After a couple of years in limbo due to challenges to the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, the California carbon credit market is heating up again. In mid-January, LCFS credits were worth $115 per ton, rising from the mid-$20 range a year earlier. A revised LCFS was readopted by the California Air Resources Board, putting the state&rsquo;s goal of reducing the carbon intensity (CI) of its fuels by 10 percent by 2020 back on track.&nbsp; In 2016, the required reduction is 2 percent from the 2010 baseline, double from the 2015 requirement and increasing steadily until 2020. Ethanol has contributed a big part of the CI reductions realized so far from the LCFS. A December 2014 CARB staff report laying out the upcoming changes to the LCFS said that cumulatively through mid-2014, 60 percent of the credits were generated from ethanol, followed by renewable diesel at 15 percent, biodiesel at 13 percent and natural gas at 10 percent. Intended to be a fuel-neutral, performance-based regulation, all fuels are given CI ratings, expressed as grams of CO2 equivalent per megajoule (gCO2e/MJ).&nbsp; The average CI requirement for gasoline in 2016 is 96.5, which will be lowered each year to reach 88.62 in 2020. Fuels used by obligated parties with ratings above that CI rack up deficits, while those below earn credits. Unlike RINs values (the renewable identification numbers used to demonstrate compliance with the renewable fuel standards to the U.S. EPA), which are given away free by the ethanol producer, the LCFS credit values are getting back to the plants. At the very beginning, they were worth $10 to $15 per metric ton, the CARB staff report said, rising to between $50 and $85 before settling to as low as $27 when the 2013 LCFS compliance curves were temporarily frozen. CARB staff project that in 2020, assuming a corn ethanol CI of 67.24 and a CI credit of $100 per metric ton, the credits will bring 18 cents added value per gallon of ethanol. Cellulosic ethanol, with an assumed 2020 CI of 20, would earn credits worth 56 cents per gallon. In January, ethanol shippers into the California market were working to get paperwork filed with CARB to have their pathways accepted as the updated LCFS takes effect. Those who made the Jan. 31 deadline were guaranteed to have their pathways reviewed and likely approved before the old ones expire at the end of the year. There are 89 U.S. ethanol plants on CARB&rsquo;s list of approved pathways. Almost half of the approved plants accepted the default CI value for ethanol found on a lookup table. Under Method 1&rsquo;s lookup table, ethanol produced with a DDGS coproduct had a CI of 98.40 and, if produced with WDGS, a CI of 90.1. Or, producers could apply under Method 2 to have a CI score calculated by CARB using more site-specific data.&nbsp; Under the readopted LCFS, Methods 1 and 2 are replaced with Tier 1 and Tier 2. Tier 1 will encompass nearly all first-generation facilities with simplified modeling using the revised CaGREET 2.0. Second-generation facilities, new fuels and new feedstock pathways are to use the Tier 2 model, plus qualifying Tier 1 facilities can petition to become a Tier 2 fuel. &ldquo;Tier 1 application and calculation is much simpler than Tier 2,&rdquo; explains John Sens, LCFS manager for EcoEngineers. &ldquo;Before, you could claim small variations, now you have to have a very efficient process to qualify for Tier 2.&rdquo; One of the most visible effects of the change will be that most plants will get a single CI number, rather than multiple CI scores, Sens continues. &ldquo;It will simplify the reporting a lot. Before, CARB was saying producers had to have one pathway for DDGS and another for wet or modified and allocate their reporting, but that turned out to be difficult.&rdquo; Under the new system, an aggregate number will reflect the historical coproduct mix, and producers will have to attest that actual production equals that or, if different, would result in a lower CI. Plants using multiple feedstocks will still have separate pathways. The default lookup CI rating will go away, and all plants will use the CaGREET model to calculate their CI. In revising the model, CARB revisited the controversial indirect land use change (ILUC) issue. While they did not remove ILUC from the analysis, they did revise the numbers. While the previous value for corn ethanol and sorghum ethanol was set at 30 g CO2e/MJ, CARB recalculated it using more recent analyses, and set corn ethanol&rsquo;s at 19.8 and sorghum at 19.4. Thus, with no other changes, all producers will see about a 10 point drop in their CI rating. There will be a lot of variation, however. Sens explains that in the Tier 1 calculator, producers need to include more than ethanol yield and energy consumption. &ldquo;In Tier 1, you put in what region you&rsquo;re in, your transportation values for sourcing feedstock and how far away you are from California.&rdquo; If you look at the multiple pathways approved for a couple of plants in the original LCFS, one can estimate the impact of transportation. White Energy&rsquo;s plant in Hereford, Texas, received a CI of 78.76 for its ethanol when using Texas sorghum and producing WDGS. CARB&rsquo;s lookup value for sorghum was 85.81.&nbsp; Pacific Ethanol&rsquo;s two plants in California, along with Calgren&rsquo;s, are listed as &ldquo;Corn ethanol-California,&rdquo; with CIs of 80.7 associated with WDGS. Pacific Ethanol&rsquo;s Idaho plant, listed as &ldquo;Corn ethanol-Midwest,&rdquo; has a CI of 90.1. Thus, West Coast plants do have an advantage on transportation, but only if they use locally produced feedstocks. This transportation factor is partly reflected in the fact that, right now, all of the plants with certified pathways are located west of the Mississippi River, although that is also a function of rail logistics. There are a handful of plants east of the Mississippi on the pending list&mdash;seven out of 31 pending ethanol plants.&nbsp; Looking at the published pathways provides other insights on how the ethanol industry is reducing its carbon footprint. In all, 26 plants have CI ratings in the low 80s or below. While it is difficult to know exactly what is contributing to that, higher proportions of wet and modified distillers grains production that result in lower energy costs is one obvious cause. Good ethanol yields and lower transport distances contribute as well. The biggest factor for most of the low-CI scoring plants is the proportion of wet distillers grains sold locally. Richard Hanson, plant manager at Arkalon Energy in Liberal, Kansas, attributes their low score to the plant&rsquo;s local market for WDGS, although it also has a let-down turbine that lowers its use of grid electricity. Arklon&rsquo;s CI for ethanol with WDGS coproduct using sorghum was 76.22 and for corn 80.17. Energy efficient technologies are noted for several plants. Arkalon&rsquo;s sister plant, Bonanza BioEnergy in Garden City, Kansas, is noted for its cogeneration on the CARB approved pathway list, receiving a rating of 76.75 for its corn ethanol produced with WDGS. Poet Biorefining Chancellor, South Dakota, has several CI scores for varying combinations of landfill gas and biomass fuel, one of the lowest being 67.50 for a sorghum-corn blend using 19 percent landfill gas and 15 percent biomass. Poet Chancellor isn&rsquo;t the only one using landfill gas. Siouxland Ethanol in Jackson, Nebraska, has multiple pathways for varying amounts of landfill gas, the lowest being 82.38 for using 16 percent landfill gas along with natural gas while producing 100 percent DDGS. Archer Daniels Midland has received multiple CI ratings for its Columbus, Nebraska, dry mill, showing various proportions of coal and biomass. No grid electricity is used and a note specifying that total plant energy use must stay within a certain, confidential, value indicates a lower-than-normal energy efficiency. The Columbus dry mill&rsquo;s lowest rating, with 15 percent biomass blended with coal, is 83.96. Coal alone for process energy resulted in a CI of 120 for another ethanol producer.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Several Poet innovations are earning low CI scores. Corn fractionation is mentioned for its Coon Rapids, Iowa, plant, which received a CI of 80.26 for fuel produced with WDGS. The combination of raw starch hydrolysis and efficient energy consumption earns a number of Poet plants a CI rating between 7 and 9 points lower than the default. Poet has LCFS pathways for 15 of the 29 plants it manages&mdash;all west of the Mississippi. Converting waste streams to ethanol results in big CI reductions. Parallel Products in California uses waste beverages to produce ethanol, earning a CI of 71.4. White Energy&rsquo;s Russell, Kansas, plant is colocated with a wheat gluten facility, with the wheat slurry being turned into ethanol. The Russell plant has multiple CI ratings for varying amounts of wheat slurry combined with sorghum and corn as feedstock, with CI scores ranging from 56.65 up to 77.66. The value of achieving lower CI ratings is clear. Sens and his colleagues at EcoEngineers have developed a spreadsheet that can be used to calculate the return to a plant at varying monetary values for the California LCFS credits and different CI ratings. The two examples (shown on page 36) illustrate the difference between CIs of 80 and 70, if the market value of the credit is $100. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a pretty significant drop,&rdquo; Sens says. In the 2016 comparison an 80 CI earns carbon credits worth 13.5 cents per gallon while a CI of 70 earns 21.6 cents per gallon. When multiplied across a unit train of ethanol heading to California, the incentive to keep improving that CI score is clear. And, with the value of those credits continuing to increase, more ethanol producers are likely to explore whether going California green makes sense for them. Author: Susanne Retka Schill Senior Editor, Ethanol Producer Magazine sretkaschill@bbiinternational.com 701-738-4922

2016/01/Regulation-LedeMarEPM_14540099431338_largethumb.jpg

2016/01/Regulation-LedeMarEPM_14540099431338_thumb.jpg

2016/01/Regulation-LedeMarEPM_14540099431338.jpg

The value of ethanol fuel pathways with a CI of 70 and 80 can be compared in these excerpts of a calculator developed by EcoEngineers. 


2016/01/CI-CreditValueChart_14540099411644.jpg

2016/01/LowCIScoresChart_14540099421638.jpg

Eighty-nine ethanol producers west of the Mississippi River prepare for the revised LCFS. This article appears in the March issue of EPM. 

