public summary of 2014 ontario solid wood combustion
TRANSCRIPT
Public Summary
of
2014 Ontario
Solid Wood Combustion
Equipment Manufacturers Survey
In 2014, a survey was conducted by the Wood Heating Systems < 3MW – Environmental Compliance
Approval Interim Guidance Sub-Project Team with the purpose of gathering information pertaining to the
design, operation, performance and cost of commercially available wood fired heating systems with an
energy input rating of less than 3 megawatts (MW). The team is structured through a partnership between
the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources
and Forestry, and Confederation College’s OPG Bioenergy Learning and Research Centre with support
from Natural Resources Canada and the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.
Contact Karry Anne Campbell, Policy Analyst – Forest Economy, Forest Tenure and Economics Branch,
Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry for more information. [email protected]
This Public Summary of the 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment Manufacturers Survey
(the “Summary”) is provided on an ‘as-is’ basis and the Province of Ontario makes no warranty, either
express or implied, including but not limited to, warranties of merchantability and fitness for any
particular purpose or that the information is complete or accurate. In no event will the Province of Ontario
or our project partners and other contributors, be liable for any direct, special, indirect, consequential or
other damages, however caused. By using all or part of the Summary, the user acknowledges that the use
of or reliance on the contents contained is solely at their own risk. This Public Summary [of the 2014
Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment Manufacturers Survey] should not be relied upon to predict
what will be contained in the existing or future Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change’s
guidance on technical requirements for wood-fired combustors.
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
Survey Method, Recruitment and
Participation
This survey was conducted in March and April of 2014 through an English language electronic survey
tool. 81 equipment manufacturers or distributors from Europe and North America were identified as
having models for wood pellets or wood chips >50kW to < 3MW on an energy input basis. These
businesses were contacted through e-mail or their website contact function and asked to identify an
appropriate technical contact, who was then requested to participate in the survey. Canadian equipment
manufacturers and distributors were also contacted by phone to identify an appropriate technical contact,
who was then requested to participate in the survey. Some European manufacturers forwarded the
responsibility to respond to the survey to their North American distributor. Some organizations and
associations were contacted and requested to communicate to their members the opportunity to participate
in the survey. The lead survey author also did direct survey participation recruitment at the Northeast
Biomass Heating Expo in Portland Maine, US. There were 51 exhibitors with over half being wood
combustion equipment manufacturers of varying styles.
The general product line section was the minimum requested participation with the wood pellet and wood
chip examples being optional. Any individual question could be skipped, thus response levels changed
from question to question. The survey was piloted with one association, one equipment manufacturer and
one equipment distributor. Equipment manufacturers and distributors were asked to participate so that the
survey data could inform the development of a new interim guidance document for small scale wood
combustion Environmental Compliance Approval permits in Ontario, Canada. They were told that their
specific survey information would be kept confidential and a public summary report for the whole sector
would be shared with survey participants and the supporting biomass heat community of practice. No
compensation was provided for participation in the survey.
This document is the aforementioned public summary of the survey. It has been subject to some limited
editing and exclusion of proprietary knowledge responses in order to protect the anonymity of the survey
results. Most of the questions are multiple-choice or yes/no. All of the questions have been included,
however, in some cases responses are not shared if the response size was too small or the response
indicated information about who participated in the survey. Where possible short answers and comments
are included or summarized without disclosing the identity of the contributing survey participant.
“Other” comments for multiple-choice questions are not shared to protect the anonymity of the survey
results.
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
Section 1: General Product Line
This section had general questions about the product line offered by the company. Respondents were told
their responses should be focused to their wood pellet or wood chip combustion system “models”
>50kW to < 3MW on an energy input basis. (Reference conditions: dry basis at 11% oxygen, temperature
25°C and pressure 101.3 kPA).
Manufacturer Information - Section 1: General Product Line
1. Name of Company:
In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be shared.
2. Country of Origin/Manufacturing:
The invitation to participate in the survey resulted in 23 participants from various North American and
European equipment manufacturers, including: Canada, United States, Austria, Czech Republic,
Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Italy and Sweden. The majority of respondents were from EU (59%) and
36% of respondents were from North America. Austria, Canada, and then the United States had the
highest participation. 19% were identified as both EU and North America, with 10% clarifying North
American assembly.
3. Is there a current distributor in Canada?
Answered Question 21
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 52% 11
No 48% 10
4. If yes to question #3, please specify their names and contact information:
In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be shared.
