http://dailysoutherner.com/community/x1221097993/Country-forestry-banquet-set-for-Tuesday
March 25, 2013
TARBORO —
Persons with an interest in the timber industry will gather Tuesday at
the East Carolina Agriculture and Education Center for the annual
Edgecombe County Forestry Banquet.
The meal portion of the event will get under way at 6:30 p.m. and the program will begin at 7:15
Clay Altizer, Utilization Forester for the North Carolina Forest
Service, and Edward Sontag, director of fiber sourcing for Envira LP,
will deliver the main presentations.
As recently as the third quarter of 2011, the forest products sector in
North Carolina included 2,299 manufacturing facilities and provided
67,613 jobs and an annual payroll of $2.7 billion.
The overall economic benefit to the state was estimated at $23.8 billion with a total related work force of 178,498.
Sontag will talk about the future of palletized woody biomass.
Enviva is one of the largest manufacturers of processed biomass fuel in
the form of 100 percent wood pellets in the United States and Europe.
Enviva operates a pellet facility in Ashokie capable of producing
350,000 metric tons of wood pellet annually and is scheduled to bring a
500,000 metric ton plant online in Northampton at mid-year.
Woody biomass is made up of the trees and woody plants, including
limbs, tops, needles, leaves, and other woody parts, grown in a forest,
woodland, or rangeland environment, that are the by-products of forest
management.
The National Energy Policy Act, signed into law on August 8, 2005,
recognized the importance of a diverse portfolio of domestic energy. The
policy outlined 13 recommendations designed to increase America’s use
of renewable and alternative energy. One of these recommendations
directed the Secretaries of the Interior and Energy to re-evaluate
access limitations to federal lands in order to increase renewable
energy production, such as biomass, wind, geothermal, and solar.
On June 18, 2003, The Departments of Energy, Interior, and Agriculture
announced an initiative to encourage the use of woody biomass from
forest and rangeland restoration and hazardous fuels treatment projects.
The three Departments signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on
Policy Principles for Woody Biomass Utilization for Restoration and Fuel
Treatment on Forests, Woodlands, and Rangelands, supporting woody
biomass utilization as a recommended option to use to reduce hazardous
fuels rather than burning or employing other on-site disposal methods.
In North Carolina, North Carolina General Statutes 105-277.2 through
105-277.7 provide an incentive for farmers and foresters to keep
agricultural and forested land in those uses through property tax
deferments as part of the use value program.
In order to qualify for forestry use, there must be at least 20 acres
of forested land, and you must present to the tax assessor a Forestry
Management Plan, showing the forested land is under a sound management
program.
For more information, contact Bob Filbrun at 641-7815.
Monday, March 25, 2013
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
First Commercial Cellulosic Ethanol Plant in US Goes Bankrupt
http://www.energytribune.com/75180/first-commercial-cellulosic-ethanol-plant-in-us-goes-bankrupt
Ed. note: This piece was first ptublished on Robert Rapier’s R-Squared Energy Blog.
Western Biomass Energy LLC, a subsidiary of Blue Sugars Corporation (previously KL Energy) reported the major milestone of claiming the first cellulosic ethanol tax credits under the RFS2 for a 20,069 gallon batch of cellulosic ethanol produced from bagasse (sugar cane waste) in April 2012.
However, regular readers are aware that for years I have been deeply skeptical that cellulosic ethanol as envisioned by — and ultimately mandated by — the US government will be an economic and scalable fuel option. The obstacles to success are significant, and I have described them in detail on many occasions.
Nevertheless, there is the possibility that in some niche applications that modest amounts of cellulosic ethanol may be produced for sale. One of those niches is from waste biomass such as bagasse that is produced during the processing of sugarcane. But in general – despite the proclamations from promoters like Vinod Khosla – the chemistry and physics are formidable obstacles working against the success of cellulosic ethanol. I will state in no uncertain terms that I don’t believe it can ever be mass-produced more cheaply than corn ethanol, and that industry’s financial trouble are well-documented.
Now comes news that Western Biomass Energy has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. In my column in which I reported on the initial production of cellulosic ethanol from Western Biomass, I noted:
The Pasadena, Texas-based firm lost $0.28 per share during the fourth quarter, falling short of the $0.15 per share loss in Q4 2011. However, it beat the Wall Street consensus of a loss of $0.32 per share.
Fourth quarter revenue rounded out at $87,000 – the company’s first revenue since inception. This fell drastically short of the $1.62 million analysts hoped for.
Ed. note: This piece was first ptublished on Robert Rapier’s R-Squared Energy Blog.
First Qualifying Cellulosic Ethanol
Last year, to much fanfare, the first batch of qualifying cellulosic ethanol was produced (i.e., it qualified for credits under the EPA program for certifying ethanol for sales). I reported on the development at that time.
Western Biomass Energy LLC, a subsidiary of Blue Sugars Corporation (previously KL Energy) reported the major milestone of claiming the first cellulosic ethanol tax credits under the RFS2 for a 20,069 gallon batch of cellulosic ethanol produced from bagasse (sugar cane waste) in April 2012.
However, regular readers are aware that for years I have been deeply skeptical that cellulosic ethanol as envisioned by — and ultimately mandated by — the US government will be an economic and scalable fuel option. The obstacles to success are significant, and I have described them in detail on many occasions.
Nevertheless, there is the possibility that in some niche applications that modest amounts of cellulosic ethanol may be produced for sale. One of those niches is from waste biomass such as bagasse that is produced during the processing of sugarcane. But in general – despite the proclamations from promoters like Vinod Khosla – the chemistry and physics are formidable obstacles working against the success of cellulosic ethanol. I will state in no uncertain terms that I don’t believe it can ever be mass-produced more cheaply than corn ethanol, and that industry’s financial trouble are well-documented.
Another Reality Check
I was extremely skeptical that the batch of cellulosic ethanol produced by Western Biomass was anything more than a publicity stunt rather than an indication that they had actually managed to conquer the economics of the process. My skepticism was heightened when they never produced another qualifying batch for the rest of the year, and that one batch they did produce was exported to Brazil to be used at the Rio+20 Conference.
Now comes news that Western Biomass Energy has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. In my column in which I reported on the initial production of cellulosic ethanol from Western Biomass, I noted:
Cellulosic ethanol commercialization still faces a number of challenges. Capital and operating costs are expected to remain higher than for corn ethanol producers, and even they are currently struggling with low margins. The ethanol market also faces the hurdle of the blend wall, which makes it difficult to expand domestic production without increases in E15 and E85 consumption, and/or ethanol exports.It will continue to be true that as long as the US government incentivizes these ventures, companies will continue to pursue them. But I believe it is also true that every gallon of production they make will be produced at a significant per gallon loss. Mother nature simply didn’t design cellulose to be easily accessible, and extracting the cellulose, converting the cellulose into sugars, fermenting those sugars to ethanol, and finally purifying that ethanol will continue to be capital and energy-intensive operations.
Investors Should be Cautious
In addition to Western Biomass, one other company has produced qualifying cellulosic fuel. Vinod Khosla-backed KiOR announced earnings this week, while at the same time announcing that they had shipped their first batch of qualifying cellulosic diesel. This was presented as great news, and KiOR’s share price initially surged on the news. But a closer reading of their financial statement signals the kind of warning flags about KiOR that I have been waving for over a year:
The Pasadena, Texas-based firm lost $0.28 per share during the fourth quarter, falling short of the $0.15 per share loss in Q4 2011. However, it beat the Wall Street consensus of a loss of $0.32 per share.
Fourth quarter revenue rounded out at $87,000 – the company’s first revenue since inception. This fell drastically short of the $1.62 million analysts hoped for.
So, revenues were 95% less than expected. Yikes. Also the company’s cash and cash equivalents declined by $91 million over the previous year, down to $41 million. KiOR’s clock is ticking. They will likely find more investors willing to take a chance on them, but even though I have a couple of friends who work there, I am not optimistic about their long-term chances of competing in the motor fuel arena. As long as natural gas prices remain low, they will probably limp along, but their heavy dependence on cheap natural gas is a risk factor unrecognized by most investors.
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
KiOR announces cellulosic diesel shipment, 2012 financial results
http://www.biomassmagazine.com/articles/8745/kior-announces-cellulosic-diesel-shipment-2012-financial-results
On March 18 KiOR Inc. announced the initial shipment of cellulosic diesel from its commercial-scale plant in Columbus, Miss. On the same day, the company reported financial results for the fourth quarter of 2012 as well as the entire fiscal year. According to the financial release, KiOR recorded its first revenues since inception during the fourth quarter 2012.
Fred Cannon, KiOR’s president and CEO, called the cellulosic diesel shipment a major step forward for his company, the biofuels industry, and the renewable fuels sector. “With first production at Columbus, KiOR has technology with the potential to resurrect each and every shut down paper mill in the country and to replace imported oil on a cost effective basis while creating American jobs,” he said. “This facility demonstrates the efficacy of KiOR's proprietary catalytic biomass-to-fuel process with the potential to deliver cellulosic gasoline and diesel to the U.S. We are proud to be making history in Mississippi. The technology is simply scalable and we believe sufficient excess feedstock exists in the Southeast alone to build almost fifty KiOR commercial scale facilities."
Cannon added that the U.S. EPA’s recent actions to qualify cellulosic gasoline for the renewable fuel standard (RFS) market and increase the gasoline blend rate to 25 percent have de-risked KiOR’s business strategy and created a market for the company’s hydrocarbon fuels that is nearly twice the size of the current ethanol market.
During the fourth quarter of 2012, KiOR posted a net loss of $29.7 million, compared to a net loss of $27 million during the prior quarter. Net loss for the full year was $96.4 million, compared to a net loss of $64.1 million in 2011.
KiOR recorded its first revenues since inception during the final three months of 2012. The $87,000 in revenue is attributed to the sale of blended cellulosic diesel from the company’s research and development facility. The fuel was blended with fossil diesel. The cost of revenue for the quarter was $68,000, and related to the first sale, including production, shipping and blending costs.
During a call to discuss the results, Cannon noted his company faces three primary risks: technology scale-up risk, regulatory risk, and financial risk. Since the last financial update was made in November, Cannon said KiOR has made substantial progress in addressing all three risks.
“A mitigation of scale-up risk due to commercial production of cellulosic gasoline and diesel at Columbus is a remarkable achievement by the KiOR team,” he said. “ In four years we have successfully achieved a 20,000 ton scale up in our proprietary biomass to fuels technology from proof of concept in our pilot plant to our demonstration plant and now to our first commercial scale facility at Columbus.”
While KiOR had previously stated it expected commercial shipments of biofuels to commence in late 2012, Cannon noted the company encountered unexpected startup issues unrelated to its technology, but has since overcome those normal startup issues and proven that KiOR’s biomass-to-fuels technology works at commercial scale. “In fact, we know now that our technology performs better in terms of quality as it is scaled,” he continued. “From very good oil at the very small pilot plant to even improved quality oil at the demo and now to our best ever quality oil made at Columbus. So high in quality we’re converting over 90 percent of our oil from Columbus into transportation fuel.” The conversion rate for conventional crude oil is only about 70 percent, he added.
Regarding regulatory risk, Cannon said that the EPA’s recent pathway rulemaking was the last hurdle to KiOR’s ability to fully participate in the mandated RFS2 market. “What this means is that every gallon of cellulosic gasoline and diesel that comes out of KiOR’s Columbus facility and all our future facilities will generate 1.5 or 1.7 cellulosic grams per gallon, which unlocks significant additional value for KiOR relative to nearly all other renewable fuel companies,” he said.
