Holding, the parent company of Modern Karton. Modern Karton is one of the leading containerboard producers in Turkey and the Middle East. When PM 5 is completed, it will be among the top six producers in Europe

A change for the better

The SimAuditTMrevealed that smaller slots in the screen cylinders and a different rotor design would vastly improve operations. The Modern Karton team was very interested in the recommendation, but was hesitant to make such a change on all the screens. AFT offered a trial on just one screen so Modern Karton could evaluate the results.

At first, AFT delivered a MacroFlowTMcylinder with 0.20 mm slots, because this matched the OEM components. "The mill soon saw that our recommendation might be on-target and that smaller slots would improve stock cleanliness and stickies removal," says Sendag. So the slot size was reduced.

Capacity quickly returned to the targeted level. Stickies were no longer an issue, and energy consumption for that particular screen was cut in half. When the screen was opened after two weeks operation, there was no fiber/reject build-up at all.

That led Modern Karton to change all the rotors in its stock preparation screens to the AFT GHCTMmodel. MacroFlow2 cylinders with 0.15-mm slots are the new standard for PM 4 screens (with the exception of 0.17-mm slots for fractionation and long fiber screening).

Says Koyunlu, "Our maintenance team was able to turn their attention to fine-tuning other aspects of the process instead of babysitting the screens. We were able to improve sheet uniformity as well."

Stock preparation improvements have improved runnability on PM 4 at Modern Karton

Solving the fractionation dilemma

As with most 100% recycled containerboard mills, Modern Karton has fractionation screens for short, medium, and long fibers. Rejects tend to concentrate in the long fiber fraction. It becomes difficult to separate the rejects from the fiber. That is why long fiber treatment is always the most difficult aspect of screening.

"With the AFT rotors and cylinders installed, we were not having the once-familiar stickies problems on the paper machine," comments Tekin. "The improvements in screening meant that we could eliminate rejects recirculation which had a big impact on the cleanliness of the stock to PM 4."

When the stock preparation screens began running smoothly, Modern Karton saw stability return to upstream and downstream processes as well. As Tekin puts it, "Stock preparation screening is now stable. The accuracy and precision of the MacroFlow2 cylinders at the smaller slot sizes have eliminated stickies as an issue for us."

Sendag notes that other issues like flakes can be handled in stock preparation, and prevented from going forward to the paper machine, where they tend to "open up" to become spots or defects in the finished sheet. "We are working now on the fundamentals of pulping AOCC and some other lower-grade local furnishes," he says, "by doing such things as reducing the gap between the pulper rotors and plates. Modern Karton is also considering installing outflow coarse screens to optimize deflaking."

Ilhan Koyunlu regularly checks formation of the sheet, which now has no stickies issues

New refiners end heavy starch doses

Once the quality of fiber from stock preparation was stabilized, Modern Karton decided to restart its refiners, to get the needed strength by properly preparing the fibers rather than relying on costly starch and chemicals.

Says Tekin, "With our stock preparation efficiency at a high level, we installed AFT Finebar®fillings on PM 4's conical refiners." The impact was dramatic. Strength targets were met immediately. Energy consumption dropped, and the mill was able to take its deflaker permanently offline.

The principal difference between Finebar and conventional plate patterns is the ultra-fine bar patterns which permit refining low intensity. This gentle handling not only produces desired strength and freeness, but reduces power consumption considerably.

Notes Tekin, "The Finebar patterns are very effective and the fillings are extremely reliable. We changed out all the fillings so that Finebar is on all our refiners on PM 4. Recently PM 3 began using them as well."

Next stop: Headbox screening

AFT has also been studying the potential to reduce slot sizes in top and bottom sections of Modern Karton's headbox screens. According to the AFT study, slot sizes can likely be reduced, especially for the top layer.

Read more

BRUSSELS, Dec. 18, 2012 (RISI) -The Confederation of European Paper Industries (CEPI) has taken up the challenge to investigate how to meet the European Union targets that aim to reduce CO2emissions by 80% by the year 2050, and has begun by forming the "Two Team Project" approach in an effort to galvanise the industry into action on the R&D front

Marco Mensink, Deputy Director General of CEPI and Bernard de Galembert, Forest and Research Director were interviewed for PPI Magazine about CEPI"s Two Team approach and what might just be the next big thing in pulp and paper.

Click hereto read more about Breakthrough Technologies: The Two Team Project

PPI: Do you include all technology? Are there boundaries?

The bottom line of the project is that there should be as little limits to creativity and imagination as possible, however the Two Team Project has a technology focus. It will NOT focus on new products, markets and value chains. The development of products and markets is an issue for the companies (within the business competition area), not for CEPI. Furthermore, in most cases the development of new markets and value chains can be covered by other initiatives such as the possible EU bio-based industries public private partnership. There is no barrier however, as the outcome of the Two Team project can also result in new products that will address the needed 50% value increase.

The project does focus on breakthrough technologies for pulp production, paper making and energy production/conversion. The teams should come with concepts for new pulp technologies, new paper machines and boilers, as well as other functionalities of the current equipment, or optimisation of the current processes. One can argue that this will not lead to breakthroughs, as it focuses on old products. However, the current equipment and a large volume of the sector turnover will by 2050 still be based on paper and pulp grades. Developing breakthrough technologies therefore makes much sense. Focusing concepts on pulp and paper (machine) technology has the added value of being valuable for more paper grades then one.

 The teams may focus on breakthrough technologies needed for new products but on a level that will lead to results for a large part of the sector, not for a single niche product. New technologies for example could be developed for separation or fractionation of fibers or new applications for waste materials, with new combinations of raw materials and products as a result. And finally the teams can focus on combinations of new products and raw materials and old and new technologies in pulp, paper and energy production (for example new combinations of fillers and nanomaterials with fibers). Teams can also consider the integration of our industry with other sectors (industrial symbiosis).

The Two Team Project should bring solutions for old and new mills, north and south, large and small and tissue, packaging and graphic papers, virgin and recycled-based. The teams will decide on which ones, but will be strongly requested to have a broad sector scope. Still the winning concepts should have a clear business case.

PPI: What are the criteria for the technologies you are looking for?

The two teams compete in identifying more efficient, lower carbon, better integrated, more sustainable technologies and/or processes. Irrespective of their working methods, each team should deliver at least two generic concepts for breakthrough technology in pulp and paper manufacturing. Each concept should have an analysis showing the estimated benefits, and a justification why the team selected it. In principle, this analysis should be in line with the value creation and carbon reduction starting points of the forest fiber industry 2050 Roadmap. Practically, the jury will vote on the basis of three specific criteria: 1: to what extent does the concept contribute to the -80% decarbonisation?, 2: to what extent does the concept contribute to the +50% value and 3: have the proposed concepts a promising business case?

PPI: Can team members be accepted from all over the world, or is it restricted to Europe?

The Two Team Project is CEPI initiative. Team members come from Europe, but also work for global companies. In order to guarantee the best possible outcome, focus will lie on the geographical spread amongst companies, institutes and "outsiders" involved - to secure a wide "European approach". Ideas can be submitted from anywhere in the world. But also experts from all over the world can be asked to join meetings if they bring great ideas.

PPI: What are the legal implications of the Two Team approach when it comes to patents etc?

Intellectual Property Rights are the most crucial issue, next to creativity. We feel we can secure a safe environment and outcome. To secure this, we will restrict the final outcome to "generic pre-competitive "concepts". These are directions for future work, programmes and projects. Not technically detailed descriptions. 90% of the process we envisage is collection of ideas, discussing, evaluating. The discussions in the team won't be public and the participants will have signed a Non-disclosure Agreement at the start of the process. It is most likely that the final generic concepts will not be single company concepts, but combinations of ideas.