5. Are there units already operating in Canada?
Answered Question 21
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 71% 15
No 29% 6
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
6. If yes to question #5, please specify location examples:
Out of the respondents who indicated they had units operating in Canada, 31% identified multiple
provinces. 38% answered that they have units located in Quebec. 31% have units in Atlantic Canada.
North West Territories and Manitoba were the next popular locations for units in Canada with 19% of
respondents indicating each location.
7. Are there models certified for operation in Canada?
Answered Question 21
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 62% 13
No 38% 8
8. If models are certified, to which standards? Note: Respondents were to select all that applied.
Answered Question 15
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Electrical Certification
Approvals
13% 2
CSA International
(also known as
Canadian Standards
Association)
67% 10
ESA, Electrical Safety
Authority
7% 1
FM Approvals LLC 0% 0
IAPMO Research and
Testing Inc.
0% 0
Intertek Testing
Services – ETL and
Entela
7% 1
LabTest Certification
Inc.: LC
0% 0
NSF International:
NSF
0% 0
QPS Evaluation
Services Inc.: QPS
0% 0
OMNI-Test
Laboratories, Inc.:
OTL
27% 4
Underwriters
Laboratories of
Canada: ULC or UL
40% 6
ET Laboratories Inc.:
MET
0% 0
Other (please specify) In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
9. Boiler Approvals:
Answered Question 13
Answer Response Percent Response Count
UL2523 (Underwriters
Laboratories of
Canada)
15% 2
CSAB416 or B366
(Canadian Standards
Association)
46% 6
ASME IV (American
Society of Mechanical
Engineers)
85% 11
Other In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
10. If not currently certified in Canada, does your current product line have models that you
could obtain Canadian federal and provincial certifications for?
Answered Question 18
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 61% 11
No 6% 1
Not Applicable 33% 6
Product Line Information – Section 1: General Product Line
11. Do you offer a defined product line of wood combustion devices (“off-the-shelf models”)?
Answered Question 21
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 81% 17
No 19% 4
12. How many models of wood combustors do you carry?
There were 19 respondents to this question, with the minimum number of models being 3. The median #
of models is 5 and only 21% of the respondents carried more than 20 models.
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
13. What size ranges do you produce (energy input basis)? Note: Respondents were to select all that
applied.
Answered Question 22
Answer Response Percent Response Count
0-50 kW 41% 9
50-100 kW 59% 13
100-200 kW 59% 13
200-400 kW 68% 15
400-800 kW 68% 15
800-1600 kW 64% 14
1600-3200 kW 46% 10
> 3200 kW 32% 7
14. What fuel types does your product line include? Note: Respondents were to select all that
applied.
Answered Question 22
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Firewood 32% 7
Briquettes 50% 11
Agricultural Biomass 55% 12
Wood Chips 86% 19
Wood Pellets 91% 20
15. Do you have models that are designed exclusively for wood pellets?
Answered Question 22
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 59% 13
No 41% 9
16. Do you have models that are designed for wood chips with moisture contents greater than 40
to 50%wt?
Answered Question 22
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 50% 11
No 50% 11
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
Combustion and Emission Controls – Section 1: General Product
Line
Respondents were asked to describe the features and performance characteristics of their wood pellet and
wood chip combustor models between 50 kW and 3 MW (input energy basis).
17. Which types of combustion chamber designs do you offer? Note: Respondents were to select all
that applied.
Answered Question 20
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Two chambers - first
chamber solid fuel
with low oxygen
environment, second
chamber combustion
of volatized gasses
with excess air
45% 9
One chamber -
staged combustion
air, primary and
secondary
95% 19
One chamber – only
primary air
10% 2
Other In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
18. Do you have models that are equipped with oxygen sensors used for process control (i.e., to
modulate the combustion air supply fan speed or wood chips/pellets supply)?
Answered Question 21
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 95% 20
No 5% 1
19. If yes to question #18, please describe make, model, manufacturer and measurement range of
the O2 sensor:
The 16 respondents’ answers varied, however the majority answered Bosch lambda probe.
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
20. Do you have models that are equipped with carbon monoxide sensors to monitor air emissions
as an indicator of combustion efficiency?
Answered Question 21
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 14% 3
No 86% 18
21. If yes to question #20, please describe make, model, manufacturer and measurement ranges of
CO sensor:
The 3 respondents’ answers varied. In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, they will not
be shared.