Meeting the California low carbon challenge

Prior to recessing for the holidays, Congress passed the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015, known as the PATH Act, and an omnibus funding bill for fiscal year 2016 known as the 2016 Consolidated Appropriations Act or the Appropriations Act, which the president signed on Dec. 18. These companion pieces of legislation contain a number of significant provisions for the energy and renewable energy industries. Second-generation biofuels producer credit: The PATH Act extends the $1.01 per gallon producer credit for qualified second-generation biofuel production occurring after Dec. 31, 2014, and prior to Jan. 1, 2017.&nbsp; Special allowance for second-generation biofuel plant property: PATH extends through 2016 the 50 percent bonus depreciation for cellulosic biofuels facilities for property placed in service after Dec. 31, 2014. Credits relating to alternative fuels: PATH extends, through 2016, the 50 cents per gallon alternative fuel tax credit and alternative fuel mixture tax credit effective for fuel sold or used after Dec. 31, 2014.&nbsp; Biodiesel and renewable diesel incentives: PATH extends the $1 per gallon biodiesel fuels incentives through Dec. 31, 2016, for fuel sold or used after Dec. 31, 2014.&nbsp; Other facilities producing energy from certain renewable resources: The PATH Act extends the production tax credit for certain other projects the construction of which begins before Jan. 1, 2017. These projects include closed-loop biomass facilities, open-loop biomass facilities, geothermal or solar energy facilities, landfill gas facilities, trash facilities, qualified hydropower facilities and marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy facilities. The PATH Act also provides that the investor tax credit in lieu of production tax credit is extended for projects that begin construction before Jan. 1, 2017. New markets tax credit: PATH extends this tax credit through 2019 and allocates $3.5 billion of credits for each of years 2015 to 2019 effective for calendar years beginning after Dec. 31, 2014.&nbsp; Bonus depreciation: PATH Act extends bonus depreciation for property acquired and placed in service during 2015 through 2019 (with an additional year for certain property with a longer production period). The amendments provide for a phasedown of bonus depreciation, as follows: &bull; Jan. 1, 2015, through Dec. 31, 2017&mdash;50 percent. &bull; Jan. 1, 2018, through Dec. 31, 2018&mdash;40 percent. &bull; Jan. 1, 2019, through Dec. 31, 2019&mdash;30 percent. In order to benefit from bonus depreciation, the requirements of Section 168(k)(2)(A) for qualified property must be met. Additionally, the amendments permit a taxpayer may elect to accelerate the use of alternative minimum tax (AMT) credits in lieu of bonus depreciation under special rules for property placed in service during 2015. During 2016, the provision modifies the AMT by increasing the amount of unused AMT credits that may be claimed in lieu of bonus depreciation.&nbsp; Reference is made to Section 143 of the PATH Act for the various effective dates of these amendments.&nbsp; Increased expensing limitations: The PATH Act permanently extends the expensing limitation and phase-out amounts currently in effect from $25,000 and $200,000, respectively, to $500,000 and $2 million, and provides for indexing both the $500,000 and $2 million limits to inflation beginning in 2016. Additionally, the amendments permanently extend the provisions for expensing of computer software and qualified real property, and modify the expensing limitation for qualified real property by elimination of the $250,000 aggregate cost that may be taken into account for any taxable year. &nbsp;
Research tax credit: The PATH Act permanently extends the R&amp;D tax credit. Additionally, beginning in 2016, certain eligible small businesses (those having $50 million or less in gross receipts) may claim the R&amp;D tax credit against AMT tax liability, certain qualified small businesses (those having $5 million or less in gross receipts), may use the R&amp;D tax credit against the employer&rsquo;s payroll tax liability. Also included in the Omnibus Act were extensions to a production tax credit and investment tax credit for wind energy, as well as an investment tax credit for solar energy. And, restrictions on oil exports were lifted, except in certain situations. Author: John Kirkwood, Partner Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Energy &amp; Natural Resources Industry Group 317-569-4602 John.kirkwood@FaegreBD.com

2016/01/Kirkwood_John_14540085001262_largethumb.jpg

2016/01/Kirkwood_John_14540085001262_thumb.jpg

2016/01/Kirkwood_John_14540085001262.jpg

Legislation passed in mid-December contain several credits, incentives and other provisions important to the renewable energy industries, writes John Kirkwood. This column appears in the March issue of EPM.  

President signs tax extenders, government funding legislation

Driving through small town Iowa today, the scenery is quite different from this time around a month ago. The TV cameras, the throngs of reporters, and the seemingly endless rounds of town meetings and forums are gone. The Iowa Caucuses, the first step on the road to the presidency, are now a memory and Iowa is no longer the center of the political universe.&nbsp; As the spotlights are turned off and the candidates move on, with them go the very important discussion of ethanol and how important it is to rural America. But we need to keep the discussion going. Regardless of where candidates stood on ethanol, having this first step on the road to the White House begin in Iowa provides an opportunity to talk about an issue that affects everyone and should not be regarded as a Midwest phenomenon.&nbsp; Energy security, domestic jobs, clean air and protecting public health are all part of any discussion about ethanol and are relevant to voters everywhere. I promised myself I would write a column without mentioning the renewable fuel standard (RFS), but I can't, although for good reason. In the course of the Iowa campaign, the RFS was a constant subject but too often we never got into why it was important.&nbsp; For me, the answer is simple: the RFS provided entry into the market so we could provide ethanol. While that is a good thing, it was rarely what we discussed in Iowa. We all know the lifeline ethanol provides to rural America and agriculture, but let&rsquo;s look at how it should appeal to everyone from Los Angeles to New York. Who in our country would not like cleaner, healthier air? And who in these other states would not at least directionally agree that reducing carbon and CO2 is a positive thing? We can contribute to both of these public policy objectives. I will continue to talk about the health benefits of clean octane ethanol, but to some extent it begins with reducing carbon. Like it or not, we are seeing a slow but sure global evolution of energy policy that suggests low-carbon fuels will be a defining criteria in the future. Trendsetter states on the West Coast like California and Oregon are laying the foundation for the next value proposition for ethanol by committing to substantial carbon reductions. Oregon alone has pledged to reduce CO2 emissions by a whopping 75 percent by 2050, starting with a 10 percent cut by 2025. That is great news for corn ethanol because we have a significantly better carbon footprint than we are credited with, a reality that even the majority of the ethanol industry may not appreciate. The California Air Resources Board and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality are beginning to embrace the improved modeling coming out of the U.S. DOE energy labs. The dreaded ILUC&mdash;indirect land use change&mdash;is being recognized for the flawed science that it is and ethanol is being penalized much less than in the past. The result should be a more prominent role in these low carbon fuel programs and recognition of ethanol's true value. What's changed, you might ask? It starts with the corn itself.&nbsp; More and more peer-reviewed studies confirm that high-yield corn, with its extensive below ground root structure, restores soil organic CO2. Corn acres are not a carbon source, but rather a significant carbon sink. According to agronomist and South Dakota State University fellow Ron Alverson, an acre of corn will sequester one ton of CO2 per year. EPA&rsquo;s models require significant updating to reflect corn ethanol&rsquo;s carbon sequestration benefits. An acre of corn converted to feed and ethanol produces nearly 450 gallons of fuel ethanol, which further reduces CO2 emissions. &nbsp; This means that a properly managed U.S. corn industry, when corn ethanol&rsquo;s CO2 tailpipe emissions are also factored in, could significantly reduce the carbon footprint of corn ethanol. The bottom line is that putting more ethanol in U.S. gasoline would result in significantly less CO2 emissions.
As November gets closer, this value proposition of ethanol needs to be part of the national discussion and not a forgotten campaign issue of Iowa. Author: David VanderGriend CEO, ICM Inc., President, Urban Air Initiative DaveV@icminc.com 316-796-0900

2016/01/Vander-Griend_Dave_14540086692534_largethumb.jpg

2016/01/Vander-Griend_Dave_14540086692534_thumb.jpg

2016/01/Vander-Griend_Dave_14540086692534.jpg

Ethanol's importance to rural America shouldn't be regarded as a Midwest phenomenon, writes Dave VanderGriend. This column appears in the March issue of EPM. 

Let's not leave the discussion in Iowa 

Upgrading bioethanol and, subsequently, butanol is a challenging science. Practitioners have to contend with numerous important considerations such as process safety, waste streams and chemical toxicity, recycling of solvents and catalysts, process economics, low oil prices, and a multitude of engineering and technology considerations. Nevertheless, despite the challenges, the ideal outcome of these efforts when accomplished is quite satisfying: a simple, efficient, green, robust and safe manufacturing process. Butanol, with a global market of about 350 million gallons per year, is an important industrial chemical. It is currently produced by the Oxo or Aldol processes. The Oxo process starts from propylene combined with hydrogen and carbon monoxide (usually in the form of synthesis gas) over an expensive rhodium catalyst.&nbsp; The Aldol process starts from acetaldehyde. These approaches using petroleum-derived components like propylene and synthesis gas are inherently &ldquo;not green.&rdquo; The Oxo process was developed and licensed to the industry beginning in 1971 in a collaboration among Johnson Matthey &amp; Co. Ltd., The Power-Gas Corporation Ltd. (formerly Davy Process Technology Ltd., now a subsidiary of Johnson Matthey PLC) and Union Carbide Corp. (now a subsidiary of The Dow Chemical Co.). A second, greener pathway is the ABE fermentation process (acetone, butanol, ethanol) that was pioneered by Chaim Weizmann during World War I. The petroleum-derived approach, however, proved to be economically advantageous and most of the facilities using fermentation processes closed, with a few exceptions, after World War II when the rapid development of the petrochemical industry took place. Today, as interest grows in transitioning from nonrenewable carbon to renewable resources, researchers and startups around the globe have made staggering progress toward the production of butanol from renewable resources. The ABE process is making a comeback to match mandates around the world. Since early 2000, the number of startups has been growing steadily and those pursuing various aspects of butanol production are flourishing more than ever&mdash;from capturing carbon dioxide or developing new microbial strains for efficient conversions to butanol, along with feedstock analysis and downstream processing.&nbsp; Butanol has successfully made the transition from a commodity chemical to a fuel additive, especially when compared to a more hygroscopic and less energy-dense ethanol. Butanol is versatile for many reasons. It can be used as a fuel additive or chemically transformed into to high-value, high-volume precursors such as butanal (global production around 6.6 million tons per year), glycol ethers, butyl acrylates or solvents.&nbsp; Butanol by itself can be used as a solvent or converted to the more widely used, workhorse plasticizer, 2-ethyl hexanol (global production around 2.5 million tons per year.)&nbsp; Jet Fuel Potential Another large-scale market attracts developers in alcohol-to-jet fuel blends. For example, a Boeing 747 consumes approximately 1 gallon of fuel per second. Over the course of a 10-hour flight, it burns about 36,000 gallons, or approximately 5 gallons per mile. Multitude volume of the fuel will be required to meet the blending requirements in the aviation department. Here we argue that: since the ethanol industry is relatively mature and represents a major chunk of biomass-derived biofuel, the annual volumes of ethanol production becomes the ideal proxy for potential volumes of alternative jet fuel. The consumption of Jet A-1 fuel used by commercial operators was 72.2 billion gallons in 2013, according to the Air Transport Action Group. The global production of ethanol in 2014 was 24.57 billion gallons. In considering the de novo design of systems that upgrade existing biofuels (such as ethanol to n-butanol or to Jet Fuel A-1), it is imperative to design working systems that are relatively inexpensive to keep investments, and final fuel cost, low. A simple back of the envelope calculation would suggest the following: With 100 percent conversion of ethanol to n-butanol the mass yield would be 80 percent. Similarly, for 100 percent conversion of ethanol to C16 hydrocarbon (carbon atoms per molecule; Jet Fuel A-1 contains C8 to C16) the mass yield would be 61 percent. If you started from butanol converted to Jet Fuel A-1, the mass yield would be 75 percent. Thus, theoretically, if all global ethanol produced in 2014 were converted, one would obtain 15 billion gallons of Jet Fuel A-1. That would amount to 21 percent of the 2013 Jet A-1 fuel consumption of 72.2 billion gallons. Fermentation Prospects Where does the ABE fermentation stand? The best results ever obtained for the ABE fermentation to date are in the vicinity of 20 grams per liter in butanol concentration from fermentation, 4.5 grams per liter per hour in butanol productivity and a butanol yield of less than 25 percent (w/w) from glucose, or about 1.29 gallons per bushel. Therefore, if the fermentation route were to be utilized, the limiting step would be a conversion of ethanol to butanol. Global ethanol production of 24.57 billion gallons would give only 4.6 billion gallons of Jet Fuel A-1, which amounts to 6.4 percent of the total requirement of the commercial operators. One critical policy hurdle for commercializing aviation biofuels is the difference in incentives for renewable fuels between on-road and aviation use. The on-road applications have been encouraged by measures such as tax breaks and mandates that do not differentiate between biofuel qualities. Under the EU&rsquo;s Renewable Energy Directive, it is left up to the market operators to use any biofuel as long as the sustainability criteria of the RED and the relevant technical specifications are met. Regarding aviation incentives, the Emission Trading Scheme qualifies aviation biofuel as noncarbon-dioxide emitting fuel, but the incentive is being undermined by the current difficulties with ETS application to the aviation sector. In the aviation sector, only high physical quality biofuels with low freezing points can be used to ensure the operability of the jet engines. The current political framework and international competition has led to a paradoxical situation, where high-quality biofuels are finding applications in road transport, although lesser-quality biofuels could also satisfy the road transport needs, while they can not be used in aviation due to the absence of incentives. A small- or medium-sized startup with a novel idea working on designing a proof-of-concept pilot has much to consider before venturing into a full-scale demo or commercial plant, or even just planning to expand its patent portfolio. Big conglomerates are also considering the technology, especially those planning to be brand ambassadors for developing sustainable solutions for tomorrow. All those considering an ethanol upgrading platform will want to consider a range of factors including market studies, value and volume chain analysis, process economics, industrial fermentation, separation technology, green chemistry, engineering technology, off-take agreements, and more. The growing number of developers is about to set up a chain of events that will be disruptive in how we look at energy and its utility. The list of factors to consider definitely presents a challenge, but it is a challenge that needs a global perspective and is most certainly not trivial. Author: Kapil S. Lokare, PhD Biomass Consultant, Emerging Technologies Division, Lee Enterprises Consulting Inc. Kapil.lokare@lee-enterprises.com 501-833-8511

