With corn costs comprising over 87 percent of the cost of ethanol production, a small improvement in corn-to-ethanol yield can have a large impact on plant profitability. Three reasons suggest why improvements don't always happen. First, ethanol producers in the past have mainly focused on throughput and have historically invested in projects that expand production. With the current oversupply and margin squeeze, producers are now being forced to focus on reducing production costs. Second, producers have difficulty accurately measuring yield without a lot of variability, and thus are not getting true measurements upon which to base improvement efforts. Third, many producers depend on a supplier&rsquo;s technical support personnel to recommend optimum conditions for the use of products such as alpha amylase, gluco amylase, yeast, urea and ammonia. Producers often believe that by optimizing conditions for the use of these products, it will automatically result in maximum yield.
 These three factors have resulted in less-than-maximum yield improvement. With current economic conditions changing production philosophy from production volume to low-cost production, the last two factors can be addressed by the use of Six Sigma process improvement tools.&nbsp;
 The Six Sigma methodology was developed in the electronics industry in the 1990s at G.E., Westinghouse and Motorola. With the outstanding results achieved in this industry, Six Sigma was adopted by the petrochemical industry and others. Companies like Dow, DuPont, 3M, Celanese and other major chemical companies saved millions of dollars in applying the statistical and other Six Sigma tools to operating plants. Both the authors learned the methodology and experienced the savings while working in the petrochemical industry.&nbsp;
 The Six Sigma method uses a road map for solving difficult problems such as yield optimization in the face of multiple variables, including the types of enzymes for both gluco and alpha, type of yeast, pH, temperatures of mix tank, temperatures of fermenters, solid concentration in the mash, urea addition rates, amount of backset, pH of backset, etc. Trying to optimize each of these variables for maximum yield is an extremely difficult, if not impossible, task without the use of advanced statistical tools.
 Define, Measure, Analyze
 Defining is the first step in the Six Sigma methodology. Defining is important because it assures agreement on what the problem is, what the process boundaries are, how to measure the results and who will be working on the project. Without that agreement, projects often suffer scope creep and are soon &ldquo;trying to save the world.&rdquo;
 The measure step is where the team handles the problem of garbage in, garbage out. Without data, it is hard, if not impossible, to make good decisions. First, the team determines how well they can measure the output, also known as the Big Y. In the case of fermentation, yield involves measuring how much corn or milo was used in the fermenter batch, the ethanol in the final sample of fermentation, and how many gallons are in the fermenter. It sounds simple in principle but it can be difficult in practice. Many plants use high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) to measure the amount of ethanol in the final or drop sample. The question arises, though, on how much variability from batch to batch is due to the variation of the process and how much is due to the measuring system (i.e. the HPLC). By analyzing samples in a prescribed way that represents the range normally seen in the process, the percent variation caused by the measuring system, the HPLC analysis, can be determined. For the measurement system to be good enough for process improvement work, the variability caused by the measurement system should be less than 30 percent of the variability of the process. The target is no more than 10 percent. The same technique can be used to reliably determine solid content in the mash measurement system.
 Once these measurement systems have been proven to be good, they can be used to calculate a batch yield, the Big Y. One proprietary and trademarked method for measuring batch yield, called YieldCalc, has been developed by the authors.
 The next part of the measure step is to determine the inputs (the little x&rsquo;s) to measure, plus how well they can be measured. The assumption used is that all measurements are bad until proven otherwise. A process map created by the team identifies all of the inputs to the fermentation process, how they are measured and typical values. Then, a measurement system analysis (MSA) is performed on all of the inputs. In a typical plant there are approximately 85 to 100 inputs that need to be checked out. Many times the MSA serves to verify the measurement is done correctly and stored in the correct place in the data system. This step requires the efforts of operators, maintenance technicians, management and just about everybody involved in running the process.
 After making sure the data being used is good, the data collection on batches begins. It is important to not experiment with any of the variables at this time, since we are trying to determine the normal operation of the plant using good data. With all of the inputs captured and a batch yield calculated to show how well or poorly we did, the next step can begin.
 In the analyze step, we use Minitab software to find the important input variables. Minitab is an intuitive statistical software package that has become the de facto standard for Six Sigma analysis. Some people use a package called Jump that also works well. First, a graphical analysis gives clues to which inputs have the greatest impact on yield and then statistical analysis determines which ones are most significant. In most processes with 85 to 100 inputs, only three or four have a high impact on the variability of the process. These critical few Big Xs will be unique to that particular plant. Even though all ICM and all Delta T plants have similar designs for the same overall ethanol capacity, there are differences that make each one unique.
 Improve, Control
 In the improve step, once the critical Big X inputs are known, we need to confirm their importance and identify any interactions by running a series of trials called a design of experiments (DOE). In a DOE, one runs the plant, varying the important inputs in a specific way, from a high value to a low value. Analysis of this data will confirm the importance of each variable and show how to best optimize the plant for maximum yield. Next, we set the important inputs at their optimum values and run the plant. The control step is designed to make sure the improvements last. In order to improve the plant operations, one must change what one was doing before. Change is hard, however, and there is a tendency to go back to the old ways. The control plan is just a written plan for how we will be sure the important variables will be kept at their best values over the long term, and how to detect when things have drifted off before it is too late.
 Results
 Six Sigma was applied by the authors at a 50 MMgy ethanol plant where the yield was not what it needed to be and varied significantly from month to month. The plant operators also had a difficult time determining what impact, if any, a new enzyme or changed process condition had on yield due to the variability in the measurement.&nbsp;
 Results of the project are shown in the two bell curves of the accompanying graph showing yield and standard deviation before and after. Yield was improved by 6 percent while the standard deviation was reduced by 52 percent. For a 50 MMgy plant, this yield improvement would result in over $7.5 million savings at a corn cost of $7 per bushel. The payback period for these projects typically ranges in the one- to three-month time frame, depending on the existing instrumentation and measurement systems.
 The reduction in standard deviation of yield measurement allows plants to more accurately monitor the impact of new enzymes, yeast or new operating conditions on the most significant metric, yield. Thus, it helps with implementing further improvements as new technologies emerge in the ethanol industry. Authors: James Frug&eacute; Frug&eacute; Consulting. 214-477-5141 <a href="mailto:jfruge@mac.com">jfruge@mac.com</a> Raul Gamboa Chemical Engineer, Consultant 214-697-0280&nbsp; <a href="mailto:Raulutex1980@aol.com">Raulutex1980@aol.com</a>

2013/02/13608797278001.jpg

2013/02/13608797298216.jpg

Fermentation optimization project results 
in improved ethanol yield.