Cannon also spoke about EPA’s approval of an increased Part 79 registration for blending KiOR’s cellulosic gasoline at levels up to 25 percent. “At a 25 percent blend, KiOR has a 33 billion gallon per year domestic market for its cellulosic gasoline. This is more than the entire RFS2 renewable volume obligation in 2022. By comparisons, this is double the size of the ethanol market and without any blend wall limitations,” Cannon continued.
During the call, Cannon also addressed two factors he said KiOR believes will de-risk its funding risk. First, he said, is the achievement of milestones. Second, he continued, is flexibility. “In our experience, one of the best ways to drive value in any financing process, whether debt or equity, is to have the flexibility to raise financing when the market allows a company to maximize the value for its existing shareholders,” he said, noting that Alberta Investment Management Co. and Vinod Khosla have agreed to amend the loan agreement KiOR signed last year in order to give the company flexibility it needs from a liquidity perspective to drive financing for the Natchez facility.
“Specifically, we have increased the potential launch under the agreement from $75 million of current principal to $125 million, with affiliates of Vinod Khosla committed to funding that additional $50 million upon request from the company,” Cannon continued. “If funded, this additional funding would automatically convert into equity in connection with future financing for the Natchez project, which further enhances our flexibility going forward.”
On March 18 KiOR Inc. announced the initial shipment of cellulosic diesel from its commercial-scale plant in Columbus, Miss. On the same day, the company reported financial results for the fourth quarter of 2012 as well as the entire fiscal year. According to the financial release, KiOR recorded its first revenues since inception during the fourth quarter 2012.
Fred Cannon, KiOR’s president and CEO, called the cellulosic diesel shipment a major step forward for his company, the biofuels industry, and the renewable fuels sector. “With first production at Columbus, KiOR has technology with the potential to resurrect each and every shut down paper mill in the country and to replace imported oil on a cost effective basis while creating American jobs,” he said. “This facility demonstrates the efficacy of KiOR's proprietary catalytic biomass-to-fuel process with the potential to deliver cellulosic gasoline and diesel to the U.S. We are proud to be making history in Mississippi. The technology is simply scalable and we believe sufficient excess feedstock exists in the Southeast alone to build almost fifty KiOR commercial scale facilities."
Cannon added that the U.S. EPA’s recent actions to qualify cellulosic gasoline for the renewable fuel standard (RFS) market and increase the gasoline blend rate to 25 percent have de-risked KiOR’s business strategy and created a market for the company’s hydrocarbon fuels that is nearly twice the size of the current ethanol market.
During the fourth quarter of 2012, KiOR posted a net loss of $29.7 million, compared to a net loss of $27 million during the prior quarter. Net loss for the full year was $96.4 million, compared to a net loss of $64.1 million in 2011.
KiOR recorded its first revenues since inception during the final three months of 2012. The $87,000 in revenue is attributed to the sale of blended cellulosic diesel from the company’s research and development facility. The fuel was blended with fossil diesel. The cost of revenue for the quarter was $68,000, and related to the first sale, including production, shipping and blending costs.
During a call to discuss the results, Cannon noted his company faces three primary risks: technology scale-up risk, regulatory risk, and financial risk. Since the last financial update was made in November, Cannon said KiOR has made substantial progress in addressing all three risks.
“A mitigation of scale-up risk due to commercial production of cellulosic gasoline and diesel at Columbus is a remarkable achievement by the KiOR team,” he said. “ In four years we have successfully achieved a 20,000 ton scale up in our proprietary biomass to fuels technology from proof of concept in our pilot plant to our demonstration plant and now to our first commercial scale facility at Columbus.”
While KiOR had previously stated it expected commercial shipments of biofuels to commence in late 2012, Cannon noted the company encountered unexpected startup issues unrelated to its technology, but has since overcome those normal startup issues and proven that KiOR’s biomass-to-fuels technology works at commercial scale. “In fact, we know now that our technology performs better in terms of quality as it is scaled,” he continued. “From very good oil at the very small pilot plant to even improved quality oil at the demo and now to our best ever quality oil made at Columbus. So high in quality we’re converting over 90 percent of our oil from Columbus into transportation fuel.” The conversion rate for conventional crude oil is only about 70 percent, he added.
Regarding regulatory risk, Cannon said that the EPA’s recent pathway rulemaking was the last hurdle to KiOR’s ability to fully participate in the mandated RFS2 market. “What this means is that every gallon of cellulosic gasoline and diesel that comes out of KiOR’s Columbus facility and all our future facilities will generate 1.5 or 1.7 cellulosic grams per gallon, which unlocks significant additional value for KiOR relative to nearly all other renewable fuel companies,” he said.
Cannon also spoke about EPA’s approval of an increased Part 79 registration for blending KiOR’s cellulosic gasoline at levels up to 25 percent. “At a 25 percent blend, KiOR has a 33 billion gallon per year domestic market for its cellulosic gasoline. This is more than the entire RFS2 renewable volume obligation in 2022. By comparisons, this is double the size of the ethanol market and without any blend wall limitations,” Cannon continued.
During the call, Cannon also addressed two factors he said KiOR believes will de-risk its funding risk. First, he said, is the achievement of milestones. Second, he continued, is flexibility. “In our experience, one of the best ways to drive value in any financing process, whether debt or equity, is to have the flexibility to raise financing when the market allows a company to maximize the value for its existing shareholders,” he said, noting that Alberta Investment Management Co. and Vinod Khosla have agreed to amend the loan agreement KiOR signed last year in order to give the company flexibility it needs from a liquidity perspective to drive financing for the Natchez facility.
“Specifically, we have increased the potential launch under the agreement from $75 million of current principal to $125 million, with affiliates of Vinod Khosla committed to funding that additional $50 million upon request from the company,” Cannon continued. “If funded, this additional funding would automatically convert into equity in connection with future financing for the Natchez project, which further enhances our flexibility going forward.”
Monday, March 18, 2013
Biofuels Digest’s 10-Minute Guide to Obama’s New Energy Policy
http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2013/03/18/biofuels-digests-10-minute-guide-to-the-obama-administrations-new-energy-policy/
“You see, after years of talking about it, we’re finally poised to take control of our energy future. We produce more oil than we have in 15 years. We import less oil than we have in 20 years…But the only way we’re going to break this cycle of spiking gas prices for good is to shift our cars and trucks off of oil for good. That’s why, in my State of the Union Address, I called on Congress to set up an Energy Security Trust to fund research into new technologies that will help us reach that goal.
“I’m proposing that we take some of our oil and gas revenues from public lands and put it towards research that will benefit the public, so that we can support American ingenuity without adding a dime to our deficit…devising new ways to fuel our cars and trucks with new sources of clean energy – like advanced biofuels and natural gas – so drivers can one day go coast-to-coast without using a drop of oil.
“And in the meantime, let’s keep moving forward on an all-of-the-above energy strategy. A strategy where we produce more oil and gas here at home, but also more biofuels and fuel-efficient vehicles; more solar power and wind power. We can do this.”
A companion study released the the Department of Energy was, in its way, more ambitious and more specific: “TEF does not project that all liquid fuels will be eliminated from the future transportation sector, but rather that demand can be sufficiently reduced so that biomass can meet all liquid fuel needs.”
No. In his 2013 State of the Union address, President Obama called on Congress to create an Energy Security Trust Fund, which would free American families and business from painful spikes in gas prices. The President’s plan builds on an idea that has bipartisan support from experts including retired admirals and generals and leading CEOs, and it focuses on one goal: shifting America’s cars and trucks off oil entirely.
Over 10 years, the Energy Security Trust will provide $2 billion for critical, cutting-edge research focused on developing cost-effective transportation alternatives. The investments will support research into a range of technologies – things like advanced vehicles that run on electricity, homegrown biofuels, and domestically produced natural gas. It will also help fund a small number of real-world experiments that try different transportation techniques in cities and towns around the country using advanced vehicles at scale.
No. The funding will be provided by revenues from federal oil and gas development, and will not add any additional costs to the federal budget.
They’re here.
Yep. Here you are.
It’s a new study from the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, and Argonne National Laboratory that finds the United States has the potential to reduce petroleum use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the transportation sector by more than 80% by 2050 – and proposes pathways towards that goal.
• Stopping Growth in Transportation Sector Energy Use
• Using More Biofuels
• Expanding Electric and Hydrogen Technologies
1. Challenges Americans to double renewable electricity generation again by 2020.
2. Directs the Interior Department to make energy project permitting more robust.
3. Commits to safer production and cleaner electricity from natural gas.
4. Supports a responsible nuclear waste strategy.
5. Sets a goal to cut net oil imports in half by the end of the decade.
6. Commits to partnering with the private sector to adopt natural gas and other alternative fuels in the Nation’s trucking fleet.
7. Establishes a new goal to double American energy productivity by 2030.
8. Challenges States to Cut Energy Waste and Support Energy Efficiency and Modernize the Grid.
9. Commits to build on the success of existing partnerships with the public and private sector to use energy wisely.
10. Calls for sustained investments in technologies that promote maximum productivity of energy use and reduce waste.
11. Leads efforts through the Clean Energy Ministerial and other fora to promote energy efficiency and the development and deployment of clean energy.
12. Works through the G20 and other fora toward the global phase out of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies.
13. Promotes safe and responsible oil and natural gas development.
14. Updates our international capabilities to strengthen energy security.
15. Supports American nuclear exports.
Right here.
The transportation sector accounts for 71% of total U.S. petroleum consumption and 33% of U.S. total carbon emissions.
1. Deployment pathways issues including the development of, transition to, and challenges of advanced technology
2. Non-cost barriers to advanced vehicles such as range anxiety, refueling availability, technology reliability, and consumer familiarity.
3. Opportunities to improve non-light-duty vehicle efficiency for medium- and heavy-duty trucks, off-road vehicles and equipment, aircraft, marine vessels, and railways
4. Opportunities for switching modes of transporting freight, such as moving freight from trucks to rail and ships.
5. Infrastructure expansion required for deployment of low-GHG fuels, including electricity, biofuels, hydrogen, and natural gas
6. Balance of biomass resource demand and supply, including allocations for various transportation fuels, electric generation, and other applications.
7. Opportunities to save energy and abate GHG emissions through community development and built environment strategies
8. Trip reduction through mass transit, tele-working, tele-shopping, carpooling, and improvement of vehicle performance through efficient driving
9. Freight demand patterns, including trends in operational needs and projections of future use levels.
Up to 100 percent of fuel needs, if the US hits its 2050 fuel efficiency, hydrogen fuel, and electrification goals as well. Even at the EIA baseline projected fuel demand in 2050, biofuels could supply as much as 50 percent of the jet fuel market, and 30 percent of the gasoline and diesel markets if EERE biofuel technology goals are met. Getting to the point where biomass could provide 100 percent of vehicle liquid fuels requires reducing the need for fuel through the efficiency and demand management measures described above, including deployment of electricity or hydrogen fuel alternatives.
Some. “While new fuel types require new infrastructure, the share of infrastructure cost within total fuel costs is very small (1.5-3 percent), and these costs can be made up for in fuel cost savings of more efficient advanced vehicles.”
You can start here at the TEF home page.
TEF is a collaboration between EERE, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and Argonne National Laboratory (ANL). The project benefitted from the input provided by a steering committee that included some of the nation’s foremost experts on transportation energy from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), academic researchers, and industry associations.
NEPA is the National Environmental Policy Act of 1970, a product of the Nixon Administration.
The President’s strategy includes requiring federal agencies, under NEPA’s authority, to include climate change impact in reviewing proposed projects. For example — leases to drill for coal, or export coal to China, or construct oil pipelines like the Keystone XL pipeline, could be reviewed not only for air pollution and water fouling, but for overall greenhouse gas impact.
Big deal. Brendan Cummings, senior counsel for the Center for Biological Diversity told Bloomberg that the result will be “a major shakeup in how agencies conduct NEPA” reviews.