22. If no to question #20, could one be added or co-located with the oxygen sensor?
Answered Question 19
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes for all models 58% 11
Yes for some models 11% 2
No 32% 6
Not applicable since
there is no oxygen
sensor
0% 0
For questions 23, 24 and 25 respondents were asked: For your wood pellet and wood chip combustor
models between 50 kW and 3 MW (input energy basis), please identify the maximum air emission
concentration that you anticipate being able to consistently perform under during steady state operating
conditions at full load (i.e., excluding start up, shut down, malfunction).
23. Maximum 10 day average carbon monoxide outlet concentration (parts per million by
volume, dry basis at 11% oxygen, 25°C and pressure 101.3 kPa)?
Answered Question 17
Answer Response Percent Response Count
< 50 24% 4
< 75 6% 1
< 100 18% 3
< 125 6% 1
< 150 24% 4
> 150 6% 1
Unknown 18% 3
Other units or
conditions (please
specify)
In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
24. Maximum 24 hour average carbon monoxide concentration (parts per million by volume, dry
basis at 11% oxygen, 25°C and pressure 101.3 kPa)?
Answered Question 16
Answer Response Percent Response Count
< 100 38% 6
< 200 25% 4
< 300 13% 2
< 400 0% 0
< 500 6% 1
> 500 0% 0
Unknown 19% 3
Other units or
conditions (please
specify)
In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
25. Maximum outlet concentration of suspended particulate matter without add-on air pollution
control equipment (milligrams per normalized cubic metre, dry basis at 11% oxygen, 25°C and
pressure 101.3 kPa) unless the air pollution control device is a non-optional device that is
integrated into the system design:
Answered Question 14
Answer Response Percent Response Count
< 50 36% 5
< 75 0% 0
< 100 21% 3
< 125 0% 0
< 150 21% 3
> 150 14% 2
Unknown 7% 1
Other units or
conditions (please
specify)
In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
26. Do you have air emission documentation from regulatory agencies and/or certified testing
agencies that can be used to validate the above-noted maximum anticipated outlet
concentrations of carbon monoxide and suspended particulate matter (for example EN 303-5)?
Answered Question 21
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 95% 20
No 5% 1
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
27. Do you have combustor models with the following types of data access/acquisition systems?
Note: Respondents were to select all that applied.
Answered Question 21
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Remote access with real time
monitoring of system
performance, data logger with
60 days storage capacity and
ability for remote diagnostics
and control
67% 14
Remote access with data
export capabilities and data
logger with 60 days storage
capacity
62% 13
Alarm setting capability and
continuous data logger with 60
days storage capacity
52% 11
Alarm setting capability and
digital displays and screens for
manual collection of data
62% 13
Digital display screens to
allow for manual data
recordings
43% 9
No data except for manual
recording of control set-points
5% 1
Other In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will
not be shared.
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
28. Do your models have the capacity to identify and/or react (i.e., activate control response or
alarm) to the following problems? Note: Respondents were to select all that applied.
Answered Question 21
Answer Response Percent Response Count
High combustion chamber
heat
91% 19
High moisture content fuel 19% 4
High/abnormal emissions 24% 5
Loss of fuel due to empty
hopper or blockage in feed
system
95% 20
Loss of flame 71% 15
Loss of power 95% 20
Failed sensor 86% 18
Exceedences of operating low
and high levels alarms
67% 14
Loss of communication
between the combustor and its
data acquisition system
33% 7
Other safety, health,
environmental and operational
interlocks
In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will
not be shared.
29. Do you recommend utilizing a water buffer system to avoid operating under partial load?
Answered Question 21
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 48% 10
No 52% 11
30. Do your models include an integrated cyclone or multi-cyclone as part of the design? Note:
Respondents were to select all that applied.
Answered Question 20
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes, all models
include integrated
cyclone or multi-
cyclone
40% 8
Some models include 10% 2
Some models can be
equipped (optional)
40% 8
No 10% 2
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
31. Do you sell additional air pollution control equipment?
Answered Question 21
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 43% 9
No 57% 12
32. If yes to question #31, please specify what types of add-on air pollution control equipment:
25% of respondents indicated Baghouses and 25% indicated Multi-cyclone dust collector. The other 50%
of respondents’ answers varied: Stainless Steel Catalyst coated with Platinum, Wet scrubber system using
palls for heat recovery; Electrostatic Precipitator; Other filter system and in addition ESP for greater
capacity.
33. If no to question #31, are the models capable of incorporating third party air pollution control
equipment into the system design?
Answered Question 13
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 92% 12
No 8% 1
34. Does your current process control infrastructure allow alarms to be set on various process
variables such as:
Answered Question 20
Answer Yes No Rating Count
Monitored process
parameters (e.g., O2)?