Considering potential conversion volumes and the interest in renewable content in aviation fuels, there could be adequate volumes for blending.

2016/01/SoaringFuel_14540089274621_largethumb.jpg

2016/01/SoaringFuel_14540089274621_thumb.jpg

2016/01/SoaringFuel_14540089274621.jpg

Developers make progress towards renewable aviation fuels. This contribution appears in the March issue of EPM. 

Promising jet fuel market looms for upgraded bioethanol, butanol

Many ethanol producers are facing considerably complex decisions regarding the age-old quandary&mdash;how to increase production. The need to increase production universally affects each and every plant, be it new, large, small and particularly those that are aging and find themselves in a competitive battle.&nbsp;&nbsp; The challenges are as diverse as the ethanol industry itself. Large plants want to seize on expanding markets. Smaller plants need to enhance their production efficiencies to compete against the larger competitors that have economies of scale. Aging plants find themselves struggling with major potential capital expenditure decisions to remain competitive. All want to be sure that they&rsquo;re in position to withstand the inevitable down times and low-profit margin periods that the ethanol industry faces by having an efficient and optimized plant that&rsquo;s running at peak.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The common link is production efficiency. It is critically important for plant operators to stay current on all maintenance requirements, while at the same time removing the bottleneck and modernizing to allow plants to remain competitive in periods where margins are diminished.&nbsp; The dilemma of how to squeeze more production has been faced at every ethanol plant from the day they were built. There are a multitude of product solutions that have been implemented to help address the fundamental issue of increased production. With the majority of ethanol plants running well-above their original nameplate design, there is one consistent element that they&rsquo;re running short of&mdash;steam. The ability to generate more steam is an integral component in the long term strategy to increase production. There are several tangible and proven approaches to achieving more steam from the boilers in a plant&rsquo;s operation. Implemented either separately or in tandem, they are sure to have a significant impact on production. Each comes with capital investment, both large and small, and with short- and long-term implications from a budgeting standpoint.&nbsp; What may be right for one plant may not be the answer for another. It depends upon the number of years the plant has been in operation, the production metrics requirement and the available budget dollars. There are six approaches to delivering on the requirement to realize more steam: 1. Add boiler capacity: The most rapid way to gain more steam for production is through either replacing existing boilers or adding new ones. This is especially true in aging plants operating original boilers. This involves planning for a capital expenditure and allowing for the potential downtime for installation. With Victory Energy&rsquo;s boilers serving the majority of the ethanol plants across North America, this experience and industry understanding minimizes downtime.&nbsp; 2. Conduct proper maintenance: There is an industry adage that you either &ldquo;schedule your downtime or it will schedule you.&rdquo;&nbsp; It is proven that boilers run far more efficiently when operators follow the recommended annual boiler manufacturer maintenance recommendations, as well as the daily, weekly, monthly and semimonthly routine maintenance. Victory Energy&rsquo;s end-market team is aligned to help ethanol plants stay ahead of unplanned shutdowns through comprehensive preventative maintenance programs. 3. Maintain proper boiler water chemistries: Overlooking this element in proper boiler maintenance is the largest single direct cause of boiler outages. When boiler feedwater and boiler water fail to receive proper preparation and treatment, the results are scale and sludge deposits that cause corrosion and pitting of boiler surfaces&mdash;all of which is preventable. Always seek a quality water treatment company or a qualified boiler feedwater consultant to monitor your boiler&rsquo;s water chemistries. It is preventative maintenance that pays for itself. 4. Install economizers: Defined as a &ldquo;device that utilizes the waste heat from a boiler flue to preheat the feedwater,&rdquo; economizers are not limited to feedwater and can be air-to-air or air-to-liquid. It is generally accepted in industry that boiler efficiency is increased by 1 percent for every 40 degrees Fahrenheit reduction in flue gas temperature. In addition to a faster response to load changes, using economizers greatly reduces the emissions and carbon footprint of a plant, reducing fuel and power costs. The payback is rapidly realized. In the United States, every year, over 5 to 13 quadrillion Btu are lost as waste heat, representing anywhere from 20 to 50 percent of industrial energy. 5. Install baffle assemblies: The installation of baffle assemblies in waste heat boilers down-stream of thermal oxidizers (TO) delivers a multitude of benefits across the plant. The baffle assemblies redirect flue gas into a designated flue gas path. The overriding benefit of baffle assemblies is the ability to increase steam capacity, a critical component for achieving better production metrics. It is a cost-effective retrofit solution with minimal downtime that pays immediate dividends with increases in plant production.&nbsp; 6. Install steam separators: As an increasing number of ethanol plants are being operated above nameplate, a common issue facing operators is carryover, generally comprised of entrained liquids, though it can include solid or vapor contaminants. This can lead to steam control valves sticking, corrosion and erosion, formation of mineral deposits and contamination of the process steam. Dealing with the effects of carryover is potentially costly in downtime, maintenance and repair man-hours associated with on-the-fly fixes. One proven way to overcome carryover issues is through steam separators that remove liquids and improve steam quality. Many plants that have installed steam separators have virtually eliminated false low water indications and TO trips.&nbsp;&nbsp; All of these approaches are time-tested methods to enhance and increase production by adding more steam or assuring the steam being produced is at an optimum state.&nbsp; They&rsquo;ve been proven in multiple boiler applications in ethanol plants throughout North America. Victory Energy can assist in helping implement a boiler strategy that is right for what you&rsquo;re trying to accomplish through productivity increases. Author: Darrell Pedersen Regional Account Manager, End-Market Sales, Victory Energy dpedersen@victoryenergy.com 918-231-9258

STEAM BOOST: Installing baffles redirects flue gas to a more efficient pathway, increasing steam capacity.  

2016/01/BaffleAssembly-Ethanol_14540090710609_largethumb.jpg

2016/01/BaffleAssembly-Ethanol_14540090710609_thumb.jpg

2016/01/BaffleAssembly-Ethanol_14540090710609.jpg

2016/01/MaintenanceSchedule_1454009072527.jpg

Six approaches provide range of solutions to squeeze out more power for production. This contribution appears in the March issue of EPM. 