The results of the Two Team Project will be owned by the sector as a whole (CEPI = the industry). They will be made public with the report, only in the form of generic concepts.

PPI: When and where will the first Award be given out?

The team reports will be evaluated by a jury. The jury consists of a selection of the CEPI Board CEO's, a high level EU Commission representative and a selected number other stakeholders that were engaged in building the CEPI 2050 roadmap. The jury will determine which of the concepts is/are most convincing and has/have the most potential and maybe even decide on a winning team. The winner will be announced at European Paper Week 2013.

PPI: Will this be an ongoing, annual activity in the future?

The Two Team Project ends at European Paper Week 2013, our intentions and goals however do not. The concepts developed will have to be taken further, by companies, research institutes and the Forest-based Technology Platform. They will offer exciting directions for suppliers, be the basis for consortia and at some stage grow into competitive projects. The Two Team project hopes to sow the seeds of future change, that then grows on its own in the future bio economy. While the Two Teams are running, the EU is developing its 2014-2020 research and innovation budgets. We will work hard to secure that they include opportunities for the best concepts coming from these teams.

The Two Team Project is as much a process as a project. The aim is to secure that the outcome of the project - the innovative breakthrough concepts - are not only developed, but welcomed, supported, agreed upon by the sector and a basis for future EU and member state support. In the meantime, attention will be given to keep the momentum generated by the launch of the Roadmap in November 2011. For this reason all steps and activities in the project will be thought through not only in content, but also in communication terms. The foundation for this is laid in the concept of the Two Team Project itself. The approach is innovative. The project is "public". The high level jury in the end of the project will secure attention to the new concepts from the industry as a whole.

PPI: What message would you like to give to the global industry?

Well, we would like to pose a few questions to the industry: we have asked many people about the last breakthrough in our sector. The development of the bioeconomy is a new direction. But huge changes to our equipment? The shoe press? The recovery boiler? A decade ago we spoke about condebelt and inpinchment. Now we might look at vertical paper machines, foam forming or supercritical CO2,maybe using ultrasound? There must be a million ideas out there with payback times above five years no one dared to propose in the current economy. Is the golden idea there? Who knows - that is up to the teams to decide. But you should give input and follow closely. In short - this is the project you cannot miss!

What is the next big thing in pulp and paper?

Posted in: Environment 12/18/2012 - 00:50

BRUSSELS, Dec. 18, 2012 (RISI) -The Confederation of European Paper Industries (CEPI) has taken up the challenge to investigate how to meet the European Union targets that aim to reduce CO2emissions by 80% by the year 2050, and has begun by forming the "Two Team Project" approach in an effort to galvanise the industry into action on the R&D front

Marco Mensink, Deputy Director General of CEPI and Bernard de Galembert, Forest and Research Director were interviewed for PPI Magazine about CEPI"s Two Team approach and what might just be the next big thing in pulp and paper.

Click hereto read more about Breakthrough Technologies: The Two Team Project

PPI: Do you include all technology? Are there boundaries?

The bottom line of the project is that there should be as little limits to creativity and imagination as possible, however the Two Team Project has a technology focus. It will NOT focus on new products, markets and value chains. The development of products and markets is an issue for the companies (within the business competition area), not for CEPI. Furthermore, in most cases the development of new markets and value chains can be covered by other initiatives such as the possible EU bio-based industries public private partnership. There is no barrier however, as the outcome of the Two Team project can also result in new products that will address the needed 50% value increase.

The project does focus on breakthrough technologies for pulp production, paper making and energy production/conversion. The teams should come with concepts for new pulp technologies, new paper machines and boilers, as well as other functionalities of the current equipment, or optimisation of the current processes. One can argue that this will not lead to breakthroughs, as it focuses on old products. However, the current equipment and a large volume of the sector turnover will by 2050 still be based on paper and pulp grades. Developing breakthrough technologies therefore makes much sense. Focusing concepts on pulp and paper (machine) technology has the added value of being valuable for more paper grades then one.

 The teams may focus on breakthrough technologies needed for new products but on a level that will lead to results for a large part of the sector, not for a single niche product. New technologies for example could be developed for separation or fractionation of fibers or new applications for waste materials, with new combinations of raw materials and products as a result. And finally the teams can focus on combinations of new products and raw materials and old and new technologies in pulp, paper and energy production (for example new combinations of fillers and nanomaterials with fibers). Teams can also consider the integration of our industry with other sectors (industrial symbiosis).

The Two Team Project should bring solutions for old and new mills, north and south, large and small and tissue, packaging and graphic papers, virgin and recycled-based. The teams will decide on which ones, but will be strongly requested to have a broad sector scope. Still the winning concepts should have a clear business case.

PPI: What are the criteria for the technologies you are looking for?

The two teams compete in identifying more efficient, lower carbon, better integrated, more sustainable technologies and/or processes. Irrespective of their working methods, each team should deliver at least two generic concepts for breakthrough technology in pulp and paper manufacturing. Each concept should have an analysis showing the estimated benefits, and a justification why the team selected it. In principle, this analysis should be in line with the value creation and carbon reduction starting points of the forest fiber industry 2050 Roadmap. Practically, the jury will vote on the basis of three specific criteria: 1: to what extent does the concept contribute to the -80% decarbonisation?, 2: to what extent does the concept contribute to the +50% value and 3: have the proposed concepts a promising business case?

PPI: Can team members be accepted from all over the world, or is it restricted to Europe?

The Two Team Project is CEPI initiative. Team members come from Europe, but also work for global companies. In order to guarantee the best possible outcome, focus will lie on the geographical spread amongst companies, institutes and "outsiders" involved - to secure a wide "European approach". Ideas can be submitted from anywhere in the world. But also experts from all over the world can be asked to join meetings if they bring great ideas.

PPI: What are the legal implications of the Two Team approach when it comes to patents etc?

Intellectual Property Rights are the most crucial issue, next to creativity. We feel we can secure a safe environment and outcome. To secure this, we will restrict the final outcome to "generic pre-competitive "concepts". These are directions for future work, programmes and projects. Not technically detailed descriptions. 90% of the process we envisage is collection of ideas, discussing, evaluating. The discussions in the team won't be public and the participants will have signed a Non-disclosure Agreement at the start of the process. It is most likely that the final generic concepts will not be single company concepts, but combinations of ideas.

The results of the Two Team Project will be owned by the sector as a whole (CEPI = the industry). They will be made public with the report, only in the form of generic concepts.

PPI: When and where will the first Award be given out?

The team reports will be evaluated by a jury. The jury consists of a selection of the CEPI Board CEO's, a high level EU Commission representative and a selected number other stakeholders that were engaged in building the CEPI 2050 roadmap. The jury will determine which of the concepts is/are most convincing and has/have the most potential and maybe even decide on a winning team. The winner will be announced at European Paper Week 2013.

PPI: Will this be an ongoing, annual activity in the future?

The Two Team Project ends at European Paper Week 2013, our intentions and goals however do not. The concepts developed will have to be taken further, by companies, research institutes and the Forest-based Technology Platform. They will offer exciting directions for suppliers, be the basis for consortia and at some stage grow into competitive projects. The Two Team project hopes to sow the seeds of future change, that then grows on its own in the future bio economy. While the Two Teams are running, the EU is developing its 2014-2020 research and innovation budgets. We will work hard to secure that they include opportunities for the best concepts coming from these teams.

The Two Team Project is as much a process as a project. The aim is to secure that the outcome of the project - the innovative breakthrough concepts - are not only developed, but welcomed, supported, agreed upon by the sector and a basis for future EU and member state support. In the meantime, attention will be given to keep the momentum generated by the launch of the Roadmap in November 2011. For this reason all steps and activities in the project will be thought through not only in content, but also in communication terms. The foundation for this is laid in the concept of the Two Team Project itself. The approach is innovative. The project is "public". The high level jury in the end of the project will secure attention to the new concepts from the industry as a whole.