Generally, yes. NEPA grants a right of Federal review of proposed projects for environmental impact — and climate change certainly falls broadly within that category. The devil is going to be in the details — after all, how much specific contribution to a problem like climate change be attributed to a single project?
No. A NEPA review is, at the end of the day, aimed at producing a thorough vetting process, rather than a specific outcome. Projects go through NEPA reviews — there is a robust commentary opportunity — but regulators, in the end, make decisions on permits. NEPA does establish a forum for introducing or reviewing data that will be used in a regulator’s decision — or, in lawsuits that may be filed to reverse a ruling.
Forbes’ Houston-based energy columnist Christopher Helman writes: “This is a terrible idea — and a backdoor to the imposition of a nationwide carbon tax — that congress should not allow to pass.
“There is absolutely no reason why we need a dedicated Energy Security Trust to fund the national labs, or to fund any kind of alternative energy research. If congress wants to fund research it can pass a bill to fund research…Isn’t congressional appropriation how the federal government is supposed to pay for such stuff?
“Then consider that the Department of Energy has in recent years built up an insanely terrible record of wasting taxpayer money by directing funds to private companies, many of which have simply gone belly up (but not before paying lavish bonuses to executives).
Here’s some flavor. “This approach will only encourage more dirty energy production…[and] doesn’t create any additional cost for using fossil fuels, thus creating no incentive for firms to divert resources into safer, cleaner and more renewable sources of energy,” Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen’s energy program, told bizjournals.com.
Major push from Obama on energy.
From DOE: “Liquid fuels demand can be sufficiently reduced so that biomass can meet all liquid fuel needs.”
What’s up? What is an Energy Security Trust, anyway? The Digest’s 10-Minute Guide tells all.
In an address at the Argonne National Laboratories on Friday, President Obama said:
“You see, after years of talking about it, we’re finally poised to take control of our energy future. We produce more oil than we have in 15 years. We import less oil than we have in 20 years…But the only way we’re going to break this cycle of spiking gas prices for good is to shift our cars and trucks off of oil for good. That’s why, in my State of the Union Address, I called on Congress to set up an Energy Security Trust to fund research into new technologies that will help us reach that goal.
“I’m proposing that we take some of our oil and gas revenues from public lands and put it towards research that will benefit the public, so that we can support American ingenuity without adding a dime to our deficit…devising new ways to fuel our cars and trucks with new sources of clean energy – like advanced biofuels and natural gas – so drivers can one day go coast-to-coast without using a drop of oil.
“And in the meantime, let’s keep moving forward on an all-of-the-above energy strategy. A strategy where we produce more oil and gas here at home, but also more biofuels and fuel-efficient vehicles; more solar power and wind power. We can do this.”
A companion study released the the Department of Energy was, in its way, more ambitious and more specific: “TEF does not project that all liquid fuels will be eliminated from the future transportation sector, but rather that demand can be sufficiently reduced so that biomass can meet all liquid fuel needs.”
The Energy Security Trust. Is it a new idea?
No. In his 2013 State of the Union address, President Obama called on Congress to create an Energy Security Trust Fund, which would free American families and business from painful spikes in gas prices. The President’s plan builds on an idea that has bipartisan support from experts including retired admirals and generals and leading CEOs, and it focuses on one goal: shifting America’s cars and trucks off oil entirely.
How does it work?
Over 10 years, the Energy Security Trust will provide $2 billion for critical, cutting-edge research focused on developing cost-effective transportation alternatives. The investments will support research into a range of technologies – things like advanced vehicles that run on electricity, homegrown biofuels, and domestically produced natural gas. It will also help fund a small number of real-world experiments that try different transportation techniques in cities and towns around the country using advanced vehicles at scale.
Does it involve new taxes?
No. The funding will be provided by revenues from federal oil and gas development, and will not add any additional costs to the federal budget.
President Obama’s complete remarks are where?
They’re here.
Does the White House’s have a short take on the Energy Security Trust?
Yep. Here you are.
What is the Transport Energy Futures (TEF) study?
It’s a new study from the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, and Argonne National Laboratory that finds the United States has the potential to reduce petroleum use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the transportation sector by more than 80% by 2050 – and proposes pathways towards that goal.
What is the strategy?
• Stopping Growth in Transportation Sector Energy Use
• Using More Biofuels
• Expanding Electric and Hydrogen Technologies
What’s the overall 15-point Obama Energy Strategy, again?
1. Challenges Americans to double renewable electricity generation again by 2020.
2. Directs the Interior Department to make energy project permitting more robust.
3. Commits to safer production and cleaner electricity from natural gas.
4. Supports a responsible nuclear waste strategy.
5. Sets a goal to cut net oil imports in half by the end of the decade.
6. Commits to partnering with the private sector to adopt natural gas and other alternative fuels in the Nation’s trucking fleet.
7. Establishes a new goal to double American energy productivity by 2030.
8. Challenges States to Cut Energy Waste and Support Energy Efficiency and Modernize the Grid.
9. Commits to build on the success of existing partnerships with the public and private sector to use energy wisely.
10. Calls for sustained investments in technologies that promote maximum productivity of energy use and reduce waste.
11. Leads efforts through the Clean Energy Ministerial and other fora to promote energy efficiency and the development and deployment of clean energy.
12. Works through the G20 and other fora toward the global phase out of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies.
13. Promotes safe and responsible oil and natural gas development.
14. Updates our international capabilities to strengthen energy security.
15. Supports American nuclear exports.
Where’s the Fact Sheet on that?
Right here.
Why the transport sector, specifically?
The transportation sector accounts for 71% of total U.S. petroleum consumption and 33% of U.S. total carbon emissions.
What are the 9 Interconnected reports that make up the overall TEF study?
1. Deployment pathways issues including the development of, transition to, and challenges of advanced technology
2. Non-cost barriers to advanced vehicles such as range anxiety, refueling availability, technology reliability, and consumer familiarity.
3. Opportunities to improve non-light-duty vehicle efficiency for medium- and heavy-duty trucks, off-road vehicles and equipment, aircraft, marine vessels, and railways
4. Opportunities for switching modes of transporting freight, such as moving freight from trucks to rail and ships.
5. Infrastructure expansion required for deployment of low-GHG fuels, including electricity, biofuels, hydrogen, and natural gas
6. Balance of biomass resource demand and supply, including allocations for various transportation fuels, electric generation, and other applications.
7. Opportunities to save energy and abate GHG emissions through community development and built environment strategies
8. Trip reduction through mass transit, tele-working, tele-shopping, carpooling, and improvement of vehicle performance through efficient driving
9. Freight demand patterns, including trends in operational needs and projections of future use levels.
How much biofuels use does the TEF study anticipate?
Up to 100 percent of fuel needs, if the US hits its 2050 fuel efficiency, hydrogen fuel, and electrification goals as well. Even at the EIA baseline projected fuel demand in 2050, biofuels could supply as much as 50 percent of the jet fuel market, and 30 percent of the gasoline and diesel markets if EERE biofuel technology goals are met. Getting to the point where biomass could provide 100 percent of vehicle liquid fuels requires reducing the need for fuel through the efficiency and demand management measures described above, including deployment of electricity or hydrogen fuel alternatives.
Will this require an avalanche of infrastructure?
Some. “While new fuel types require new infrastructure, the share of infrastructure cost within total fuel costs is very small (1.5-3 percent), and these costs can be made up for in fuel cost savings of more efficient advanced vehicles.”
Where can I start to dig deeper into the overall plan and the TEF study?
You can start here at the TEF home page.
Who was responsible for TEF?
TEF is a collaboration between EERE, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and Argonne National Laboratory (ANL). The project benefitted from the input provided by a steering committee that included some of the nation’s foremost experts on transportation energy from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), academic researchers, and industry associations.
What is NEPA and what is happening there?
NEPA is the National Environmental Policy Act of 1970, a product of the Nixon Administration.
Er, Nixon? What’s new there?
The President’s strategy includes requiring federal agencies, under NEPA’s authority, to include climate change impact in reviewing proposed projects. For example — leases to drill for coal, or export coal to China, or construct oil pipelines like the Keystone XL pipeline, could be reviewed not only for air pollution and water fouling, but for overall greenhouse gas impact.
Are the changes in NEPA reviews ho-hum, or a big deal?
Big deal. Brendan Cummings, senior counsel for the Center for Biological Diversity told Bloomberg that the result will be “a major shakeup in how agencies conduct NEPA” reviews.
Does the President have this authority under NEPA?
Generally, yes. NEPA grants a right of Federal review of proposed projects for environmental impact — and climate change certainly falls broadly within that category. The devil is going to be in the details — after all, how much specific contribution to a problem like climate change be attributed to a single project?
Is a NEPA review capable of derailing a project?
No. A NEPA review is, at the end of the day, aimed at producing a thorough vetting process, rather than a specific outcome. Projects go through NEPA reviews — there is a robust commentary opportunity — but regulators, in the end, make decisions on permits. NEPA does establish a forum for introducing or reviewing data that will be used in a regulator’s decision — or, in lawsuits that may be filed to reverse a ruling.
Overall, is there going to be opposition from the right on the Energy Security Trust?
Forbes’ Houston-based energy columnist Christopher Helman writes: “This is a terrible idea — and a backdoor to the imposition of a nationwide carbon tax — that congress should not allow to pass.
“There is absolutely no reason why we need a dedicated Energy Security Trust to fund the national labs, or to fund any kind of alternative energy research. If congress wants to fund research it can pass a bill to fund research…Isn’t congressional appropriation how the federal government is supposed to pay for such stuff?
“Then consider that the Department of Energy has in recent years built up an insanely terrible record of wasting taxpayer money by directing funds to private companies, many of which have simply gone belly up (but not before paying lavish bonuses to executives).
Why is there opposition from the left?
Here’s some flavor. “This approach will only encourage more dirty energy production…[and] doesn’t create any additional cost for using fossil fuels, thus creating no incentive for firms to divert resources into safer, cleaner and more renewable sources of energy,” Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen’s energy program, told bizjournals.com.
KiOR ships first cellulosic diesel volumes from Miss. biorefinery
http://www.biodieselmagazine.com/articles/9006/kior-ships-first-cellulosic-diesel-volumes-from-miss-biorefinery
KiOR Inc. announced initial shipments of cellulosic diesel from its first commercial-scale facility in Columbus, Miss., where the company uses pine wood chips that previously fed a now-defunct paper mill to produce cellulosic gasoline and diesel fuels. The $213 million facility is scaled to process 500 bone dry tons of sustainably harvested woody biomass per day. It can produce more than 13 million gallons of gasoline, diesel and fuel oil blendstocks annually.
KiOR's renewable gasoline is also the first renewable cellulosic gasoline registered by U.S. EPA for sale in the U.S.
Condoleezza Rice, former U.S. Secretary of State and a current member of KiOR's board of directors, said, “KiOR is changing the American energy equation by innovating and commercializing an entirely new generation of hydrocarbon-based diesel and gasoline fuel. By making the promise of cellulosic fuels a reality, KiOR demonstrates that these fuels are an attractive option for lessening America's dependence on foreign sources of energy.”
Haley Barbour, former Governor of Mississippi, who was instrumental in attracting KiOR to Mississippi, said, “The shipment of this first fuel from KiOR's Columbus, Miss., facility is the culmination of a vision to establish Mississippi as the birthplace of the wood-to-fuels production technology. This progress highlights our highly skilled labor force, abundant natural resources and supportive government climate for innovative companies like KiOR seeking a home to expand their businesses. Mississippi has partnered with KiOR throughout this history-making project, contributing economic development support ranging from research and testing projects within our world class universities, to technical training within our superb community college system.”
