Showing posts with label military. Show all posts
Showing posts with label military. Show all posts

Friday, December 14, 2012

Policy Shifts Signal Growth Ahead for Advanced Biofuels

http://www.forbes.com/sites/pikeresearch/2012/12/14/policy-shifts-signal-growth-ahead-for-advanced-biofuels/



12/14/2012 @ 4:15PM

 Mackinnon Lawrence, Contributor

This has been a tough year for the U.S. biofuels industry: drought curtailed corn starch ethanol production and investment in the industry shrank to its lowest level in nearly a decade.  Headed into 2013, though, industry momentum appears to be regaining steam.  Led by advanced biofuels, the potential for expanding biofuels production has improved dramatically as Washington offers clarity on key policy issues.

Last week, in a vote on partisan lines, the U.S. Senate extended support for the military’s efforts to scale up advanced biofuels production.  As reported in Biofuels Digest, it approved an amendment offered by Senator Kay Hagan of North Carolina to repeal a section of the annual Defense appropriations bill that would have prohibited “the Secretary of Defense or any other official from the Department of Defense (DoD) from entering into a contract to plan,  design, refurbish, or construct a biofuels refinery or any other facility or infrastructure used to refine biofuels unless such planning, design, refurbishment, or construction is specifically authorized by law.”

Over the past year, the U.S. military has emerged as a key torchbearer leading the commercialization of advanced biofuels.  Spearheaded by the Navy, which signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Department of Energy (DOE) to develop cost-competitive advanced biofuels, the DoD has been a lone bright spot for an industry that has suffered from press blowback and investor retrenchment in recent years.

Only $84 Billion to Go

Prior to the Hagan amendment, the Senate approved another amendment, offered by Senator Mark Udall of Colorado, to repeal section 313 of the annual Defense appropriations bill.  Offered by Republican Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, Section 313 would have prohibited the DoD from procuring alternative fuels if they cost more than their conventional counterparts.  The section was introduced in response to the U.S. Navy’s highly criticized purchase of advanced biofuels from firms like Solazyme and Dynamic Fuels for its “Great Green Fleet” exercises off the coast of Hawaii, at an estimated price-tag of $15 per gallon.

These bills are expected to facilitate public-private partnerships and funnel much-needed capital to support advanced biorefinery construction within the United States.  In our Industrial Biorefineries report, Pike Research forecasts that at least 13 billion gallons of advanced biorefinery production capacity will come online over the next decade in the United States.  Although that falls short of the 21 billion gallons of advanced biofuels carved out under the EPA’s Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), more than $60 billion will be invested over that same period.

With the minimum cost of scale-up to meet the advanced biofuel production mandate estimated at $84 billion, the industry still has significant ground to make up.  Although continued federal support will help assuage investor fears, uncertainties around feedstock supply and production profitability persist, translating into high levels of risk for investors.

Advanced biofuels, which address these concerns at least in part, have enjoyed a rising tide of policy support in recent months from Washington.  In August, Congress allocated $170 million to support the development of military biofuels and other defense initiatives, voted to extend key tax credits for advanced biofuel producers, and granted algae producers tax credit parity with other feedstock pathways.  Meanwhile, the recent commissioning of first-of-kind facilities from advanced biofuel producers KiOR and INEOS Bio are strong indicators of a maturing cellulosic biofuels industry.

 

Friday, October 19, 2012

Vilsack: Strengthening homegrown energy

http://www.cattlenetwork.com/cattle-news/Vilsack-Strengthening-homegrown-energy-174966171.html?ref=171

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack   |   Updated: October 19, 2012 


As the drought continues today, USDA and other Federal agencies are doing all we can to help farmers, ranchers and communities who have been impacted.

Unfortunately, our tools are limited. Due to inaction by Congress, many parts of the 2008 Farm Bill expired October 1, and other aspects of the law will expire in the coming months.

This brings tremendous uncertainty for rural families – particularly livestock producers who have lost access to disaster programs, and dairy producers who no longer have access to dairy support programs.