PPI: What message would you like to give to the global industry?

Well, we would like to pose a few questions to the industry: we have asked many people about the last breakthrough in our sector. The development of the bioeconomy is a new direction. But huge changes to our equipment? The shoe press? The recovery boiler? A decade ago we spoke about condebelt and inpinchment. Now we might look at vertical paper machines, foam forming or supercritical CO2,maybe using ultrasound? There must be a million ideas out there with payback times above five years no one dared to propose in the current economy. Is the golden idea there? Who knows - that is up to the teams to decide. But you should give input and follow closely. In short - this is the project you cannot miss!

Read more

BRUSSELS, Dec. 18, 2012 (RISI) -The Confederation of European Paper Industries (CEPI) has taken up the challenge to investigate how to meet the European Union targets that aim to reduce CO2emissions by 80% by the year 2050. The pulp and paper industry in the region is going to be instrumental to that plan, in fact if the industry stays on its current investment path in Europe, it will already be cutting its own emissions by 50% up to the year 2050.

However, the balance of 30% has to be found by designing, trialling and implementing Breakthrough Technologies to give the industry that extra push towards its goal. Decarbonising does not only make environmental sense. When made equal to "de-energizing" the sector, it will guarantee a future in the 2050 world with high fuel and power costs. At CEPI Paper Week, held in Brussels recently, the confederation has begun addressing the balance by forming the "Two Team Project" approach in an effort to galvanise the industry into action on the R&D front. Mark Rushton Editor of PPI, finds out more by interviewing Marco Mensink, Deputy Director General of CEPI and Bernard de Galembert, Forest and Research Director.

Marco Mensink, Deputy Director General of CEPI
Bernard de Galembert, Forest and Research Director, CEPI

PPI: Can you explain why the Two Team approach has been formed?

CEPI Two Teams': In November 2011 CEPI launched its 2050 Roadmap for a low carbon economy. The Roadmap represents the vision for the sector in the next 40 years. It includes what the sector will need to achieve 80% CO2emissions reduction and create 50% more value. The document sets the vision for the transformation of the industry in the context of the bio economy and outlines the technology needs, the policy imperatives, and the financial perspectives. CEPI is now deploying the strategy to roll out the Roadmap.

In the pathway to 2050, one key element in making it happen is the development of breakthrough technologies. They have to be available by 2030 to deliver in 2050. We have ten years to think, 10 years to demo, 10 years to build and 10 years to run. Breakthrough technologies are relevant for all regions of the European pulp and paper industry, for companies of all sizes and their various activities. Breakthrough approaches will be based on the existing industrial base, contribute to the transformation of the industry within two investment generation cycles. Improved technologies, new functionalities of both existing technologies and products, and the development of new products can be the result of breakthrough approaches.

We strongly believe that breakthroughs can only be developed in a joint European sector approach. Working together imposes some rules, in particular the need to focus only on pre-competitive research and cooperation mechanisms, and this in a very secure Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) context while allowing for ideas to be brought to the table without being too restrictive.

A European approach also allows for inclusion of suppliers to the pulp and paper industry. Furthermore, inclusion of stakeholders from outside the sector is crucial as ideas out of the box are needed and the Roadmap will require alliances and partnerships with other industrial sectors.

All this led us to believe that an approach that would put two teams in competition would create the needed emulation and would fasten the process of identification of potential breakthrough technologies.

PPI: Who will the teams be made up of and how many members will they have each?

Each team is about 15 people and will at least include representatives of pulp and paper producers, technology suppliers, other suppliers, a university and research institutes, as well as representatives of external partners. Two free seats per team will be filled up by the teams themselves as they start to work. Customers will be invited for their views and needs. Each team has a "team engine", a CEPI staff member to organise meetings, workshops, exchange of information, etc. Furthermore each team will have a CEPI Director as team member. Two former CEOs are the sponsors of each team, giving guidance, inspiration and direction. The two teams will in their startup phase work together to establish a common knowledge base. The idea is that teams compete on creativity, and not lose for lack of information.

PPI: Can pulp and paper producers as well as suppliers to the industry join the teams?

Anyone connected or not even connected to the industry can submit ideas, via the different channels we have set up (website, social networks ...). Both producers and suppliers will be part of the teams. The teams will really have to become teams and will spend a lot of time together. The cohesion is in that respect crucial. It would therefore be difficult to include more people in the teams. For this reason the Two Team Project has two other features - the "skybox" and the "fan clubs". People can join the fan club of one of the teams and engage in discussions. CEPI member companies who are not represented in the teams can join the "skybox" - a position with a clear view of the ring, but with less work.

PPI: Can anyone from the industries involved apply? If so, how do they join the teams?

We have finalized the teams (see Blue and Red boxes). The blue team is led by Heiner Grussenmeyer (Stora Enso, Germany) and the red team by Jérôme Grassin (CTP France). All major players in the sector and in the research community are involved in the teams. There is no open call for (new) members. CEPI has approached the suppliers, researchers, universities, companies and free thinkers in the teams, who have then proposed team members on their behalf. The remaining free seats - to be filled with outsiders - will be decided upon by the teams themselves. It is hugely important that there are enough outsiders in the teams to make us think outside of the box.

PPI: Can technology be submitted by non team members? If so, how do they submit it?

Absolutely, that is a must. The two teams can be approached by anyone with a good idea, via the special website (www.unfoldthefuture.eu). Furthermore, we have set up a Twitter account (@CEPI2TP), a LinkedIn group (@CEPI Two Team Project) and a Facebook account (@2050 Roadmap: Two Team Project) to invite people to submit and discuss ideas. We hope that the submitted ideas will partly come from existing literature, partly be known, partly be new for our sector but known elsewhere and partly be fully new. These ideas will be digested and combined by the teams into generic concepts for breakthroughs - combinations of ideas that can be clustered into a clear and innovative direction. The final report will describe the generic concepts that the teams feel are the ones this sector should further develop.

Breakthrough Technologies: The Two Team Project

Posted in: Environment 12/17/2012 - 14:00

BRUSSELS, Dec. 18, 2012 (RISI) -The Confederation of European Paper Industries (CEPI) has taken up the challenge to investigate how to meet the European Union targets that aim to reduce CO2emissions by 80% by the year 2050. The pulp and paper industry in the region is going to be instrumental to that plan, in fact if the industry stays on its current investment path in Europe, it will already be cutting its own emissions by 50% up to the year 2050.

However, the balance of 30% has to be found by designing, trialling and implementing Breakthrough Technologies to give the industry that extra push towards its goal. Decarbonising does not only make environmental sense. When made equal to "de-energizing" the sector, it will guarantee a future in the 2050 world with high fuel and power costs. At CEPI Paper Week, held in Brussels recently, the confederation has begun addressing the balance by forming the "Two Team Project" approach in an effort to galvanise the industry into action on the R&D front. Mark Rushton Editor of PPI, finds out more by interviewing Marco Mensink, Deputy Director General of CEPI and Bernard de Galembert, Forest and Research Director.

Marco Mensink, Deputy Director General of CEPI
Bernard de Galembert, Forest and Research Director, CEPI

PPI: Can you explain why the Two Team approach has been formed?

CEPI Two Teams': In November 2011 CEPI launched its 2050 Roadmap for a low carbon economy. The Roadmap represents the vision for the sector in the next 40 years. It includes what the sector will need to achieve 80% CO2emissions reduction and create 50% more value. The document sets the vision for the transformation of the industry in the context of the bio economy and outlines the technology needs, the policy imperatives, and the financial perspectives. CEPI is now deploying the strategy to roll out the Roadmap.

