Wednesday, May 4, 2011

Fierce competition over the world's wood fibre supply set to take off: PwC

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/article/23323--fierce-competition-over-the-world-s-wood-fibre-supply-set-to-take-off-pwcBy Canada NewsWire  | May 04, 2011
Emerging markets and industry needs for fibre will outweigh traditional demands for paper

VANCOUVER, May 4 /CNW/ - The demand for some types of paper, like newsprint and other printing and writing paper will decrease in the next decade but the many other uses for wood fibre will mean dramatic increases in global demand overall, according to a new report from PwC.

PwC's Canadian Forest, Paper and Packaging Leader Bruce McIntyre says: "Companies from a diverse array of industries - energy, utilities, chemicals and potentially many more as biomaterials evolve - will compete with FPP companies for control of forests, or at least access to their fibre, and the best economic use of the resources they provide."

As a result, demand will outpace supply and increasing competition for fibre will be a key factor of future supply chains.

"The world's forests will make a reduced contribution to meeting our increasing needs for wood fibre," says McIntyre. "Many of these forests are economically inaccessible or are sensitive to disturbance. Instead, these forests are going to be valued for their conservation benefits and that will result in restrictions on industrial wood output."

Wood fibre needs are increasingly being met from planted forests which currently cover approximately 272 million hectares or 7% of the world's total forest area. The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) estimates that the yield and harvest from planted forests, will need to increase threefold by 2050, with planted land-area increasing 60%.

In 2005, there were already nearly 141 million ha of plantation forests globally, an increase of over 12.8 million ha compared to 2000. Brazil stands out as the world leader in forest plantation agriculture, with nearly 6 million ha of plantations producing significant amounts of fibre for the global market. Brazil's largest trading partner is now China, and large shipments of pulp are one reason for the increased demand.

The report also finds that in North America and Europe, many of the existing mills simply won't be needed for newsprint or printing and writing paper. But increasing populations and wealth will mean more fibre is needed, regardless of the reduction in traditional paper use.

In the EU for instance, 340-420 million cubic metres of woody biomass per year is forecast to be needed solely for energy purposes by 2020, if current government policies continue. That level of demand could lead to a forest fibre deficit of 200-260 million metres³ by 2020.

Asia's emerging markets are also booming. In China and India, absolute demand for paper will still go up, although it won't increase as quickly as overall GDP growth. China in particular has a large fibre deficit, so pressure to secure access will grow in order to achieve its 2020 goal of 20 million ha for additional woodland planting to fuel bioenergy projects. In 2009, China imported over 100 million metres³ on a roundwood equivalent basis - roughly as much as Canada's entire timber harvest in that year.

Plantations have already faced a lot of criticism, though, for everything from replacing natural forests with plantations, to displacement of local peoples, to accusations that they have damaged local water tables.
"We believe that plantations still represent the single best opportunity to meet increased demand for forest products without damaging ecosystems, provided planting is done responsibly and balanced with appropriate conservation programs," says McIntyre.

New methods of accessing available fibre may emerge in response to the growing pressures. PwC sees international fibre exchanges and the emergence of a new biomass aggregation industry as two possibilities, but there may be others as well.

"The focus will shift from accessing fibre to using fibre more efficiently. There will be viable alternatives to woody biomass, although land availability may be a limiting factor," says McIntyre. "Technologies can help, but those businesses that control, or have secure access to competitive sources of fibre will be the best positioned for growth."

These and other issues affecting the global forest products industry will be discussed at PwC's 24th Annual Global Forest & Paper Industry Conference, taking place May 11, 2011 at the Westin Bayshore Resort & Marina in Vancouver, BC. For more information, please visit: www.pwc.com/forestconf11.

For more information, and to read the full report, entitled "Growing the Future", please visit http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/forest-paper-packaging/publications/new-values-directions-technology-fibre-competition.jhtml. The report is also available from the media contacts.

PwC's 24th Annual Global Forest & Paper Industry Conference

Over 400 CEOs, senior executives, customers, suppliers, analysts and policy makers from the world's forest and paper industry will meet on May 11, 2011 at PwC's 24th Annual Global Forest & Paper Industry Conference in Vancouver, BC, Canada. Accredited media are welcome to attend the full day conference, please pre-register. Contact Jim Nelson at: jim.nelson@ca.pwc.com, or +1 604 806 7047.

