By John Addison. Scientists know how to make fuel from prairie grasses growing on marginal land. They know how to make fuel from fast growing trees with root systems that extend 25 feet into the ground, sequestering carbon emissions and enriching the soil. They even know how to make fuel from algae. They do all this in their labs every day. The problem is making cellulosic and algal fuel in large quantities at costs that compete with fuels from petroleum such as gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel.
This is my second article (previous article) from the 31st Symposium on Biotechnology for Fuels and Chemicals sponsored by NREL. 800 global bioscientists gathered in San Francisco to share their research and showcase their progress.
Their progress with biofuels from cellulosic sources is important. Some corn ethanol plants have closed. Once promising corporations, such as VeraSun, are now bankrupt. Lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions for fuel-from-food are being scrutinized. Industry would benefit from biomass that can be grown at much higher yields per acre than corn. Industries such as agriculture, wood, and paper would benefit from making money from waste and from having added revenue sources.
At the conference, Verenium (VRNM) shared their progress. In Jennings, Louisiana, they are producing 1.4 million gallons per year of cellulosic ethanol. The fuel can be mixed up to 10 percent with our current gasoline, saving us from needing almost 1.4 million gallons of foreign oil each year. Some might be delivered as E85. Instead of using corn, which requires high inputs of energy, nitrogen, fertilizer, and water to produce, Verenium is using a crop that produces eight times the energy required to process it – energy cane, a hybrid of sugar cane optimized as a fuel source not a food source.
Sugarcane and energy cane are part of Brazil’s energy independence, being the source of over 40 percent of their fuel. Now energy cane is being grown in some of the more tropical places in the United States. At a time when project financing is difficult, major partners are critical to financing larger commercial plants. In a joint-venture with BP, Verenium plans to build a 36 million gallon per year plant in Florida.
Dr. Stuart Thomas with DuPont Danisco Cellulosic Ethanol (DD, DNSCY.PK) outlined their plans to bring a 20 million gallon per year plant on line in 2012. They are evaluating non-food feedstocks with much higher yields per acre than corn, including switchgrass and sorghum. DuPont Danisco anticipates reaching parity with $60 to $100/barrel oil by 2015. The pilot plant will be in Tennessee which is providing $70 million of funding for ethanol from switchgrass.
The long-term potential for biofuels may not be in ethanol, but in renewable gasoline, biodiesel, bio-jet fuel, and biocrude. All contain more energy than ethanol, which only delivers 84,000 BTU/gallon. Gasoline delivers 114,000; biodiesel 120,000.
With better microbes and fewer process steps, Chief scientist Dr. Steve del Cardayre with LS9, presented plans to produce industry standard biodiesel from energy cane. The plant should be able to compete with oil at today’s prices by also producing other valuable outputs, such as chemicals which can be used to make detergents. Synthetic biology competitor, Amyris, is moving even faster in building process plants to convert energy cane into renewable hydrocarbons and bio-jet fuel.
Indeed, creating multiple products from a process plant is likely to be critical to having a profitable industry. Oil refining is profitable because fractional distillation creates many valuable products at one refiner:
· Naphtha which can be processed into chemicals and plastics
· Gasoline
· Jet fuel
· Diesel
· Heavy oils which can be processed into lubricants and asphalt
Gevo will build plants with mass efficiency of over 40 percent that can produce multiple products including:
· Bio-jet fuel
· Bio-diesel
· Isobutanol for other products
Gevo sees opportunities to buy existing moth-balled ethanol plants and retrofit for $30 million per plant, a fraction of building a cellulosic plant from scratch. Gevo’s yeast fermentation process produces heat and steam which would be valuable if co-located with industrial processes that benefit from combined heat and power.
By converting wood waste to next generation fuel, Mascoma has a significant potential to co-locate with existing paper mills and wood processing operations. The same is true for Range Fuels.
Enerkem is being paid to covert municipal solid waste into fuel as it targets 2011 to bring live a 9.6 million gallon per year plant in Edmonton, Canada, and a 20 million gallon per year plant in Pontotoc, Mississippi.