In the pathway to 2050, one key element in making it happen is the development of breakthrough technologies. They have to be available by 2030 to deliver in 2050. We have ten years to think, 10 years to demo, 10 years to build and 10 years to run. Breakthrough technologies are relevant for all regions of the European pulp and paper industry, for companies of all sizes and their various activities. Breakthrough approaches will be based on the existing industrial base, contribute to the transformation of the industry within two investment generation cycles. Improved technologies, new functionalities of both existing technologies and products, and the development of new products can be the result of breakthrough approaches.

We strongly believe that breakthroughs can only be developed in a joint European sector approach. Working together imposes some rules, in particular the need to focus only on pre-competitive research and cooperation mechanisms, and this in a very secure Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) context while allowing for ideas to be brought to the table without being too restrictive.

A European approach also allows for inclusion of suppliers to the pulp and paper industry. Furthermore, inclusion of stakeholders from outside the sector is crucial as ideas out of the box are needed and the Roadmap will require alliances and partnerships with other industrial sectors.

All this led us to believe that an approach that would put two teams in competition would create the needed emulation and would fasten the process of identification of potential breakthrough technologies.

PPI: Who will the teams be made up of and how many members will they have each?

Each team is about 15 people and will at least include representatives of pulp and paper producers, technology suppliers, other suppliers, a university and research institutes, as well as representatives of external partners. Two free seats per team will be filled up by the teams themselves as they start to work. Customers will be invited for their views and needs. Each team has a "team engine", a CEPI staff member to organise meetings, workshops, exchange of information, etc. Furthermore each team will have a CEPI Director as team member. Two former CEOs are the sponsors of each team, giving guidance, inspiration and direction. The two teams will in their startup phase work together to establish a common knowledge base. The idea is that teams compete on creativity, and not lose for lack of information.

PPI: Can pulp and paper producers as well as suppliers to the industry join the teams?

Anyone connected or not even connected to the industry can submit ideas, via the different channels we have set up (website, social networks ...). Both producers and suppliers will be part of the teams. The teams will really have to become teams and will spend a lot of time together. The cohesion is in that respect crucial. It would therefore be difficult to include more people in the teams. For this reason the Two Team Project has two other features - the "skybox" and the "fan clubs". People can join the fan club of one of the teams and engage in discussions. CEPI member companies who are not represented in the teams can join the "skybox" - a position with a clear view of the ring, but with less work.

PPI: Can anyone from the industries involved apply? If so, how do they join the teams?

We have finalized the teams (see Blue and Red boxes). The blue team is led by Heiner Grussenmeyer (Stora Enso, Germany) and the red team by Jérôme Grassin (CTP France). All major players in the sector and in the research community are involved in the teams. There is no open call for (new) members. CEPI has approached the suppliers, researchers, universities, companies and free thinkers in the teams, who have then proposed team members on their behalf. The remaining free seats - to be filled with outsiders - will be decided upon by the teams themselves. It is hugely important that there are enough outsiders in the teams to make us think outside of the box.

PPI: Can technology be submitted by non team members? If so, how do they submit it?

Absolutely, that is a must. The two teams can be approached by anyone with a good idea, via the special website (www.unfoldthefuture.eu). Furthermore, we have set up a Twitter account (@CEPI2TP), a LinkedIn group (@CEPI Two Team Project) and a Facebook account (@2050 Roadmap: Two Team Project) to invite people to submit and discuss ideas. We hope that the submitted ideas will partly come from existing literature, partly be known, partly be new for our sector but known elsewhere and partly be fully new. These ideas will be digested and combined by the teams into generic concepts for breakthroughs - combinations of ideas that can be clustered into a clear and innovative direction. The final report will describe the generic concepts that the teams feel are the ones this sector should further develop.

Read more

BRUSSELS, Dec. 17, 2012 (RISI) -Replacement of hardwood kraft pulp with high-yield pulps in UCFS and CFS offers some furnish cost optimization, and can drive quality improvements and sustainability benefits. HYP addition also assists another very important trend - increasing sheet filler content.Click hereto read Part I.

Conductivity

Conductivity affects the degree to which individual charges interact and has impact on colloidal stability and the performance of polymers for retention and drainage. Increased conductivity reduces repulsive forces between charges on the flocculant molecule as it assumes coiled conformation that reduces its ability for bridging.

Pruszynski[10]studied the effect of increased conductivity on performance of a number of typical retention programs at pH=5 and pH=7, Fig. 3.

Figure 3 - Impact of various ionic impurities on the drainage loss (100% represents drainage gain from the chemical program in clean system) for dual polymer program at pH=7

Available strategies

  • Monitor the conductivity level of the HYP stream, determine its variability and understand its sources.
  • Install an online conductivity probe in the HYP stream and HB and look for correlations with paper machine data.
  • Consider pre-mixing coagulant with a cationic flocculant solution. This has typically improved the performance of the flocculant especially at increased conductivity levels, Fig.4.
  • If needed, in case of extreme conductivity buildup, consider more extensive changes to the retention program including multi-component programs (dual flocculant programs) or incorporation of bentonite typically added upstream in the thick-stock area.
  • High and varying conductivity negatively affects colloidal stability and requires early and gentle fixation of colloidal particles (pitch) to avoid agglomeration.
  • Consider a higher degree of substitution (DS) starches to better survive higher conductivity levels and improve strength and sizing applications[11].
Figure 4 - With total coagulant dosage constant, moving the feed point of coagulant from pre-screen (1) to the flocculant dilution water line (2) significantly reducesflocculant flow required to meet the whitewater consistency target

Extractives

Hardwood HYP introduces increased levels of relatively unstable natural pitch to the system and may potentially increase machine deposit potential.

Available strategies

  • Measure the level of extractives in your source of YP with a consistent total extractives measurement.
  • Evaluate the physical form of extractives in HYP lurry microscopically to determine amount and particle size. A pitch particle that increases to twice its diameter is 8-times heavier and much less stable.
  • Application of Nalco HYBRID coagulants was found to promote desired attachment to the fiber with limited colloidal agglomeration[12]and have low impact on fiber zeta potential and OBA performance.
  • Operate thickening stages in the pulp mill at as high a pH level as possible to maximize extractives removal without brightness loss.
  • Fix colloidal particles to fibers and fines as early as possible to prevent agglomeration.
  • Apply fixative treatment to the thick stock but closer to the headbox (machine chest pump inlet) for final polishing treatment.
  • Measure the hardness level and control pH in systems that use calcium carbonate fillers to avoid calcium ion saponification of pitch.
  • Optimize microbiological treatment and broke operating strategies to prevent pH depression anywhere in the system, especially in large broke towers.

Brightness and OBA performance

HYP can be produced at a very high brightness and their addition even at high fiber substitution levels may not affect brightness significantly. However, the lignin content of these pulps results in a yellowing tendency in the paper when exposed to UV or heat and impacts the performance of OBA additives.

UV-VIS light quenching by lignin explains the lower level of fluorescence from OBA additives. Wood-free coated grades of paper, with OBA added as a part of the coating formulation, are less affected as the integrity of the coating layer minimizes the impact of the lignin present in the base sheet[13].

Ni[14]discussed the effect of HYP on brightness stability in uncoated wood-free grades. Increasing PCC filler content not only increased immediate OBA performance levels but also sheet brightness stability. In a very elegant set of experiments, authors[13]demonstrated that combining the stabilizing effects of OBA and PCC allows for the production of papers with HYP and high UV brightness stability.

Interesting results were observed by Ni and Pruszynski[15]when studying the impact of surface size treatment with Nalco's EXTRA WHITE® (EW) brightness technology. Adding EW to the size press formulation increased the brightness ceiling by about 2 units and the CEI whiteness ceiling by about 6 units, Fig.5,6.