Complete PwC conference and speaker details are available at: www.pwc.com/forestconf11.

Firm Description

PwC firms provide industry-focused assurance, tax and advisory services to enhance value for their clients. More than 161,000 people in 154 countries in firms across the PwC network share their thinking, experience and solutions to develop fresh perspectives and practical advice. See www.pwc.com for more information. In Canada, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (www.pwc.com/ca) and its related entities have more than 5,700 partners

Enviva expands wood pellet plant plans

 
By Anna Austin | May 04, 2011
 
Wood pellet manufacturer Enviva LP has decided to expand the capacity of its 300,000-ton plant under construction in Ahoskie, N.C., by 50,000 tons.

Spokeswoman Elizabeth Woodworth said company has significant demand for wood pellets—specifically, a large European customer base—and given the plant was already in development, it was decided to increase capacity in order to help meet that demand.

 Prior to the planned expansion, Enviva’s portfolio of operating plants in the wood biomass supply chain totaled more than 300,000 metric tons per year of combined capacity, with an additional 2.5 million tons of production in various stages of construction, permitting, and development. 

On feedstock, Woodworth said that Enviva has identified enough potential supply to support the expansion, and feels comfortable that the additional volume can be secured.

The plant, which is being built at a former Georgia Pacific Lumber site, is schedule to be operating in the early fourth quarter 2011, according to Woodworth. It has received a great deal of local and state support, including a $270,000 grant from the state’s One North Carolina Fund, a program that invests in state projects to create jobs.

With the expansion, the company projects that the plant will provide more than 60 full-time jobs to area residents. It is on schedule to be operating in the early fourth quarter of 2011, Woodworth said.

Earlier this year, Enviva acquired a deep water port terminal in Chesapeake, Va., to enable the company to receive, store and load in excess of 3 million tons of woody biomass for export annually.

Europe's carbon policies bolster a b.c. bioenergy industry

 

Wood pellets made from waste are generating power, warming homes overseas

 By Gordon Hamilton, Vancouver Sun May 4, 2011
When Regina and Peter Pretterhofer built their new home in the city of Graz, Austria, they decided to give up fossil fuels and adopt a nationwide trend toward alternative energy to keep them warm during the snowy Austrian winters.
Instead of a gas furnace, their home has a three-metre-bythree metre room in the cellar that is filled to the top with four to six tonnes of wood pellets every two years, which are automatically fed into an Austrian-designed pellet-burning furnace in the next room. It heats their water and warms their 2,300-square-foot home. The pellet furnace is augmented by solar panels on days when the sun shines, and is made efficient by triple-glazed windows and insulation derived from local wood byproducts.

By North American standards, the Pretterhofer's green home would be on the environmental fringe, but in Austria they are doing nothing unusual, Peter Pretterhofer explained in a telephone interview. New homes in Graz are being built to similar, or even tighter, environmental standards.

The home-building revolution in Austria is part of Europe's broader commitment to reduce greenhouse gases 20 per cent by 2020 and rely on renewable energy for 20 per cent of its needs. It's a Kyoto commitment that has turned Europe into a global leader in alternative energy technologies and, in the process, has created a new bioenergy industry in British Columbia: Wood pellets made from sawmill waste.

B.C.'s pellet industry has grown in the last decade from mom-and-pop businesses making pellets sold by the bagful to wood stove owners, to the point where 11 plants operated by seven companies produced 1.2 million tonnes of wood pellets in 2010, contributing $185 million to the provincial economy, according to the B.C. ministry of forests, lands and natural resources. This year, with higher operating rates and new capacity coming onstream, the industry expects to produce two million tonnes.

Europe's energy policies created the market but B.C.'s huge volume of biowaste, especially after the mountain pine beetle epidemic, made it economical for pellets from the B.C. Interior to be trucked to either Prince Rupert or Vancouver, loaded aboard a ship and delivered 16,000 kilometres away to Amsterdam. The cost, and the greenhouse gas footprint, is equivalent to pellets produced in Europe.