75% (15) 25% (5) 20
Flue gas composition
(e.g., CO)?
29% (5) 71% (12) 17
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
35. Do you or are you planning to offer your Canadian customers, either directly or through 3rd
parties:
Answered Question 21
Answer Yes No Rating Count
Original Equipment
Manufacturers’
(OEM’s) warranties
and optional extended
warranties on both
parts and labour?
89% (17) 11% (2) 19
Spare parts? 100% (20) 0% (0) 20
Service contracts with
guaranteed, remote or
onsite support
services?
89% (16) 11% (2) 18
Obsolescence
notifications on
hardware and
software?
59% (10) 41% (7) 17
Training and
certifications on
operation and
maintenance of your
combustors?
100% (20) 0% (0) 20
Price list for spare
parts and schedule of
rates for technical
support services?
89% (17) 11% (2) 19
36. Use of a continuous emissions monitoring (CEM) system is the current guideline requirement
for all permitted wood combustors in Ontario. Would you be interested in participating in a small
wood combustion equipment manufacturers working group to help us understand maintenance and
reliability of systems, automation options and alternatives to CEM through monitoring of
indicators of good combustion? Note: Respondents were asked to provide contact information for a
technical representative that could participate in a working group.
Answered Question 17
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 76% 13
No 24% 4
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
37. Are you a member of an association that represents you?
Answered Question 19
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 42% 8
No 58% 11
38. If yes to question #37, please provide names of associations:
Of the 8 respondents, the majority belonged to Biomass Thermal Energy Council (BTEC).
39. If no to question #37, do you see a need for a representative association?
Answered Question 17
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 59% 10
No 41% 7
40. Would you be willing to provide more detailed information for one of your combustor models
as an example of equipment designed for wood pellets?
Answered Question 19
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 74% 14
No 26% 5
41. Would you be willing to provide more detailed information for one of your combustor models
as an example of equipment designed for wood chips?
Answered Question 7
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 29% 2
No 71% 5
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
Section 2: Wood Pellet Equipment Example
This section was intended to gather more detailed information for one of the respondents’ combustor
models as an example of equipment designed for wood pellets. Respondents were told that the wood pellet
examples would be compared to the following wood chip examples to identify if/how the two
fuels/equipment categories would be treated differently in the interim guideline. Respondents were asked,
if available, to provide an example of a unit that was certified for sale in Canada (unless indicated
otherwise, survey results were based on normal operating conditions, using wood pellets with 10%
moisture content, without additional air pollution control equipment (unless it is a non-optional device
integrated into the system design)). (Reference conditions: dry basis at 11% oxygen, temperature 25°C
and pressure 101.3 kPa)
General Information – Section 2: Wood Pellet Equipment Example
42. Model name:
There were 14 equipment manufacturer respondents that provided information on their specific wood
pellet models. In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be shared.
43. Size (energy input basis) kW:
Of the 14 respondents, examples were provided for various model sizes, which ranged from 10 kW to 4
MW.
44. Thermal efficiency % (energy output/energy input x 100):
Of the 14 respondents, the model with the lowest reported thermal efficiency was at 70% and the highest
reported efficiency was at 97%. The average reported thermal efficiency was at 87% and the median was
85%.
45. Can wood chips also be combusted in this unit?
Answered Question 14
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 79% 11
No 21% 3
46. Is this model currently available for sale in Canada?
Answered Question 14
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 71% 10
No 29% 4
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
47. Is this model currently certified for use in Canada?
Answered Question 13
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 54% 7
No 46% 6
48. What is included in wood combustion unit? Note: Respondents were to select all that applied.
Answered Question 14
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Combustion chamber 100% 14
Heat transfer device
(e.g., hot water boiler)
100% 14
Integrated air pollution
control system
71% 10
Fuel handling 100% 14
Fuel storage 79% 11
Other (please specify) In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
49. What is the price range for wood combustion unit (as described in above question, excluding
installation and commissioning support) delivered in Ontario (in Canadian $)?