Energy center enhancements deliver more steam

Which needs to come first, a new high-octane midlevel ethanol blend or new vehicles optimized to more efficiently take advantage of the higher octane content? &ldquo;It is that classic chicken and egg thing,&rdquo; says Timothy Theiss, bioenergy technologies program manager at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. &ldquo;The analysts say it's the simultaneous introduction of a new fuel and a new vehicle, which is very difficult.&rdquo; Brian West, deputy director of the Fuels, Engines and Emissions Research Center at ORNL, offered a slight tweak to that perspective. &ldquo;All we are talking about doing, and I don't mean to make it sound easy, is just changing that ratio a little bit,&rdquo; he says, adding that the nation already has a gasoline and ethanol infrastructure. &ldquo;It would certainly seem to me to be a much simpler thing than putting in a whole new infrastructure of, say, hydrogen.&rdquo; West believes a new E25 or E40 blend, perhaps marketed as a &ldquo;renewable super premium,&rdquo; could be sold in a way that is a win for consumers, retailers and everybody involved. In fact, vehicles optimized for the new fuel could be manufactured today. &ldquo;I often say, there's not a good technical reason we couldn't see this in the marketplace in five or 10 years,&rdquo; West adds. &ldquo;That doesn't mean I think it will happen in that time frame. There's just too many parties that need to be in agreement.&rdquo; Thiess and West are two of many researchers at ORNL, Argonne National Laboratory and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory who have been engaged in a study since 2013. The goal of the U.S. DOE-sponsored scoping study was to assess the potential of an E25 to E40 mid-level blend. In mid-January researchers were wrapping things up, preparing to provide a short, high-level summary to the DOE. The last of the data will be released in publications within the next year, West says. Up next is the Optima initiative, which will focus on developing new, co-optimized fuels and engines to maximize performance and carbon efficiency. While the high-octane fuel study focused specifically on ethanol, Optima will look at fuels like ethanol as well as other high-octane fuels, as well as fuels for advanced compression engines, Thiess says. Significant Findings The high-octane fuel study found that E25 and E40&mdash;when used to fuel a vehicle optimized for the blend&mdash;could achieve volumetric fuel-economy parity with E10. In other words, each additional gallon of ethanol added would displace a full gallon of gasoline and fuel economy would be the same as one of today's vehicles using E10. Vehicle efficiency would also increase, at 5 percent for E25 and 10 percent for E40. Of course, fuel economy varies according to multiple factors, such as how fast the vehicle is driven and engine design. &ldquo;Not everybody is going to see all of this across the board every time,&rdquo; Theiss says. &ldquo;Your mileage may vary.&rdquo; An ANL report concluded that, compared to E10, when 40 percent corn ethanol was used for blending, total greenhouse gas emissions were reduced by 18 percent. If corn stover were the feedstock, E40 achieved a 32 percent GHG emission reduction. NREL was involved in the high-octane fuel study in several capacities, says Robert McCormick, principal engineer and platform lead in fuels performance R&amp;D. For example, a market analysis concluded that high-octane vehicles could make up 43 to 79 percent of light-duty vehicle stock by 2035. Another thing NREL completed was an infrastructure assessment. &ldquo;There are no technical issues in deploying equipment for higher ethanol blends, only cost considerations and station knowledge of their equipment,&rdquo; he says. That's what's exciting to Thiess about the high-octane fuel study. &ldquo;In this, we're finding we have a lot of ands,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;We can get better fuel economy. And. When ethanol is traditionally priced a little less than gasoline, we can get a fuel that is a little bit less because we are using less petroleum and more ethanol. And. We're showing that we'd get pretty nice greenhouse gas emission reductions. And. We're showing that the vehicle manufacturers would be favorably inclined to build those vehicles. And. We're showing that the biofuel infrastructure could pretty much be adapted to handle it. And. We're showing that there's a lot of feedstock out there that could be used to make it. So, there's a lot of ands, and not the major ors, where we have to make very big trade-off decisions right up front. Now, that's not to say that it's not a difficult thing. It is very difficult to introduce any new fuel. And this would be no exception. But there are a lot of benefits that stack on top of each other.&rdquo; Making It Happen In order to make high-octane fuels and vehicles a reality, quite a few players, including the U.S. EPA and the auto industry, have to get on board. &ldquo;For manufacturers to build cars that are dedicated for this fuel, I think a number of things have to happen,&rdquo; West says. &ldquo;It has to be widely available. They have to believe the consumer is going to buy it all the time, or they aren't going to get the fuel economy benefit that they are getting in the certification test. In order for the consumer to buy it all the time, it has to be on a cost-parity basis with E10.&rdquo; But that doesn't mean that the fuel can't be sold until that happens. In fact, E30 is already being sold at some blender pumps across the nation and work to increase the infrastructure for higher ethanol blends is ongoing. And, most flex-fuel vehicles on the road today can already use midlevel ethanol blends and actually see a performance benefit doing so. Thiess sees the FFV fleet as a bridge across the chicken and egg dilemma in establishing a new midlevel ethanol blend and new vehicles optimized for that fuel. Author: Holly Jessen Managing Editor, Ethanol Producer Magazine hjessen@bbiinternational.com 701-738-4946

Scott Sluder evaluates a range of compression ratios and fuels with a range of octane numbers in this Ford EcoBoost engine at ORNL. 

2016/01/Ecoboost-ethanol_1454009223983_largethumb.jpg

2016/01/Ecoboost-ethanol_1454009223983_thumb.jpg

2016/01/Ecoboost-ethanol_1454009223983.jpg

A 2013 Cadillac ATS with a 2.0 Turbo gasoline direct injection engine was used in multiple midlevel ethanol blend studies at ORNL and will be used in future studies. 

2016/01/Cadillac-ATS_1454009222761.jpg

Widely introducing consumers to 'super premium' ethanol blends could offer substantial benefits, but the barriers to making it happen are significant as well. This article appears in the March issue of EPM. 

E25, E40 for the masses

Arkalon Energy has been generating nearly one-third of the electrical needs for the 110 MMgy plant since start-up eight years ago. &ldquo;When they were planning the facility, ICM offered the option,&rdquo; explains plant manager Richard Hanson. A let-down turbine was installed in the steam line between the boilers and the evaporators. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re using the steam twice,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Once to turn power and then to do its job in evaporation.&rdquo; The technology is not new, says John Graham, proposal development engineer with the Dresser-Rand business, part of Siemens Power and Gas. The turbines are widely used in refineries and combined-heat-and-power projects, and have been used in the ethanol industry since the early 2000s. &ldquo;I think we&rsquo;ve installed about 50 steam turbine generator sets in various corn-to-ethanol plants in the U.S. and a few in other countries.&rdquo; He adds, the interest was higher for a while and dropped off, most likely because all those who benefited most had already installed turbines, but it once again is building. After a few years of few inquiries, interest is building again. &ldquo;From my experience the plant has to produce at least 50 MMgy to have a large enough volume to make a steam turbine practical,&rdquo; he says. Most plants he&rsquo;s worked with produce steam at 150 pounds per square inch, the highest pressure needed in the process, while the lowest pressure required is near-atmospheric for the evaporators. Rather than releasing pressure through a valve, those plants can install a turbine, called either a let-down or back-pressure turbine. A 50 MMgy plant generally has enough steam for a 1 MW turbine that can generate up to 30 percent of its electrical power. Graham adds that it isn&rsquo;t exactly free, however. &ldquo;All of the energy that the steam turbine takes out has to be made up with additional fuel burn in the boiler in order to have the energy available in the exhaust steam needed for the evaporator. It isn&rsquo;t free power, but generally it&rsquo;s very inexpensive.&rdquo; The steam turbine takes 10 to 20 percent of the heat energy out of the steam, he explains. One ethanol producer took the idea one step further, Graham adds. &ldquo;They generate steam at higher pressure than they need in the process and use a topping steam turbine to drop all of their steam down to the higher process pressure needed. Then, they use a separate stream turbine to drop the steam to the lower process pressure required by the evaporator.&rdquo;&nbsp; As plants expand, Dan Sonnek, principal with IntegroEnergy Group Inc., recommends they consider installing an oversized boiler. &ldquo;Right now they&rsquo;re running 150-pound boilers,&rdquo; he explains. &ldquo;We may spec out a 400-pound or 600-pound boiler so we have additional steam pressure that we can spin a turbine with and make more electricity down the road.&rdquo; The boiler is run at a lower pressure until the time when electric costs cross a line at which it will pay to add the turbine. How quickly a turbine gives a return on the investment (ROI) depends largely upon a plant&rsquo;s cost of electricity. A 1 MW turbine costs about $1 million itself and the entire project, with auxiliary equipment and installation can range from a total of $1.5 million up to $3 million on the high end, Sonnek says. &ldquo;If they&rsquo;re still running on a 5-cent per kWh electric contract, it will take a long time to pay it back: It&rsquo;s not making the electric bill go away, it&rsquo;s just reducing it some. If you&rsquo;re just dropping it 15 percent, it may not justify it. You may be able to spend that money elsewhere and make more ethanol.&rdquo; Typically, plants aren&rsquo;t interested unless the ROI is 2.5 years or less, he adds, the exception being plants that are trying to reduce their carbon intensity score to ship ethanol into the California market. The number of facilities approaching that ROI is increasing as many plants are seeing their electric costs go up each year. There is a difference between plants served by investor-owned utilities (IOUs) and those getting electricity from rural electric cooperatives (RECs), Sonnek continues. Many ethanol projects were welcomed by the RECs because the plants added to their base load, and evened out demand. Because RECs generally do not generate their own power, they often view a plant&rsquo;s interest in installing a turbine as a negative. Many IOUs have a different perspective, Sonnek says. &ldquo;The IOUs have more incentives for this type of thing. They&rsquo;re more open to it because they generate themselves. At a soybean facility, we actually got money back from the investor-owned utility as incentive to install the turbine, to reduce their electric load. They like having the distributed generation throughout their system.&rdquo; Among the services his engineering firm offers to plants is to work with the utility. &ldquo;We never advocate making the utility go away, because if something happens to our system, we still need the electricity. We don&rsquo;t want to shut down. We want to be able to work with the utility.&rdquo; Installation, Maintenance Installing a back-pressure turbine requires proper planning. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s not just taking a valve and replacing it with a turbine,&rdquo; Sonnek says. Integration with the plant and the interconnect with the utility are key to maximizing the electrical output. There are added piping, controls, safeties and switch gear, plus the system has to be designed to handle turbine condensate. It&rsquo;s also important the turbine controls and the front end are set up correctly, he adds. &ldquo;If the plant backs off its run rate, the turbine can become very, very inefficient, almost insignificant. We&rsquo;ve addressed some issues with that, and there are ways to make them efficient on the lower end.&rdquo;&nbsp;&nbsp; Maintenance on the turbines is much like anything else in the plant, says Hanson about Arkalon&rsquo;s system. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s there turning seven days a week, 24 hours a day, so there&rsquo;s things we check such as vibration analysis of bearings. There&rsquo;s some yearly maintenance. We did a three-year tear down of the turbine and rebuilt whatever needed to be and we just completed our five-year turbine and generator rebuild. So, there is some expense, but it&rsquo;s no different than anything else in the plant.&rdquo; Sonnek adds that back-pressure turbines are a good way for plants to get into generation. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a fairly simple operation and fairly simple install and they can get used to having a generator on-site,&rdquo; he says. He got his start working in the wet milling industry, where full-scale cogeneration systems are the norm. Ethanol plants, with their 24-7 power loads, are considered prime candidates for cogeneration through combined-heat-and-power installations. A back-pressure turbine is a good first step, Sonnek says. &ldquo;They&rsquo;re all going to be capable of it. You can see the maturity in the ethanol industry with operations, with management. They&rsquo;re getting better control, better analysis of their system at all times, and that&rsquo;s what you need when you get into generation.&rdquo; Author: Susanne Retka Schill Senior Editor, Ethanol Producer Magazine sretkaschill@bbiinternational.com 701-738-4922

A 1 MW Dresser-Rand back-pressure turbine is ready for shipment.