"The key for us is full ships," said Leroy Reitsma, chief operating officer at the province's first and largest pellet company, Pinnacle Renewable Energy Group. "We have been able to grow to a size where we are now loading full vessels for transport and it's by having those full vessels that we can be competitive."

Pinnacle has six pellet plants in the B.C. Interior -five of them owned outright and one that is a joint venture with forest giant Canfor -accounting for most of the province's pellet shipments to Europe, where they are used almost exclusively as a substitute for coal in generating power. The pellets are mixed with coal, usually at a 50/50 ratio, and used to power the boilers that create steam to drive the generators.
And pellet-makers in B.C. believe their success in Europe is just the beginning. Asia, specifically Japan and Korea, are eyeing wood pellets as a replacement for not only coal but for nuclear energy.

Tourism Minister Pat Bell, whose portfolio includes international marketing initiatives, said in an interview that there's "huge upside potential," for the pellet industry in both Europe and Asia.

"Japan and Korea are just starting to review their options around renewable fuels," he said.

The biggest issue the industry faces, he said, is not market potential but capacity limitations of B.C. ports.

"We are close to exporting two million tonnes a year now and that's a substantial amount of product going into ships," Bell said. "It's not something you can mix on coal chutes. It has to go in independently. It is also very dependent on moisture. You can't load in the rain unless you have all the conveyors covered. The pellets swell and generate heat as well. So you have to be cautious about that."

In B.C. there's no industrial market for pellets. Reitsma said Canada lags behind Europe and Asia in terms of policies to encourage the use of alternative energy.

"I think there is a lack of definitive targets that need to be achieved. If there were policies in place that said 'You must generate X amount of power from renewable sources,' you would see an evolution of the business along those lines.

"It boils down to the values of society."

In contrast, he said, the cost of meeting Kyoto objectives in Holland has been costed out at eight euros per person a month, an amount of money Dutch citizens say they are willing to pay to reduce carbon emissions.

Wood pellets are manufactured from sawmill waste or from debris left after logging. The amount of forest waste has been growing in regions where pine forests have been killed by the mountain pine beetle epidemic.

To prevent beetle-killed wood from decaying and releasing its carbon back into the atmosphere, pellet companies pay salvage rates to access it after logging companies leave it in roadside piles.

Once at the plant, the wood is dried and pulverized, then compressed into a dense cylinder 6 mm in diameter and 20 mm long. One tonne of wood waste can be condensed into half a tonne of pellets after drying. The pellets are pulverized again before being injected into furnaces where they burn with the intensity of a dust explosion.

Gordon Murray, executive director of the Wood Pellet Association of Canada, said wood pellets are more costly to produce than coal but only if society places no value on coal's carbon footprint and other environmental costs.

"If you look at dollars per megawatt, then coal is cheaper. But if you put an environmental cost on it, then pellets start to look pretty attractive. That's the whole concept behind bioenergy."

ghamilton@vancouversun.com


Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Europe+carbon+policies+bolster+bioenergy+industry/4723415/story.html#ixzz1LPTzS3oK

Tuesday, May 3, 2011

Wesley Clark on Ethanol

Post image for Wesley Clark on Ethanol
In an appearance on E&E TV, retired General Wesley Clark discusses the future of corn ethanol policy.

Transcript here.

Given that he is a member of Growth Energy, completely objectivity isn’t expected. However, he makes a number of incorrect statements and supports very poor economic analysis.
CLARK: And so we’re behind in cellulosic because we’ve been artificially constrained in the fuels market, first by the EPA blend wall at 10 percent, which meant there was no market for cellulosic. And then secondly then by the lack of infrastructure to be able to actually go out to the service agent and say, hey, I want to try 20 to 30 percent ethanol blend.
Cellulosic ethanol production is “behind” because its not economical, and investors are aware that the current market for cellulosic ethanol relies almost entirely on a government law that clearly isn’t guaranteed given how difficult it is to produce cellulosic ethanol at a price that is even close to something consumers would want.