“This is a major step forward for KiOR, the biofuels industry and the entire renewable fuels sector,” said Fred Cannon, KiOR's president and CEO. “With first production at Columbus, KiOR has technology with the potential to resurrect each and every shut down paper mill in the country and to replace imported oil on a cost-effective basis while creating American jobs. This facility demonstrates the efficacy of KiOR's proprietary catalytic biomass-to-fuel process with the potential to deliver cellulosic gasoline and diesel to the U.S. We are proud to be making history in Mississippi. The technology is simply scalable and we believe sufficient excess feedstock exists in the Southeast alone to build almost 50 KiOR commercial-scale facilities.”
The company plans to build a similar but larger facility in Natchez, Miss., scaled to process three times the woody biomass as the Columbus biorefinery.
KiOR Inc. announced initial shipments of cellulosic diesel from its first commercial-scale facility in Columbus, Miss., where the company uses pine wood chips that previously fed a now-defunct paper mill to produce cellulosic gasoline and diesel fuels. The $213 million facility is scaled to process 500 bone dry tons of sustainably harvested woody biomass per day. It can produce more than 13 million gallons of gasoline, diesel and fuel oil blendstocks annually.
KiOR's renewable gasoline is also the first renewable cellulosic gasoline registered by U.S. EPA for sale in the U.S.
Condoleezza Rice, former U.S. Secretary of State and a current member of KiOR's board of directors, said, “KiOR is changing the American energy equation by innovating and commercializing an entirely new generation of hydrocarbon-based diesel and gasoline fuel. By making the promise of cellulosic fuels a reality, KiOR demonstrates that these fuels are an attractive option for lessening America's dependence on foreign sources of energy.”
Haley Barbour, former Governor of Mississippi, who was instrumental in attracting KiOR to Mississippi, said, “The shipment of this first fuel from KiOR's Columbus, Miss., facility is the culmination of a vision to establish Mississippi as the birthplace of the wood-to-fuels production technology. This progress highlights our highly skilled labor force, abundant natural resources and supportive government climate for innovative companies like KiOR seeking a home to expand their businesses. Mississippi has partnered with KiOR throughout this history-making project, contributing economic development support ranging from research and testing projects within our world class universities, to technical training within our superb community college system.”
“This is a major step forward for KiOR, the biofuels industry and the entire renewable fuels sector,” said Fred Cannon, KiOR's president and CEO. “With first production at Columbus, KiOR has technology with the potential to resurrect each and every shut down paper mill in the country and to replace imported oil on a cost-effective basis while creating American jobs. This facility demonstrates the efficacy of KiOR's proprietary catalytic biomass-to-fuel process with the potential to deliver cellulosic gasoline and diesel to the U.S. We are proud to be making history in Mississippi. The technology is simply scalable and we believe sufficient excess feedstock exists in the Southeast alone to build almost 50 KiOR commercial-scale facilities.”
The company plans to build a similar but larger facility in Natchez, Miss., scaled to process three times the woody biomass as the Columbus biorefinery.
Construction on Clinton biofuel refinery could start as early as fall
http://www.fayobserver.com/articles/2013/03/18/1243607?sac=fo.business
Published: 07:22 AM, Mon Mar 18, 2013
Construction on a $170 million refinery in Clinton to convert 20 million tons of grass into fuel each year could start as early as this fall.
Chemtex, an international company with offices in Wilmington, plans to build the refinery on 166 acres in Sampson County. The plant would mirror one already built in Italy. If construction begins as planned, the plant could open in 2015.
Yet hurdles remain.
"We're working very hard to try to make it a reality," said Dennis Leong, an executive vice president at Chemtex. "I'm very confident that in 2015, this plant will be open somewhere, and I should say we're still very hopeful and it's our intention to open in North Carolina. It's really making sure it's a project that's welcome in the state."
It will take at least 20,000 acres of energy crops such as miscanthus and switchgrass to feed the refinery. Chemtex has developed its own technology to extract the energy from green plants and soft woods.
The plan is to sign up farmers near the plant to grow materials on land they aren't already using to grow food.
Chemtex estimates the facility will help create more than 300 jobs in the region while helping the nation reduce its dependence on foreign oil. And that could be just the beginning. Chemtex documents say North Carolina has enough available land to support as many as 15 refineries, which could mean 5,000 new jobs and a $2 billion boost to the state's economy.
The N.C. Biofuels Center has identified 100,000 acres of spray fields in Sampson, Duplin and Wayne counties that could potentially be used for biocrops. But state environmental workers are still studying how to plant the crops in spray fields in a way that complies with waste regulations.
The ethanol produced at the plant could be sold to fuel blenders and end up in cars' gasoline tanks.
Published: 07:22 AM, Mon Mar 18, 2013
Construction on a $170 million refinery in Clinton to convert 20 million tons of grass into fuel each year could start as early as this fall.
Chemtex, an international company with offices in Wilmington, plans to build the refinery on 166 acres in Sampson County. The plant would mirror one already built in Italy. If construction begins as planned, the plant could open in 2015.
Yet hurdles remain.
"We're working very hard to try to make it a reality," said Dennis Leong, an executive vice president at Chemtex. "I'm very confident that in 2015, this plant will be open somewhere, and I should say we're still very hopeful and it's our intention to open in North Carolina. It's really making sure it's a project that's welcome in the state."
It will take at least 20,000 acres of energy crops such as miscanthus and switchgrass to feed the refinery. Chemtex has developed its own technology to extract the energy from green plants and soft woods.
The plan is to sign up farmers near the plant to grow materials on land they aren't already using to grow food.
Chemtex estimates the facility will help create more than 300 jobs in the region while helping the nation reduce its dependence on foreign oil. And that could be just the beginning. Chemtex documents say North Carolina has enough available land to support as many as 15 refineries, which could mean 5,000 new jobs and a $2 billion boost to the state's economy.
The N.C. Biofuels Center has identified 100,000 acres of spray fields in Sampson, Duplin and Wayne counties that could potentially be used for biocrops. But state environmental workers are still studying how to plant the crops in spray fields in a way that complies with waste regulations.
The ethanol produced at the plant could be sold to fuel blenders and end up in cars' gasoline tanks.
Staff writer John Ramsey can be reached at ramseyj@fayobserver.com or 486-3574.
Colonial Pipeline to ship biodiesel on Georgia line by end-March
http://www.platts.com/RSSFeedDetailedNews/RSSFeed/Oil/6267714
San Antonio (Platts)--18Mar2013/315 pm EDT/1915 GMT
Colonial Pipeline will begin shipping biodiesel blends on its pipeline to central and southern Georgia by the end of the month, the company said Monday, calling it a first for the nation's largest volume pipeline shipper of refined products.
The introduction of biodiesel into Colonial's system will occur near Griffin, Georgia, resulting in a blend of no more than 5% biodiesel suitable for trucking, farming and other diesel uses. The biodiesel will be stored in tankage owned by TransMontaigne Partners and injected into diesel as it flows through Colonial's pipeline.
Colonial officials said they have worked with the US Environmental Protection Agency for years on the project. Gwen Keyes Fleming, EPA regional administrator, commended Colonial for advancing biofuel growth along the busy I-75 corridor.
"It took longer than expected, but we're making it happen," Colonial CEO Tim Felt said at a news conference in San Antonio.
Colonial has a 1.272 million b/d gasoline Line 1 and 1.16 million b/d distillates Line 2 from Pasadena, Texas, to Greensboro, North Carolina, where they link up with a 945,000 b/d line into Linden, New Jersey.
The main distillates line allows renewable diesel, which is biodiesel that has been hydrotreated to kill any live agents in the fuel. But biodiesel had not been allowed due to the possibility it will trail back into the jet fuel stream, causing problems with airplane performance.
The 150,000 b/d Line 17, stub line off the main lines from Atlanta to Bainbridge, Georgia, does not carry jet fuel past Griffin, which is near Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, the world's busiest airport.
Felt said the company will learn from the project and may look at biodiesel injection into several other so-called stub lines in the future.
--Matthew Kohlman, matthew_kohlman@platts.com
--Edited by Katharine Fraser, katharine_fraser@platts.com
San Antonio (Platts)--18Mar2013/315 pm EDT/1915 GMT
Colonial Pipeline will begin shipping biodiesel blends on its pipeline to central and southern Georgia by the end of the month, the company said Monday, calling it a first for the nation's largest volume pipeline shipper of refined products.
The introduction of biodiesel into Colonial's system will occur near Griffin, Georgia, resulting in a blend of no more than 5% biodiesel suitable for trucking, farming and other diesel uses. The biodiesel will be stored in tankage owned by TransMontaigne Partners and injected into diesel as it flows through Colonial's pipeline.
Colonial officials said they have worked with the US Environmental Protection Agency for years on the project. Gwen Keyes Fleming, EPA regional administrator, commended Colonial for advancing biofuel growth along the busy I-75 corridor.
"It took longer than expected, but we're making it happen," Colonial CEO Tim Felt said at a news conference in San Antonio.
Colonial has a 1.272 million b/d gasoline Line 1 and 1.16 million b/d distillates Line 2 from Pasadena, Texas, to Greensboro, North Carolina, where they link up with a 945,000 b/d line into Linden, New Jersey.
The main distillates line allows renewable diesel, which is biodiesel that has been hydrotreated to kill any live agents in the fuel. But biodiesel had not been allowed due to the possibility it will trail back into the jet fuel stream, causing problems with airplane performance.
The 150,000 b/d Line 17, stub line off the main lines from Atlanta to Bainbridge, Georgia, does not carry jet fuel past Griffin, which is near Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, the world's busiest airport.
Felt said the company will learn from the project and may look at biodiesel injection into several other so-called stub lines in the future.
--Matthew Kohlman, matthew_kohlman@platts.com
--Edited by Katharine Fraser, katharine_fraser@platts.com
Thursday, March 14, 2013
Southern Research Institute (NC) Wins DOE Grant to Develop Biomass Liquification Process For Transportation Fuels Production
http://www.biofuelsjournal.com/articles/Southern_Research_Institute__NC__Wins_DOE_Grant_to_Develop_Biomass_Liquification_Process_For_Transportation_Fuels_Production-131092.html
Date Posted: March 14, 2013
Durham, NC—Southern Research Institute announced March 13 it has entered into a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Dept. of Energy to develop a mild liquefaction process that will economically convert biomass to petroleum refinery-ready bio-oils.
The process will convert biomass to stabilized bio-oils that can be directly blended with hydrotreater and cracker input streams in a petroleum refinery for production of gasoline and diesel range hydrocarbons.
“We hope the project will advance liquefaction by demonstrating cost-effective biomass conversion to stable bio-oils at mild conditions. Other liquefaction processes either use severe conditions or expensive catalysts to achieve stability,” said Santosh K. Gangwal, Ph.D., Southern Research principal investigator.
“We will also evaluate the suitability and process economics of directly blending our bio-oils with refinery hydrotreater and cracker streams for co-production of diesel and gasoline.”
Gangwal said co-processing of bio-oil with petroleum refinery streams can help refineries comply with new renewable fuels standards (RFS-2.)
The process will be evaluated and optimized using a continuous flow lab-scale biomass liquefaction system simulating the commercial embodiment of Southern Research’s liquefaction process.
Also a lab-scale reactor will be constructed and tested for hydrotreating and cracking the bio-oils to produce gasoline and diesel range hydrocarbons.
Southern Research is seeking a refinery partner who will help to further define bio-oil quality specifications that meet requirements for direct insertion at various points in the petroleum refining process.
Based on the experimental data, a technical and economic evaluation and life-cycle assessment of the process will be carried out.
Requirements for scale-up and commercialization of the liquefaction process will be determined.
“Development and commercialization of a cost-effective biomass liquefaction process using a high impact feedstock such as wood waste to produce renewable gasoline and diesel can reduce the nation’s requirement for importing oil from foreign countries, help to stabilize the prices at the pump, and lower the emission of greenhouse gases” said Tim Hansen, director of Advanced Energy and Transportation Technologies.