2016/01/Dresser-Rand-turbine_14540095733117_largethumb.jpg

2016/01/Dresser-Rand-turbine_14540095733117_thumb.jpg

2016/01/Dresser-Rand-turbine_14540095733117.jpg

The let-down turbine at Arkalon Energy, pictured in back, was installed when the plant was built. It started up in December 2007.

2016/01/TwiceBakedSteam_14540095743264.jpg

Installing a turbine where steam pressures are being dropped generates power and reduces carbon intensity. This article appears in the March issue of EPM with the headline, "Powering up by letting down."

Powering up with a let-down turbine

A century ago, J.D. Rockefeller amassed one of the greatest fortunes of all time&mdash;an equivalent of $340 billion today&mdash;by cornering the market on petroleum refining leftovers. Turn-of-the-century kerosene producers were dumping gasoline and other undesirable oil derivatives anywhere they could&mdash;including rivers&mdash;because the products were ostensibly worthless. Rockefeller, despising wastefulness, rejected this and used gasoline to make thermal energy for his kerosene plants. Automobiles arrived and the rest is history. Alain Castro, CEO of Irvine, California-based Ener-Core, doesn&rsquo;t claim to be the next Rockefeller. But he does believe his company&rsquo;s technology could be a catalyst for transforming unwanted industrial waste gases into new fortunes. &ldquo;What we think of today as low-quality waste gases will only be considered that for a short time longer,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;We have a technology that could cause industries to really shift.&rdquo; By that, Castro means he believes Ener-Core&rsquo;s patented Power Oxidizer, which turns low-value industrial waste gases into base-load, on-site power, is poised to change the way industries manage and utilize the gases most of them currently consider a liability. The oxidizers come in 250-kW and 333-kW sizes, and Ener-Core recently completed the primary construction of a highly anticipated 2-MW unit, which will be integrated with a Dresser-Rand gas turbine. One of the first major adopters of the modified turbine will be a Pacific Ethanol plant in Stockton, California, which is waiting for the 2-MW unit to be fully tested.&nbsp;&nbsp; &ldquo;They&rsquo;re planning to install two of our systems,&rdquo; Castro says. &ldquo;And they&rsquo;ve determined that once the systems are installed&mdash;and we expect that to happen this summer&mdash;they will drop their operational costs by $3 million to $5 million a year. That&rsquo;s a huge cost advantage for an ethanol plant.&rdquo; Rather than sell directly to Pacific Ethanol, Ener-Core will sell its oxidizers to Dresser-Rand, a Siemens-owned company that&rsquo;s been working with Ener-Core for about two years. &ldquo;We view this as a game-changer that&rsquo;s going to allow customers to do something they couldn&rsquo;t do before&mdash;utilize their own low-energy fuels,&rdquo; says Mike Cormier, business development director for Dresser-Rand.&nbsp; As planned, Pacific Ethanol will install two Dresser-Rand KG2-3GEF 2-MW gas turbine generators coupled with integrated Power Oxidizers. The deal was made official last spring when Ener-Core received nonbinding notification from Dresser-Rand stating its intent to issue a formal purchase order, valued at $2.1 million, pursuant to Ener-Core&rsquo;s ability to complete a subscale acceptance test. &ldquo;We wanted to simulate how the full-scale unit would operate on a small-scale acceptance test,&rdquo; says Doug Harmin, vice president of engineering for Ener-Core. &ldquo;To do that, we used our multifuel test facility to simulate the conditions of the 2-MW gas turbine.&rdquo; That test was successfully completed last summer and Dresser-Rand followed through with a purchase order. Now, a full-scale acceptance test of the large unit is all that remains before Pacific Ethanol adopts the technology. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a very good fit for pollution control&mdash;it is the best available control technology&mdash;and it helps reduce our operating costs,&rdquo; says Pat McKenzie, director of corporate engineering at Pacific Ethanol. &ldquo;When we&rsquo;re finished with the installation of the power oxidizer at our Stockton facility, we&rsquo;re going to take those results and look at how it fits into our operations in the remainder of our facilities in North America.&rdquo; Castro says completing construction of the 2-MW unit represents a big milestone for Ener-Core. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a big step towards final validation,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;At some point, most utility-scale power technologies must prove that they can surpass the 1-MW-size threshold. We are on the cusp of making this historic step in the next few months.&rdquo; Pacific Ethanol will reduce its operating costs and become an inordinately clean ethanol plant when it adopts oxidizer-integrated turbines. But Castro says the latter benefit is not the ethanol producer&rsquo;s chief motivation for change. &ldquo;They&rsquo;re not doing this just to be clean,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;This goes way beyond state and federal air emissions standards. They don&rsquo;t have to go this far. They&rsquo;re doing this because it gives them a cost advantage and because they&rsquo;ll be better prepared for the next ethanol price drop.&rdquo; Baseload Power Castro says Ener-Core is on the leading edge of a transformative distributed energy generation movement that&rsquo;s hungry for clean, baseload power. &ldquo;I believe distributed generation is not just a trend that&rsquo;s here now and going to pass,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;This is a big shift in the energy industry. We&rsquo;re going away from the concept of massive centralized coal and nuclear power, and huge thermal energy plants, and moving toward small generation at the load.&rdquo; With wind and solar energy at the forefront of the renewable and distributed energy transformation, Castro says there is a growing need for sources of energy that are not intermittent. &ldquo;You need baseload energy,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;You can&rsquo;t just make this transition with wind and solar because consumers need power all the time. That&rsquo;s why we need baseload power generation assets like gas turbines.&rdquo; But Castro says companies that are installing their own gas turbines, often in the form of combined heat and power, are still exposed to fuel price volatility. &ldquo;Natural gas prices have been cheap lately&mdash;we&rsquo;ve all been spoiled&mdash;but I don&rsquo;t think it can last much longer,&rdquo; he says. Regulatory Transcendence In addition to energy price swings, Castro says industries are also susceptible to the volatility of environmental regulation. &ldquo;We don&rsquo;t know what the EPA is going to propose next month or next year, but we are pretty sure that it is not going to go easier on industries with waste gases,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s never going to get easier to emit waste gases into the atmosphere. It&rsquo;s always going to get tougher. It&rsquo;s only a question of how steep and how challenging the EPA&rsquo;s rules will be.&rdquo; At a recent technology showcase for the Power Oxidizer, former U.S. EPA administrator Stephen Johnson, an Ener-Core&rsquo;s advisory board member, said he expects no letup in U.S. industrial regulation in the future. &ldquo;The policy and regulatory trend is not for relaxation on air quality,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;It is definitely toward tougher air emissions standards.&rdquo; There are countless types of manufacturing and industrial plants that emit, flare, mitigate or otherwise manage waste gases. Castro&rsquo;s list of prospective Power Oxidizer buyers includes ethanol plants, distilleries, oil refineries and petrochemical plants, semiconductor manufacturing plants, animal rendering plants, coal mines, wastewater treatment plants and more. &ldquo;We think we can make them all more efficient and more cost competitive,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;They all have waste gases, spend lots of money on energy, and are exposed to increasingly strict air-emissions standards. All three of those problems can be taken care of with our technology.&rdquo; According to the U.S. EPA, industrial and commercial emissions represent about one-third of all greenhouse gas emissions. If all of the industrial waste gases flared around the world were converted to energy, Castro says, 70 to 100 gigawatts of power would be generated&mdash;enough power for every home in the United States for a year. Castro thinks of industrial emissions as a symptom of inefficiency and misdirected environmental solutions. He says industries would gladly stop emitting waste gases if they had a financial incentive to do so. &ldquo;We just need to give industries a reason to change for capitalistic reasons rather than by force-feeding them more rules and new costs,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Here&rsquo;s something that can make them cleaner and more competitive at once. Everyone has been focused on the problem, and that&rsquo;s why there are hundreds of technologies on the market that focus on destroying waste gases. That&rsquo;s like throwing aspirin at a disease. You might feel better, but you haven&rsquo;t really tackled the problem. Let&rsquo;s focus on the underlying root cause. Let&rsquo;s focus on inefficiency.&rdquo; Ultimately, the Power Oxidizer&rsquo;s adoption in the industrial marketplace will depend on its ability to align economic and environmental goals for early adopters like Pacific Ethanol. &ldquo;When you align capitalism with environmental solutions, it&rsquo;s powerful,&rdquo; Castro says. &ldquo;I&rsquo;d like to think companies would deploy this solution even in a world where there wasn&rsquo;t environmental regulation,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;They would do it because it&rsquo;s a way for them to utilize a resource that will make them more profitable&mdash;just like Rockefeller did with gasoline.&rdquo; Author: Tom Bryan Editor in Chief, Ethanol Producer Magazine 701-746-8385 tbryan@bbiinternational.com

Ener-Core CEO Alain Castro (right) poses in front of a model of the Power Oxidizer with Mike Cormier, Dresser-Rand business development director, and Boris Maslov, Ener-Core chief technology officer. 

2016/01/Castr-Ethanol_14540101230897_largethumb.jpg

2016/01/Castr-Ethanol_14540101230897_thumb.jpg

2016/01/Castr-Ethanol_14540101230897.jpg

2016/01/OxidizerSideBar-2016_14540101239299.jpg

Ener-Core completed construction on its 2-MW Power Oxidizer in December. The unit was assembled at an industrial staging site managed by Combustion Associates Inc. in Corona, California. 

2016/01/Power-Oxidizer-EPM_14540101249318.jpg

With a 2-MW Power Oxidizer built and being tested Ener-Core is determined to start changing the way companies like Pacific Ethanol handle low-value waste gases. This article appears in the March issue of EPM with the headline "Nothing wasted."