Figure 5 - Effect of EW on the brightness ceiling of HYP-containing sheets
Figure 6 - Effect of EW on the CIE whiteness ceiling of HYP-containing sheets

Strength

In terms of strength, HYP occupy an intermediate position between typical mechanical pulps and chemical pulps. Gao[16]reviewed HYP fiber development strategies in terms of certain quality expectations. These strategies indicate a number of trade-offs between certain pulp properties such as tensile, strength, and bulk. Increased fiber rigidity, less external fibrillation, lignin content and higher fines content reduce the strength of HYP compared with kraft pulps. Some data indicate that increasing the content of HYP in a copy paper furnish from 0% to 20% decreased MD breaking length from 6.0 km to 5.7 km (5% drop) and CD breaking length from 3.3 km to 2.9 km (13% drop). The tear index remained practically unchanged. Other strength related issues need to be considered, including surface strength as related to offset printability issues, such as linting and dusting. The effect to which HYP impact paper strength depend on many factors and in some cases at low substitution levels (10-15%) it was observed that the synergy between HYP fines and HWK content led to strength improvement.

Available strategies

  • Optimize HYP grade selection to best meet goals in terms of cost and impact on quality. If possible, select HYP grade with least impact on strength properties.
  • Select starch with higher degree of substitution at higher conductivity.
  • Bearing in mind the saturation of the dosage-response curve for starch application, consider the use of synthetic strength materials.
  • Pre-treatment of HYP with proper coagulant typically results in improved cost effectiveness of starch and synthetic strength additives.

Conclusions

The successful introduction of HYP into typical wood-free furnish blends requires papermakers to take advantage of established best practices from mechanical grades in conjunction with new technology development. Remedies for potential issues such as increased levels of contamination and variability of wet-end conditions, extractives control, brightness, and strength optimization were discussed in this paper. The authors wish to emphasize that increased levels of cooperation between papermakers and specialty chemical suppliers will be required as the trend of increasing HYP continues. PPI

LITERATURE
10. PRUSZYNSKI P, JAKUBOWSKI R., Appita Journal 2006, 59(2); 114-119.
11. BEAUDOIN, R., GRATTON, R. and TURCOTTE, R., J.Pulp Paper Sci.21(7), J238 (1995).
12. MAHER, L., STACK, K., McLEAN, D., RICHARDSON, D, APPITA Annual Conference and Exhibition (2005), 59th, 115-122.
13. YUAN, Z., SCHMIDT J, HEITNER, C., et al, TAPPI J., 5(1): 9-13 (2006)
14. He, Z., HUI, L., LIU, Z., NI, Y., and ZHOU, Y. TAPPI J., 9(3); 15-20(2010)
15. NI, Y., LONG, Z., PRUSZYNSKI P., unpublished work
16. GAO, Y., HUANG, F., RAJBHANDARI, V., LI, K., and ZHOU, Y., Pulp and Paper Canada, 28-33, July/August 2009.

Increase high-yield pulps in fine paper furnish - Part II

Posted in: Chemicals 12/16/2012 - 23:20

BRUSSELS, Dec. 17, 2012 (RISI) -Replacement of hardwood kraft pulp with high-yield pulps in UCFS and CFS offers some furnish cost optimization, and can drive quality improvements and sustainability benefits. HYP addition also assists another very important trend - increasing sheet filler content.Click hereto read Part I.

Conductivity

Conductivity affects the degree to which individual charges interact and has impact on colloidal stability and the performance of polymers for retention and drainage. Increased conductivity reduces repulsive forces between charges on the flocculant molecule as it assumes coiled conformation that reduces its ability for bridging.

Pruszynski[10]studied the effect of increased conductivity on performance of a number of typical retention programs at pH=5 and pH=7, Fig. 3.

Figure 3 - Impact of various ionic impurities on the drainage loss (100% represents drainage gain from the chemical program in clean system) for dual polymer program at pH=7

Available strategies

  • Monitor the conductivity level of the HYP stream, determine its variability and understand its sources.
  • Install an online conductivity probe in the HYP stream and HB and look for correlations with paper machine data.
  • Consider pre-mixing coagulant with a cationic flocculant solution. This has typically improved the performance of the flocculant especially at increased conductivity levels, Fig.4.
  • If needed, in case of extreme conductivity buildup, consider more extensive changes to the retention program including multi-component programs (dual flocculant programs) or incorporation of bentonite typically added upstream in the thick-stock area.
  • High and varying conductivity negatively affects colloidal stability and requires early and gentle fixation of colloidal particles (pitch) to avoid agglomeration.
  • Consider a higher degree of substitution (DS) starches to better survive higher conductivity levels and improve strength and sizing applications[11].
Figure 4 - With total coagulant dosage constant, moving the feed point of coagulant from pre-screen (1) to the flocculant dilution water line (2) significantly reducesflocculant flow required to meet the whitewater consistency target

Extractives

Hardwood HYP introduces increased levels of relatively unstable natural pitch to the system and may potentially increase machine deposit potential.

Available strategies

  • Measure the level of extractives in your source of YP with a consistent total extractives measurement.
  • Evaluate the physical form of extractives in HYP lurry microscopically to determine amount and particle size. A pitch particle that increases to twice its diameter is 8-times heavier and much less stable.
  • Application of Nalco HYBRID coagulants was found to promote desired attachment to the fiber with limited colloidal agglomeration[12]and have low impact on fiber zeta potential and OBA performance.
  • Operate thickening stages in the pulp mill at as high a pH level as possible to maximize extractives removal without brightness loss.
  • Fix colloidal particles to fibers and fines as early as possible to prevent agglomeration.
  • Apply fixative treatment to the thick stock but closer to the headbox (machine chest pump inlet) for final polishing treatment.
  • Measure the hardness level and control pH in systems that use calcium carbonate fillers to avoid calcium ion saponification of pitch.
  • Optimize microbiological treatment and broke operating strategies to prevent pH depression anywhere in the system, especially in large broke towers.

Brightness and OBA performance

HYP can be produced at a very high brightness and their addition even at high fiber substitution levels may not affect brightness significantly. However, the lignin content of these pulps results in a yellowing tendency in the paper when exposed to UV or heat and impacts the performance of OBA additives.

UV-VIS light quenching by lignin explains the lower level of fluorescence from OBA additives. Wood-free coated grades of paper, with OBA added as a part of the coating formulation, are less affected as the integrity of the coating layer minimizes the impact of the lignin present in the base sheet[13].

Ni[14]discussed the effect of HYP on brightness stability in uncoated wood-free grades. Increasing PCC filler content not only increased immediate OBA performance levels but also sheet brightness stability. In a very elegant set of experiments, authors[13]demonstrated that combining the stabilizing effects of OBA and PCC allows for the production of papers with HYP and high UV brightness stability.

Interesting results were observed by Ni and Pruszynski[15]when studying the impact of surface size treatment with Nalco's EXTRA WHITE® (EW) brightness technology. Adding EW to the size press formulation increased the brightness ceiling by about 2 units and the CEI whiteness ceiling by about 6 units, Fig.5,6.

Figure 5 - Effect of EW on the brightness ceiling of HYP-containing sheets
Figure 6 - Effect of EW on the CIE whiteness ceiling of HYP-containing sheets

Strength

In terms of strength, HYP occupy an intermediate position between typical mechanical pulps and chemical pulps. Gao[16]reviewed HYP fiber development strategies in terms of certain quality expectations. These strategies indicate a number of trade-offs between certain pulp properties such as tensile, strength, and bulk. Increased fiber rigidity, less external fibrillation, lignin content and higher fines content reduce the strength of HYP compared with kraft pulps. Some data indicate that increasing the content of HYP in a copy paper furnish from 0% to 20% decreased MD breaking length from 6.0 km to 5.7 km (5% drop) and CD breaking length from 3.3 km to 2.9 km (13% drop). The tear index remained practically unchanged. Other strength related issues need to be considered, including surface strength as related to offset printability issues, such as linting and dusting. The effect to which HYP impact paper strength depend on many factors and in some cases at low substitution levels (10-15%) it was observed that the synergy between HYP fines and HWK content led to strength improvement.