Clark also complains about the 10% “blend wall” yet doesn’t acknowledge that the majority of ethanol sold is due to an “artificial” government mandate. I’d gladly end the EPA’s ability to determine what American’s can put in their gas tanks just as I’d gladly end the mandate requiring refiners to blend petroleum with ethanol.

Also, its obvious that a lack of infrastructure is due to a lack of demand for ethanol, not because of any artificial market constraints. E85 exists in almost all 50 states, yet sales are low because its still too expensive given the lower fuel economy. Why would anyone want to buy E20 or E30 if individuals with flex-fuel vehicles don’t purchase E85?

On fuel economy with higher blends:
CLARK: You know, our own personal research is that American cars that are flex-fuel cars, they work really great at 20 and 30 percent ethanol. And sometimes you get a falloff in mileage at 85 percent because the motor is not really tuned to use the ethanol. But at 20 and 30 percent, in some of these models, there’s no falloff and you’re saving.
I’m not sure what study he is referring to, perhaps an in-house, yet to be published, study. However, recent comprehensive studies show the exact opposite. As the percentage of ethanol increases as a percentage of the total fuel blend, fuel economy drops.

Here is a study by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory: “Effects of Intermediate Ethanol Blends on Legacy Vehicles and Small Non-Road Engines.” From the executive summary:
E.4.1 Fuel Economy
• All 16 vehicles exhibited a loss in fuel economy commensurate with the energy density of the
fuel.* With E20, the average reduction in fuel economy (i.e., the reduction in miles per
gallon) was 7.7% when compared to E0.
• Limited evaluations of fuel with as much as 30% ethanol were conducted, and the reduction
in miles per gallon continued as a linear trend with increasing ethanol content.
On importing foreign oil:
CLARK: They know, look, in the $14 to $15 trillion economy like the American economy, you cannot generate jobs if you are sending $400 billion a year, every year, abroad. It’s like a tax on the American people and that’s what our oil companies are — put a tiger in our tank and they look all-American, but they’re actually — they’re dollar extraction mechanisms. And the friendly service station operator there that some of them we’ve grown up with, they’re actually — it’s like a $1200 year tax on every man, woman, and child in America so we can import foreign oil.
The idea that importing goods from abroad is equivalent to a tax of $1200 is laughable, and I wish the host hadn’t been so easy on him. Perhaps Clark believes the world would be better off without any international trade.
Monica Trauzzi: Is corn ethanol being produced at the expense of other biofuels?
         Wesley Clark: No, I don’t think it’s being produced at the expense of biofuels. This is market demand driven. Look, corn is a crop that people have learned to be increasingly innovative in growing.  I mean the yield grows up — goes an average of maybe three, 4 percent per year, per annum. I mean year after year after year.

The demand for corn ethanol is not market driven. It’s government mandated.

2011 marks an important year for developments in ethanol policy. Building out infrastructure is just as big a waste of taxpayer dollars as is the current VEETC/mandate.

The Ethanol Hunger

The Ethanol Hunger


WEST LAFAYETTE, INDIANA – Food prices have in many cases surpassed the peak levels reached in July 2008. At that time, food-price increases were attributed to growing global demand for food commodities, a major decline in the value of the US dollar, crop failures in some parts of the world, and biofuels. But what is driving the surge in prices today?


I believe that the key factors now are somewhat different from those that drove up food prices in 2008. Growth in global demand for food and feed commodities is still a major part of the story, as are biofuels. But the short- and long-term implications are quite different.


As developing countries become better off, one of the first things that happens is so-called “dietary transition.” With more income at their disposal, people begin to consume more of their food basket in the form of animal products. Producing these animal products requires significantly more agricultural resources than a predominantly plant-based diet. So, as incomes grow, demand for food products grows even faster.


Both population growth and dietary transition contribute to faster demand growth and higher food prices.


Biofuels policies in the US and the European Union have led to the creation of biofuels industries with significant output capacity – mainly ethanol in the US and biodiesel in the EU. In the US, government policy mandates 48 billion liters of ethanol in 2011. Production capacity already exceeds that level.