Six Sigma Provides Analytical Tool for Ethanol Producers

Iowa State University&rsquo;s Center for Agricultural and Rural Development recently published a policy brief on the outlook for ethanol and conventional biofuel renewable identification numbers (RINs) through 2014. The brief, written by economics professor Bruce Babcock, addresses whether banked RINs will be used in 2013 to offset high production costs, or if banked RINs are likely to be held until 2014, when they could help offset low ethanol prices.
 Babcock stressed that when the cost to an obligated party to use a banked RIN is less than the lost value for buying ethanol, it will use a RIN meet its obligation. This can cause ethanol use to decline and the price of RINs to increase.
 According to Babcock, a significant portion of these banked RINs are expected to be used this year, due in part to the E10 blend wall and high ethanol production costs. However, the actual use of banked RINs will be highly dependent on this year&rsquo;s corn yields, the use of sugarcane ethanol to meet RFS advanced biofuel targets, and the biodiesel mandate.

2013/02/13608786699956.jpg

Analysis provides RIN outlook

There&rsquo;s an apt analogy for centrifuge maintenance in ethanol plants to how different people view their cars. Some follow the recommended maintenance routine and get the oil changed at the appointed time, regularly swap out windshield wipers and replace tires as they near the end of the expected lifespan. Others push the oil changes out to the maximum, only change the wipers when they begin to come apart and wait to change tires until the steel cords are beginning to show.
 Chris Fell, market unit manager in separation products at Alfa Laval Inc., says he participated in a study over a decade ago that compared these two approaches to maintenance at an ethanol plant. For three years, the cost of preventative maintenance on one set of centrifuges was compared to a second set for which repairs were done as needed. &ldquo;The cost for the preventative maintenance averaged 28 percent less than running on a reactive maintenance schedule,&rdquo; he says.
 A challenge for the ethanol industry is that some maintenance schedules follow set intervals while others are site specific. Fell recommends that ethanol producers benchmark wear characteristics over the first few years of operation and use this data to plan future inspection and maintenance schedules. &ldquo;Some people will plan that for every 18 months where others can go 40 months,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Knowing that in advance is critical, and not making the assumption that you leave something go for three years and you&rsquo;ll be OK.&rdquo;
 The wear characteristics are determined by how much abrasive sand and grit is in the process, Fell says. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a combination of factors. In the ethanol industry, sand content varies depending on where the corn is harvested. Another factor is process water and how it is filtered. A third factor, particularly in older plants, is the re-use of floor washings from a sump back into the process.&rdquo;
 Plants that experience high-wear characteristics, he adds, should consider using one or more forms of erosion protection specifically developed to extend maintenance intervals and protect the equipment. One such technique is a tile system rather than the less-durable hard surfacing on the edges of the of scroll conveyer. &ldquo;The tiles are expensive as a component,&rdquo; Fell says. &ldquo;But in the ethanol industry, we find very little wear on tile assemblies.&rdquo;
 Planning for the big maintenance projects is built around recommended routine tasks, such as greasing the bearings during a brief shutdown every two weeks and replacing the gear box oil every six months. Dell Hummel, Alfa Laval sales manager for separation equipment in the U.S. ethanol, starch and sugar markets, points out that a plant that operates 24/7 runs roughly 8,000 hours in a year. Referring to the car analogy, he says, &ldquo;Every once in a while you have to perform tune-ups, that&rsquo;s where bearing changes&mdash;every 8,000 hours for conveyer bearings and every 16,000 hours for main bearings&mdash;come in.&rdquo;
 Fine-Tuning Operations
 Hummel, who serves as a decanter specialist supporting the global ethanol market, explains how fine-tuning centrifuge operation affects the front end of the process, as well as the efficiency of the evaporators and dryers. The function of the decanter centrifuge is to dewater whole stillage, which is the water, spent grains and yeast remaining after ethanol is distilled.
 The centrifuge separates the suspended solids from the thin stillage (also called centrate) that contains primarily dissolved solids. To use another analogy, the suspended solids are like sand that settles to the bottom of a bucket of water, whereas dissolved solids in the thin stillage are like sugar granules in water. The suspended solids are conveyed out of the conical section of the centrifuge bowl and become the wet cake that heads to the dryers. The thin stillage is decanted off the other end of the centrifuge bowl. Generally, about a third of the thin stillage becomes backset and is sent to the front end of the process to become part of the makeup water for the next batch of mash. The rest of the thin stillage is concentrated in the evaporators and applied to the wet cake, becoming the solubles in distillers dried grains with solubles.
 The challenge for centrifuge operations is to find the right balance between getting the optimal amount of water out of the wet cake to reduce the load on the dryers while maximizing the clarity of the thin stillage to minimize fouling in the evaporators. It is best to keep the level of suspended solids remaining in the thin stillage at about 1 to 2 percent, Hummel says. Too many fine solids tend to build up in the process and, in the portion used as backset, those fine solids that are not fermentable take up valuable space in the fermenter and reduce yields.
 Two main variables impact separation efficiency. &ldquo;The higher the flow rate, the lower the separation efficiency,&rdquo; Hummel says. The other main adjustment is the differential speed between the bowl and the conveyer. The bowl uses centrifugal force to remove the suspended solids while the conveyer, running either slower or faster than the bowl, creates a scrolling action that moves the solids out of the bowl. &ldquo;If you move the solids out quickly they come out wetter,&rdquo; Hummel explains. &ldquo;Because you move them out quicker, there&rsquo;s not as much solids build-up in the bowl, so you end up with a cleaner thin stillage.&rdquo; Conversely, a lower differential speed moves solids out more slowly giving them more retention time in the bowl and the solids come out drier, but there is more potential for carryover to the thin stillage.
 In some centrifuge designs, another adjustment can be made to the dams that control the depth of the liquid left in the centrifuge pond as the liquids decant off. &ldquo;If you have a traditional decanter, the deeper you make the pond, the cleaner you&rsquo;ll make the thin stillage but the wetter the cake,&rdquo; Hummel says. Alfa Laval&rsquo;s centrifuge design eliminates that adjustment, he adds. &ldquo;The machine we use for the ethanol industry has a baffled feed zone, which allows us to run with a deep pond to make clean thin stillage, but it blocks the pond from getting to the conical portion of the machine, so we can still make a dry cake.&rdquo;
 Venting is another critical issue that can be overlooked, Hummel continues. &ldquo;This is a hot process&mdash;the feed material is going in 20 or 30 degrees below boiling for water. You get vapors and steam inside the machine and you can get vapor and steam coming back from the dryer through the conveyer system or from the thin stillage tanks coming back up to the decanters.&rdquo; If not vented, the housing around the bowl fills with steam and makes the bearings run hot, or if pressure begins to build, can even force steam into the bearings. &ldquo;Once you do that, you reduce the bearing life and could potentially have bearing failures,&rdquo; he explains. &ldquo;It is a critical thing.&rdquo; Utilizing a slight vacuum will help vent the steam off the machines but it is important to ensure the vacuum be equal on both ends of the machine so there is no interference with the movement of the material. This helps avoid a buildup of solids in the centrifuge housing.
 Many factors play into the decisions behind how to operate the centrifuges. Some plants, of course, are located near cattle lots that prefer wet cake, thus they don&rsquo;t have to worry about optimizing the dryers. Most plant operators, though, are well aware that dryers are the biggest energy users in the plant. Yet, while the temptation is to keep the cake as dry as possible, the resulting thin stillage is the bigger issue, Hummel warns. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s more of a disruption to let the thin stillage get too dirty. If the evaporator fouls, a shutdown is required in order to clean and that&rsquo;s not an easy job. If too many unfermentable solids are returned to the fermenter, ethanol production is reduced. Performing planned, predictive maintenance and regular process tuning is an important factor in optimizing the complete process.&rdquo; Author: Susanne Retka Schill Contributions Editor, Ethanol Producer Magazine 701-738-4922 <a href="mailto:sretkaschill@bbiinternational.com">sretkaschill@bbiinternational.com</a>