For more information, call 205-337-9634.
Date Posted: March 14, 2013
Durham, NC—Southern Research Institute announced March 13 it has entered into a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Dept. of Energy to develop a mild liquefaction process that will economically convert biomass to petroleum refinery-ready bio-oils.
The process will convert biomass to stabilized bio-oils that can be directly blended with hydrotreater and cracker input streams in a petroleum refinery for production of gasoline and diesel range hydrocarbons.
“We hope the project will advance liquefaction by demonstrating cost-effective biomass conversion to stable bio-oils at mild conditions. Other liquefaction processes either use severe conditions or expensive catalysts to achieve stability,” said Santosh K. Gangwal, Ph.D., Southern Research principal investigator.
“We will also evaluate the suitability and process economics of directly blending our bio-oils with refinery hydrotreater and cracker streams for co-production of diesel and gasoline.”
Gangwal said co-processing of bio-oil with petroleum refinery streams can help refineries comply with new renewable fuels standards (RFS-2.)
The process will be evaluated and optimized using a continuous flow lab-scale biomass liquefaction system simulating the commercial embodiment of Southern Research’s liquefaction process.
Also a lab-scale reactor will be constructed and tested for hydrotreating and cracking the bio-oils to produce gasoline and diesel range hydrocarbons.
Southern Research is seeking a refinery partner who will help to further define bio-oil quality specifications that meet requirements for direct insertion at various points in the petroleum refining process.
Based on the experimental data, a technical and economic evaluation and life-cycle assessment of the process will be carried out.
Requirements for scale-up and commercialization of the liquefaction process will be determined.
“Development and commercialization of a cost-effective biomass liquefaction process using a high impact feedstock such as wood waste to produce renewable gasoline and diesel can reduce the nation’s requirement for importing oil from foreign countries, help to stabilize the prices at the pump, and lower the emission of greenhouse gases” said Tim Hansen, director of Advanced Energy and Transportation Technologies.
For more information, call 205-337-9634.
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Cellulosic Ethanol ‘to Be Cost Competitive by 2016′
http://www.environmentalleader.com/2013/03/12/cellulosic-ethanol-to-be-cost-competitive-by-2016/
March 12, 2013
Cellulosic ethanol is on track be cost competitive with corn-based ethanol by 2016, a development that could drive the fuel’s production, according to an industry survey conducted by Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
The survey focused on 11 major players in the cellulosic ethanol industry, all of which use a technique known as enzymatic hydrolysis to break down and convert the complex sugars in non-food crop matter, and a fermentation stage to turn the material into ethanol, BNEF said.
Cellulosic ethanol cost 94 cents a liter to produce in 2012, about 40 percent more than ethanol made from corn, BNEF said. That price gap will close by 2016, surveyed cellulosic ethanol producers predicted.
Project capital expenditures, feedstock and enzymes used in the production process are still the largest costs of running a cellulosic ethanol plant, the respondents said in the survey. But technology has pushed operating costs lower. For example, enzyme costs for a liter of cellulosic ethanol dropped 72 percent between 2008 and 2012 due to technological improvements, BNEF said.
Cellulosic ethanol producers will shift their focus from technology enhancements to logistical planning over the next five to 10 years in an effort to rein in capital costs, suggesting the industry is maturing, said BNEF’s lead biofuel analyst Harry Boyle.
Globally, there are 14 enzymatic hydrolysis pilots, nine demonstration-stage projects and 10 semi-commercial scale plants either announced, commissioned or due online shortly, according to the survey. Five of the semi-commercial plants are in the US and more are expected to open in Brazil in the near future, BNEF said. A semi-commercial facility with a capacity of 90 million liters per year requires an initial capital outlay of about $290 million.
By 2016, when second- and third-generation plants with capacities between 90m and 125m liters will be commissioned, initial capital costs per installed liter are expected to fall from $3 to $2 due to economies of scale and a reduction in over-engineering, BNEF said.
Meanwhile, some corn-based ethanol producers are struggling to maintain profits.
Some simple corn-based ethanol plants, which can only produce ethanol and distillers grains from corn, have temporarily shut down as production costs have exceeded revenue, according to a report released by the US Energy Information Agency. As of January 2013, the number of idled plants had grown to at least 20.
Profit margins at plants that can recover other products, such as corn oil, have been 15 cents to 20 cents per gallon higher than plants without that capability, the EIA said. Margins at plants without corn oil recovery have been negative (see graph), forcing plant shutdowns in Nebraska, Illinois and Minnesota.
March 12, 2013
Cellulosic ethanol is on track be cost competitive with corn-based ethanol by 2016, a development that could drive the fuel’s production, according to an industry survey conducted by Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
The survey focused on 11 major players in the cellulosic ethanol industry, all of which use a technique known as enzymatic hydrolysis to break down and convert the complex sugars in non-food crop matter, and a fermentation stage to turn the material into ethanol, BNEF said.
Cellulosic ethanol cost 94 cents a liter to produce in 2012, about 40 percent more than ethanol made from corn, BNEF said. That price gap will close by 2016, surveyed cellulosic ethanol producers predicted.
Project capital expenditures, feedstock and enzymes used in the production process are still the largest costs of running a cellulosic ethanol plant, the respondents said in the survey. But technology has pushed operating costs lower. For example, enzyme costs for a liter of cellulosic ethanol dropped 72 percent between 2008 and 2012 due to technological improvements, BNEF said.
Cellulosic ethanol producers will shift their focus from technology enhancements to logistical planning over the next five to 10 years in an effort to rein in capital costs, suggesting the industry is maturing, said BNEF’s lead biofuel analyst Harry Boyle.
Globally, there are 14 enzymatic hydrolysis pilots, nine demonstration-stage projects and 10 semi-commercial scale plants either announced, commissioned or due online shortly, according to the survey. Five of the semi-commercial plants are in the US and more are expected to open in Brazil in the near future, BNEF said. A semi-commercial facility with a capacity of 90 million liters per year requires an initial capital outlay of about $290 million.
By 2016, when second- and third-generation plants with capacities between 90m and 125m liters will be commissioned, initial capital costs per installed liter are expected to fall from $3 to $2 due to economies of scale and a reduction in over-engineering, BNEF said.
Meanwhile, some corn-based ethanol producers are struggling to maintain profits.
Some simple corn-based ethanol plants, which can only produce ethanol and distillers grains from corn, have temporarily shut down as production costs have exceeded revenue, according to a report released by the US Energy Information Agency. As of January 2013, the number of idled plants had grown to at least 20.
Profit margins at plants that can recover other products, such as corn oil, have been 15 cents to 20 cents per gallon higher than plants without that capability, the EIA said. Margins at plants without corn oil recovery have been negative (see graph), forcing plant shutdowns in Nebraska, Illinois and Minnesota.
Monday, March 11, 2013
LanzaTech Announces Datuk Ir. (Dr) Abdul Rahim Hj Hashim, President of Malaysian Gas Association, to Board of Directors
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/lanzatech-announces-datuk-ir-dr-abdul-rahim-hj-hashim-president-of-malaysian-gas-association-to-board-of-directors-2013-03-11
36 Year Veteran of Oil & Gas Industry Will Help Company Accelerate Commercialization of Novel Technology to Convert Unused Gas Streams Into Marketable Commodities
ROSELLE, IL, Mar 11, 2013 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) --
LanzaTech, a producer of low-carbon fuels and chemicals from
carbon-containing gases, announced the appointment of Datuk Ir. (Dr)
Abdul Rahim Hj Hashim, the current President of the Malaysian Gas
Association, former Chief Executive of PETRONAS Oil Refinery and a 36
year oil and gas industry veteran to its board of directors.
"As we take our technology further into the fuel production value
chain, Datuk Rahim's extensive leadership experience in the oil and
gas industry will be incredibly valuable," said Jennifer Holmgren,
CEO of LanzaTech. "In addition to the significant potential to create
marketable commodities from industrial waste streams containing
carbon monoxide, we are seeing increasing opportunity to leverage our
technology with underutilized, or otherwise unusable gas streams."
Datuk Rahim, the President of the Malaysian Gas Association, began
his career in PETRONAS soon after graduating from the University of
Birmingham, UK in electrical and electronics engineering. Throughout
his 36 years of involvement in the oil and gas industry, he has held
a number of high profile positions of increasing responsibility. As
Vice President at PETRONAS for 10 years, he covered three different
portfolios: Vice President of Human Resource Management for the
PETRONAS Group for four years; vice president of the Gas Business for
three years and Vice President for Research and Technology for three
years. In addition, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of
PETRONAS Oil Refinery (Melaka) Sdn Bhd as well as Managing Director
and Chief Executive Officer of Malaysian Refining Company Sdn Bhd
(MRC).
While serving in PETRONAS, he also held several key positions in a
variety of gas industry organizations, both in Malaysia and at an
international level including serving as President of the Asia
Pacific Natural Gas Vehicle Association (ANGVA) and President of the
International Gas Union (IGU). A professional engineer, Datuk Rahim
serves on the Board of Engineers (BOE), Malaysia and also the
Chairman of the Engineering Accreditation Council (EAC) Malaysia. He
is also an Associate Member of the American Institute of Chemical
Engineers. In 1997, he completed the Advanced Management Program at
Harvard Business School.
"I've been very impressed with the progress LanzaTech has made to
date developing and scaling its core technology to convert waste
gases into renewable fuels and chemicals," said Datuk Rahim. "I look
forward to helping the company extend that platform into new
feedstocks, including CO2, methane and other carbon sources as well
as new end products."
In 2012, LanzaTech partnered with PETRONAS to develop new approaches
to effectively capture carbon, with an initial focus on using CO2
from a variety of sources including refinery off gases and natural
gas wells to produce acetic acid, a high value chemical with
applications in the polymers and plastics markets.
About LanzaTech
LanzaTech is a leader in gas fermentation technology. It provides
novel and economic routes to fuels and high value chemicals from
waste gas streams. LanzaTech's unique process provides a sustainable
pathway to produce platform chemicals that serve as building blocks
to products that have become indispensable in our lives such as
rubber, plastics, synthetic fibers and fuels.
LanzaTech's technology solutions mitigate carbon emissions from
industry without impacting adversely food or land security.
Currently commissioning a second pre-commercial facility in China
using steel mill off gases for ethanol production, LanzaTech, a
company founded in New Zealand, is now a global organization with
full commercial operation targeted for 2014.
More information is
available at www.lanzatech.com
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Is it bourgeois to worry about biofuels?
http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2013/03/is-it-bourgeois-to-worry-about-biofuels
07 Mar 2013, 15:00 /Robin Webster
A committee of MPs approved new subsidies for bioenergy yesterday, despite controversy over the environmental impact of the fuels. Many academics appear convinced that generating power from some biofuels like palm oil may result in emissions going up rather than down. But are concerns about the sustainability of biofuels "bourgeois" when the country faces the challenge of keeping the lights on?
Arguments over the use of fuels derived from organic matter like plants or crops for transport and in power stations has raged ever since scientific studies began emerging showing that they may have a far higher impact on greenhouse gas emissions than previously thought. Crops like palm oil and soy can compete with food crops for land, ultimately resulting in more clearance of forest and grasslands for agricultural land - driving up emissions.
The UK's former chief scientific advisor Professor David King told Radio 4's Today programme yesterday that biofuels are "pretty much a dead letter" in terms of their ability to reduce emissions.
But on the same programme, energy minister John Hayes told listeners he is "not persuaded at all" by King's argument. Hayes said it's "bourgeois" to worry about biofuels' climate impacts when the country needs to maintain energy security - and biofuels remain a part of the government's plans for meeting its EU-mandated 2020 renewables target.