The lack of a Food, Farm and Jobs Bill also limits USDA from continuing our record investments in homegrown American energy. Since 2009 USDA has worked hard to ensure that rural America plays a key role in our nation’s energy strategy.

For example, we’ve invested in more than 330 bioenergy projects, strengthening biofuels production across America. Ethanol alone supports nearly 400,000 American jobs, while reducing the price of gas by more than one dollar per gallon for American families.

We’ve helped grow America’s capacity for creating advanced biofuels from non-food, non-feed sources. Since 2009 USDA has invested in historic efforts to create nine new, advanced biofuels refineries. Meanwhile, we have added new income sources for farmers – providing incentives to grow advanced feedstocks on nearly 60,000 acres.

Finally, USDA has undertaken groundbreaking research that’s necessary to expand our homegrown energy capacity.

Last year we established five research centers across America to enhance research and coordination in the development of new biofuels technologies. Just last week, USDA announced a sixth such effort, providing support for researchers across the northeast United States to undertake additional biofuels research.

USDA has invested more than $320 million to accelerate research into the new technologies associated with advanced biofuels. And in partnership with the U.S. Navy and the Department of Energy, we are making an historic investment of more than $510 million to develop advanced biofuels for military ships and aircraft. In fact, just recently, ships and aircraft of the Navy’s “Great Green Fleet” conducted operations off the coast of Hawaii using advanced marine and aviation biofuels.

We’re proud of where we stand today. In 2011 America imported about 45 percent of our oil from foreign countries – down from more than 60 percent in 2005. Our nation’s growing biofuels industry played a key role in that progress.

But there’s much left to be done. I know that given the tools to succeed, USDA can continue to bring down gas prices for families. We can further strengthen America’s energy security. And we can support more good jobs in our small towns and rural communities.


Wednesday, January 4, 2012

The March on Georgia: Renmatix raises $50M; LanzaTech buys Range Fuels site

http://www.biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2012/01/04/the-march-on-georgia-renmatix-raises-50m-lanzatech-buys-range-fuels-site/

| January 4, 2012 
 Renmatix and LanzaTech announce major advances in Georgia on the same day. Big Mo’? What does it all mean?
 
Our old friend, Brian Westlake, re-surfaces again to help us figure it all out, and delve into the real story.

“Well, g’day, g’day, g’day, what’s all this confusion about Renmatix and LanzaTech?” So began my friend Brian Westlake.

“Jim, I figured you’d call, completely stumped as usual. Let’s sort you out, matey, and quickly. Let’s make it quick. The waves here at Byron Bay are compelling. Now, what exactly are you hearing about LanzaTech?”

I explained that in Georgia, LanzaTech bought the Range Fuels Soperton site for $5.1 million at an auction yesterday at the property.

“And yer question is ‘what’s the value proposition?’ Is this something Vinod Khosla shoved down their throats? Something along those lines, ay?”

Yep. Although there been some confusion, I mentioned, as to whether LanzaTech bought RangeFuels or just the Georgia site.

“Bought Range Fuels? That’s total bollocks, mate. You’ve been reading ICIS again. The company wasn’t up for auction, it was just the site.”

Range Fuels Rewind

 

For a moment, we went through the Range timeline. Range Fuels closed its doors last fall after attempts failed to refinance, or sell the company as a whole. Range had stopped making payments on its government-guaranteed loans, and found its payments under a DOE grant suspended after the company had ultimately failed in its demonstration project, which called for the catalytic conversion of syngas into ethanol.

“And you think Vinod is behind this?”

Well, people are talking.

“Aw, Jim, you need to get to know these people better. Not Vinod’s style to impose on his CEOs. Not Jennifer Holmgren’s style to lead her company down a path that advantaged one investor.”

OK, I can buy that.