Since this quantity is required by the government to be blended with gasoline, regardless of the price of ethanol, corn, or gasoline, the demand that it creates for corn is not at all responsive to the price of corn. In economic terms, such demand is highly “inelastic”: the mandate must be met at any price.


That is the situation in which we now find ourselves, at least in the short run. The added inflexibility (or inelasticity) amplifies the price response to a real or perceived crop shortfall either in the US or elsewhere. In addition, the fact that nearly 40% of the US corn crop is being used for ethanol, up from around 5% a few years ago, means that corn prices must be higher to meet the feed, export, and ethanol demands for corn.


The bottom line is that the current version of US biofuels policy, with its fixed requirement for blending, leads to a greater price response in the event of a crop shortfall – in the short run. We saw this in 2008, and are now seeing it again.


But the 2011 surge appears to be rooted in broader commodity scarcity than before. In the first half of 2008, commodity prices moved up quickly – and plummeted just as fast in the second half of the year. There may well have been speculative behavior that contributed to the rapid swing.


Even with normal crop production around the world, we will end this year with stocks-to-use ratios near historic lows. Stocks-to-use ratios are a primary driver of commodity prices, because they give us an indication of the cushion that we have for shortfalls somewhere in the world. The ratio tells us essentially how many months of stocks we have, and today they are around 15% for some key commodities – meaning two months of stocks.


What about the long run? With several years to adjust, we would expect a powerful supply-side response to higher commodity prices now prevailing all over the world.


In many regions around the world, crop yields are only a fraction of US levels – even in agricultural zones with similar climate, soils, and other production conditions. In the US, it is common to see a gap of around 20% between test plots and actual yields in the same area. In many other regions, these gaps are 40-60%. The bottom line is that there is huge potential to increase production in many parts of Eastern Europe, Africa, and South America.


To the extent that higher commodity prices benefit farmers in these regions, they will respond by increasing their production, which will eventually reduce scarcity, increase stocks-to-use ratios, and attenuate the higher prices. In fact, to the extent that developing countries permit higher prices to go to their farmers, the result could be a significant stimulus to economic growth in rural regions of developing countries – where most of the world’s poor live.


One problem is that developing countries often attempt to isolate their domestic markets from world prices, particularly price increases, in order to protect their more politically powerful urban citizens. This policy can stymie rural development and diminish poverty alleviation.


The short- and long-term stories are simplifications, but they nonetheless convey the essence of some critical drivers of price changes. America’s biofuels policies inevitably lead to larger price responses to supply shocks in the short run. In the long run, the higher prices that result could become an engine of economic development in the world’s poor rural regions. That distinction could make a huge difference to millions of people.


Wallace E. Tyner is Professor of Agricultural Economics at Purdue University.

Draft regulation of Mass. woody biomass RPS eligibility filed

 
By Lisa Gibson | May 03, 2011

The Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (DOER) filed with the Clerk of the House May 3 a much-anticipated draft regulation that outlines woody biomass eligibility for the state’s 20 percent by 2025 renewable portfolio standard (RPS). Uncertainty has surrounded the biomass industry in the commonwealth since the DOER released a draft of RPS qualification regulations in September 2011. One of the main issues with the draft was the minimum efficiency standard of 40 percent for biomass power facilities to qualify, and unfortunately, it looks like this draft didn’t revise that rule.

The May draft says a low-emission, advanced biomass power conversion technology using an eligible biomass fuel can qualify as an RPS Class I Renewable Generation Unit if it can demonstrate a minimum of 40 percent efficiency on a quarterly basis, among several other criteria. The definition of eligible biomass fuel includes eligible biomass woody fuels, which are certain forest-derived residues, forest salvage, nonforest derived residues such as those from primary and secondary forest product industries, yard waste and dedicated energy crops.

The draft includes a number of provisions for those woody biomass fuels. For instance, a biomass fuel certificate must accompany every delivery of eligible woody biomass fuel or manufactured fuel to a generation unit. For forest-delivered eligible woody biomass fuel, the biomass fuel certificate must be issued with the eligible forest residue tonnage report, which details the amount of biomass that can be harvested, and includes one of a number of aspects including a signature of a professional forester who is certified by the Society of American Foresters, licensed by the host state of the harvest site, or certified by the DOER based on documentation that a professional forester has proficiency and experience in forestry, the draft specifies.

