1. BNL Presentation BTEC Commercial Thermal Efficiency Protocol Project successes and next steps April 7, 2016 Ben Bell-Walker, Technical Affairs Manager Biomass Thermal Energy Council (BTEC)

2. Presentation Overview  Introduction to BTEC  Thermal efficiency protocol technical scope decisions  Thermal efficiency protocol timeline 2

3. Introduction to BTEC  The Biomass Thermal Energy Council (BTEC) is the industry trade association dedicated to advancing the use of biomass for thermal energy applications.  Members include landowners, handling equipment manufacturers, fuel refiners, appliance manufacturers, project developers, investment companies, nonprofits, universities, associations, and many others Why was BTEC established? 1.To advocate for and promote the biomass thermal industry in the national energy policy debate 2.To reach out to and educate the public and decision makers on the benefits and advantages of using biomass for heat and CHP 3.To develop biomass energy research and analysis that enables sound investment and policy decisions 3

4. BTEC’s Membership* * As of 2015 4

5. Commercial efficiency test method needed to drive market maturity  Commercial scale consumers lack an overall, transparent, US measure for biomass system efficiency (efficiency, performance main drivers)  EPA Residential NSPS covers small systems, Boiler MACT ( Maximum Achievable Control Technology) covers over 10MMBTU/hr systems (2930.7 kW)  Equipment specifiers don't have accredited US standard to reference System specifiers can receive any number of efficiency test results, e.g.:  Photo copy of combustion analyzer tape  ASME PTC 4.1 calculation  EN303-5 results  Lack of reference for federal, state, and local legislation  BTU Act (S.727), Energy efficiency tax credit (S.3352) tie investment tax credit levels to efficiency – what standard?  NY, MA, VT, others – require test showing 80% efficiency – what standard?  Emissions often certified by manufacturer testing 5

6. BNL Presentation Participants in standard development Primary partners BTEC members Technical and Regulatory Affairs Committee (TRAC) David Dungate, TRAC Chair Ray Albrecht, Technical Consultant Laboratory Testing Partner* West Penn Power Sustainable Energy Fund US Endowment for Forestry and Communities Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources* Observing partners USDA / USFS, EPA, DOE State Energy Offices Standards body representatives** Regional scoping meeting groups 6 Technical consultants * = Phase II ** = Standards partner

7. BNL Presentation TRAC MembersInvited Participants NameOrganizationNameOrganization Bede Wellford Viessmann Geoffrey Halley ABMA Brandon Oyer Enwave Seattle Aykut Yilmaz AHRI Chris Neufeld Catalytic Hearth Coalition John Steinert Dirigo Labs Christopher Tureson Central Boiler Inc Ben Myren Myren Consulting Dan Wilson Wilson Engineering Services, PC Markus Schwarz Bioenergy 2020+ David Dungate Bioenergy Project Partners, LLC Vijay Kumar Verma Bioenergy 2020+ Dean Zook Smokeless Heat Robert Rizzo MA DOER Declan Crosse Wood Energy Solutions Marc Cohen MA DEP Gerry Guard Messersmith Manufacturing Edward Dobbin MA DOER Harry "Dutch" Dresser Maine Energy Systems/Okofen Tom Butcher DOE / Brookhaven James Knight Pelletco, LLC Sebnem Madrali NRCan Jeff Hallowell ClearStak LLC Karry Anne Campbell Ontario Ministry of NR Jessica Peterson ClearStak LLC Lew McCreery USFS John Hinckley Resource Systems Group (RSG) Julie Tucker USFS Karl-Heinz Schulz Seeger Green Energy Mark Knaebe USFS Lou Okonski Evoworld Carlton Owens US Endowment Ray Albrecht Technical Consultant Signe Cann US Endowment Scott Nichols Tarm Biomass/Froling Joel Morrison WPPSEF Stephen Sundeen Twin Ports Testing, Inc.Rick CurkeetASTM T.J. Morice Marth John WadeUL Tom Miles T.R.Miles Technical Consultants