$25M in infrastructure for a $5.1M check

 

“Here’s the thing. It’s a $5.1 million deal for, I don’t know, $20 or $25 million in site value. Jennifer would tell you, “why be patient?” when you can get all that, for that, and right away, instead of waiting 12-24 months for Christmas.”

But, she could have bought the project directly via the USDA. Why run the auction risk?

“Not at that price, cobber. Now, you’ve got this all wrong.  Consider this acquisition similar to the LS9 deal.

Where that company picked up a 12 Mgy capacity site and fermentation infrastructure in Florida, last year, for under $3M, by cherry-picking a site out of foreclosure?

“There you go, much better already.”

Son of the Range gasifier

 

But what’s LanzaTech going to do with the Range Fuels gasifier?

“Ah, that’s right. Everyone’s got their knickers in a knot over the troubled Range gasifier, now in LanzaTech’s possession. But you don’t  need it, don;t you see. Whether it can produce beyond the 125 tons per day of biomass or so that it did demonstrate, well it's academic at the price they acquired the site.”

Academic?

“Jim, don’t you see? LanzaTech’s phone must be ringing off the hook with gasifier companies, vying for a partnership with LanzaTech. Especially now that they have branched out beyond industrial off-gases. Sean Simpson’s microorganism – and you know as a ridgy-didge Aussie I don’t hand out lollipops to Kiwis just for fun – that bug could well aim for other higher-value chemicals.

Isn’t LanzaTech looking more and more like Coskata?

 

“LanzaTech has one advantage you’re overlooking, They don’t have themselves embroiled in a trade secret dispute with INEOS Bio. But you’re missing the big picture. It’s not about Coskata. For that matter, there’s INEOS Bio active in that space, not to mention MSW-to-ethanol players such as Terrabon, Enerkem and Fulcrum, or wood-to-ethanol projects like Mascoma or American Process. It really doesn’t have much to do with all that.

So, what’s it about?

 

“Catch a clue, old mate. LanzaTech needs its own house, You’re all tied up in whether this is Vinod somehow escaping his fate on Range.

Their own house.

“Yeah. Let’s take the site LanzaTech is developing with Bao Steel in China to take advantage of waste gases from steel production.

Nice project that one.

“Well, try explaining to your new Chinese partners that you want to do some scale-up investigation on a new feedstock, one that isn’t off-gases from a steel blast furnace.”

Problematic, yes.

“Problematic?? Apoplectic! But you owe the duty to the LT shareholder to investigate all the possibilities inherent in the micro-organism. So there’s the problem of mixed objectives, disagreements and problems, avoided.”

What about jet fuel?

 

“And there’s another point. You’re coffee must be kicking in. It’s a site that can be utilized to make low-cost jet fuel from wood biomass in the US, for sale to the US military. Not to mention the bloody RFS.

The Renewable Fuel Standard


How is the RFS mixed up in this?

“You complete nimrod, how are you going to qualify a fuel made from industrial off-gases under RFS, when it specifies you have to make it from biomass? Where’s the biomass in a blast furnace?”

Ah.

Over to Renmatix


“Righto, I think we have you straightened out on that one. Now, what about Renmatix? What don’t you understand about that one?

Well, BASF announced plans to invest $30 million in the US technology firm Renmatix, as part of a new $50 million Series C investment round announced yesterday by Renmatix.

“Too right. Smart gang there at BASF. You didn’t believe me back in November when I said that BASF chairman Kurt Bock practically put it on a silver platter for you.

That’s right, what did they say?

“Only that they aim to grow 2 percentage points above chemical production and thus increase sales by an average of 6 percent per year until 2020. That’s a target of 115 billion euros. And they’re targeting emerging markets. And they are all over the sustainability angle. “Sustainability is becoming one of the main drivers of growth and value creation,” they said. Do you you need me to draw a map for you? They’re going to be looking at this sector to help them drive massive growth. That’s what I told you in November. You need to get the wax out of your ears.”

The Russians are coming

 

But who are the other investors? They raised $50 million, what about the other $20 million?