Answered Question 13
Answer Response Percent Response Count
< $ Canadian 10,000 8% 1
$ Canadian
10,000 - 50,000
69% 9
$ Canadian
50, 000 - 100,000
8% 1
$ Canadian
100,000 - 200,000
23% 3
$ Canadian
200,000 - 400,000
31% 4
> $ Canadian 400,000 15% 2
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
System Design and Controls – Section 2: Wood Pellet Equipment
Example
50. The combustion chamber can be described as: Note: Respondents were to select all that applied.
Answered Question 10
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Underfeed ring 20% 2
Moving grate 60% 6
Moving chain 10% 1
Tilted and/or stepped
grate
10% 1
Stationary bed 30% 3
Other (please specify) In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
51. The combustion chamber design is:
Answered Question 13
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Two chambers - first
chamber solid fuel
with low oxygen
environment, second
chamber combustion
of volatized gasses
with excess air
15% 2
One chamber - staged
combustion air,
primary and secondary
85% 11
One chamber – only
primary air
0% 0
Other (please specify) In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
52. What is the design gas residence time in the area of the combustion chamber with excess air?
(sec)
Five respondents provided answers to this question, of which ranged from 0.5 to 5 seconds, with an
average of 2.2 sec.
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
53. What is the design gas temperature in the area of the combustion chamber with excess air?
(ºC)
Eight respondents provided answers to this question, of which ranged from 400 ºC to 1200 ºC. The
average was 870 ºC and the median was 950 ºC.
54. Indicate all sensors that are/can be included in system: Note: Respondents were to select all that
applied.
Answered Question 14
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Flue gas oxygen
sensor
86% 12
Flue gas carbon
monoxide sensor
14% 2
Combustion chamber
temperature sensor
64% 9
Combustion chamber
pressure sensor/switch
64% 9
Other (please specify) In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
55. If your system includes a flue gas oxygen sensor, does it:
Answered Question 13
Answer Yes No Rating Count
Control combustion
air (e.g., variable
speed drive of air
intake system)?
85% (11) 15% (2) 13
Have data acquisition
system (logging,
archiving and
reporting)?
46% (6) 54% (7) 13
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
56. Please indicate how the following operating/maintenance conditions are controlled: Note:
Respondents were to select all that applied.
Answered Question 14
Answer Manual Automatic
(timer /
thermostat
controlled)
Automatic
(performance
sensor
controlled)
Rating Count
Start-up 21% (3) 21% (3) 57% (8) 14
Turn down 0% (0) 14% (2) 86% (12) 14
Shut down 21% (3) 21% (3) 71% (10) 14
Heat exchanger
cleaning
23% (3) 46% (6) 31% (4) 13
Ash cleaning 8% (1) 46% (6) 46% (6) 13
Performance and Emissions – Section 2: Wood Pellet Equipment
Example
Respondents were asked to indicate performance and emissions including start-up, turn-down and shut-
down conditions unless otherwise indicated.
57. Under normal steady state operation excluding start-up and shut down, what is the design
target range of oxygen concentrations in the flue gas (percent by volume, dry basis for a 3-hour
rolling average) Note: If scale was too fine, respondents were to select all that applied.
Answered Question 12
Answer Response Percent Response Count
< 4% 8% 1
4% to 6% 17% 2
6% to 8% 17% 2
8% to 10% 58% 7
> 10% 8% 1
Unknown 17% 2
58. What is the normal emission intensity range for particulate matter over an hour time period
assuming normal steady state operation (specify units i.e., mg/MJ)
Response size too small, in order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
59. What is the normal emission intensity range for carbon monoxide over an hour time period
assuming normal steady state operation (specify units i.e., mg/MJ)
Response size too small, in order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
60. What minimum turn down rate (% load) can the system still operate at, while maintaining
high combustion, high thermal efficiency and low emissions?
Answered Question 14
Answer Response Percent Response Count
> 90% load 0% 0
80 – 90% load 0% 0
70 – 80% load 0% 0
60 – 70% load 0% 0
50 – 60% load 21% 3
< 50% load 79% 11
61. What minimum turn down rate (% load) can the system operate in idle mode prior to
requiring shut-down?
Answered Question 12
Answer Response Percent Response Count
> 40% load 0% 0
30 – 40% load 25% 3
20 – 30% load 25% 3
10 – 20% load 8% 1
< 10% load 42% 5
62. Do you have air emission certification from a regulatory agency and/or certified testing
agencies to validate suspended particulate matter and carbon monoxide for a range of operating
conditions including the recommended turn down ratios (e.g., EN303-5)?
Answered Question 14
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 79% 11
No 21 3
63. Does the system have an integrated air pollution control device included in the design?
Answered Question 14
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 43% 6
No 57% 8
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
64. If yes to question #63, please specify:
Of the 5 respondents, all mentioned cyclones or multi-cyclones. Stainless steel catalyst and wet system
integrated air pollution control devices were also identified as included in the integrated air pollution
control designs.