Whereas the September draft mandated that biomass harvests could not exceed 15 percent of the weight of all forest products, the new draft reads, “The total weight of the forest products shall be calculated utilizing weight standards by species provided by the Department in a Guideline. The allowable percent removal limit shall be determined as prescribed by the Department in a Guideline to protect soil nutrient retention in varying soil conditions.”

Overall, the draft includes numerous changes from the original, but still seems to be incredibley limiting for the Massachusett's biopower industry.

“We expect the regulation to be referred to the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities, and Energy, who will have 30 days to review the regulation and provide their comments back to DOER,” said Dwayne Breger, director of renewable and alternative energy development for the DOER. “After considering these comments, DOER anticipates filing the final regulation after another 30 days for promulgation.”

To see the May 3 draft, click here.

Amyris: The Owner’s Manual

Jim Lane | May 3, 2011 |


Your broker has told you about this high-flying “bio-something” stock, AMRS, that’s up 60 percent in the past six months.


What is Amyris, and what’s ahead? The Digest goes in-depth, and talks with CEO John Melo.


So, what exactly do you own when you buy into Amyris?


You now own a piece of a company that uses synthetic biology to produce a C15 hydrocarbon, farnesene, (at present from sugarcane syrup), which can be sold as-is or upgraded into a host of industrial chemicals used in fragrance, oils, lubricants, and even as a diesel or jet fuel.

Why is that important? It replaces building blocks or finished products made commercially today from fossil crude oil. It’s one of the first-movers in what US Energy Secretary Steve Chu described as “the glucose economy” that, in his view, will replace the oil economy.

Oh, the oil economy. That one. The $3 trillion traffic in crude oil that powers, well, just about everything.


“We’d like to create a biofene economy,” Amyris CEO John Melo told the Digest. “There, green is the value add, not an opportunity for a price premium.”

Let’s focus on that for a second. Aren’t all “green” products supposed to cost more, but in some way benefit the planet?

Wasn’t it a New England utility that recently signed a 20-year wind energy deal where it guaranteed three times the market rate per KWh, with a price escalation clause? (A deal which prompted Lignol CTO Colin South to drily observe to the Digest, “If I could get those terms, I’d be building capacity right now, instead of talking to you.”

Shouldn’t there be some huge feed-in tariff, or carbon tax, required to make Amyris rpoducts anywhere near comparable on price? Well, apparently, there are exceptions.

Here’s the claim from Amyris and its owners: it can make farnesene and the downstream products at a substantially lower cost than the comparable building blocks can be made from fossil crude oil. And its signing on partners at a dizzying pace, and starting commercial-scale production as you read.

Dang it, Adam Smith: you’re right again, markets function. Even green ones.

A biofene economy?


Why is a biofene economy significant for customers? From the broadest point of view: farnesene, made from a renewable resource, gives marketers of finished products — and their end-use customers, that is to say, thee and me — a break from the rollercoaster of oil prices.

Melo says, The alternative [crude oil-based product] has volatility in supply. A basis for our customer discussion is their exposure to crude. In our verticals, we hear from customers that they would like to move 10-20 percent of volume [to renewable-based suppliers], to get a better mix.”

Melo should know. A long time senior team veteran of BP and other majors, Melo has one of those historic years in 2010, leading Amyris through a celebrated IPO, instead of working through the huge transformation at BP that has taken place since last year’s oil spill.

Does he think about BP and the ‘year that might have been’, has he stayed on at the oil giant?

“Last year, I watched Tony Hayward on the TV and thought, it could have been any one of us. I feel blessed; BP was not exactly an exciting place to be, this past year. But I think about this too: BP, when I was there, created a case for me, for all of us, why it was good, and good business, to do the right thing. I’m thankful for that.”

Beyond premium, the green discount




Among the many things that BP is reputed to stand for – beyond petroleum, bad planning, big polluter – one of the acronym de-codes ought to be “beyond [the green] premium”.