Waving through
Yesterday afternoon, the obscurely-named Eleventh Delegated Legislation Committee voted for new support measures for renewables. First highlighted by the BBC, the vote covered a series of amendments to the Renewables Obligation (RO) - a subsidy to renewable power, several of which relate to bioenergy.
Some of the amendments set out new incentives for power plant to burn wood or plant material for some of all of the time. The new subsidies follow a consultation from DECC on what the levels should be.
Another amendment guarantees that an energy supplier may get " no more than four per cent" of its subsidies under the RO scheme from bioliquids. Bioliquids are liquid fuels made from organic sources - often vegetable oils like rapeseed, palm oil or soy. The amendment means that some power stations burning vegetable oils can be subsidised by the RO, but sets a cap on the subsidies.
The vote is a routine part of passing through changes to legislation and the attention it attracted seems to have been a surprise to key stakeholders. A spokesperson for trade body the Renewable Energy Association (REA), which supports biofuels, told us yesterday was "flummoxed" by the BBC's report.
Palm oil
The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) says the four per cent cap equates to approximately two terawatt hours of bioliquid electricity generation in 2017. The new limit on bioliquids has attracted criticism from anti biofuel campaigners - largely because of the potential that more palm oil could be imported to be burnt in UK power stations.
REA told us less than 0.1 per cent of biofuels in the transport sector are from palm oil, adding that the amount used in the power sector is probably "a similarly small figure" - so the new subsidies will not result in a rush of palm oil into UK power stations.
But anti-biofuels campaigner campaigner Kenneth Richter, from Friends of the Earth, said that the four per cent limit is "enormous" - and that guaranteed subsidies will cause a significant growth in the consumption of palm oil in power stations. Campaign group BiofuelWatch has calculated that if all of the bioliquids burnt under this cap were palm oil - admittedly rather a big if - then "up to 500,000" tonnes of bioliquid would be burnt in UK power stations as a result.
The UK and EU have both introduced sustainability standards for the biofuels in their energy mix.
But campaigners say that the sustainability criteria aren't strong enough to solve the problem. They point to studies by the European Commission showing emissions from palm oil can be worse than fossil fuels once land use change, deforestation and the draining of carbon-rich peatlands are taken into account.
MPs pointed out in yesterday's Committee meeting that Germany, France and the Netherlands have removed subsidies for bioliquids in the light of concerns about the sustainability of palm oil. John Hayes promised that his department would "look at the matter closely", but provided no further details - arguing that there is little sense to removing subsidies to all bioliquids because of problems with one of them. And with that, the new measures were voted through.
Argument over? Not likely
The argument is not all about bioliquids like palm oil. The new support measures for power stations that convert, or partially convert, to burning biomass are also attracting criticism. This means directly burning organic products like woods and crops in a power station instead of of fossil fuels.
Green campaigners argue DECC's figures show that burning whole conifer trees instead of coal would result in a 49 per cent increase in emissions over a forty year time period. But the REA says that this argument is " simply wrong" and is based on a misrepresentation of industry standards.
While this argument has attracted less attention over recent years, it seems likely to rev up in the future.
In the meantime, it looks as though biofuels' overall carbon emissions may not be top of the agenda for politicians tangling with the energy system. Pressed yesterday on whether it is really 'bourgois' to worry whether the government's so-called 'green' policies could unintentionally drive up greenhouse gas emissions, rather them down, John Hayes did not seem very concerned.
07 Mar 2013, 15:00 /Robin Webster
A committee of MPs approved new subsidies for bioenergy yesterday, despite controversy over the environmental impact of the fuels. Many academics appear convinced that generating power from some biofuels like palm oil may result in emissions going up rather than down. But are concerns about the sustainability of biofuels "bourgeois" when the country faces the challenge of keeping the lights on?
Arguments over the use of fuels derived from organic matter like plants or crops for transport and in power stations has raged ever since scientific studies began emerging showing that they may have a far higher impact on greenhouse gas emissions than previously thought. Crops like palm oil and soy can compete with food crops for land, ultimately resulting in more clearance of forest and grasslands for agricultural land - driving up emissions.
The UK's former chief scientific advisor Professor David King told Radio 4's Today programme yesterday that biofuels are "pretty much a dead letter" in terms of their ability to reduce emissions.
But on the same programme, energy minister John Hayes told listeners he is "not persuaded at all" by King's argument. Hayes said it's "bourgeois" to worry about biofuels' climate impacts when the country needs to maintain energy security - and biofuels remain a part of the government's plans for meeting its EU-mandated 2020 renewables target.
Waving through
Yesterday afternoon, the obscurely-named Eleventh Delegated Legislation Committee voted for new support measures for renewables. First highlighted by the BBC, the vote covered a series of amendments to the Renewables Obligation (RO) - a subsidy to renewable power, several of which relate to bioenergy.
Some of the amendments set out new incentives for power plant to burn wood or plant material for some of all of the time. The new subsidies follow a consultation from DECC on what the levels should be.
Another amendment guarantees that an energy supplier may get " no more than four per cent" of its subsidies under the RO scheme from bioliquids. Bioliquids are liquid fuels made from organic sources - often vegetable oils like rapeseed, palm oil or soy. The amendment means that some power stations burning vegetable oils can be subsidised by the RO, but sets a cap on the subsidies.
The vote is a routine part of passing through changes to legislation and the attention it attracted seems to have been a surprise to key stakeholders. A spokesperson for trade body the Renewable Energy Association (REA), which supports biofuels, told us yesterday was "flummoxed" by the BBC's report.
Palm oil
The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) says the four per cent cap equates to approximately two terawatt hours of bioliquid electricity generation in 2017. The new limit on bioliquids has attracted criticism from anti biofuel campaigners - largely because of the potential that more palm oil could be imported to be burnt in UK power stations.
REA told us less than 0.1 per cent of biofuels in the transport sector are from palm oil, adding that the amount used in the power sector is probably "a similarly small figure" - so the new subsidies will not result in a rush of palm oil into UK power stations.
But anti-biofuels campaigner campaigner Kenneth Richter, from Friends of the Earth, said that the four per cent limit is "enormous" - and that guaranteed subsidies will cause a significant growth in the consumption of palm oil in power stations. Campaign group BiofuelWatch has calculated that if all of the bioliquids burnt under this cap were palm oil - admittedly rather a big if - then "up to 500,000" tonnes of bioliquid would be burnt in UK power stations as a result.
The UK and EU have both introduced sustainability standards for the biofuels in their energy mix.
But campaigners say that the sustainability criteria aren't strong enough to solve the problem. They point to studies by the European Commission showing emissions from palm oil can be worse than fossil fuels once land use change, deforestation and the draining of carbon-rich peatlands are taken into account.
MPs pointed out in yesterday's Committee meeting that Germany, France and the Netherlands have removed subsidies for bioliquids in the light of concerns about the sustainability of palm oil. John Hayes promised that his department would "look at the matter closely", but provided no further details - arguing that there is little sense to removing subsidies to all bioliquids because of problems with one of them. And with that, the new measures were voted through.
Argument over? Not likely
The argument is not all about bioliquids like palm oil. The new support measures for power stations that convert, or partially convert, to burning biomass are also attracting criticism. This means directly burning organic products like woods and crops in a power station instead of of fossil fuels.
Green campaigners argue DECC's figures show that burning whole conifer trees instead of coal would result in a 49 per cent increase in emissions over a forty year time period. But the REA says that this argument is " simply wrong" and is based on a misrepresentation of industry standards.
While this argument has attracted less attention over recent years, it seems likely to rev up in the future.
In the meantime, it looks as though biofuels' overall carbon emissions may not be top of the agenda for politicians tangling with the energy system. Pressed yesterday on whether it is really 'bourgois' to worry whether the government's so-called 'green' policies could unintentionally drive up greenhouse gas emissions, rather them down, John Hayes did not seem very concerned.
Wednesday, March 6, 2013
The Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels Recognizes Forests Certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)
http://www.virtual-strategy.com/2013/03/06/roundtable-sustainable-biofuels-recognizes-forests-certified-forest-stewardship-council-f
RSB now recognizes FSC which certifies responsibly managed forests.
The Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels (RSB) is pleased to announce its
decision to recognize the standard of the Forestry Stewardship Council
(FSC) which certifies responsibly managed forests.
As RSB and FSC standards are aligned on most sustainability aspects, FSC certified forests and operators will now be able to access biofuel and bioenergy markets by receiving RSB certification through a simplified audit process to demonstrate compliance, therefore saving costs and time. This process will enhance the development of advanced biofuel pathways by increasing the supply of sustainable forestry products and ligno-cellulosic material to biofuel and bioenergy producers.
“This move, which recognizes the high level of sustainability of FSC-certified operations, offers them increased access to bioenergy markets,” said Barbara Bramble, Board Chair of the Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels. “It is part of the ongoing project of the RSB to streamline certification requirements for established sustainability standards, and we are delighted that the benchmarking report found our standards to be comparable.”
“We are very pleased to be recognized by RSB as this demonstrates our leadership role in forest certification and responsible forest management. This is also an important signal how like-minded, best-in-class organizations can collaborate across sectors and create additional value for their beneficiaries,” said Kim Carstensen, Director General of the Forest Stewardship Council.
This recognition builds upon a benchmarking process conducted by RSB to compare the respective sustainability requirements of the RSB Principles & Criteria and the FSC Principles & Criteria (Versions 4 and 5). The comparison revealed that FSC certified forests could be de facto considered compliant with all 12 RSB Principles & Criteria, with the exception of RSB Principle 3 (Greenhouse Gas) and RSB Principle 6 (Food Security – Not applicable to natural forests). The complete gap analysis is available upon request via info(at)rsb(dot)org.
About RSB
The Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels has developed a global sustainability standard and certification system for biofuel production. The RSB sustainability standard represents a global consensus of over 100 organizations including farmers, refiners, regulators and NGOs, and was designed to ensure the sustainability of biofuels production while streamlining compliance for industry. More information: http://www.rsb.org
About FSC
The Forest Stewardship Council is an independent, non-governmental, not-for-profit organization established to promote the responsible management of the world's forests. Established in 1993, FSC is a pioneer stakeholder forum convening global consensus on responsible forest management through democratic processes. FSC has developed the FSC Certification Scheme, based on the FSC Principles & Criteria, and the related FSC Accreditation Program delivered through Accreditation Services International. More information: http://www.fsc.org
RSB and FSC are both members of the ISEAL Alliance, which defines codes of good practices for standard-setting organisations.
# # #
For the original version on PRWeb visit: http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2013/3/prweb10473989.htm
RSB now recognizes FSC which certifies responsibly managed forests.
Geneva, Switzerland (PRWEB) March 06, 2013
As RSB and FSC standards are aligned on most sustainability aspects, FSC certified forests and operators will now be able to access biofuel and bioenergy markets by receiving RSB certification through a simplified audit process to demonstrate compliance, therefore saving costs and time. This process will enhance the development of advanced biofuel pathways by increasing the supply of sustainable forestry products and ligno-cellulosic material to biofuel and bioenergy producers.
“This move, which recognizes the high level of sustainability of FSC-certified operations, offers them increased access to bioenergy markets,” said Barbara Bramble, Board Chair of the Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels. “It is part of the ongoing project of the RSB to streamline certification requirements for established sustainability standards, and we are delighted that the benchmarking report found our standards to be comparable.”
“We are very pleased to be recognized by RSB as this demonstrates our leadership role in forest certification and responsible forest management. This is also an important signal how like-minded, best-in-class organizations can collaborate across sectors and create additional value for their beneficiaries,” said Kim Carstensen, Director General of the Forest Stewardship Council.