Abrasive Wear The presence of a lot of sand and grit in the process can wear the leading edges of a scroll conveyer faster and is a major contributor to the variable servicing requirements at different ethanol plants.     

2013/02/13608794410632.jpg

2013/02/13608795333383.jpg

Separation Workhorse   Fine-tuning the performance of the centrifuge is important for efficient dryer operations, minimal evaporator fouling and low-solids backset.


2013/02/13608795345359.jpg

Proper centrifuge maintenance minimizes unplanned downtime, while well-balanced adjustments impact dryers, evaporators and backset. 

Tuning up the  Decanter Centrifuge

The U.S. DOE has made an award of up to $2.5 million to help Novozymes identify new and efficient enzymes to produce advanced biofuels and chemicals from corn stover. The company is partnering with MBI International on the project.
 The two companies will spend two years screening natural enzymes to determine the best performing varieties. The selected enzymes will be tested on pretreated agricultural waste for conversion to sugar. The project will utilize MBI&rsquo;s Ammonia Fiber Expansion (AFEX) pretreatment technology, which was invented by Michigan State University professor Bruce Dale. According to MBI, the technology is compatible with high solids enzyme and fermentation processing, produces minimal waste streams and operates under relatively mild conditions.
 In addition to helping Novozymes further its research, the award will also offer a means for external evaluation of the enzymes, as the DOE requires a government lab to validate performance targets.

DOE award supports enzyme development

Believe it or not, Big Oil companies have started talking about the blend wall.&nbsp; By dragging their feet on E15, the blend wall is largely a problem of their making&mdash;and a 30-some year old arbitrary U.S. EPA rule limiting the percentage of ethanol permitted in gas. But now, the oil lobby has suddenly decided to distort the meaning of the blend wall in a last-ditch effort to kill the renewable fuel standard (RFS) in 2013.
 For years, the American Coalition for Ethanol and others have been cautioning about the E10 blend wall, the need for higher blends of ethanol, more blender pumps, and flex-fuel vehicles&mdash;putting consumers, not oil companies, in control, and doing so in a way that avoids any future blend wall problem. When federal law requires 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel to be used by 2022, much of that ethanol, we must overcome the blend wall.
 Here&rsquo;s why oil companies are in panic mode today. While ethanol production will remain flat or decline this year, the RFS provides for annual increases in ethanol use, so refiners are expected to draw upon their stockpile of renewable identification number credits (RINs). As RIN stockpiles thin, refiners will need to purchase physical gallons of ethanol to comply with their renewable volume obligations under the RFS for the latter half of 2013 and into 2014. Moreover, at the same time the RFS ensures annual increases in renewable fuel use, new fuel economy standards are shrinking overall gasoline consumption in the U.S. When the RFS2 was enacted in 2007, we consumed around 150 billion gallons of motor fuel. Today that total is closer to 130 billion gallons. An RFS calling for ethanol use to rise from 13.8 billion gallons in 2013 to 14.5 billion gallons in 2014, while the overall gasoline pool is shrinking, means refiners can no longer refuse to comply with the RFS by dragging their feet to adopt E15.
 And it&rsquo;s E15 that&rsquo;s got the oil lobby talking about the blend wall. The idea of farmers and ethanol producers taking more market share via E15 is giving Big Oil sleepless nights.
 Enactment of the RFS2 in 2007 disrupted the profitable status quo of oil companies (and many others). What ensued was an onslaught against the RFS and ethanol industry in general. The oil lobby has orchestrated attack campaigns, petitioned to waive the RFS, in 2008 and 2012, both denied, and filed more than half a dozen lawsuits. Bruised but not broken, the ethanol industry remains on its feet, so Big Oil has nothing left to do but distort the meaning of the blend wall as something that is unworkable and forces them to adopt E15.&nbsp;
 For those of us who view the need to overcome the blend wall and increase E15 use this year a top priority, the leverage we have is the RFS. The oil lobby views 2013 as its last best hope to repeal it. ACE is supporting the Fuels America RFS campaign, designed to counteract opposition efforts to distort ethanol&rsquo;s reputation inside the Beltway. This month, we&rsquo;re also hosting our fifth annual grassroots DC fly-in. It is the grassroots who put a human face on the blend wall and make the most compelling case for keeping the RFS.&nbsp;
 ACE&rsquo;s grassroots fly-in doesn&rsquo;t just tell the ethanol story, it shows the ethanol story. We show Congress how the blend wall affects real people when 60 grassroots ethanol supporters from dozens of states and various walks of life take the time to personally explain why the RFS and E15 are important to them. We prove how ethanol results in food and fuel when those same grassroots lobbyists show members of Congress and their staff samples of No. 2 yellow corn, distillers grain, corn oil and other coproducts from ethanol production like soap (yes, soap). Take it from me, as a former congressional staffer, showing your story is more effective than just telling it.
 Welcome to the blend wall conversation, Big Oil. When our grassroots is successful in showing Congress why it&rsquo;s important to keep the RFS to overcome the E10 blend wall, we look forward to your helping us prove the safety, affordability and reliability of E15. Author: Brian Jennings Executive Vice President American Coalition for Ethanol 605-334-3381 <a href="mailto:bjennings@ethanol.org">bjennings@ethanol.org</a>