For some time, BP Biofuels chief Phil New has called on the renewables industry to get beyond terms like “advanced biofuels,” which are distinctions based in process, and think about “advantaged biofuels,” or distinctions based in cost.

His point: there is no green premium – the broad customer market, at the end of the day, is unwilling to pay a consistently higher rate for products made from renewable resources. At best, it’s a tie-breaker – products made from renewables, made at the same cost and displaying the same performance, will win orders from industry over traditionally made products.

Melo agrees, emphatically. “For our customer – the price discussion is simple. We cannot be more expensive, the quality has to as good or better, and there has to be reliability.”

But there’s a more important territory that is being explored, and one in which Amyris is one of a handful of companies securing first-mover advantage: beyond the green premium, there lies the green discount, which is to say products made from renewables with sustainable cost advantages over its crude oil-based competition.

In these huge commodity markets green discounts do not provide lower prices to the consumer, but higher margins to the companies supplying their first trickle of product into the commodity streams.

“Take flavors and fragrances,” says Melo, where we have numerous different products, and in all of them the market price is different levels. We set our price based on the market price, but we have a significant cost benefit in every case.”

Later on, if and as production volumes grow, we may well see these “advantaged” products (as opposed to “advanced” or “green” products) produced in sufficient volumes that they will begin to downshift consumer prices, and squeeze the margins of traditional suppliers. Perhaps they will snuff some of those traditional suppliers entirely out of their traditional markets, or all of them.

Pickin’ mighty molecules




There are tens of thousands of molecules out there that have some industrial application, and margin and opportunity is how Amyris structures its approach. Melo comments, “We focus on an application that has the greatest margin, where we are structurally cost advantaged. We target the #1 or #2 company, and bring to them a strong value proposition based on cost, reliability and quality.”

Shell Oil recently forecast that 30 percent of the fuels markets will be replaced by biofuels, by 2050. The International Energy Agency forecast a 27% market share for biofuels by 2050. That represents, in the fuels markets alone, a shift of 225 billion gallons – 351 billion gallons, taken against the entire spectrum of uses for the barrel of oil.

But that’s a long ways away, generations of innovation from now. For now, we remain focused not on who and how traditional suppliers will exit the market, but how renewables companies, using synthetic biology, will enter the market.

The Brazilian gambit


To date, we have known more about where, as opposed to when, and how. 2010-11 was the winter of Brazil. But Amyris has been down there for some time; they were the pioneer in the market, in so many ways. The Portugal-born Melo has a caution for others who go down expecting a gold-rush mentality, some kind of switched-on, deal-a-minute expectation borne of watching the flurry of MOUs , partnerships and offtake agreements that have been pouring out of the Amyris offices of late. It takes time, Melo cautions.

“Be patient. Be local. Sector is very tight. Family business, or family in control. Takes a long time, you have to deliver a lot, there are high expectations. First meeting, you think, the people are wonderful, we’ll be in business in six months. Then, you have 20 more meetings. It takes tremendous patience to build the case.”

But Amyris has been reaping the rewards of first-mover advantage, and that’s been a major factor in its celebrated stock rise, now trading at a 65 percent premium to its IPO opening price last September.  Along with Gevo and Codexis, they’ve opened the IPO window again for industrial biotech. Sometimes, that has resulted in a confusion over the distinctions between the three.

Gemyris, Codexvo…er, who exactly are these companies again, and why are they distinct?


As we wrote in “Gevo: The Owners Manual”: “Gevo and Amyris have been run together by public investors lately, into a sort of Gemyris, companies powered by magic bugs that ferment ordinary crop-based sugars into suites of exotic fuels and chemicals that will slowly take over the world.

“There are common elements, for sure. Both companies have their strong roots in synthetic biology, and both feature exotic magic bugs engineered from yeast. Both had investment roots in Silicon Valley, with Khosla Ventures in their pedigrees.

Both have been rocketing up the 50 Hottest Companies in Bioenergy, with Amyris landing #1 this year and Gevo #5.  Both had celebrated IPOs this past year, and have been performing strongly in the aftermarket, with both up more than 60 percent over their debuts.

About there, the Gevo-Amyris similarities fade.