65. What air emission or particulate matter pollution control equipment is recommended or
included in the design? Note: Respondents were to select all that applied.
66. Do you have air emission certification from a regulatory agency and/or certified testing
agencies that validate your air emission performance with additional air pollution control
equipment (e.g., EN303-5)?
Answered Question 14
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 50% 7
No 50% 7
Answered Question 13
Answer Response Percent Response Count
None 39% 5
Catalytic converter 8% 1
Settling chamber 8% 1
Cyclone 46% 6
Multi-cyclone 46% 6
Electrostatic
precipitator
0% 0
Fabric filter/baghouse 15% 2
Scrubber 8% 1
Panel bed filter 8% 1
Other (please specify) In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
Operation and Maintenance – Section 2: Wood Pellet Equipment
Example
67. Which of these wood pellet fuel standards are approved for use in your combustors? Note:
Respondents were to select all that applied.
Answered Question 12
Answer Response Percent Response Count
A1 European EN 14961-2
(pellets for non-industrial
use)
75% 9
A2 European EN 14961-2
(pellets for non-industrial
use)
50% 6
B European EN 14961-2
(pellets for industrial use)
33% 4
Premium US Pellet Fuels
Institute
67% 8
Standard US Pellet Fuels
Institute
50% 6
Utility US Pellet Fuels
Institute
33% 4
Other (please specify) In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will
not be shared.
68. How are your combustors optimized for fuel quality?
Answered Question 14
Answer Response Percent Response Count
The system utilizes sensors
and control logics to adjust
operating parameters in real
time to optimize for the fuel
quality
64% 9
The operator manually
adjusts operating parameters
to optimize for the fuel
quality
36% 5
No fuel quality optimization 0% 0
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
69. How frequently must the system be inspected/maintained by a trained operator?
Answered Question 13
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Daily 31% 4
Weekly 46% 6
Fuel consumption/run
time trigger
23% 3
Other (please specify) In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
70. Would you be willing to complete an additional wood pellet equipment example should the
project team identify a gap in survey responses for an equipment size/technology type?
Answered Question 13
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 69% 9
No 31% 4
71. If yes to question #70, please provide contact information:
In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be shared.
72. Would you be willing to provide more detailed information for one of your combustor models
as an example of equipment designed for wood chips?
Answered Question 13
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 69% 9
No 31% 4
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
Section 3: Wood Chip Equipment Example
This section was intended to gather more detailed information for one of the respondents’ combustor
models as an example of equipment designed for wood chips. Respondents were told that the wood chip
examples would be compared to the wood pellet examples to identify if/how the two fuels/equipment
categories would be treated differently in the interim guideline. It was also intended to gather information
on the technology and performance differences for combusting low moisture content and high moisture
content fuels (i.e., wood chips under 35% wt or over 45% wt). Respondents were asked, if possible, to
provide an example of a unit that was certified for sale in Canada (unless indicated otherwise, survey
responses were based on normal operating conditions, using wood chips, without additional air pollution
control equipment (unless it is a non-optional device integrated into the system design)). (Reference
conditions: dry basis at 11% oxygen, temperature 25°C and pressure 101.3 kPa).
General Information – Section 3: Wood Chip Equipment Example
73. Model name:
There were 12 equipment manufacturer respondents that provided information on their specific wood chip
models. In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be shared.
74. Size (energy input basis) kW:
There were 10 respondents and examples were provided for various model sizes, which ranged from 100
kW to 3.5MW. The average size was 914kW and the median was 390kW.
75. Thermal efficiency % (energy output/energy input x 100):
From the 9 respondents, the model with the lowest reported efficiency was at 80% and the highest
reported efficiency was at 94%. The average reported efficiency was at 86%.
76. Can wood pellets also be combusted in this unit?
Answered Question 11
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 91% 10
No 9% 1
77. Is this model currently available for sale in Canada?
Answered Question 11
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 73% 8
No 27% 3
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
78. Is this model currently certified for use in Canada?
Answered Question 11
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 55% 6
No 46% 5
79. What is included in wood combustion unit? Note: Respondents were to select all that applied.
Answered Question 11
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Combustion chamber 100% 11
Heat transfer device
(e.g., hot water boiler)
100% 11
Integrated air pollution
control system
73% 8
Fuel handling 100% 11
Fuel storage 73% 8
Other (please specify) In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
80. What is the price range for wood combustion unit (as described in above question, excluding
installation and commissioning support) delivered in Ontario (in Canadian $)?