2013/02/1360877786468.jpg

Big Oil's Last- Ditch Effort 

Over &euro;51 billion ($68.6 billion) turnover. Almost &euro;5 billion net profit. These are the core 2012 annual results of Dutch/British food company Unilever, the company that is big in selling small ice creams. Impressive results in times of economic crisis and circumstances that they describe as bringing &ldquo;intense competition and volatile commodity costs.&rdquo; The other Big EU Food producer Nestl&eacute; has not yet published its annual results, but in the first six months it already showed a net profit of &euro;4 billion. I assume it will be double by the end of 2012. With this level of turnover and profit, I am surprised that these two companies maintain their aggressive views on biofuels.
 Recently the Nestl&eacute; chairman, who also is member of the board of ExxonMobile and chairman of Formula One, said to Reuters that biofuels helped boost food prices. Very likely his company is more to blame for higher food prices than any biofuel producer in the world. In any case, Nestl&eacute;&rsquo;s profit did not suffer from higher commodity prices and Nestl&eacute; wasn&rsquo;t forced to shut down plants because of the drought we had last year. He is quoted saying that &ldquo;it is really unbelievable that when we have insufficient food in our world that we give it to cars.&rdquo; This shows the man&rsquo;s lack of intellectual honesty.
 As usual, he is mixing up commodities and food on purpose. He knows that the corn and wheat for biofuel is all feed quality and doesn&rsquo;t impinge on the Mexican tortilla or a loaf of bread. But besides this fact, he is ignoring that this year the world is producing a huge mountain of 2.2 billion metric tons of grain (USDA data). That is more than the world population can eat. If people do not have access to food, it is because they cannot afford it. This is where Big Food is intellectually not honest.
 We see the same lack of intellectual honesty in the first draft report on biofuels and food security produced by a group of so-called experts for the United Nation Food and Agriculture Organization&rsquo;s Committee on World Food Security. The experts were asked to &ldquo;conduct a science-based comparative literature analysis ... of the positive and negative effects of biofuels on food security.&rdquo; Maybe, in the expert&rsquo;s brief, the word &ldquo;positive&rdquo; was deleted for it has become one long witch-hunt against biofuel policy all over the globe.
 The report is not the literature review requested and far from scientific. I have been looking for a methodology to justify the literature referenced but couldn&rsquo;t find any methodology. Nor could I find a section on coproducts and the implication for feed/food supply&mdash;an item not to be swept under the carpet, when one assesses biofuels and food security. A major 550-page-plus FAO study on biofuel coproducts issued last year doesn&rsquo;t appear anywhere in the references. It is an opinionated, selective report drafted by a group of people of whom some have never ever said one positive word on biofuels in their life. It is shocking that the FAO is allowing this sort of biased report to be drafted.
 The global biofuels industry needs to take this report seriously, even the fact that it has been drafted. For me, this is a warning sign that we can expect a new wave of attacks on biofuel policy later this year. As usual, several NGOs will use this report to claim that the most important international organization on food affairs wants biofuel policy to stop. They will not care if the report is biased. For them intellectual honesty doesn&rsquo;t matter either. Stopping biofuel justifies whatever means it will take&mdash;even if that involves spinning and telling half-truths, using methods that go against the moral integrity these organizations claim to embrace. Author: Robert Vierhout Secretary-general, ePURE <a href="mailto:Vierhout@epure.org">Vierhout@epure.org</a>