Beyond the cellulosic sources for fuel, covered in this article, is the potential for fuel from algae. A future article will examine the near-term challenges and long-term potential of algal fuel.
As this Symposium took place in California, in Copenhagen, Greenpeace protesters stopped all buses because they use biofuel from food sources. In the future, they may welcome biofuel from wood and waste sources as an alternative to gasoline from tar sands and jet fuel from coal.
This December, the leaders of the world will gather in Copenhagen, Denmark, to develop a framework for a more promising sustainable future. In Denmark they will be able to visit a new cellulosic ethanol plant developed by Inbicon. The feedstock will be an agricultural waste product - wheat straw. The plant will process 24 metric tons per day of wheat straw, ten times more than a demonstration plant that Inbicon only a few years ago. The plant will be more efficient and come closer to competing with refined oil because the operation will have three products creating three revenue streams:
1. 5.4 million liters ethanol year
2. 8,250 MT biofuel which will displace some coal used by a power plant
3. 11,250 MT of molasses which will be used to feed cattle
Can such operations displace all our need for petroleum? No, but in five years we will see commercial scale next generation biofuel operations. If oil is selling for $100 dollar per barrel, then cellulosic biofuels may lower our cost of fuel. In ten years, all such operations could displace 20 percent of our petroleum use and represent an important step towards energy independence.
Cellulosic ethanol is not the only sustainable solution that world leaders will see in Copenhagen. They will see at least 40 percent of the population commuting on bicycles, demonstrating an immediate and very cost-effective way to reduce our need for oil. Many delegates will ride on electric light-rail from the airport and notice the wind farms that deliver the electricity. Some will ride in electric cars that further demonstrate transportation that uses renewable energy.
Next generation biofuels promise to be part of a portfolio of solutions to our current climate and energy problems.
John Addison publishes the Clean Fleet Report and speaks at conferences. He is the author of the new book - Save Gas, Save the Planet - now selling at Amazon and other booksellers.
Calling ‘em Out: The World’s 10 Worst Greenwashers
As the green movement sweeps the globe, companies, trade groups and government organizations are eager to get a piece of the pie. ‘Green’ can definitely translate into big profits if you do it right – but all too often, these money-hungry entities choose to fudge the facts in an attempt to make themselves seem more environmentally friendly and responsible than they really are. That’s called greenwashing, folks, and here are 10 of the world’s worst offenders.
BP
BP’s ad campaign with the theme ‘Beyond Petroleum’ led the public to believe the company was headed in the direction of cleaner, renewable fuels. But, it turned out the company was spending more money on advertising than on green efforts, leading Treehugger to ask, “What does BP stand for these days? Beyond Propaganda? Bye-Bye Planet? Bad Pollution?” After all those greenwashing ads, BP went and dropped $3 billion to buy into oil from the Alberta Tar Sands. Each barrel of oil out of the tar sands generates about two thirds of a ton of CO2, meaning BP’s 200,000 barrels a day will generate about 127,000 tons per day.
American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity
(image via: ACCCE)
Clean coal isn’t just a contradiction in terms – it’s propaganda. The ‘Clean Coal’ message has been brought to us by none other than a front group for the coal industry – the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity. ACCCE gathered up tons of money from the coal and utility industries and used it to fund a far-reaching effort to convince people that coal can be used in a way that’s not harmful to the environment. ACCCE membership includes Peabody Coal, Duke Energy, Southern Company and American Electric Power and, as we all know, there is nothing clean about coal.
General Motors
Watching these two videos one after the other, General Motors’ unabashed attempt to hype its green cred while also selling Hummers speaks for itself. GM’s ‘Gas-Friendly to Gas-Free’ ad campaign sought to reframe GM as eco-friendly, but the company is still the leading producer of gas-guzzling vehicles and has fought to undermine attempts to improve CAFE fuel economy standards.
ExxonMobil
It’s not surprising that oil companies are among the worst greenwashing offenders: they’re used to making billions off dirty energy, and they’re getting scared that their revenue streams are going to drop off a cliff once renewables are firmly established. Over the past few years, ExxonMobil has launched a number of ad campaigns touting their supposed new-found commitment to renewable energy and the environment.