Answered Question 10
Answer Response Percent Response Count
< $ Canadian 10,000 0% 0
$ Canadian
10,000 – 50,000
40% 4
$ Canadian
50,000 - 100,000
20% 2
$ Canadian
100,000 – 200,000
0% 0
$ Canadian
200,000 – 400,000
30% 3
> $ Canadian 400,000 10% 1
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
System Design and Controls – Section 3: Wood Chip Equipment
Example
81. The fuel feed can be described as:
Answered Question 11
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Overfeed 27% 3
Horizontal feed 55% 6
Underfeed 18% 2
82. The combustion chamber can be described as: Note: Respondents were to select all that applied.
Answered Question 10
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Underfeed ring 10% 1
Moving grate 30% 3
Moving chain 10% 1
Tilted and/or stepped
grate
30% 3
Stationary bed 30% 3
Other (please specify) In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
83. The combustion chamber design is:
Answered Question 10
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Two chambers - first
chamber solid fuel
with low oxygen
environment, second
chamber combustion
of volatized gasses
with excess air
20% 2
One chamber - staged
combustion air,
primary and
secondary
70% 7
One chamber – only
primary air
10% 1
Other In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
84. What is the design gas residence time in the area of the combustion chamber with excess air?
(sec)
Five respondents provided answers to this question, of which ranged from 0.8 to 3 seconds. The average
was 1.4 seconds and the median was 1.2 seconds.
85. What is the design gas temperature in the area of the combustion chamber with excess air?
(ºC)?
Seven respondents provided answers to this question, of which ranged from 800 ºC to 1200 ºC. The
average response was 964 ºC with a median of 1000 ºC. Most of respondents indicated the design gas
temperature was 1000 ºC.
86. Indicate all sensors that are/can be included in system: Note: Respondents were to select all that
applied.
Answered Question 11
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Flue gas oxygen sensor 100% 11
Flue gas carbon
monoxide sensor
18% 2
Combustion chamber
temperature sensor
82% 9
Combustion chamber
pressure sensor/switch
82% 9
Other (please specify) In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
87. If your system includes a flue gas oxygen sensor, does it:
Answered Question 11
Answer Yes No Rating Count
Control combustion air
(e.g., variable speed
drive of air intake
system)?
91% (10) 9% (1) 11
Have data acquisition
system (logging,
archiving and
reporting)?
60% (6) 40% (4) 10
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
88. Please indicate how the following operating/maintenance conditions are controlled: Note:
Respondents were to select all that applied
Answered Question 11
Answer Manual Automatic
(timer /
thermostat
controlled)
Automatic
(performance
sensor
controlled)
Rating
Count
Start-up 36% (4) 9% (1) 55% (6) 11
Turn down 0% (0) 18% (2) 82% (9) 11
Shut down 9% (1) 18% (2) 73% (8) 11
Heat exchanger
cleaning
27% (3) 36% (4) 46% (5) 11
Ash cleaning 18% (2) 36% (4) 46% (5) 11
Performance and Emissions – Section 3: Wood Chip Equipment
Example
Respondents were asked to indicate performance for wood chips with 25 to 35% moisture content unless
indicated otherwise. There were a few repeated questions to identify differences in performance with
wood chips with 40 to 50% moisture content. Performance included start-up, turn down and shut-down
conditions unless otherwise indicated.
89. Under normal steady state operation excluding start-up and shut-down, what is the design
target range of oxygen concentrations in the flue gas (percent by volume, dry basis for a 3-hour
rolling average)? Note: If scale was too fine, respondents were to select all that applied.
Answered Question 10
Answer Response Percent Response Count
< 4% 10% 1
4% to 6% 40% 4
6% to 8% 30% 3
8% to 10% 70% 7
> 10% 0% 0
Unknown 10% 1
90. What is the normal emission intensity range for particulate matter over an hour time period
assuming normal steady state operation (specify units i.e., mg/MJ)
Response size too small, in order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
91. What is the normal emission intensity range for carbon monoxide over an hour time period
assuming normal steady state operation (specify units i.e., mg/MJ) Note: If scale was too fine,
respondents were to select all that applied.
Response size too small, in order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
92. Is the system designed/approved for wood chips with moisture contents between 40 and 50%
wt?
Answered Question 11
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 55% 6
No 46% 5
Respondents who answered yes to question 92 were asked to repeat the following three questions in
relation to expected performance with wood chips with 40 to 50% moisture content.