2013/02/13608778672882.jpg

Intellectual  Honesty

Novozymes has appointed Peder Holk Nielsen as its new president and CEO, effective April 1. Nielsen will replace current president and CEO, Steen Riisgaard, who is stepping down after 12 years leading the company. Nielsen has served seven years as executive vice president and head of Novozyme&rsquo;s enzyme business. He has also held management positions in Novozymes and Novo Indstri/Novo Nordisk in business development, research and development, quality management, and sales and marketing. According to Novozymes, its executive management will organize into a functional structure with all current executive vice presidents, joined by Andrew Fordyce, who currently serves as vice president of sales and customer solutions. The Scoular Co. has sold a portion of its interest in Pratt Energy LLC, a 55 MMgy facility in Kansas, to Pratt Biofuel Investors LLC, which has related ownership to Calgren Renewable Fuels. Scoular remains part owner of the ethanol plant, and will continue to operate the grain facility as well as procure all feedstock and provide distillers grains marketing services for the facility. Scoular acquired the Pratt ethanol plant and adjoining 1.8 million bushel shuttle facility in 2011 from Gateway Plant LLC. Since that time, Scoular has operated the grain facility while seeking an operating partner for the ethanol plant. PBI will take the lead in renovating the facility, with completion expected in the spring of this year. As of the close of the transaction, Lyle Schlyer, president of Calgren Renewable Fuels, has also been named president of Pratt Energy. He will provide general management and production expertise at both plants. Metso has acquired software company ExperTune Inc. The company&rsquo;s products are widely used as software tools to analyze and monitor the performance of industrial processes. They are also used to identify maintenance and improvement opportunities. ExperTune&rsquo;s products will be sold as stand-alone solutions that can be used in any automation system environment, and as part of Metso&rsquo;s performance business solutions, targeted to optimize plant performance. A group of Iowa businesses and organizations have announced the formation of the Iowa RFS Coalition. Members of the coalition are committed to protecting and preserving the federal renewable fuel standard&nbsp; (RFS) through cooperative efforts of advocacy, outreach and education. Current membership includes DuPont, the Iowa Biodiesel Board, the Iowa Biotechnology Association, the Iowa Corn Growers Association, the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation, the Iowa-Nebraska Equipment Dealers Association, the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, the Iowa Soybean Association, Monsanto and Syngenta. The 100 MMgy Patriot Renewable Fuels LLC ethanol plant in Annawan, Ill., is no longer for sale. The plant&rsquo;s owner, Patriot Holdings LLC, took the facility off the market earlier this year. In mid-2012, the company retained Ascendant Partners Inc. to explore strategic options and in October announced it was exploring a potential sale. While marketing efforts did result in a number of offers, those offers did not meet shareholder expectations. Patriot intends to continue to operate the plant independently for the foreseeable future. California and Nebraska became home to new E85 fuel pumps in January. A grant awarded by the Nebraska Corn Board supported the installation of two flex-fuel pumps at the Stop N Go in Hartington, Neb.. In California, Pearson Fuels was awarded a $1.35 million grant from the California Energy Commission to add E85 dispensing equipment at 19 existing fuel stations throughout the state. Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad has been selected as chair of the Governors&rsquo; Biofuels Coalition for 2013. The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association congratulated Branstad and noted that his leadership has been instrumental in helping Iowa lead the nation in renewable fuel production and policy. Branstad served as the original chair of the organization, which was then called the Governors&rsquo; Ethanol Coalition. Eco-Energy Inc. has announced marketing agreements with two ethanol plants. The company has entered into an exclusive marketing agreement with Lincolnway Energy LLC, a 50 MMgy facility in Nevada, Iowa. Eco-Energy has also formed a marketing agreement with Winnebago, Minn.-based Corn Plus Ethanol, a 49 MMgy plant. Eco-Energy is an integrated supply chain company that is focused on marketing, trading, transportation and distribution of biofuels. Cellulosic sugar producer Sweetwater Energy Inc. is partnering with Wisconsin-based Ace Ethanol to produce cellulosic ethanol at its plant for up to 16 years. The contract has a potential value of more than $100 million and requires a minimal capital outlay by Ace Ethanol. As part of the agreement, Sweetwater will place one of its cellulosic facilities adjacent to Ace Ethanol and deliver enough refined monomeric sugar to produce up to 3.6 million gallons of ethanol per year during the initial phase of the partnership. Sweetwater has formed a similar deal with Colorado-based Front Range Energy. Pacific Ethanol Inc. has contracted to install Edeniq Inc.&rsquo;s Cellunator technology at its 60 MMgy plant in Stockton, Calif. In the initial phase, the Cellunator will be used on corn grind to increase efficiencies in yield. In the future, the Edeniq agreement will allow for the integration of propriety enzymes for cellulosic ethanol production. The company has also closed on a transaction to improve its debt portion and increase its ownership interest in the four plants it operates. Under the agreements, the company purchased $21.5 million of secured term debt of the Pacific Ethanol plants and extended the maturity date of the purchased term debt from June 2013 to June 2016. LifeLine Foods Inc. has received the Safe Quality Food program certification, providing a boost as it moves forward following a financial restructuring. In the restructuring, LifeLine raised $25 million through the sale of preferred stock, and established a $20 million revolving credit facility with Wells Fargo Capital Finance NA. In addition, $26.5 million in Chapter 100 Bonds were issued with the support of the St. Joseph Economic Development Partnership. Freez-it Cleen has announced its proprietary dry ice cleaning process is now protected by a U.S. patent. The technology uses dry ice pellets to clean exchange surfaces on a wide variety of equipment found in biofuel production facilities, including thermal oxidizers, boiler tube coils, stack coil economizers and other fin and tube bundles. The National Corn Growers Association has announced winners of the 2012 National Corn Yield Contest. The contest is in its 48th year and remains NCGA&rsquo;s most popular program. With 8,262 entries, the 2012 NCGA National Corn Yield Contest neared the participation record of 8,425 set in 2011. The 18 winners in six production categories had verified yields averaging more than 316.32 bushels per acre. The projected national average was 122.3 bushels per acre for the year. Yields from the first, second and third place farmers overall production&nbsp; categories topped out at 384.36.

Business Briefs

I return from the 2013 National Ethanol Conference hopeful but unconvinced that 2013 will be a huge bounce-back, breakthrough year for U.S. ethanol production. Too many unknowns remain&mdash;the lingering drought, the blend wall, cellulosic ethanol&rsquo;s unhurried arrival&mdash;to pretend rosy times are at hand. What I am sure of, however, is that 2013 will be a year of recovery, trial and modification for our industry.
 Renewable Fuels Association President and CEO Bob Dinneen had the most difficult job in bioenergy on Feb. 6 when he opened his association&rsquo;s annual conference in Las Vegas with a stirring but pragmatic &ldquo;State of the Industry Address.&rdquo; Dinneen reminded us that a historic drought and heat wave caused the industry&rsquo;s current woes. He lambasted the American Petroleum Institute for trying to impede the development of advanced biofuels. He censured Big Food for swinging at us while we were down. And then he did his thing: He fired us up and reminded us that better times are ahead.
 Dinneen believes it. I believe it. But do the owners and managers of America&rsquo;s 36 idled ethanol plants believe it? In a city built on bets, some producers sat before Dinneen in Sin City, arms folded, without much to wager. It was a tall order to ask them to look beyond their current challenges, beyond crazy expensive corn, flagging gasoline demand and negative margins.
 Yes, producers should be encouraged by the fact that ethanol production is expected to rebound to predrought levels later this year, but America&rsquo;s heartland remains locked in drought. If dry weather persists into the planting season, analysts say, so will high corn prices.
 The U.S. Energy Information Agency expects ethanol&rsquo;s share of the gasoline market to reach 11 percent next year (from 9.7 percent today) as E15 implementation takes hold, but even that conservative level of penetration may be wishful thinking. With U.S. gasoline demand slumping and fuel economy improving, the fight for E15 is a battle for the barrel. Implementation will happen slowly and without market pull.&nbsp;&nbsp;
 Yes, the renewable fuel standard is more durable than ever having survived the 2012 waiver requests and, more recently, gaining strength from a district court ruling that fundamentally validates the U.S. EPA&rsquo;s management of the program. However, for every time Dinneen thunders &ldquo;Don&rsquo;t mess with the RFS,&rdquo; five delegates of Big Oil say the opposite&mdash;and louder.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp; And finally, yes, millions of cellulosic gallons are on the way. That is a fact. Significant volumes of cellulosic ethanol will come online in the next 18 to 24 months. Ineos, ZeaChem, Abengoa Bioenergy, Poet-DSM Advanced Biofuels, DuPont and others have the potential to be collectively producing upwards of 75 to 100 MMgy by the end of 2014. But will the industry actually produce 14 MMgy this year, as the EPA&rsquo;s proposed RFS volumes would require? I&rsquo;d like to think so. But like the rest of challenges in front of us, it would be a formidable task.