Technology harnesses waste gases for power

The South Dakota Corn Growers Association honored Poet as Most Valuable Player in Agriculture during its annual meeting in January. Poet played a lead role in changing the landscape of agriculture in South Dakota, which now uses 370 million bushels of corn to produce 1 billion gallons of ethanol annually. Poet has the capacity to produce 1.7 billion gallons of ethanol, 4.6 tons of distillers grains and 75 million pounds of corn oil annually at its facilities located in seven states. The Broin family began experimenting with making ethanol on its Minnesota farm in 1983. Within a few years, the company got its start at a small ethanol plant in Scotland, South Dakota. Today, the company is one of the largest ethanol producers in the world, with its headquarters located in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Jeff Broin currently serves as CEO of Poet. &nbsp; Solenis LLC, through its Brazilian subsidiary Solenis do Brasil Qu&iacute;micas Ltda, has completed the acquisition of 100 percent of the shares of Quimatec Produtos Qu&iacute;micos Ltda, a Brazilian manufacturer of specialty chemicals for the sugar and ethanol processing industry; and Locatec de Araraquara Ltda-Me, the associated logistics provider. The acquisition of Quimatec is part of Solenis&rsquo; strategy to broaden its process chemical and industrial water treatment offerings in the ethanol market worldwide. Quimatec is located in Araraquara, state of S&atilde;o Paulo, Brazil, and has approximately 110 employees. &nbsp; Ross Glendinning has been appointed senior vice president of the services division of Alfa Laval Inc. He is charged with driving consistent profitable growth, and developing new sales opportunities for the service business of Alfa Laval in the U.S. His responsibilities include leading parts sales, reconditioning services, field services and technical support activities. Glendinning joined Alfa Laval in 1982 as marine engineer for the company&rsquo;s military products group.&nbsp; He worked in various areas of the organization, holding positions in regional and national service, global business development, as well as capital equipment marketing and sales management.&nbsp; He was most recently responsible for Alfa Laval&rsquo;s services for the industrial process markets.&nbsp; &nbsp; Three Sorghum Checkoff board members were sworn in during a December meeting. Returning to the board as an at-large member is David Fremark of St. Lawrence, South Dakota. New to the board are Craig Poore of Alton, Kansas and Jim Massey IV of Robstown, Texas. Boyd Funk of Garden City, Kansas, will be sworn in during the next Sorghum Checkoff board meeting. The newly sworn in board members were appointed by the U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack in October and will serve three-year terms. Fremark will serve as chairman, Dan Krienke of Perryton, Texas, as vice chairman, Adam Baldwin of McPherson, Kansas, as secretary and Verity Ulibarri of McAlister, New Mexico, as treasurer.&nbsp; &nbsp; Corn LP has joined Growth Energy. The facility is located next to its partner Gold-Eagle Cooperative in Goldfield, Iowa, and has a production capacity of 60 MMgy.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The Andersons Inc. has announced Chief Operating Officer Harold M. (Hal) Reed will step down from his current position on Feb. 1 and oversee special company initiatives until his retirement in July. He held various positions within the agriculture group before serving as the president of the Grain &amp; Ethanol Group between 2001 and 2012, and becoming COO in January 2012. He is also a past chairman of the National Grain and Feed Association. &nbsp;&nbsp; Deinove has been granted six new patents in the U.S.&nbsp; One, titled &ldquo;Process for chromosomal engineering using a novel DNA repair system,&rdquo; Deinove&rsquo;s founding patent, is already registered in Europe and describes the mechanism behind the biodiversity and resistance of Deinococcus bacteria, a major discovery made by Miroslav Radman&rsquo;s team and which led to the launch of Deinove. The second, titled &ldquo;Methods for isolating bacteria,&rdquo; protects a method for selecting and identifying bacteria that has enabled the company to build a strain library with over 6,000 bacterial strains, all resistant to UV radiation. The company was awarded four additional patents pertaining to Deinococcus bacteria that are associated with&nbsp; producing biofuels as part of the Deinol program. Deinove now holds a portfolio of 170 patents internationally. &nbsp; The United Sorghum Checkoff Program board of directors invested nearly $6.2 million, the largest investment made by the board since its establishment, to fund proposals targeted at furthering sorghum growers&rsquo; productivity and demand. The commitment, which was approved during the Dec. 9 board meeting, concludes the request for proposals that began July 2015. A total of 114 preproposals were received and 37 full proposals were requested. The board of directors awarded funding to 30 projects. The Biotechnology Industry Organization has changed its name to the Biotechnology Innovation Organization. The change aims to better reflect the progress and groundbreaking innovations its members achieve in healing, fueling and feeding the world. The organization, which is the largest biotechnology trade association in the world, will continue to use the shortened &ldquo;BIO&rdquo; name. BIO represents biotechnology companies, academic institutions, state biotechnology centers and related organizations across the U.S. and in more than 30 other countries. The organization was founded more than 22 years ago, uniting scientists, entrepreneurs, policymakers and the public to advance breakthrough cures and products in fields ranging from health, food and agricultural to industrial and environmental. &nbsp; Growth Energy and New Holland Agriculture announced Bill Howell as the 2015 Growth Energy Individual Member Sweepstakes winner. In December, Howell was presented with the Boomer 47, a 47 hp tractor customized with Growth Energy racing decals at Haley Equipment in Carroll, Iowa. Nancy Ho, founder and president of Green Tech America Inc. and a research professor emerita in Purdue University&rsquo;s School of Chemical Engineering, has received the National Medal of Technology and Innovation from President Barack Obama. Ho has focused her research on using recombinant DNA techniques to improve industrial microorganisms, particularly for production of renewable biofuels and bioproducts by using renewable cellulosic resources as the feedstocks. Her most noted work has been the development of recombinant Saccharomyces yeast that can effectively produce cellulosic ethanol from all types of cellulosic plant materials such as corn stalks, wheat straws, wood and grasses. The original Saccharomyces yeast used for producing ethanol from corn and other edible feedstocks cannot ferment cellulosic sugars to produce transportation fuel such as ethanol. She founded Green Tech America Inc. in 2006 at the Purdue Research Park to produce and market the yeast and provide other services for cellulosic ethanol production. &nbsp; Archer Daniels Midland Co. has announced an agreement with Kinder Morgan Inc. and Bailey Feed Mill to construct a new unit train rail facility and ethanol off-loading system in Selma, North Carolina. KMI will invest in and construct the new facilities, which will be located at the Bailey Feed Mill and will have the ability to off-load up to 96 railcar-long unit trains in a 24-hour period. KMI will also build a 2.6 mile pipeline to connect the unit train off-load system to its vast tank farm in Selma, allowing ethanol to be distributed to blending terminals in Selma and the surrounding markets. The Sunoco Fulton Ethanol manufacturing facility in Volney, New York, has received a $700,000 Central New York Regional Economic Development Grant. The REDC grant will be used to help fund a new $9.1 million barley malting facility that will be integral to the growth of the state&rsquo;s craft beer industry.

2016/01/Glendinning-MarEPM16_14540106654424.jpg

2016/01/GrowthEnergy_14540106663568.jpg

2016/01/Ho_1454010667359.j

2016/01/Reed_14540106683661.jpg

Business Briefs

World leaders recently gathered for the 2015 Paris Climate Conference (COP21), and, for the first time in over 20 years of United Nations negotiations, sought to achieve a legally binding and universal agreement on climate. COP21 presented an unparalleled opportunity to recognize biofuels as part of the renewable energy mix and as an integral tool in the fight against climate change.&nbsp;
Biofuels, such as ethanol and biodiesel, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 40 to 90 percent compared to fossil fuels when incorporated into the transportation fuel pool. Thirty-six countries recognized biofuels at COP21 by including them in their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions plans. And although Canada and the United States are already major producers and consumers of biofuels, neither country specifically mentioned biofuels in their COP21 plans. The Global Renewable Fuels Alliance published a report during COP21 entitled &ldquo;GHG Emission Reductions from World Biofuel Production and Use for 2015.&rdquo; The report found that biofuels reduced global GHG emissions by an estimated 168.7 million metric tons in 2014. While substantial, there is room for growth. At the current growth rate, GRFA projects that the 168.7 million metric tons in 2014 will grow to 263.9 million metric tons in 2030. GHG emissions will be reduced by a further 19 million metric tons if the United States, Canada and Europe use E15 by 2030. E15 has been approved by the U.S. EPA for all post-2001 vehicles, meaning this is a solution that can be implemented without major consumer behavior changes and financial or time commitments.&nbsp; The GRFA report&rsquo;s findings are supported by a national survey conducted by the Canadian Renewable Fuels Association in 2015 that showed more than three quarters (88 percent) of Canadians believe more renewable fuels should be produced in Canada and that government should do more to promote the industry. The transportation sector accounts for 23 percent of Canada&rsquo;s emissions, within which biofuels offer immediate environmental and economic benefits. On a life-cycle basis, biofuels blended into Canada&rsquo;s fuel mix already reduce carbon emissions by 4.2 million metric tons every year, the equivalent of nearly 1 million cars from our roads. It makes sense that increasing the use of biofuels will yield greater environmental and economic benefits in Canada. The Paris Agreement, adopted by 195 countries at COP21, seeks to stop at nothing short of reshaping the global energy landscape. At the same time, recent decisions by Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec to standardize their cap-and-trade systems have set ambitious GHG reduction targets. For these plans to be successful, immediate solutions to cut carbon and reduce emissions are needed. Electrification is one solution, but its application may be limited and its infrastructure requires build-out. Biofuels are making meaningful impacts today. As an industry, we have been supporting governments reach their environmental targets for decades, and we look forward to continuing this work with all levels of government. After all, the ambitions for tackling climate change have never been higher, and neither has what is at stake. Author: Jim Grey Chairman Canadian Renewable Fuels Association 613-594-5528 greenfuels@greenfuels.org

2016/01/Jim-Grey_14540107673536_largethumb.jpg

2016/01/Jim-Grey_14540107673536_thumb.jpg

2016/01/Jim-Grey_14540107673536.jpg

Biofuels are an important part of the renewable energy mix and an internal tool in the fight against climate change, writes Jim Grey. This column appears in the March issue of EPM.