So let’s turn to Amyris, its biofene market and its applications


Amyris’s business model is in producing high-value products through low-cost fermentation. From fermentation of sugar cane syrup via bolted-on units at existing sugar and ethanol mills, Amyris produces a C15 molecule, farnesene, that can be finished, or used as a building block, for products in six verticals: cosmetics; flavors & fragrances, polymers & plastic additives; lubricants; consumer products; and fuels.

It’s expected product stream is closely tied to a series of production, marketing and offtake partnmerships. Here are a few of the major ones scheduled to commence delivery between 2011 through 2013:

Squalane, for Soliance
Amyris lubricants, for US Venture
Niche diesel, for BPTrans
Base oils, for the Cosan JV
Biofene, to Gruppo M&G
Supply to Firmenisch
Supply to Givaudan
Biofene, to Proctor & Gamble
Lubricants, to Total

The Amyris Ring of Partnerships


Amyris is best understood as a web of partnerships, which form the core strategic element in its capital-light, distributed path to market.

They have partnership models to build value across the supply chain. They exist in four types.

1. Production partnerships, such as with Sao Martinho, in that case in the form of a JV that brings production capacity.

2. Development and supply agreement partnerships, such as with Firmenich, that provide  offtake markets and also provide a partner-managed marketing and distribution function.

3. Marketing and distribution partnerships, such as with Soliance, that include an offtake agreement and cooperation on marketing and distribution activities.

4. Integrated partnerships, such as with Cosan, that provide feedstock, manufacturing capacity, a cooperative marketing and distribution effort, and a fuel customer.

Capital: a staged business model to accelerate the volume ramp


The capital strategy evolves as the products and partnerships move forward. The nearer-term products utilize Amyris capital and contract manufacturing – but by mid-decade, Amysis will have moved through cost-sharing partnerships to partnerships where the partners absorb the capital cost of bringing products to market.

Phase 1, in 2011, represents contracted manufacturing using Amyris capital, in partnership with Tate & Lyle, Antibioticos and Biomin.

In 2012-13, the company moves to joint ventures, in which capital outlay is shared, primarily with Sao Martinho and Paraiso Bioenergia.

In 2013-14, the company moves to 3rd party mills for production, using partner’s capital – based on partnmerships with Total, Cosan, Sao Martinho, Bunge and Guarani.

The Fuel Story


So, where in all this is the biofuel story. Amyris will be participating in three distinct fuels markets in the early to mid 2010s: diesel additives, diesel and jet fuel.

2011-12, look for the launch of niche diesel additives and blends with BR and Mercedes Benz.

In 2012-2015, expect an entry into Brazilian diesel and European diesel markets with Shell and Total.

In the 2014-2020 period, look for entry into commercial jet fuel market with General Electric, Embraer, and Total among the partners. Efforts will begin with development and testing in 2011-12, and moving to demonstration scale by 2013-15.

The Chemicals story


There are a lot of molecules out there. To make the story easier to follow, we have prepared a chart, by vertical sector, product, partner, year of market entry, the price per kilo of the target product, and the market size.




The bottom line: inflection points


It’s a sophisticated web of partnership, as we have noted. Use this owners guide to measure progress – analysts are using it too, to project value and set target prices. Watch the flow of announcements – is Amyris hitting its targets in terms of market entries, and timelines.

With every “hit,” start adding to the target price, because some level of risk is assigned into each one. With every “miss”, knock down the value according to the market size of the product. Look for new verticals that open up, or new partnerships that address value.

The overall opportunity: staggering, by any measure. In the chemicals market alone, Amyris’ product pipeline through 2015 has it entering $66 billion of markets, with customers talking in terms of moving 10-20 percent of contracts to renewables companies. That’s $6.6-$13.2 billion in potential orders, and expect product margins of as much as 30-40 percent, or $2-$5.2 billion for the total opportunity for the sector. (Note, we said “opportunity,” not projected sales.)

That’s leaving aside the fuel markets. And shows how much discount (for risk, time and competition) is built into Amyris’ current market cap of $1.16 billion, given that a public company should easily support that market cap on as little as $47 million in net earnings.