2013/02/13608774206482.jpg

Formidable Challenges  In Front of Us   

As we have seen, drought has a very negative impact on the public image of biofuels. This negative public image is based on the perceived impact of biofuels use of crops as a feedstock. It is replete with fear mongering by those opposed to biofuels, or those who have simply read something somewhere that biofuels negatively impact food prices and world hunger.
 Ironically, the effort to reduce global warming through the reduction of CO2 is one of the clear advantages of biofuels. Ethanol has been demonstrated through multiple studies to reduce the emissions of CO2 by at least 20 percent compared to gasoline. The dichotomy is that while ethanol is one of the first things targeted when the effects of global warming in the form of increased heat and drought are present, it remains an important component in helping reduce global warming.
 I&rsquo;m no climatologist, but I firmly believe that those who deny that we are going through a period of significant global warming have their heads in the sand. The earth is getting warmer, there is no longer any doubt about that. You can possibly question how much of the global warming is cyclical and how much has been caused by humans, but it&rsquo;s pretty difficult to question the fact that it is occurring. Interestingly, 97 percent of climatologists agree that human activity is having a predominant impact on the rate of global warming, not just by polluting, but by reducing the number of carbon sinks in the world.
 So what can we do? First, we can cease stomping on one of the things that has been demonstrated time and time again to have a positive effect in reducing global warming&mdash;ethanol. Second, we can support efforts to increase the use of other clean fuels, such as wind, solar, geothermal and natural gas. Third, we can encourage government to reduce carbon emissions through a carbon tax or carbon offsets of some sort. Setting all politics aside, it is an important step that must be taken to demonstrate to the world that we are serious about a healthier planet.
 Finally, I suppose the alternative is to do nothing and wait and see if the naysayers are right and this whole thing is just cyclical and anything we do to combat global warming will be a moot point. While the short-term economics of that strategy may be appealing to some, the long-term consequences may be irreversibly devastating.
 For me, I like my money on the science, and the science says we had better get a move on!
 That&rsquo;s the way I see it. &nbsp;

2013/02/13608775048413.jpg

Global Warming: We'd Better Get A Move On!

Call it a blessing or a curse. But one of the realities of having worked for the Renewable Fuels Association for 26 years is that I&rsquo;ve heard every argument against ethanol there is in Big Oil's bag of malarkey. Whether it's ethanol&rsquo;s supposed impact on Mexican tamales or energy balance, I&rsquo;ve heard it all before. One that I believed had been left to the scrapheap of history, however, is the incomprehensible notion that we don&rsquo;t need biofuels because the U.S. will be energy independent. That idea should have been buried in 1971, when M. King Hubbert&rsquo;s 1956 prediction of America&rsquo;s peak oil production proved true, and the U.S. reliance on imported oil began a climb that went unabated until the renewable fuel standard (RFS) was passed. U.S. ethanol production proved to be the remedy to our imported oil addiction, driving America&rsquo;s dependence down from 60 percent in 2005 to 41 percent last year. Incredibly, even that tired canard has been revived in Big Oil's desperate effort to repeal the RFS.
 That&rsquo;s right. The record oil prices we have seen over the past several years have encouraged new investment in nonconventional oil from shale and tar sands. As a result, domestic oil production has seen an uptick. Never missing an opportunity, oil stakeholders are now predicting North American energy independence and have insisted that the RFS is now an anachronism, passed at a time when Congress thought we were never going to be able to produce enough oil domestically to meet our transportation needs. We don&rsquo;t need the RFS anymore, the misplaced narrative goes. &ldquo;New day, new circumstances,&rdquo; the American Petroleum Institute&rsquo;s Jack Gerard has said.&nbsp;
 Big Oil&rsquo;s narrative follows a time-honored tradition, one that an old codger like me remembers. In 1980, we were told there is &ldquo;as much oil under the north slope of Alaska as there is in all of Saudi Arabia.&rdquo; Well, maybe not. Alaska field production peaked in 1988 and today is less than a quarter of its peak production. Indeed, Alaskan production is falling so fast some wonder if there will be enough to keep the pipeline flowing economically.&nbsp;
 In 1999, BP trumpeted the Thunder Horse discovery in the Gulf of Mexico. It was supposed to be the biggest discovery ever in the Gulf with an estimated billion barrels of recoverable oil. Well, no. Thunder Horse never even saddled up. It never came close to the 250,000 barrels per day it was designed to produce, losing 63 percent of its production in a single year.
 In 2007, oil analysts trumpeted the Elm Coulee field in the Bakken formation of Montana as the largest onshore discovery in the Lower 48 in half a century. Missed it by that much! After about five years of drilling, it was pretty much tapped out and the rigs dismantled and moved to new more promising sites.
 This is the fact. Domestic production from conventional sources continues to fall. Increased production from nonconventional resources will make up some of the shortfall in the near term, but there will be no reduction in price. (Indeed if there were, investments in nonconventional oil recovery technologies would be uneconomic.) And there will be no long-term benefit. As the Elm Coulee experience demonstrated, these resources are fickle and finite. These are not long-term solutions to this country&rsquo;s energy or economic issues. Consider this, technically recoverable tight oil from Bakken shale is 3-4 billion barrels according to the U.S DOE or 20 billion barrels if you believe the oil companies. Annual U.S. refiner input of crude oil is about 5.5 billion barrels. Thus, whoever you believe, the Bakken only promises six months to three and a half years&rsquo; worth of U.S. crude oil consumption. That doesn&rsquo;t sound like energy independence to me.
 Unfortunately, the media and the Congress don&rsquo;t always remember their history. They seem to have forgotten the lessons of the past. Those of us who do remember must remind them&mdash;constantly. We cannot frack our way to energy independence. The need for domestic renewable fuels remains as important as ever. Don&rsquo;t mess with the RFS! Author: Bob Dinneen President and CEO, Renewable Fuels Association 202-289-3835