Available strategies

  • Optimize HYP grade selection to best meet goals in terms of cost and impact on quality. If possible, select HYP grade with least impact on strength properties.
  • Select starch with higher degree of substitution at higher conductivity.
  • Bearing in mind the saturation of the dosage-response curve for starch application, consider the use of synthetic strength materials.
  • Pre-treatment of HYP with proper coagulant typically results in improved cost effectiveness of starch and synthetic strength additives.

Conclusions

The successful introduction of HYP into typical wood-free furnish blends requires papermakers to take advantage of established best practices from mechanical grades in conjunction with new technology development. Remedies for potential issues such as increased levels of contamination and variability of wet-end conditions, extractives control, brightness, and strength optimization were discussed in this paper. The authors wish to emphasize that increased levels of cooperation between papermakers and specialty chemical suppliers will be required as the trend of increasing HYP continues. PPI

LITERATURE
10. PRUSZYNSKI P, JAKUBOWSKI R., Appita Journal 2006, 59(2); 114-119.
11. BEAUDOIN, R., GRATTON, R. and TURCOTTE, R., J.Pulp Paper Sci.21(7), J238 (1995).
12. MAHER, L., STACK, K., McLEAN, D., RICHARDSON, D, APPITA Annual Conference and Exhibition (2005), 59th, 115-122.
13. YUAN, Z., SCHMIDT J, HEITNER, C., et al, TAPPI J., 5(1): 9-13 (2006)
14. He, Z., HUI, L., LIU, Z., NI, Y., and ZHOU, Y. TAPPI J., 9(3); 15-20(2010)
15. NI, Y., LONG, Z., PRUSZYNSKI P., unpublished work
16. GAO, Y., HUANG, F., RAJBHANDARI, V., LI, K., and ZHOU, Y., Pulp and Paper Canada, 28-33, July/August 2009.

Read more

BRUSSELS, Dec. 17, 2012 (RISI) -The elusive goal of a refinery with biomass as a feedstock has moved a step closer to reality, thanks to technology developed by the Gas Technology Institute (GTI) of Des Plaines, IL,and Houston-based Catalytic Research Institute (CRI).

The IH2technology makes use of proprietary catalysts developed through the cooperative efforts of CRI's affiliates in their research facilities in Bangalore, India, and manufactured by CRI affiliates in the US, Belgium and Germany.

Chicago-based GTI is a non-profit body that was originally established by a consortium of gas companies. Its current mandate is to develop energy solutions, typically working with a third party. It has a staff of 250 and holds more than 1,200 patents.

GTI and CRI have commercial agreements in place for joint development and novel R&D focused on catalyst development, and an exclusive worldwide license granted to CRI as the sole licensor of IH2technology.

CRI's involvement with GTI began three years ago. Mike Demaline, Global Business Manager for Renewable Fuels in the Forestry, Pulp & Paper sector explains, "We got involved because GTI knew they needed catalysts to develop the technology. As we familiarized ourselves with their process, we knew it had the potential to transform the industry by providing transportation fuel range hydrocarbons direct from biomass. We supplied the initial catalysts that GTI used and we knew we could significantly enhance the process by further developing proprietary catalyst lines."

With an eye on both sustainability and the bottom line, CRI realized agreements between the two organizations relative to IH2technology made perfect sense.

How about seaweed?

IH2is a catalytic thermo-chemical process designed to produce fungible liquid transportation fuels and/or blend stocks from lignocellulosic and other forms of biomass. Wood was GTI's initial choice because it knew the material and already had a concept in mind. Perhaps more importantly an abundant, sustainable supply could be readily available at a good price. However, the IH2process has been shown effective at the conversion of a broad range of other biomass types including seaweed, aquatic plants, algae, bagasse, corn stover and even municipal solid waste. Future work will examine customer specific feedstocks including miscanthus, jatropha and residues from sweet sorghum.

The feedstocks are fungible, meaning that the molecular structures present are the same as those in fossil-based fuels such as gasoline, jet fuel or diesel. Demaline says that at first, he expects the renewable hydrocarbons will be blended with traditional fuels. Independent life cycles studies suggest that the carbon footprint should be at least 94% lower than traditional fossil hydrocarbons on a seed to wheel basis.

The development of alternative fuels is important to the US as the government encourages the use of non-fossil based fuels. However, the US consumes 13.5 million barrels per day of liquid transport fuel , making goals non-fossil based fuels challenging to meet.

This may be evidenced by standards which originally set goals of 36 billion gal/yr of renewable fuel, which have been amended more recently to 25.7 billion gal/yr

A paper co-authored by GTI and CRI personnel shows possible scenarios of the IH2process using various feedstocks. For example, it shows a 2,000-bone-dry-ton wood feed/day plant could use stumps, branches, sawdust, bark and even the possibility to blend in various mill sludges. Hardwood or softwood, it makes no difference.

Research shows the IH2process can produce up to 92 gallons of liquid fuel per ton of wood feedstock (on a dry, ash-free basis). This totals 184,000 gal/day. The gasoline:diesel ratio would be expected to be 70:30.

It is a low-waste producing process. Product oxygen is below detectable limits and the total acid number or TAN is less than 0.03. Demaline points out this is very low and that most refineries invoke special procedures when processing crude oil with a TAN of more than two. Traditional pyrolysis oils have a TAN in excess of 100.

Still, to put it into perspective, to meet the amended fuel blend requirements of the US would potentially mean 400 such "bio-refineries" would needed by 2020 .

Demaline stresses that CRI and GTI are poised to meet the relevant challenges in the deployment phase. It will not be easy, since in full production, a 2,000-ton/day plant in a day would produce the equivalent of 12 hours' production of a world-scale fossil fuel refinery.

Moving ahead, Demaline states "We can make a dent in these numbers. The market is big because of the mandate."

The pilot plant produces sufficient product to allow fuel qualification

"Game changing" technology

So how does it work? Demaline says the IH2process is "game changing". The process equipment is not new or novel nor does it require special materials to construct. It can be refinery or mill integrated although the refinery integration model may have better economics.

Lignocellulosic biomass contains oxygen and this must be removed for it to become a hydrocarbon; that's why the catalytic thermo-chemical process is used. Breaking the carbon-oxygen bonds and replacing them with carbon-hydrogen bonds (and forming water as a result) creates heat (i.e. it is exothermic) that, for example, can be used to make high pressure steam for a paper machine dryer.

The oxygen from the biomass is removed primarily as water. The water is then used together with light gases produced by the process as the input to create all the hydrogen the system needs together with CO2. The CO2is referred to as "green" CO2because it comes from a non-fossil source. Demaline says this CO2may be captured to create a product for enhanced oil recovery, food or chemical products.

The cellulose and lignin molecules are turned into gasoline, jet fuel and diesel molecules. To get to the end product, there are various stages. The first is feed conditioning where the raw material is sized
(2-4 mm is optimum), mixed and dried.

The first stage reactor is a bubbling fluidized bed (BFB) but unlike a traditional BFB boiler, no sand is used. "Instead, we use advanced proprietary catalysts," Demaline explains. The BFB is loaded with the catalyst, which acts as a heat transfer mechanism.

Inside the BFB, the biomass meets the catalyst in the presence of a low-pressure hydrogen atmosphere. Hydrogen is produced in a hydrogen manufacturing unit (HMU).

The reaction takes seconds in the pressurized reactor. By the end of the first stage, the material is in vapor form and the vapor includes hydrocarbon molecules of varying length as well as the water.