Yet, ExxonMobil has consistently funded the climate denial industry for decades, including the Heartland Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the George C Marshall Institute and the American Enterprise Institute. These organizations have colluded with the Bush administration to discredit the EPA’s efforts to fight climate change and offered scientists $10,000 to undermine the findings of the 2007 IPCC report.
ExxonMobil finally stopped funding many of these organizations in the past few years, but the energy giant still doesn’t live up to the rosy impression they’re forcing upon us through these ad campaigns. It is spending just $300 million over the next 10 years researching potential energy sources (many of which are not renewable). Compare that to the $47 billion they spent between 2003 and 2006 developing oil and gas.
Monsanto
Monsanto, the world’s largest seed and pesticide company, is working to convince us that they are supporters of sustainable agriculture – all while monopolizing and homogenizing the world’s food supply. Hardly sustainable. Monsanto, the maker of toxic pesticide RoundUp, has a long history of producing genetically modified seeds, including ‘terminator’ seeds that cannot reproduce on their own, forcing farmers to go back to Monsanto again and again for more seeds. They’re also the creators of rGBH (recombinant bovine growth hormone), which is given to cows to increase production and often ends up in our water supply.
Check out the documentary ‘The World According to Monsanto’ for an in-depth look at Monsanto’s practices and the threat they pose to the global food supply. Monsanto: “No food will be grown that we don’t own!”
Malaysian Palm Oil Council
The companies that make palm oil-based products like soap and margarine don’t want you to know that these things are coming to you at the expense of rainforests in southeast Asia. The Malaysian Palm Oil Council is troubled by all of those pesky reports detailing how rainforests are cut down to make way for palm oil plantations, destroying the habitats of animals like orangutans. In short, there’s nothing even remotely sustainable about it – but that didn’t stop Malaysian palm oil producers from running a series of ads with the tagline “Sustainably Produced Since 1917”.
American Electric Power
This utility giant falsely advertised itself as environmentally friendly and concerned about wildlife and animal habitats, while simultaneously destroying those habitats with its emissions, which contribute to air pollution, acid rain, global warming and mercury poisoning. American Electric Power is also one of the companies behind the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity.
Dow Chemical
Dow Chemical wants us to think they’re an environmentally responsible company with the best interests of humans and the environment at heart. But since its inception in the 1890s, Dow has polluted property and poisoned thousands of people. Dow created Agent Orange, and its subsidiary Union Carbide was responsible for the world’s worst industrial disaster in Bhopal, India. Dow Chemical has never taken responsibility for or cleaned up the poisonous gas disaster in Bhopal, which killed 8,000 people within two weeks and caused the deaths of an additional 8,000 people in the years since due to gas-related diseases.
Dow Chemical is also skirting its responsibility to clean up the dioxin contamination in the Tittabawasee and Saginaw Rivers in Michigan, claiming that scientific proof does not exist that dioxins are harmful to humans. Dow has been dumping these chemicals in the rivers for more than a century. So much for their regard for “The Human Element”.
Fur Council of Canada
The Fur Council of Canada thought they could pull the dead animal fur over our eyes by claiming that “fur is green”. Yes, they really said that. They claim that fur is “natural, renewable, recyclable, biodegradable and energy efficient.” They even went so far as to call it “the ultimate eco clothing”. PETA naturally had a response to that: “It takes more than 60 times as much energy to produce a fur coat from ranch-raised animals than it does to produce a fake fur. Plus, the waste produced on fur farms poisons our waterways. And don’t forget … unlike faux fur, the “real thing” causes millions of animals to suffer every year.”
Fiji Water
The quality of most bottled water is no better than tap water, and more than 2 billion plastic bottles end up in the waste stream in America every year. But, that doesn’t stop bottlers like Fiji from claiming that bottled water can be green. The website FIJIGreen.com touts the company’s “progress”, buying carbon offsets and increasing recycling efforts. That’s all fine and good, but the simple fact of the matter is that Fiji water still travels halfway around the world. That’s a lot of wasted fossil fuels, and a lot of emissions.
Tags:
coal,
economy,
fossil fuels,
oil,
recycling,
renewable energy