2013/02/13608775685786.jpg

Stop Them, If You've Heard This One Before

The clean in place (CIP) process is something every ethanol producer knows well&mdash;when it is scheduled, how long it will take, how much wash water generated, etc. There is one additional issue producers must pay attention to: what air emissions are generated by the CIP process and how, if at all, are those emissions authorized by existing regulations or permits? The U.S. EPA is increasingly paying attention to these issues and so should you.
 In 2012, EPA issued Clean Air Act Section 114 Information Requests to several ethanol producers asking for documentation and air emissions data concerning typical CIP activities. Section 114 of the Clean Air Act provides EPA broad authority to request information from any person who owns or operates an emission source, who manufactures emission control or process equipment, or any other person the agency believes can assist in achieving its regulatory or enforcement objectives. In issuing a Section 114 Information Request, EPA may be trying to develop a regulatory scheme for an industry, develop an enforcement action against a particular company for violations of the Clean Air Act, or simply develop a better understanding of how an industry handles some operational or technical issue. In the context of CIP emissions, EPA likely issued the 2012 Section 114 Information Requests to better understand the CIP process, the quantity and nature of emissions that are generated from CIP, and how well producers manage those emissions. It is possible that EPA or a state agency will use this information to develop specific emission limitations or work practice standards for CIP activities. This information could also launch an industry-wide enforcement initiative, however.&nbsp;
 Historically, air emissions from the CIP process have not been uniformly or explicitly accounted for in air permits. This is likely due, in part, to the difficulty in quantifying these emissions, in particular the practical difficulty of how and when to measure emissions during the CIP process. Producers and regulators may have also considered these emissions to be de minimis and therefore of little regulatory consequence. Be that as it may, ethanol producers should take note of regulators&rsquo; recent interest in these emissions and address them as appropriate.&nbsp;
 For example, producers need to review all applicable air permits prior to undertaking CIP activities to ensure that all permit requirements are being met and that the facility&rsquo;s permits authorize the planned activities. This includes meeting applicable state regulations and permit obligations, if any, for reporting to regulators the undertaking of CIP activities, the bypassing of a pollution control device and the emissions generated during the process.
 If CIP-related emissions are routed to a pollution control device, be sure that your air permit authorizes such a configuration. A permit term requiring that fermentation-related emissions be routed to a pollution control device &ldquo;at all times&rdquo; could be interpreted as precluding a bypass during the CIP process. For these types of permit limitations, it is important to closely review what the permit means by &ldquo;fermentation&rdquo; and whether fermentation&mdash;as defined by the permit&mdash;is actually occurring during the CIP process.&nbsp;
 If a producer emits CIP emissions to the atmosphere but its air permit doesn&rsquo;t explicitly address emissions generated during the CIP process, a producer may wish to obtain a written notice from their regulator stating that emissions from the CIP process are authorized and will not result in an administrative enforcement action. A producer should not simply assume that CIP-related emissions qualify for a regulatory exemption for startup, shutdown or malfunction events. Author: Todd Palmer, Attorney, Michael Best &amp; Friedrich LLP 608-283-4432 <a href="mailto:tepalmer@michaelbest.com">tepalmer@michaelbest.com </a> Anna Wildeman Attorney, Michael Best &amp; Friedrich LLP 608-283-0109 <a href="mailto:ajwildeman@michaelbest.com">ajwildeman@michaelbest.com</a>

2013/02/13608779679096.jpg

2013/02/13608779713948.jpg

How a Regulator Might View Clean In Place

In early 2013, the U.S. Energy Information Administration released its first Short-Term Energy Outlook to include forecasts for 2014. According to the EIA&rsquo;s analysis, ethanol production will rebound to pre-drought levels during the second half of 2013, and continue to grow in 2014.
 The expected average production rate for 2013 is 870,000 barrels per day, which equates to an annual production level of approximately 13.3 billion gallons. While production is expected to be maintained at current levels through the first half of the year, the EIA said that production should start to rebound following this year&rsquo;s harvest, assuming the drought does not continue.
 In the outlook, the EIA noted that it expects previously idled ethanol production capacity to come back online in 2014 to help meet the expanding renewable fuel standard volume mandates. Overall, production is expected to average 915,000 barrels per day, or 4 billion gallons per year, in 2014.

2013/02/13608782768723.jpg

Strong ethanol rebound expected in 2014

The first employees hired to work at Enerkem Alberta Biofuels LP&rsquo;s 10 MMgy cellulosic ethanol plant have begun technical training at Enerkem Inc.&rsquo;s demonstration facility. Interviews for the next round of hiring are also underway.
 &ldquo;With plant commissioning expected to begin this summer, it&rsquo;s exciting to see the facility&rsquo;s first employees join the Enerkem team and start their technical training,&rdquo; said Vincent Chornet, president and CEO of Enerkem.
 The facility's gasifier is already in place, and the prefabricated process modules were scheduled for delivery by mid-February.
 The company has also announced closing on $37 million in additional financing from Waste Management of Canada Corp. and EB Investments, bringing the total investments from the two entities to $52 million.

Enerkem prepares  for startup 

The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association announced that the state&rsquo;s ethanol plants produced a combined 3.7 billion gallons last year, matching the 2011 production level. Iowa&rsquo;s production equaled roughly 28 percent of U.S. ethanol production last year. According to the IRFA, 2012 marks the first since 2002 that Iowa&rsquo;s production did not increase year over year.
 &ldquo;2012 will be remembered for the great drought,&rdquo; said IRFA Executive Director Monte Shaw. &ldquo;Due to Iowa&rsquo;s incredible farmers, the state weathered the drought better than most. Iowa was fortunate not to have an ethanol plant shut down in 2012.&rdquo;
 While most plants reduced production due to the drought, Shaw noted that within Iowa those reductions were offset by another plant operating for a full year.

2013/02/13608784272969.jpg

Iowa ethanol production  held steady in 2012

The U.S Grains Council has officially announced the classification of distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) as a nonhazardous cargo under the International Maritime Organization. The achievement was a culmination of a process initiated by the USGC in 2010, in coordination with DDGS producers, shippers, and the U.S. Coast Guard.
 "The Council successfully organized the effort to classify DDGS as a nonhazardous material. That classification ensured lower freight costs to me, in turn increasing returns to ethanol plants," said Steve Markham of Council member CHS Inc.
 According to the USCG, the recommendation of the relevant IMO subcommittee and acceptance of that recommendation were obtained in 2010 and 2011. Turning a proposal into a mandatory classification, however, is a multi-year process, said Erick Erickson, USGC director of global strategies.
 The IMO accepted the proposal to classify DDGS as non-hazardous in November 2010, after which the Coast Guard issued a letter to the USGC affirming that it would consider DDGS as nonhazardous. That letter is no longer needed, as the categorization of DDGS as nonhazardous is now final.
 The USGC has also reported that DDGS exports to Japan have increased substantially. During the January-October 2012 reporting period,&nbsp; DDGS exports to Japan reached an all-time high. According to the U.S. Grains Council, Japan imported more than 384,000 metric tons of DDGS. Exports for the entire year were expected to reach 450,000 metric tons.