The first stage takes out the majority of the oxygen. The second stage takes out the rest as well as undesirable trace elements such as sulfur and nitrogen.

A cyclone collects char and ash (about 10-12%), the char having an energy content of 11,000-12,000 BTU/lb.

The process requires a fossil fuel source such as natural gas only at startup. It is used in three places: to heat the first stage reactor; to pre-heat the feed to the second stage reactor and as an initial feed gas in the HMU. The process is self-sufficient and self-sustaining after startup, no longer requiring the need for natural gas addition.

Catalysts are the key to using biomass as fuel

Posted in: Chemicals 12/16/2012 - 14:00

BRUSSELS, Dec. 17, 2012 (RISI) -The elusive goal of a refinery with biomass as a feedstock has moved a step closer to reality, thanks to technology developed by the Gas Technology Institute (GTI) of Des Plaines, IL,and Houston-based Catalytic Research Institute (CRI).

The IH2technology makes use of proprietary catalysts developed through the cooperative efforts of CRI's affiliates in their research facilities in Bangalore, India, and manufactured by CRI affiliates in the US, Belgium and Germany.

Chicago-based GTI is a non-profit body that was originally established by a consortium of gas companies. Its current mandate is to develop energy solutions, typically working with a third party. It has a staff of 250 and holds more than 1,200 patents.

GTI and CRI have commercial agreements in place for joint development and novel R&D focused on catalyst development, and an exclusive worldwide license granted to CRI as the sole licensor of IH2technology.

CRI's involvement with GTI began three years ago. Mike Demaline, Global Business Manager for Renewable Fuels in the Forestry, Pulp & Paper sector explains, "We got involved because GTI knew they needed catalysts to develop the technology. As we familiarized ourselves with their process, we knew it had the potential to transform the industry by providing transportation fuel range hydrocarbons direct from biomass. We supplied the initial catalysts that GTI used and we knew we could significantly enhance the process by further developing proprietary catalyst lines."

With an eye on both sustainability and the bottom line, CRI realized agreements between the two organizations relative to IH2technology made perfect sense.

How about seaweed?

IH2is a catalytic thermo-chemical process designed to produce fungible liquid transportation fuels and/or blend stocks from lignocellulosic and other forms of biomass. Wood was GTI's initial choice because it knew the material and already had a concept in mind. Perhaps more importantly an abundant, sustainable supply could be readily available at a good price. However, the IH2process has been shown effective at the conversion of a broad range of other biomass types including seaweed, aquatic plants, algae, bagasse, corn stover and even municipal solid waste. Future work will examine customer specific feedstocks including miscanthus, jatropha and residues from sweet sorghum.

The feedstocks are fungible, meaning that the molecular structures present are the same as those in fossil-based fuels such as gasoline, jet fuel or diesel. Demaline says that at first, he expects the renewable hydrocarbons will be blended with traditional fuels. Independent life cycles studies suggest that the carbon footprint should be at least 94% lower than traditional fossil hydrocarbons on a seed to wheel basis.

The development of alternative fuels is important to the US as the government encourages the use of non-fossil based fuels. However, the US consumes 13.5 million barrels per day of liquid transport fuel , making goals non-fossil based fuels challenging to meet.

This may be evidenced by standards which originally set goals of 36 billion gal/yr of renewable fuel, which have been amended more recently to 25.7 billion gal/yr

A paper co-authored by GTI and CRI personnel shows possible scenarios of the IH2process using various feedstocks. For example, it shows a 2,000-bone-dry-ton wood feed/day plant could use stumps, branches, sawdust, bark and even the possibility to blend in various mill sludges. Hardwood or softwood, it makes no difference.

Research shows the IH2process can produce up to 92 gallons of liquid fuel per ton of wood feedstock (on a dry, ash-free basis). This totals 184,000 gal/day. The gasoline:diesel ratio would be expected to be 70:30.

It is a low-waste producing process. Product oxygen is below detectable limits and the total acid number or TAN is less than 0.03. Demaline points out this is very low and that most refineries invoke special procedures when processing crude oil with a TAN of more than two. Traditional pyrolysis oils have a TAN in excess of 100.

Still, to put it into perspective, to meet the amended fuel blend requirements of the US would potentially mean 400 such "bio-refineries" would needed by 2020 .

Demaline stresses that CRI and GTI are poised to meet the relevant challenges in the deployment phase. It will not be easy, since in full production, a 2,000-ton/day plant in a day would produce the equivalent of 12 hours' production of a world-scale fossil fuel refinery.

Moving ahead, Demaline states "We can make a dent in these numbers. The market is big because of the mandate."

The pilot plant produces sufficient product to allow fuel qualification

"Game changing" technology

So how does it work? Demaline says the IH2process is "game changing". The process equipment is not new or novel nor does it require special materials to construct. It can be refinery or mill integrated although the refinery integration model may have better economics.

Lignocellulosic biomass contains oxygen and this must be removed for it to become a hydrocarbon; that's why the catalytic thermo-chemical process is used. Breaking the carbon-oxygen bonds and replacing them with carbon-hydrogen bonds (and forming water as a result) creates heat (i.e. it is exothermic) that, for example, can be used to make high pressure steam for a paper machine dryer.

The oxygen from the biomass is removed primarily as water. The water is then used together with light gases produced by the process as the input to create all the hydrogen the system needs together with CO2. The CO2is referred to as "green" CO2because it comes from a non-fossil source. Demaline says this CO2may be captured to create a product for enhanced oil recovery, food or chemical products.

The cellulose and lignin molecules are turned into gasoline, jet fuel and diesel molecules. To get to the end product, there are various stages. The first is feed conditioning where the raw material is sized
(2-4 mm is optimum), mixed and dried.

The first stage reactor is a bubbling fluidized bed (BFB) but unlike a traditional BFB boiler, no sand is used. "Instead, we use advanced proprietary catalysts," Demaline explains. The BFB is loaded with the catalyst, which acts as a heat transfer mechanism.

Inside the BFB, the biomass meets the catalyst in the presence of a low-pressure hydrogen atmosphere. Hydrogen is produced in a hydrogen manufacturing unit (HMU).

The reaction takes seconds in the pressurized reactor. By the end of the first stage, the material is in vapor form and the vapor includes hydrocarbon molecules of varying length as well as the water.

The first stage takes out the majority of the oxygen. The second stage takes out the rest as well as undesirable trace elements such as sulfur and nitrogen.

A cyclone collects char and ash (about 10-12%), the char having an energy content of 11,000-12,000 BTU/lb.

The process requires a fossil fuel source such as natural gas only at startup. It is used in three places: to heat the first stage reactor; to pre-heat the feed to the second stage reactor and as an initial feed gas in the HMU. The process is self-sufficient and self-sustaining after startup, no longer requiring the need for natural gas addition.

Read more

BRUSSELS, Dec. 10, 2012 (RISI) -Energy has historically been a major component of an integrated pulp and paper mill's overall operating cost structure. As energy costs have rapidly escalated over the last five years, how well a mill positions itself to manage this spend can be a major determinant in its long-term viability.

To address this priority mills have responded in a variety of ways. To leverage their own internal operational and engineering expertise, many facilities have used on-site staff and resources from other mills within their corporation to identify and evaluate energy optimization (EO) opportunities. Outside energy management consultants are routinely contracted to perform studies on a mill's potential to optimize energy costs. With all of these efforts, expertise and analysis one may wonder if yet another different perspective could generate additional novel and innovative solutions.

Most energy studies whether performed by internal teams or outside consultants have a tendency to specialize in a certain branch of EO whether it is demand-side conservation project identification or power supply-side agreement cost-reduction. As is often the case, when one steps back to take a broader view of the mill production cycles, additional perspectives and solutions may arise. This is the arena where the Nalco approach to EO excels and serves to complement existing, ongoing and previously performed work. The main objective of the Nalco EO approach is to develop a short list of high impact projects that can be easily implemented with little or no capital, Fig. 1.