8. Recent Developments  Rough draft of standard out for working group review  Funding from Massachusetts Dep't. Of Energy Resources for “Phase II”  Testing and validation of efficiency protocol in lab environment  Strengthens method “out the gate”  Standards organization/industry engagement  Observers from AHRI, ABMA  ASTM, UL interest in partnership  ASHRAE 155P committee apprised of project 8

9. Draft recently released for comment.

10. BNL Presentation Already Completed 10

11. BNL Presentation In Process, Next Steps 11

12. BNL Presentation Longer Term 12 20 15 Present Results to Funders

13. Into the weeds (also potential fuel??) - key technical questions  Boiler size range  Fuels  Rating conditions  Lab or field test  Direct I/O or stack loss method  Jacket losses  Data acquisition requirements  Air pollutant emission testing 13

14. Key technical questions  Boiler size range  Fuels  Rating conditions  Lab or field test  Direct I/O or stack loss method  Jacket losses  Data acquisition requirements  Air pollutant emission testing 14 Not yet settled: 0.3 – 10.0 mmBTU/hr considered. EPA definition of “residential” could include this range.

15. Key technical questions  Boiler size range  Fuels  Rating conditions  Lab or field test  Direct I/O or stack loss method  Jacket losses  Data acquisition requirements  Air pollutant emission testing 15 Chips, pellets, cord/crib wood, and “as specified by boiler manufacturer” – ISO 17225 standards for fuel definitions

16. Key technical questions  Boiler size range  Fuels  Rating conditions  Lab or field test  Direct I/O or stack loss method  Jacket losses  Data acquisition requirements  Air pollutant emission testing 16 Supply and return temps, steam and feedwater conditions, fuel moisture ranges, ambient conditions, loads, with and without thermal storage, test duration

17. Key technical questions  Boiler size range  Fuels  Rating conditions  Lab or field test  Direct I/O or stack loss method  Jacket losses  Data acquisition requirements  Air pollutant emission testing 17 Lab or site with load control

18. Key technical questions  Boiler size range  Fuels  Rating conditions  Lab or field test  Direct I/O or stack loss method  Jacket losses  Data acquisition requirements  Air pollutant emission testing 18 Direct input / output preferred, calculation for fuel consumption, field vs. lab; also uses CSA stack loss method

19. Key technical questions  Boiler size range  Fuels  Rating conditions  Lab or field test  Direct I/O or stack loss method  Jacket losses  Data acquisition requirements  Air pollutant emission testing 19 Optical temp. measurement (ASHRAE 155P)

20. Key technical questions  Boiler size range  Fuels  Rating conditions  Lab or field test  Direct I/O or stack loss method  Jacket losses  Data acquisition requirements  Air pollutant emission testing 20 Sampling frequency, data file format and size. Will require submission in a standard format.

21. Key technical questions  Boiler size range  Fuels  Rating conditions  Lab or field test  Direct I/O or stack loss method  Jacket losses  Data acquisition requirements  Air pollutant emission testing  PM, NOx, CO 21 Overlap this test method with air emissions testing for compliance or for certification for reference by regulatory agencies – reduce test burden. Maryland air regs MA, NY, VT incentive programs allow manufacturer tests on a line of boilers – onsite stack test not required depending on size

22. Other technical considerations  Single and multiple-boiler system efficiency  Optional tables for undersized/oversized systems  Approach to incorporating EN 303-5  Audience thoughts/questions? 22

23. BNL Presentation Involvement Opportunities  Participation in working group calls  Providing feedback on draft  Encouragement of affected stakeholders to participate formally  Industry: time and financial support.  Spreading the word about the project during development  Venue selection and planning help for regional Scoping Meetings 23

24. BNL Presentation 24 Any Questions? 202-596-3974 ben.bell-walker@biomassthermal.org