2013/02/13608785896266.jpg

DDGS earn official classification,  exports increase to Japan

Western Plains Energy LLC has begun operations of anaerobic digesters at its 50 MMgy plant in Oakley, Minn. The digesters are expected to reach full operational capacity in March, at which time the anaerobic digestion system will be capable of producing enough methane to completely refire the plant&rsquo;s thermal oxidizer and boiler.
 Installation of the system is expected to help the plant produce advanced ethanol from sorghum in the future. To qualify its fuel as an advanced biofuel under the renewable fuel standard, Western Plains Energy must power the plant with methane from its digester system, as well as utilize other advanced technologies. While the U.S. EPA calls for a combined-heat-and-power system to be among those technologies, Western Plains Energy employs other advanced technologies and has petitioned the agency for a separate pathway.

Western Plains installs AD system 

A 195 MMly ethanol plant in Chatham, Ontario, will supply waste heat and carbon dioxide to an adjacent greenhouse under development by Truly Green. Greenfield Ethanol-Chatham plant is updating its technology to condense stack heat through a series of exchanger systems, allowing the ethanol plant to supply hot water to the greenhouse. The water will be returned to the ethanol plant through an expanding cooling water loop.
 The project received a $3.2 million grant from Ontario&rsquo;s Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. The funding is being used to offset the cost of engineering and specialized equipment. Construction of the greenhouse will be completed in four phases. Once complete, it will cover a total of 90 acres sitting on 120 acres of land.

Ethanol plant to  supply CO2, waste  heat to greenhouse

Wesley Just, maintenance technician, works on a CIP spray nozzle at Granite Falls Energy LLC, a 62 MMgy located about 100 miles east of Minneapolis.  

2013/02/13609433117843.jpg

Pushing It Through The CIP dilute tank and high- and low-pressure pumps at Glacial Lakes Energy LLC. 

2013/02/13608788231567.jpg

Neglecting an ethanol plant's clean-in-place system can drive down yield, ratchet up maintenance costs and even bring production to a grinding halt.  

CIP Matters

It came as no surprise that the American Petroleum Institute recently called for a repeal of the renewable fuel standard (RFS), the most successful energy policy this nation has enacted in the past 40 years. Big Oil understands that as renewables enter the marketplace, consumers will increasingly choose home-grown, cleaner-burning American energy instead of foreign oil from some of the globe&rsquo;s most hostile regions. This cuts into their market share and ultimately their profits, so they will stop at nothing to protect their bottom line.
 As the biofuels industry seeks to finally scale the blend wall, API has launched a multimillion-dollar campaign targeted at repealing the RFS, saying it is broken and that the blend wall is the primary challenge for a workable RFS. When it comes to the blend wall, however, Big Oil companies need only look in the mirror to see who is maintaining the status quo. This is their entire play&mdash;if the blend wall can&rsquo;t be broken, the RFS won&rsquo;t work. But it is the oil companies that are maintaining the blend wall by erecting every possible barrier to bringing increased blends to the marketplace. While they opine for a free market, they are singlehandedly denying consumers a choice and savings at the pump by preventing a lower-cost, high-performance alternative such as E15.
 Now is the time to take a stand against the continual efforts of oil companies to prevent renewables from entering the marketplace. What is most egregious about this is that our industry and the American taxpayers are subsidizing this campaign by allowing archaic and unnecessary tax incentives. While the ethanol industry has voluntarily given up the volumetric ethanol excise tax credit, nearly a century has passed and the oil industry is still raking in excessive government tax breaks, even though it is among the most profitable sectors operating today. It is time the oil industry stands on its own, just as the ethanol industry does. During a time of financial difficulty, growing national debt and rising deficits, we can no longer afford to hand out taxpayer money to the tune of $40 billion over the next decade&mdash;the amount Big Oil is to get over the next decade.
 President Obama understands that we, as a nation, must move forward in reducing our dependence on foreign oil and make significant strides toward sustainable and renewable sources of homegrown energy. Recently, the president called on the America people to lead in this effort during his second inaugural address, highlighting the importance of cleaner-burning fuels for our environment, as well as the economic benefits of jobs created through domestic energy production.
 A number of common sense proposals have been put forth to end the senseless subsidies to oil companies. Current taxpayer handouts that the oil industry receives, as noted by the Office of Management and Budget, include: &ldquo;1) The enhanced oil recovery credit for eligible costs attributable to a qualified enhanced oil recovery project; 2) The credit for oil and gas produced from marginal wells; 3) The expensing of intangible drilling costs; 4) The deduction for costs paid or incurred for any tertiary injectant used as part of a tertiary recovery method; 5) The exception to passive loss limitations provided to working interests in oil and natural gas properties; 6) The use of percentage depletion with respect to oil and gas wells; and, 7) Two-year amortization of independent producers&rsquo; geological and geophysical expenditures, instead, allowing amortization over the same seven-year period as for integrated oil and gas producers.&rdquo;
 At a time when our nation is tightening its belt, managing budget cuts and also looking to transition to sustainable energy sources, nearly century-old tax subsidies for oil companies are unnecessary, especially when these tax breaks are being used to help fund a multimillion-dollar campaign to kill a successful energy policy. Now is the time to move forward in sound government policy. It is not appropriate or even defensible to continue to line the pockets of those who wish to take us backwards in our quest for energy security. Author: Tom Buis CEO, Growth Energy 202-545-4000 <a href="mailto:tbuis@growthenergy.org">tbuis@growthenergy.org</a>

March 2013

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Columns

Big Oil's Last- Ditch Effort

Intellectual Honesty

Formidable Challenges In Front of Us

Global Warming: We'd Better Get A Move On!

Stop Them, If You've Heard This One Before

How a Regulator Might View Clean In Place

Time to Stop Subsidizing Status Quo

Featured

Tuning up the Decanter Centrifuge

CIP Matters

Contributions

Six Sigma Provides Analytical Tool for Ethanol Producers

March 2013 .css-7jxktu{position:absolute;bottom:0px;left:0px;right:0px;height:3px;border-radius:3px;background-color:var(--chakra-colors-brandBlack);}

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Columns

Big Oil's Last- Ditch Effort

Intellectual Honesty

Formidable Challenges In Front of Us

Global Warming: We'd Better Get A Move On!

Stop Them, If You've Heard This One Before

How a Regulator Might View Clean In Place

Time to Stop Subsidizing Status Quo

Featured

Tuning up the Decanter Centrifuge

CIP Matters

Contributions

Six Sigma Provides Analytical Tool for Ethanol Producers

March 2013