Many integrated mills are good candidates for the Nalco EO approach. From experience a brief phone interview with mill operations staff members is all that is required to determine if a mill could benefit from the Nalco approach.

Fig. 1 - The fluency in all branches of EO allows Nalco to provide innovative solutions to compliment specialized efforts by the mill and conventional energy management consultants

The need for a thermodynamic model

An integrated pulp and paper mill has one of the most complex industrial utilities operations, burning multiple fuels and supplying varying proportions of mill electrical demand. Simple conservation- minded approaches to energy cost reduction can have the unanticipated effect of actually raising overall facility operating costs. For example, a project to conserve low-pressure steam in a pulp mill could lead the power and recovery department to adjust its operations which could in itself result in a purchase of more electricity at a higher rate because decreased steam demand reduces turbine electrical output. These are the kind of complex inter-relationships that necessitate the development of a comprehensive thermodynamic model (TM) of mill power production, Fig. 2, as the first step in the Nalco EO approach. The main purpose of the model is to easily evaluate the financial consequences of any change in the utility which could be influenced by an increase or decrease in steam demand at a variety of pressures.

In one Nalco EO project the thermodynamic model confirmed that a previous attempt to increase the heat recovery in the boiler make-up water system ahead of a reverse osmosis system was producing a net increase in energy consumption and subsequent cost. An alternate solution, verified by the thermodynamic model, was identified whereby the addition of a vent condenser on the condensate storage tank, would enable the mill to generate the desired increased heat recovery in a more cost effective manner. The mill achieved a net saving of ~$275,000 after recovery of the capital and installation costs associated with the second exchanger.

Figure 2 - The TM of the utility allows complex inter-relationships to be considered and the financial impact quantified when planning a process change that will affect a mill’s energy picture

Where to start: Mining the data for gold

Once the TM has been constructed it is possible to determine how either the production process or the utility can be manipulated and any subsequent impact on energy costs. The next step in the EO process is to establish the correct strategy for the particular mill by asking a series of general questions:

  • Can the mill produce more power internally?
  • If so, what are the implications on fuel costs and power contracts?
  • If more power is produced, what amount of additional steam would be generated and at what pressure?
  • If more steam is produced, how could it be used in the various process areas to provide a process benefit?

This is one example of a typical line of reasoning that is undertaken once the model is constructed.

In addition to the TM model, an energy consumption benchmarking exercise is conducted. There are comprehensive thermal energy consumption benchmarks that have been published for the pulp and paper industry for entire mills and individual production areas, Fig. 3.

Reviewing benchmarks in one case challenged long held views of performance in the mill's evaporator section. The mill had what they thought was an acceptable steam economy and annual steam usage with respect to grade and tons produced. The benchmark exercise revealed comparisons that prompted the mill technical staff to closely inspect the evaporator set during the annual outage. This comprehensive inspection revealed a problem that was able to be corrected and reduce mill steam load to the point that auxiliary No. 6 fuel oil was no longer required.

Figure 3 - Example of using energy consumption benchmarking comparisons by process area. This measure is a useful step in establishing an EO strategy

To be continued ...Click here to read Part II

Pulp & Paper Internationalis FREE to qualified subscribers.Click hereto find out more.

Managing the overlap

Posted in: Bio-Insight 12/09/2012 - 14:00

BRUSSELS, Dec. 10, 2012 (RISI) -Energy has historically been a major component of an integrated pulp and paper mill's overall operating cost structure. As energy costs have rapidly escalated over the last five years, how well a mill positions itself to manage this spend can be a major determinant in its long-term viability.

To address this priority mills have responded in a variety of ways. To leverage their own internal operational and engineering expertise, many facilities have used on-site staff and resources from other mills within their corporation to identify and evaluate energy optimization (EO) opportunities. Outside energy management consultants are routinely contracted to perform studies on a mill's potential to optimize energy costs. With all of these efforts, expertise and analysis one may wonder if yet another different perspective could generate additional novel and innovative solutions.

Most energy studies whether performed by internal teams or outside consultants have a tendency to specialize in a certain branch of EO whether it is demand-side conservation project identification or power supply-side agreement cost-reduction. As is often the case, when one steps back to take a broader view of the mill production cycles, additional perspectives and solutions may arise. This is the arena where the Nalco approach to EO excels and serves to complement existing, ongoing and previously performed work. The main objective of the Nalco EO approach is to develop a short list of high impact projects that can be easily implemented with little or no capital, Fig. 1.

Many integrated mills are good candidates for the Nalco EO approach. From experience a brief phone interview with mill operations staff members is all that is required to determine if a mill could benefit from the Nalco approach.

Fig. 1 - The fluency in all branches of EO allows Nalco to provide innovative solutions to compliment specialized efforts by the mill and conventional energy management consultants

The need for a thermodynamic model

An integrated pulp and paper mill has one of the most complex industrial utilities operations, burning multiple fuels and supplying varying proportions of mill electrical demand. Simple conservation- minded approaches to energy cost reduction can have the unanticipated effect of actually raising overall facility operating costs. For example, a project to conserve low-pressure steam in a pulp mill could lead the power and recovery department to adjust its operations which could in itself result in a purchase of more electricity at a higher rate because decreased steam demand reduces turbine electrical output. These are the kind of complex inter-relationships that necessitate the development of a comprehensive thermodynamic model (TM) of mill power production, Fig. 2, as the first step in the Nalco EO approach. The main purpose of the model is to easily evaluate the financial consequences of any change in the utility which could be influenced by an increase or decrease in steam demand at a variety of pressures.

In one Nalco EO project the thermodynamic model confirmed that a previous attempt to increase the heat recovery in the boiler make-up water system ahead of a reverse osmosis system was producing a net increase in energy consumption and subsequent cost. An alternate solution, verified by the thermodynamic model, was identified whereby the addition of a vent condenser on the condensate storage tank, would enable the mill to generate the desired increased heat recovery in a more cost effective manner. The mill achieved a net saving of ~$275,000 after recovery of the capital and installation costs associated with the second exchanger.

Figure 2 - The TM of the utility allows complex inter-relationships to be considered and the financial impact quantified when planning a process change that will affect a mill’s energy picture

Where to start: Mining the data for gold

Once the TM has been constructed it is possible to determine how either the production process or the utility can be manipulated and any subsequent impact on energy costs. The next step in the EO process is to establish the correct strategy for the particular mill by asking a series of general questions:

  • Can the mill produce more power internally?
  • If so, what are the implications on fuel costs and power contracts?
  • If more power is produced, what amount of additional steam would be generated and at what pressure?
  • If more steam is produced, how could it be used in the various process areas to provide a process benefit?

This is one example of a typical line of reasoning that is undertaken once the model is constructed.

In addition to the TM model, an energy consumption benchmarking exercise is conducted. There are comprehensive thermal energy consumption benchmarks that have been published for the pulp and paper industry for entire mills and individual production areas, Fig. 3.

Reviewing benchmarks in one case challenged long held views of performance in the mill's evaporator section. The mill had what they thought was an acceptable steam economy and annual steam usage with respect to grade and tons produced. The benchmark exercise revealed comparisons that prompted the mill technical staff to closely inspect the evaporator set during the annual outage. This comprehensive inspection revealed a problem that was able to be corrected and reduce mill steam load to the point that auxiliary No. 6 fuel oil was no longer required.

Figure 3 - Example of using energy consumption benchmarking comparisons by process area. This measure is a useful step in establishing an EO strategy

To be continued ...Click here to read Part II

Pulp & Paper Internationalis FREE to qualified subscribers.Click hereto find out more.

Read more

Pages

Copyright © 2020 RISI. All rights reserved.