This recognition builds upon a benchmarking process conducted by RSB to compare the respective sustainability requirements of the RSB Principles & Criteria and the FSC Principles & Criteria (Versions 4 and 5). The comparison revealed that FSC certified forests could be de facto considered compliant with all 12 RSB Principles & Criteria, with the exception of RSB Principle 3 (Greenhouse Gas) and RSB Principle 6 (Food Security – Not applicable to natural forests). The complete gap analysis is available upon request via info(at)rsb(dot)org.
About RSB
The Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels has developed a global sustainability standard and certification system for biofuel production. The RSB sustainability standard represents a global consensus of over 100 organizations including farmers, refiners, regulators and NGOs, and was designed to ensure the sustainability of biofuels production while streamlining compliance for industry. More information: http://www.rsb.org
About FSC
The Forest Stewardship Council is an independent, non-governmental, not-for-profit organization established to promote the responsible management of the world's forests. Established in 1993, FSC is a pioneer stakeholder forum convening global consensus on responsible forest management through democratic processes. FSC has developed the FSC Certification Scheme, based on the FSC Principles & Criteria, and the related FSC Accreditation Program delivered through Accreditation Services International. More information: http://www.fsc.org
RSB and FSC are both members of the ISEAL Alliance, which defines codes of good practices for standard-setting organisations.
# # #
For the original version on PRWeb visit: http://www.prweb.com/releases/prweb2013/3/prweb10473989.htm
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
BSPI announces Louisiana Company to hold pellet plant project.
http://www.biomasssecurepower.ca/News/News_2013-03-05/news_2013-03-05.html
NEWS - March 5, 2013
Abbotsford,
British Columbia, March 05, 2013 - Biomass Secure Power Inc.
(OTC:Pinksheet: “BMSPF”) (the “Company”) is pleased to provide
shareholders with an update on the status of lease option at the Port of
Greater Baton Rouge. The Company has set up a wholly owned subsidiary
in the State of Louisiana to hold the pellet plant project, namely
Biomass Power Louisiana L.L.C.
Biomass
Power Louisiana L.L.C. effective March 1, 2013 has secured a six month
option to lease the site on which they propose to build a pellet plant
for a payment of $50,000. Plans are in place to build the plant in four
phases over several years. The scopes for phase one will be released for
tender April 2013 and construction is expected to commence summer 2013.
Phase
one consists of three production lines each capable of producing
340,000 tonne per year of biomass pellets. When phase 1 is complete the
company will have the capacity to produce one million tonnes of pellets
per year.
About the Company
Biomass
Secure Power Inc. is incorporated in the Province of British Columbia.
The Company has designed its biomass pellets plants to produce 340,000
tonnes of pellets per line. This allows the Company to leverage the
engineering over multiple lines and several plants, as key equipment
will be identical in each plant. Public filings and financial
information on the Company can be found at: www.sedar.com
Safe Harbour Statement:
This
information includes certain "forward-looking statements." The
forward-looking statements reflect the beliefs, expectations, objectives
and goals of the Company management with respect to future events and
financial performance. They are based on assumptions and estimates,
which are believed reasonable at the time such statements are made.
However, actual results could differ materially from anticipated
results.
On Behalf of the Board,
BIOMASS SECURE POWER INC.
"Jim Carroll"
Jim Carroll
President and CEO
Contact: 604 807 4957
"Jim Carroll"
Jim Carroll
President and CEO
Contact: 604 807 4957
Monday, March 4, 2013
New U.K. Regulations Could Impact U.S. Pellet Producers
http://biomassmagazine.com/blog/article/2013/03/new-u-k-regulations-could-impact-u-s-pellet-producers
Last week the U.K. Department of Energy and Climate Change released a long-term plan regarding its renewable heat scheme. The plan essentially aims to make sure the program stays on budget, as there is a fixed annual amount of funding available for the RHI.
So far, the program’s launch in the non-domestic sector has resulted in more than 1,300 applications, and more than EUR 24 million ($36 million) is expected to be paid out this year. To ensure the program remains solvent, the DECC has devised a plan where the funding awarded to new applicants will gradually decline if the program proves more popular than anticipated.
As part of the announcement, the DECC published the government response to the consultation, which was originally released in July. It is titled “Non-Domestic Renewable Heat Incentive: A Government Response to ‘Providing Certainty, improving performance’ July 2012 consultation,” and is available for download from the DECC website.
In the response, the DECC addresses several topics, including biomass sustainability requirements.
The consultation asked for public comments on proposals to introduce sustainability standards into the non-domestic RHI. The standards covered two primary factors: GHG emissions savings, and land use criteria. Regarding emissions savings, the DECC drew from guidance provided by the European Commission’s 2010 “Requirements for sustainability criteria for the use of solid biomass and biogas” report. The DECC ultimately proposed requiring a 60 percent GHG savings compared with EU fossil heat average from April 2014. For wood fuel land criteria, the UK the process of producing raw feedstock corresponds to “meeting the UK procurement policy on wood and wood products, which provides rules on the purchase of wood and wood derived products.” For other biomass feedstocks, the proposal said land use criteria should correspond to those set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive for transportation biofuels and bioliquids.
According to the response document, one respondent noted a concern with the 60 percent GHG reduction threshold. That respondent was concerned that the proposed limit would significantly impact the potential transatlantic supplies of biomass, which is of particular importance to large projects. Another respondent noted a GHG calculator may need to be adapted to reflect the units in which wood chips are sold, such as weight, volume and heat.
Like most government regulations, the final rules published by the DECC are rather long and complicated. While I encourage you to read the full government document to learn the specific requirements of the program, I will attempt to summarize some of the major points, particularly those applicable to the U.S. pellet industry.
While the DECC specified that compliance regimes for the RHI and RO will be different, the department said a consistent approach will be taken to ensure RHI requirements don’t lead to burdensome double reporting for biomass suppliers.
The DECC also said it intends to link eligibility for the RHI with meeting the sustainability criteria, which needs to be notified to the EC as a technical standard. Since this can take some time, the DECC said the biomass sustainability requirements will not be included in the March 2013 regulatory changes. Rather, the goal is to have them in place by the end of the year. Starting April 1, 2014 RHI recipients will be required to demonstrate they meet GHG emissions savings to be eligible for RHI payments. Land criteria will be enforced in-line with the RO timetable, no later than April 2014 and no sooner than April 2015.
According to the DECC, the proposed 60 percent GHG savings threshold will be maintained, equating to lifecycle emissions of less than or equal to 125.28 kg CO2 equivalent per MWh of heat.
For the use of woody biomass, the DECC said it intends to follow the U.K. Public Procurement Policy for Timber and for biomass sourced from a Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade partner to be considered as meeting the land criteria. The department noted it needs to complete additional work to define what would count as meeting the criteria from a non FLEGT partner and will take an approach consistent with the RO.
According to the DECC, work is currently ongoing to develop a supplier list. That list is expected to be in place by the end of the year.
Last week the U.K. Department of Energy and Climate Change released a long-term plan regarding its renewable heat scheme. The plan essentially aims to make sure the program stays on budget, as there is a fixed annual amount of funding available for the RHI.
So far, the program’s launch in the non-domestic sector has resulted in more than 1,300 applications, and more than EUR 24 million ($36 million) is expected to be paid out this year. To ensure the program remains solvent, the DECC has devised a plan where the funding awarded to new applicants will gradually decline if the program proves more popular than anticipated.
As part of the announcement, the DECC published the government response to the consultation, which was originally released in July. It is titled “Non-Domestic Renewable Heat Incentive: A Government Response to ‘Providing Certainty, improving performance’ July 2012 consultation,” and is available for download from the DECC website.
In the response, the DECC addresses several topics, including biomass sustainability requirements.
The consultation asked for public comments on proposals to introduce sustainability standards into the non-domestic RHI. The standards covered two primary factors: GHG emissions savings, and land use criteria. Regarding emissions savings, the DECC drew from guidance provided by the European Commission’s 2010 “Requirements for sustainability criteria for the use of solid biomass and biogas” report. The DECC ultimately proposed requiring a 60 percent GHG savings compared with EU fossil heat average from April 2014. For wood fuel land criteria, the UK the process of producing raw feedstock corresponds to “meeting the UK procurement policy on wood and wood products, which provides rules on the purchase of wood and wood derived products.” For other biomass feedstocks, the proposal said land use criteria should correspond to those set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive for transportation biofuels and bioliquids.
According to the response document, one respondent noted a concern with the 60 percent GHG reduction threshold. That respondent was concerned that the proposed limit would significantly impact the potential transatlantic supplies of biomass, which is of particular importance to large projects. Another respondent noted a GHG calculator may need to be adapted to reflect the units in which wood chips are sold, such as weight, volume and heat.
Like most government regulations, the final rules published by the DECC are rather long and complicated. While I encourage you to read the full government document to learn the specific requirements of the program, I will attempt to summarize some of the major points, particularly those applicable to the U.S. pellet industry.
While the DECC specified that compliance regimes for the RHI and RO will be different, the department said a consistent approach will be taken to ensure RHI requirements don’t lead to burdensome double reporting for biomass suppliers.
The DECC also said it intends to link eligibility for the RHI with meeting the sustainability criteria, which needs to be notified to the EC as a technical standard. Since this can take some time, the DECC said the biomass sustainability requirements will not be included in the March 2013 regulatory changes. Rather, the goal is to have them in place by the end of the year. Starting April 1, 2014 RHI recipients will be required to demonstrate they meet GHG emissions savings to be eligible for RHI payments. Land criteria will be enforced in-line with the RO timetable, no later than April 2014 and no sooner than April 2015.
According to the DECC, the proposed 60 percent GHG savings threshold will be maintained, equating to lifecycle emissions of less than or equal to 125.28 kg CO2 equivalent per MWh of heat.
For the use of woody biomass, the DECC said it intends to follow the U.K. Public Procurement Policy for Timber and for biomass sourced from a Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade partner to be considered as meeting the land criteria. The department noted it needs to complete additional work to define what would count as meeting the criteria from a non FLEGT partner and will take an approach consistent with the RO.
According to the DECC, work is currently ongoing to develop a supplier list. That list is expected to be in place by the end of the year.
New company to bring $25 million wood pellet plant to George County
http://blog.gulflive.com/mississippi-press-news/2013/03/new_company_to_bring_25_millio.html
By
on March 04, 2013 at 10:04 AM, updated March 04, 2013 at 11:51 AM
LUCEDALE, Mississippi -- Gulf Coast Renewable Energy LLC plans to bring a $25 million wood pellet manufacturing facility to George County's industrial park, company officials announced Monday at the Board of Supervisors meeting.
The project will create 28 new jobs and 144 indirect jobs, company Vice President for Engineering Gary Ogle said.
It will produce about 160,000 metric tons of pellets per year, Ogle said, and the company also plans to double production within the next 3 years.
GCRE, a new company, will produce biomass for sale to European utilities, which will mix the pellets with coal to reduce their carbon emissions.
Offtake agreements are in place, mostly with utility companies in the United Kingdom, said Economic Development and Communication Director Ken Flanagan.
The plant should be producing pellets by the fourth quarter of 2014, Ogle said, and will take up to 14 months for construction.
"The timeline's getting tight," he told supervisors.
The company is buying from Mississippi Export Railroad about 40 acres that sit just south of Vulcan Materials on Industrial Road.
The company will tie into the existing railroad spur, and about 3 railroad cars of pellets will be sent to the port in Theodore, Ala., every 2 to 3 days, Flanagan said.
Ogle asked supervisors for help building an access road to the site and said he will work with Mississippi Power and the county for assistance with utilities and connections.
"We're glad y'all chose us," board President Kelly Wright said, noting the company represents "the type of growth we're looking to get."
Ogle told him, "George County always felt right from the beginning."