93. Under normal operating conditions excluding start-up and shut-down, what is the design
target range of oxygen concentrations in the flue gas (percent by volume, dry basis for a 3-hour
rolling average) – in relation to expected performance with wood chips with 40 to 50% moisture
content: Note: If scale was too fine, respondents were to select all that applied.
Answered Question 9
Answer Response Percent Response Count
< 4% 0% 0
4% to 6% 11% 1
6% to 8% 22% 2
8% to 10% 78% 7
> 10% 0% 0
Unknown 11% 1
94. What is the normal emission intensity range for particulate matter over an hour time period
assuming steady state operation (specify units i.e., mg/MJ) – in relation to expected performance
with wood chips with 40 to 50% moisture content:
Response size too small, in order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
95. What is the normal emission intensity range for carbon monoxide over an hour time period
assuming steady state operation (specify units i.e., mg/MJ) – in relation to expected performance
with wood chips with 40 to 50% moisture content: Note: If scale was too fine, respondents were to
select all that applied.
Response size too small, in order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
96. What minimum turn down rate (% load) can the system still operate at while maintaining high
combustion, high thermal efficiency and low emissions?
Answered Question 11
Answer Response Percent Response Count
> 90% load 9% 1
80 – 90% load 0% 0
70 – 80% load 0% 0
60 – 70% load 0% 0
50 – 60% load 9% 1
< 50% load 82% 9
97. What minimum turn down rate (% load) can the system operate in idle mode prior to
requiring shut-down?
Answered Question 11
Answer Response Percent Response Count
> 40% load 0% 0
30 – 40% load 0% 0
20 – 30% load 46% 5
10 -20% load 9% 1
< 10% load 46% 5
98. Do you have air emission certification from a regulatory agency and/or certified testing
agencies to validate suspended particulate matter and carbon monoxide for a range of operating
conditions including the recommended turn down ratios (e.g., EN303-5)?
Answered Question 11
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 73% 8
No 27% 3
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
99. Does the system come with any air pollution control equipment?
Answered Question 11
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 55% 6
No 46% 5
100. If yes to question #99, please specify:
Response size small, but multi-cyclone mentioned most frequently.
101. What emission or particulate matter pollution control equipment is recommended or
included in the system? Note: Respondents were to select all that applied.
Answered Question 11
Question Response Percent Response Count
None 46% 5
Catalytic converter 9% 1
Settling chamber 0% 0
Cyclone 18% 2
Multi-cyclone 55% 6
Electrostatic
precipitator
9% 1
Fabric filter/baghouse 0% 0
Scrubber 0% 0
Panel bed filter 0% 0
Other (please specify)
102. Do you have air emission certification from a regulatory agency and/or certified testing
agencies that validate your air emission performance with additional air pollution control
equipment (e.g., EN303-5)?
Answered Question 11
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 55% 6
No 46% 5
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
Operation and Maintenance – Section 3: Wood Chip Equipment
Example
103. Are there specific wood chip fuel standards approved for use in your combustors?
The ten respondents’ answers varied and will not be shared in order to protect the anonymity of the
survey results, as standards are different from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
104. What is the maximum wood chip moisture content that can be used in your combustors on a
continuous basis?
Eleven respondents provided answers to this question, of which ranged from 35 to 60%. The average was
45% and the median was 50%.
105. What additional fuel variation limits do you recommend for your combustors?
Answered Question 11
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Temperature of fuel
(i.e., frozen):
55% 6
Moisture content
variations
46% 5
Fines 46% 5
Other (please specify) In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results, responses will not be
shared.
106. How are your combustors optimized for fuel quality?
Answered Question 12
Answer Response Percent Response Count
The system utilizes
sensors and control
logics to adjust
operating parameters in
real time, to optimize
for the fuel quality
58% 7
The operator manually
adjusts operating
parameters to optimize
for the fuel quality
42% 5
No fuel quality
optimization
0% 0
Public Summary of 2014 Ontario Solid Wood Combustion Equipment
Manufacturers Survey
107. How frequently must the system be inspected/maintained by a trained operator?
Answered Question 12
Question Response Percent Response Count
Daily 42% 5
Weekly 42% 5
Fuel consumption/run
time trigger
17% 2
Other (please specify)
108. Would you be willing to complete an additional wood chip equipment example should the
project team identify a gap in survey responses for an equipment size/technology type?
Answered Question 12
Answer Response Percent Response Count
Yes 75% 9
No 25% 3
109. If yes to question #108, please provide contact information:
Eight respondents provided contact information. In order to protect the anonymity of the survey results,
responses will not be shared.