Biofuels “here and now” solution  

Shortly after enactment of the renewable fuel standard (RFS) in Congress, the American Coalition for Ethanol began to organize annual grassroots fly-ins to help educate policymakers in Washington, D.C., about the importance of the renewable fuels industry.&nbsp; This year will mark the eighth annual ACE fly-in to the nation&rsquo;s capital. We label our fly-in the &ldquo;Biofuels Beltway March,&rdquo; and as the name would suggest, we normally hold the event during the month of March. But because the 2016 congressional calendar includes an unusually timed Easter recess, we are hosting the fly-in April 13-14. The goal of ACE&rsquo;s fly-in is to help you tell your personal story to decision makers in DC and demonstrate the breadth and depth of grassroots support for renewable fuels policies. During our 2015 fly-in, 70 people from all walks of life, including ethanol producers, gas station owners, college and high school students, corn growers, bankers, accountants, electric co-op employees, industry vendors and others shared their personal ethanol stories with more than 160 Members of Congress and top administration executives. The best advice these prior participants would offer to first timers is to wear comfortable shoes because we will put you through your paces. While our initial fly-ins focused on Capitol Hill, more recently the event has reflected the fact that all three branches of government impact our industry. To be sure, the flashpoint for ethanol in Washington has been with the executive branch and courts. Whether it is EPA oversight of the RFS, Reid vapor pressure limits, and CAFE-GHG rules, the Federal Trade Commission&rsquo;s new rule modifying pump labels, or USDA&rsquo;s support of the Biofuels Infrastructure Partnership grants to the states, you can be sure that our fly-in will include federal agencies and issues relevant to your business. To cover the judicial branch, we will provide an update on the status of our pending lawsuit against EPA regarding their misinterpretation of the RFS general waiver authority.&nbsp; Of course, we will schedule meetings with Congress, as it is imperative to keep educating them about our priorities, especially in an election year. We also expect to bring retailers who are selling higher ethanol blends to join us once again and share how they have new customers and profits because they&rsquo;re selling E15 and flex fuels. Whether you love or hate politics, have been to D.C. multiple times or never before, are an ACE member or not, I strongly encourage you to join us in the nation&rsquo;s capital. You don&rsquo;t need to be a professional lobbyist to take part in this event. In fact, I can tell you from personal experience that the best lobbyists aren&rsquo;t really lobbyists at all. The most persuasive and effective spokespeople for our industry are real people, whose everyday life experiences and authenticity illustrates how the decisions made in Washington, D.C., impact their businesses and communities.&nbsp; If you&rsquo;ve taken part in previous ACE fly-ins, please join us again in 2016 and encourage a colleague, board member, or employee to come along. If you haven&rsquo;t participated, there is no more important time to help protect your ethanol investment and see first-hand how your membership support of ACE makes a strong and positive difference inside the Beltway. It&rsquo;s vitally important for us to show policymakers that people from all walks of life care about the future of renewable fuels.&nbsp; There is no registration fee to attend, although participants are asked to cover their own travel expenses to and while in Washington. Our staff will schedule all meetings on your behalf, prepare you for those meetings, and provide background material you can leave in each congressional office.&nbsp; Our fly-in headquarters will be The Washington Court Hotel on Capitol Hill; this is where we will hold group briefings before Hill visits and host meetings with EPA, USDA, and others. For more information about the event, please contact Shannon Gustafson, ACE Director of Strategic Projects, at sgustafson@ethanol.org or 605-334-3381, ext. 16. If you need just a bit more encouragement, the cherry blossoms will likely be in full bloom April 13-14, during the event. I hope to see you in Washington then. Author: Brian Jennings Executive Vice President American Coalition for Ethanol 605-334-3381 bjennings@ethanol.org

2016/01/JenningsBrian_14540115942335_largethumb.jpg

2016/01/JenningsBrian_14540115942335_thumb.jpg

2016/01/JenningsBrian_14540115942335.jpg

Participants in ACE's annual fly-in don't need to be professional lobbyists, writes Brian Jennings. This column appears in the March issue of EPM. 

“The best lobbyists aren”t really lobbyists” 

Ethanol takes the spotlight in two high-octane events in late February in Florida.&nbsp; NASCAR&rsquo;s season-opening Daytona 500 is Feb. 26 and the seventh annual Growth Energy Executive Leadership Conference is Feb. 20-23. As a former driver, the team owner of Richard Childress Racing (RCR) and a believer in the importance of homegrown renewable fuels, I couldn&rsquo;t be more thrilled to see these two events align. This year&rsquo;s conference theme is Full Throttle and I believe that it&rsquo;s as important to go full throttle in the real world as it is on the race track. At RCR, we are proud to partner with this American-grown, American-made industry for many reasons. Biofuels, like ethanol, keep money we would normally send abroad for oil in the U.S., creating jobs and economic activity here at home instead of overseas. We have a unique platform to share this message with race fans and to demonstrate that E15 is a reliable, high performance fuel that can withstand the toughest driving conditions. Nationwide, moving to E15 will create another 136,000 American jobs that can&rsquo;t be outsourced, reduce our demand for foreign oil by 7 billion gallons and reduce greenhouse gas emissions relative to regular gasoline, all while saving consumers between 5 and 15 cents per gallon at the pump. From RCR&rsquo;s perspective, we should be doing things that help drivers adopt biofuels and encourage companies to produce advanced and cellulosic biofuels. Of course, we didn&rsquo;t become successful by not paying attention to the performance details of our race cars. In 2011, NASCAR switched to a 15 percent ethanol fuel blend, Sunoco Green E15. After several tests done by our engineers at ECR Engines, we have seen increased horsepower from the higher-octane ethanol fuel blend, decreased emissions and an overall cooler running engine. RCR and ECR Engines have even tested ethanol blends up to E30, finding no issues. These are areas our team of talented engineers and mechanics are really excited about. The final formulation of Sunoco Green E15 was the result of extensive analysis by Sunoco scientists and the support of over 100 members of the technical areas of the NASCAR Research and Development Center, nearly all of the race teams, their engine shops and the extended NASCAR green team. After over a year and a half of work on the lab bench, the engine dynamometer and in thousands of miles of live on-track endurance testing of a range of fuel blend levels from substantially below to substantially greater than 15 percent ethanol, Sunoco Green E15 was selected. E15 provided the optimal synergy of high performance as reflected by roughly 10 additional horsepower on average over the prior fuel, and 100 percent reliability on the track. E15 is a great fuel for RCR and for the entire NASCAR community. Now in its sixth season of use, the fuel has been used in over 8 million miles of racing with zero reported engine problems or increased maintenance issues. As a lifelong fan of the sport, I am certain that the switch to a higher blend of ethanol has been a great move by NASCAR. The transition has been seamless; we&rsquo;re proud of our connection to the ethanol industry and all of the good that it&rsquo;s doing for our country. I hope the attendees of the Growth Energy Executive Leadership Conference enjoy the Daytona 500 and are inspired to go full throttle in 2016. With the right energy, strategy and momentum, I believe that the ethanol industry will finish in victory lane. &nbsp; Author: Richard Childress Chairman and CEO, Richard Childress Racing 202-545-4000 info@growthenergy.org

2016/01/Richard-Childress_1454011713546_largethumb.jpg

2016/01/Richard-Childress_1454011713546_thumb.jpg

2016/01/Richard-Childress_1454011713546.jpg

E15 is a great fuel for Richard Childress Racing and for the entire NASCAR community, writes the former driver and team owner of RCR. This column appears in the March EPM. 

Going full throttle with ethanol 

Ethanol and the renewable fuel standard (RFS) have loomed large in this year&rsquo;s presidential campaign. Those with the desire to occupy the White House have found themselves being peppered with questions about their stance on these issues. The mainstream media has portrayed ethanol and the RFS as issues which are only of interest to Iowa voters, and they frequently misrepresent important details like whether ethanol receives subsidies. But biofuel policies are not merely local issues and getting the policy details correct is critical to ensure a meaningful public discourse.&nbsp; The Renewable Fuels Association has worked to make sure the mainstream media has the correct information. But often, they&rsquo;re working off a narrative that gives great deference to their important advertisers&mdash;the oil industry. But we keep plugging away, as should everyone who cares about the continued growth of the U.S. ethanol industry.&nbsp; Misinformation is not the sole bastion of the mainstream media. There&rsquo;s plenty of that on Capitol Hill as well. Of course, there the narrative is shaped by politics. On committees that are dominated by lawmakers from oil states, it is a challenge to be heard through the din of talking points from the American Petroleum Institute. Indeed, in far too many cases, the hearings scheduled ostensibly to provide insight into RFS, ethanol or biofuels issues are decidedly stacked against us, with few if any voices of support from our industry. We expect numerous congressional hearings this year and each will likely hold their own brand of political theatre. Witnesses often use congressional hearings as a chance to perpetuate myths like ethanol has increased food prices. With no pro-ethanol voices, these canards perpetuate unchallenged.&nbsp; One-sided congressional hearings do a real disservice to the political process. There&rsquo;s no opportunity to tell &ldquo;the rest of the story,&rdquo; as Paul Harvey would say. The ethanol industry has been a boon for rural economies across America, injecting a healthy $53 billion into the GDP and boosting household income by $26.7 billion. A USDA study shows that rural counties with ethanol plants can attribute 32 percent of county-wide employment growth from 2000 to 2008 to those respective biorefineries. The industry single-handedly lifts the energy and agricultural sectors together by providing hundreds of thousands of jobs and financial prosperity to ethanol producers and farmers. Some issues that become the subject of congressional hearings are fairly complicated, such as the carbon impact of ethanol production and use. In such cases, it is even more critical that committees seek balance. Too often, they don&rsquo;t. It&rsquo;s easy to level a salacious accusation like corn ethanol is no better than gasoline in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. It&rsquo;s far more difficult to have an informed discussion about the science of climate change. But there are several recent analyses demonstrating corn ethanol produced today reduces GHG emission by at least 34 percent on average compared to fossil fuels. These views need to be represented as well. Again, too often, they&rsquo;re not. We in the biofuels industry need to be ever vigilant in pushing back against the myths and misinformation regarding ethanol that is being perpetuated by the media and policymakers. We have a positive story to tell and we need to use all of our various communications channels to make sure our voices are heard on the campaign trail and in the halls of Congress.
Author: Bob Dinneen President and CEO, Renewable Fuels Association 202-289-3835

2016/01/Bob-Dineen_14540118014113_largethumb.jpg

2016/01/Bob-Dineen_14540118014113_thumb.jpg

2016/01/Bob-Dineen_14540118014113.jpg

Members of the biofuel industry need to be vigilant in pushing back against the myths and misinformation regarding ethanol that is being perpetuated by the media and policymakers, writes Bob Dinneen. This column appears in the March issue of EPM. 