“Well, matey of mine, think Russia, that’s all I can tell you.”

Russia?

“They are streaming out of Russia, high net worths. China too. It’s built around key individuals, not some faceless Pushkin Equity Partners or Dostoyevsky Capital. Your CEOs and their boards will have to be all over them, but Renmatix clearly got the jump on a few companies. Wink-wink.”

What this country needs is a good five-cent sugar

 

What’s everyone’s interest in the low-cost cellulosic sugars that Renmatix makes? Why the heat right now?

“How dense can you be, Jimbo? If Renmatix’ technology works at scale, its a new game. Those are 4-cent sugars they propose to produce. Per pound. That’s well less than 40 cents per gallon for the feedstock. That’s like getting, say, 100,000 tons per year out of a full-scale Renmatix plant at the something like $20-$30 per bone dry ton of biomass. Plus, they’re talking less than $1.25 per gallon in capital costs. Total game-changers, those low-cost sugar companies. Keep your eye on all of them. Comet, Proterro, even Bluefire is getting into it.”

$20 per bone-dry tone. That’s cheap.

“Too right it is. I think Coskata is working with $55 per ton in its IPO, for a fuel that has an OPEX of $1.50 or less per gallon, according to the Coskata IPO.  You do the maths.”

What’s the Series C investment going towards – what do you hear?

“Don’t you talk to anyone anymore, Jim? Ask Mike Hamilton, the CEO over at Renmatix. Part of it will be equity, and there’ll be some technical development on other biomass.”

The BASF partnership

 

What about the relationship with BASF?

“Too soon to tell, isn’t it. They’ll both want a long-term relationship. Whether, and how, that spills over to a customer relationship, or technical partnership, that remains to be seen, ay?

Validating the industry

 

What do you think it says about Renmatix?

“It’s a complete validator of the technology. I mean, BASF, it’s not like they just parachuted into the space yesterday. It’s a $100 billion revenue company, with 100,000 people. They’re bigger than the global biofuels industry, all by their onesy. They’ve been watching it carefully, and putting their strategy together, for years. And they do their due diligence. That’s not someone else’s money they’re investing here – it’s hard yakka, making money in the chemicals business,. They’re not putting it into Renmatix on a finger-crossed basis. They are selective and diligent. But, it validates the whole space, really.”

Low-cost cellulosic sugars?

“No, you complete dolt, the whole space of biofuels and biomaterials. Look beyond how they are making the sausage – in this case, with a low-cost cellulosic sugar – and look at what they are trying to make. If BASF thought for a minute like those flaming idiots at the Wall Street Journal that there’s no hope in cellulose’s, this wouldn’t have happened.”

So, why Renmatix?

“It has to be the new management. Technology’s remarkable the same. Mike Hamilton’s an old sea dog in the chemicals business. They speak the same language now, as BASF. Sustainability. It’s a buzzword, but when you drill that down to providing a product from renewables at costs comparable to the old fossil fuels boys, Renmatix and BASF are completely on the same page. Everyone sees where it’s going, as far as the long-term value of trusting your company to the idea that someone ids going to be able to push a couple more holes in the ground and keep supplying you with low-cost fossil fuels, forever. It’s a non-starter.”


Cellulosics and the Journal

 

Er, what about those flaming idiots at the Wall Street Journal?

“Matey, it’s the editorial board. Do they ever come out of the cave? Their reporters are the real deal. But I wonder about that editorial page. That paper used to be about what companies like Dow, Dupont, Waste Management, and BASF were thinking. These days, the Journal must think that half the companies in their own Index are completely off their rocker. Here in Sydney we have the Financial Times, and they’re not making the same mistake. Everyone is jumping in.

“Which reminds me, time to jump back into the surf. We’re up at Byron, the surf is incredible. 1.5 meter swell from the east, should be over two meters by the weekend. Time to go now, over and out.”

Thursday, April 7, 2011

WSU poised to lead nation’s aviation biofuels initiative