[SustainableTompkins] new to list

[Anthony Nekut]

Joel,
To answer your questions:

First, the whole "forest biomass for heat" scheme is well developed in
some European countries.  For example, in Austria forest biomass
supplies about 20% of heating energy. The Scandinavian countries are
also heavily committed.  So there is no real question about fundamental
viability.


How reliable is the supply likely to be?
>the potential supply is large.  There are 160000 acres of forestland in
Tompkins country, each growing about a ton of biomass/year.  This
equates to about 20,000 buildings with an annual heat load of 100
million BTU.  With heating oil at about $20/million BTU, this equates to
an annual heating budget of $2000/building.  Thus, potentially, tens of
millions of dollars could be available to drive the supply side.


How much more work would be involved on my part to handle and operate
the 
equipment?
>This depends on the level of automation built into your heating plant.
Sophisticated models have closed loop feedback combustion control (very
low emissions) and self cleaning/deashing features.  Wood fuel has a
relatively low energy density and thus requires more storage space than
say, heating oil.  A fuel vendor could periodically replenish your
supply during the heating season.

How much of a mess will it make in my house?
>none, if the system is well designed.  I have experience heating my
home with wood chip supplied by tree service contractors; my system is
in an outbuilding.

What effect will rising costs for fossil fuels have on the cost of this
fuel?
>some, I'm sure, but not nearly as much as the fossil fuel prices
themselves.

How long would the investment in new equipment take to pay back?
>I have done some calculations which indicate a five year payback in the
current market.  Given a twenty to thirty year equipment lifetime, there
are potentially substantial long term savings possible.  Moreover, even
if wood biomass prices go up, these dollars will be staying in the local
economy.