Ogle has experience building at least 3 wood pellet facilities over the last 10 years -- 1 each in Georgia, Louisiana and Arkansas -- but this is the first under the new company, Flanagan said.
The pellets are made from a mix of soft and hard woods, including long and scrap timber. There is minimal waste in the process, as even the removed bark is used to fire the wood driers.
Flanagan said the facility will be a good fit for George County.
"It's an emerging energy business, not a smoke stack driven business," he said. "And it's a good step in showing what our industrial park has to offer, including highway access, a rail spur and a workforce that understands hard work."
By
on March 04, 2013 at 10:04 AM, updated March 04, 2013 at 11:51 AM
LUCEDALE, Mississippi -- Gulf Coast Renewable Energy LLC plans to bring a $25 million wood pellet manufacturing facility to George County's industrial park, company officials announced Monday at the Board of Supervisors meeting.
The project will create 28 new jobs and 144 indirect jobs, company Vice President for Engineering Gary Ogle said.
It will produce about 160,000 metric tons of pellets per year, Ogle said, and the company also plans to double production within the next 3 years.
GCRE, a new company, will produce biomass for sale to European utilities, which will mix the pellets with coal to reduce their carbon emissions.
Offtake agreements are in place, mostly with utility companies in the United Kingdom, said Economic Development and Communication Director Ken Flanagan.
The plant should be producing pellets by the fourth quarter of 2014, Ogle said, and will take up to 14 months for construction.
"The timeline's getting tight," he told supervisors.
The company is buying from Mississippi Export Railroad about 40 acres that sit just south of Vulcan Materials on Industrial Road.
The company will tie into the existing railroad spur, and about 3 railroad cars of pellets will be sent to the port in Theodore, Ala., every 2 to 3 days, Flanagan said.
Ogle asked supervisors for help building an access road to the site and said he will work with Mississippi Power and the county for assistance with utilities and connections.
"We're glad y'all chose us," board President Kelly Wright said, noting the company represents "the type of growth we're looking to get."
Ogle told him, "George County always felt right from the beginning."
Ogle has experience building at least 3 wood pellet facilities over the last 10 years -- 1 each in Georgia, Louisiana and Arkansas -- but this is the first under the new company, Flanagan said.
The pellets are made from a mix of soft and hard woods, including long and scrap timber. There is minimal waste in the process, as even the removed bark is used to fire the wood driers.
Flanagan said the facility will be a good fit for George County.
"It's an emerging energy business, not a smoke stack driven business," he said. "And it's a good step in showing what our industrial park has to offer, including highway access, a rail spur and a workforce that understands hard work."
Friday, March 1, 2013
Irvine Renewable Fuels Firm Halts Work on Mississippi Plant
http://www.ocbj.com/news/2013/mar/01/irvine-renewable-fuels-firm-halts-work-mississippi/
Friday, March 1, 2013
Irvine-based renewable fuels maker BlueFire Renewables Inc. has halted construction work on a plant planned for Fulton, Miss. plant.
BlueFire converts non-food resources, such as trash, wood waste and other agricultural residues, into ethanol. It also has a subsidiary called SucreSource LLC in Anaheim, which makes cellulosic sugars for the commercial applications.
It began working on the Fulton plant in 2009. The facility was designed to employ about 80 workers and produce 19 million gallons of ethanol per year. The project, which was estimated to cost $300 million, had seen some progress on permits and site preparation.
Work recently was put on hold while BlueFire focuses on building a facility in South Korea, according to Greg Deakle, the executive director of Itawamba County Development Council in Mississippi.
BlueFire signed a deal last year with GS Caltex, a South Korea-based petroleum company, to build a cellulose sugar plant there.
The company counts another Asian partner in Beijing-based Chinese Huadian Engineering Co.
Friday, March 1, 2013
Irvine-based renewable fuels maker BlueFire Renewables Inc. has halted construction work on a plant planned for Fulton, Miss. plant.
BlueFire converts non-food resources, such as trash, wood waste and other agricultural residues, into ethanol. It also has a subsidiary called SucreSource LLC in Anaheim, which makes cellulosic sugars for the commercial applications.
It began working on the Fulton plant in 2009. The facility was designed to employ about 80 workers and produce 19 million gallons of ethanol per year. The project, which was estimated to cost $300 million, had seen some progress on permits and site preparation.
Work recently was put on hold while BlueFire focuses on building a facility in South Korea, according to Greg Deakle, the executive director of Itawamba County Development Council in Mississippi.
BlueFire signed a deal last year with GS Caltex, a South Korea-based petroleum company, to build a cellulose sugar plant there.
The company counts another Asian partner in Beijing-based Chinese Huadian Engineering Co.
Sundrop Fuels buys 1,213 acres for Alexandria-area biofuels plant
http://www.thetowntalk.com/article/20130301/BUSINESS/303010310/Sundrop-Fuels-buys-1-213-acres-Alexandria-area-biofuels-plant?nclick_check=1
Sundrop Fuels Inc. closed on the purchase of more than 1,213 acres of
land in the Rapides Station area Thursday where the biofuels company
plans to locate its plant manufacturing "green gasoline."
Sundrop Fuels has had an option on the property, owned by Ballina Farms, for more than a year while it moved forward with pre-construction efforts, including permitting. The sale price was $4,752,000, according to Rod Noles with NAI/Latter & Blum of Alexandria, who represented the property owners.
Sundrop, a Colorado-based biofuels startup, announced plans in late 2011 to build a $500 million pilot plant for its renewable fuel in the Alexandria area. It chose the Ballina Farms property, which is located off Interstate 49 just north of Alexandria in Rapides Parish.
The plant will use woody biomass and natural gas to produce liquid fuel -- billed as the world's first "green gasoline" -- ready to drop into a gas tank. Vehicles don't need to be modified to use it, and it doesn't need to be blended with petroleum-based gasoline.
Dirt work on the project could begin in April in advance of construction.
Sundrop also recently reached an agreement to buy the closed entertainment venue formerly known as Cowboy Town, which is bordered on three sides by the Ballina Farms property. The company bought Cowboy Town from Yahweh LLC, a venture by local businessmen James Greer and Richard Kyle, for $2.5 million.
The facility, now known as Sundrop Fuels Louisiana LLC headquarters, will contain offices as well as maintenance and fabrication operations.
ALEXANDRIA, La. -- Sundrop Fuels Inc., a Colorado-based renewable fuels company, will build its $450 million plant north of Alexandria with help from the state.
Louisiana taxpayers will fund $4.5 million to help with the costs of moving Sundrop's research and development department to Alexandria, and give performance-based grants totaling $14 million over 10 years based on employment figures, Louisiana Economic Development Secretary Stephen Moret said.
Here's the process:
1. Biomass material is fed into Sundrop's proprietary RP Reactor. The reactor can be powered by high-temperature heat sources such as natural gas, concentrated solar power or electric power. The company currently finds natural gas to be the most effective heat source. Though the technology works with many different types of biomass, the planned facility in the Rapides Station area will use woody biomass.
2. Natural gas is added to the biomass as a second feedstock. Woody biomass by itself does not contain sufficient hydrogen to create a fuel usable in standard engines. In other biomass-to-fuel conversion processes, this has meant using twice as much biomass and discarding a large part of it. Adding natural gas corrects the hydrogen imbalance and allows nearly all the biomass to be used, rather than wasting a good portion of it.
3. Temperatures in the reactor of more than 1,300 degrees Celsius (2,372 degrees Fahrenheit) "gasify" the feedstock, creating synthetic gas.
4. Using a methanol-to-gasoline process developed by ExxonMobil, the synthetic gas is made into transportation fuels such as unleaded, diesel or aviation fuels. The fuel is ready to use and does not have to be blended into gasoline in the way that ethanol does (though much of it is expected to be sold to refineries for blending with traditional gasoline).
5. According to Sundrop officials, the green gasoline can be produced at prices competitive with petroleum refined gas, and the process dramatically reduces the amount of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere compared to traditional gasoline refining.
Note: The Alexandria facility will not use all aspects of Sundrop's proprietary technology, as the larger planned future Sundrop plants will.
---The Town Talk
Mar 1, 2013
Sundrop Fuels Inc. of Longmont, Colo., bought 1,213 acres of land in Rapides Parish on Thursday on which to build a biofuels plant projected to cost as much as $500 million. The land is adjacent to the former Cowboy Town venue (above) off of Interstate 49 in Boyce, just north of Alexandria. Sundrop Fuels bought that 28-acre site earlier this year. / The Town Talk
Written by: Jeff Matthews
Sundrop Fuels has had an option on the property, owned by Ballina Farms, for more than a year while it moved forward with pre-construction efforts, including permitting. The sale price was $4,752,000, according to Rod Noles with NAI/Latter & Blum of Alexandria, who represented the property owners.
Sundrop, a Colorado-based biofuels startup, announced plans in late 2011 to build a $500 million pilot plant for its renewable fuel in the Alexandria area. It chose the Ballina Farms property, which is located off Interstate 49 just north of Alexandria in Rapides Parish.
The plant will use woody biomass and natural gas to produce liquid fuel -- billed as the world's first "green gasoline" -- ready to drop into a gas tank. Vehicles don't need to be modified to use it, and it doesn't need to be blended with petroleum-based gasoline.
Dirt work on the project could begin in April in advance of construction.
Sundrop also recently reached an agreement to buy the closed entertainment venue formerly known as Cowboy Town, which is bordered on three sides by the Ballina Farms property. The company bought Cowboy Town from Yahweh LLC, a venture by local businessmen James Greer and Richard Kyle, for $2.5 million.
The facility, now known as Sundrop Fuels Louisiana LLC headquarters, will contain offices as well as maintenance and fabrication operations.
Louisiana taxpayers helping Sundrop with project
Published Jan. 6, 2012:
ALEXANDRIA, La. -- Sundrop Fuels Inc., a Colorado-based renewable fuels company, will build its $450 million plant north of Alexandria with help from the state.
Louisiana taxpayers will fund $4.5 million to help with the costs of moving Sundrop's research and development department to Alexandria, and give performance-based grants totaling $14 million over 10 years based on employment figures, Louisiana Economic Development Secretary Stephen Moret said.
THE PROCESS
Sundrop Fuels Inc.'s technology converts wood waste such as branches and other low-grade tree parts into "green gasoline" -- transportation fuel able to be dropped into vehicles and pipelines like any petroleum refined gasoline.
Here's the process:
1. Biomass material is fed into Sundrop's proprietary RP Reactor. The reactor can be powered by high-temperature heat sources such as natural gas, concentrated solar power or electric power. The company currently finds natural gas to be the most effective heat source. Though the technology works with many different types of biomass, the planned facility in the Rapides Station area will use woody biomass.
2. Natural gas is added to the biomass as a second feedstock. Woody biomass by itself does not contain sufficient hydrogen to create a fuel usable in standard engines. In other biomass-to-fuel conversion processes, this has meant using twice as much biomass and discarding a large part of it. Adding natural gas corrects the hydrogen imbalance and allows nearly all the biomass to be used, rather than wasting a good portion of it.
3. Temperatures in the reactor of more than 1,300 degrees Celsius (2,372 degrees Fahrenheit) "gasify" the feedstock, creating synthetic gas.
4. Using a methanol-to-gasoline process developed by ExxonMobil, the synthetic gas is made into transportation fuels such as unleaded, diesel or aviation fuels. The fuel is ready to use and does not have to be blended into gasoline in the way that ethanol does (though much of it is expected to be sold to refineries for blending with traditional gasoline).
5. According to Sundrop officials, the green gasoline can be produced at prices competitive with petroleum refined gas, and the process dramatically reduces the amount of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere compared to traditional gasoline refining.
Note: The Alexandria facility will not use all aspects of Sundrop's proprietary technology, as the larger planned future Sundrop plants will.
---The Town Talk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)