Pushing back against misinformation 

The recent statement of American Petroleum Institute CEO Jack Gerard that the renewable fuel standard (RFS) is &ldquo;a relic of our nation&rsquo;s era of energy scarcity and uncertainty&rdquo; reflects the myopic vision of an industry that has become increasingly out of touch with mainstream America. The oil industry is so desperate to hold on to the last remaining vestiges of an energy source that is fast becoming a relic in its own right, that it will sacrifice anything&mdash;including national security&mdash;to save itself. Diminishing the importance of renewable energy based on finding more sources of domestic oil, is like touting the discovery of a more deadly nuclear weapon rather than finding a peaceful solution to conflict. Oil has powered the world for generations, but, in truth, it has killed more people in the process than all the American wars combined. With the technology we have today, it&rsquo;s a disgrace that we still largely depend on oil as our main source of energy. The only reasons we continue do so, is because it is cheap, available and the infrastructure is well-established. One might argue that those are good reasons to continue, until you examine the real cost of oil and the availability of cleaner, more dependable and, in some cases, cheaper alternatives. Oil has become the easy path, the path of least resistance, the energy source that we all know is killing us and polluting our environment but we just turn our heads and hope that the government will save us from this known carcinogenic killer. In fact, the government is in on it. Many are under the spell of dependency, a cheap energy source and the influence bought by the deep pockets of Big Oil. We have come to expect myopic thinking from the oil industry, but we should not tolerate it from our elected officials. We spend billions on defense to protect us from foreign threats, yet financially support and encourage an industry that has decimated our environment and killed countless numbers of our citizens. As the strongest nation on earth, we have no control over our energy when it comes to oil. We are at the mercy of other countries and cartels. The price of oil goes up, we complain, the price of oil goes down and we cheer. We are the puppet who acts in whatever way the oil cartels want us to act. Perhaps in time, the puppet actually begins to believe they are in control, but a jerk of the string snaps us back into the reality of who is in control. It doesn&rsquo;t need to be this way. We can be in control. We have the resources, the technology and the capability to actually control our energy destiny. It&rsquo;s time to tell the puppet master that we are taking over. Oil benefits small pockets of our economy and creates the need for large-scale transportation infrastructure changes, which generate even more pollution. Renewable energy on the other hand is diverse, it can be spread across the entire country, benefiting large swaths of the population, thus minimizing transportation demands. In the final analysis, nature will always return to the default position, and when the oil wells of today are nothing more than rusted relics of a polluted past, nature will still be producing clean, dependable, healthy energy. That&rsquo;s the way I see it. Author: Mike Bryan Chairman, BBI International mbryan@bbiinternational.com

2016/01/mikeBryan_14540119921808_largethumb.jpg

2016/01/mikeBryan_14540119921808_thumb.jpg

2016/01/mikeBryan_14540119921808.jpg

With the technology we have today, it's a disgrace that we still largely depend on oil as our main source of energy, writes Mike Bryan. This column appears in the March issue of EPM with the headline, "Puppets on a string."

Oil consumers puppets on a string 

The U.S. ethanol industry has, for years, viewed California as both a land of opportunity and a source of immense regulatory aggravation.While the state&rsquo;s Low Carbon Fuel Standard has historically been a largely dubious prospect for ethanol producers, participating in the program, now, is a serious revenue play for many of them. As we learn in <a href="http://www.ethanolproducer.com/articles/13000/meeting-the-california-low-carbon-challenge" target="_blank">&ldquo;Meeting the California Low Carbon Challenge,&rdquo;</a> the LCFS is a performance-based regulation aimed at dramatically lowering the carbon intensity (CI) rating of transportation fuels used in the Golden State. Under the program, clean fuels earn credits that are ultimately worth money&mdash;sometimes 20 cents a gallon or more&mdash;which is captured by the companies that make and sell the fuel. As EPM Senior Staff Writer Susanne Retka Schill reports, the greenest grain ethanol plants in America, at least from CARB&rsquo;s perspective, are those that sell wet and modified wet distillers grains locally. Other low-CI plants are hosting innovative technologies, utilizing waste streams and deploying advanced energy systems like landfill gas power, cogeneration and steam turbines. In fact, steam turbines are the subject of our feature, <a href="http://www.ethanolproducer.com/articles/12999/powering-up-with-a-let-down-turbine" target="_blank">&ldquo;Powering Up By Letting Down,&rdquo;</a> also authored by Retka Schill. Many of these let-down, or back-pressure steam turbines, were installed in the ethanol industry over a decade ago. Now, interest in them is picking up once again as electricity rates&mdash;and concerns about grid reliability&mdash;have risen. Retka Schill reports that producers interested in turbines should plan ahead. For example, by installing a boiler with a higher-than-necessary capacity, a plant would have enough excess steam to power a turbine, should it want to, in the future.&nbsp;&nbsp; In <a href="http://www.ethanolproducer.com/articles/13001/technology-harnesses-waste-gases-for-power" target="_blank">&ldquo;Nothing Wasted,&rdquo;</a> we introduce the still unfolding story of Ener-Core, a California-based company that&rsquo;s scaling up a technology designed to enable industrial plants to convert poor-quality waste gases into high-quality heat and power. If everything goes as planned, Pacific Ethanol will install two of the systems at its Stockton, California, ethanol plant. It&rsquo;s another great example of the ethanol industry&rsquo;s predilection for efficiency. Finally, our story, <a href="http://www.ethanolproducer.com/articles/12998/e25-e40-for-the-masses" target="_blank">&ldquo;E25, E40 for the Masses,&rdquo;</a> explores the benefits and barriers of bringing new ethanol blends to market. EPM Managing Editor Holly Jessen reports on how new research being conducted by consorting national labs might breathe new life into the idea of marketing ethanol blends like E25 and E40 as &ldquo;renewable super premium&rdquo; fuels. The labs&rsquo; researchers discovered that higher blends of this nature can achieve fuel-economy parity with E10 when used in engines optimized for them. Getting automakers on board would of course be challenging, but what about new ethanol blends isn&rsquo;t?&nbsp;
Author: Tom Bryan President &amp; Editor in Chief tbryan@bbiinternational.com

2016/01/Tom-Bryan-Ethanol_14540120803946_largethumb.jpg

2016/01/Tom-Bryan-Ethanol_14540120803946_thumb.jpg

2016/01/Tom-Bryan-Ethanol_14540120803946.jpg

The March issue of EPM is now online, including stories about the LCFS, on-site energy options and research into mid-level ethanol blends, writes Tom Bryan, in his editor's note. 

The energy behind ethanol 

Utility companies trim trees along the highway in order to avoid interaction with electrical wires, city governments cut down dangling branches in local parks to ensure safety of visitors, and when a big storm hits, felled limbs and debris are bundled and picked up by garbage companies. But where does this urban wood waste go? Most times, it is either openly burned or sent to the local landfill. As efforts to conserve and recycle natural resources increase, urban wood waste utilization projects are becoming more popular in cities across the U.S. These projects take urban wood waste from tree removals, untreated salvaged lumber and scrap wood from pallets or crates, nonmarketable limbs and stumps, dying trees and trees infected by invasive insect species in order to give the wood a second life and communities a new source of thermal energy. Urban wood can fuel entire cities, and provide a clean alternative to other types of heating fuels such as coal and heating oil. For example, St. Paul, Minnesota, has had great success in using urban wood to heat 80 percent of its commercial, residential, and industrial buildings in the downtown area. Heat is provided by District Energy, which operates a hot water district heating system. The primary source of hot water comes from a combined-heat-and-power plant (CHP) that is primarily fueled by urban wood residues. When Dutch elm disease started killing off St. Paul&rsquo;s urban forests, the CHP plant proved an ideal opportunity for the city to reduce reliance on coal, while simultaneously reducing unhealthy particulate emissions and saving taxpayer dollars that would otherwise be spent on hauling the diseased trees to landfills. St. Paul is not the only example of using what would otherwise be considered wood waste as a productive source of energy and a savings of public funds.&nbsp; &nbsp;Colorado&rsquo;s Boulder County is working on installing a biomass burner in its jail, in order to provide heat for more than 450 inmates. This facility is to be powered by wood thinnings from nearby forested land, not only reducing the jail&rsquo;s carbon footprint, but also lowering the likelihood of forest fires or reducing the intensity of those that might occur. The reuse of waste wood is not simply limited to its use as a source of thermal energy. As communities look to better utilize resources that were once considered valueless, they are now transforming it into a host of products from mulch to furniture. For example, in 2014, members of Chicago Sculpture International partnered with the Chicago Park District to transform sick and dying trees into public art. These trees can now be found in an array of parks in downtown Chicago; they vary from stumps embellished with mirrors and yarn to carved masterpieces that brighten the city&rsquo;s public spaces. Similarly, the furniture industry is increasingly using recycled wood, in addition to lumber harvested from plantations. For example, Starbucks Coffee Co. is making its stores greener through recent renovations that include new tables and chairs built from recycled wood. Local furniture manufactures are starting to use urban wood from trimmings to create cabinet doors and shelving units. Thrifty individuals are even creating their own coffee tables and household d&eacute;cor from urban wood found around their towns. While urban wood utilization projects are effective in conserving natural resources, increasing the number of jobs in a community and displacing coal, certain roadblocks can be encountered. In the case of using urban wood for mulch, there are environmental concerns around the recycling of wood that has been treated with chemicals. These chemicals can leach into the soil; therefore, measures must be taken to ensure that the wood being used is free of harmful elements. Facilities that rely on urban wood waste for energy sometimes struggle to have enough wood to keep it running, but in cases like St. Paul, these facilities can use a backup source of timber such as material provided by state&rsquo;s forestry industry. As the popularity of these types of projects increase, communities throughout America will continue to see nature-inspired art and a decreased dependence on coal and other nonrenewable sources of energy. The artistic and practical usage of urban wood waste is helping to engage creative, scientific, and environmentally focused minds in moving toward a path of sustainability in urban settings. Author: Meghan Martin Clean Energy Fellow, Biomass Thermal Energy Council 202-596-3974 www.biomassthermal.org

2016/02/woodwaste_14556412795159_largethumb.jpg

2016/02/woodwaste_14556412795159_thumb.jpg

2016/02/woodwaste_14556412795159.jpg

As efforts to conserve and recycle natural resources increase, urban wood waste utilization projects are becoming more popular in cities across the U.S.

Utilizing Urban Wood Waste

At the beginning of 2015, Biomass Magazine was tracking 46 different pellet production projects in various stages of development, not already in active construction. Together, these 46 projects represented over 9 million tons of production capacity, and industry insiders began wondering and worrying about rampant overbuilding. For Mike Curci, North American capital sales manager at Andritz, this activity made for a busy year. &ldquo;Last year alone we spoke with probably 35 to 40 different projects in the early stages of development,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Possibly 85 percent of those received a budgetary quotation and further details from us.&rdquo; Andritz, a leading manufacturer of pellet presses and other material handling equipment, supplies equipment recommendations and pricing as development teams work to understand the capital costs required to get a plant built and operating. As 2015 played out, however, the dollar strengthened, mild winters characterized most of the pellet-consuming world, and low-cost producers gobbled up emerging demand in Asia. Simultaneously, stories about start-up challenges for similarly sized production facilities began to circulate. Investor confidence began to unravel. Throughout its 2015 plant data confirmation efforts, Biomass Magazine confirmed that development activities had ceased at 16 of the 46 pellet projects under development but not yet in construction. Together, these 16 projects represented over 5 million tons of annual production capacity. For the facilities Biomass Magazine was able to reach, over half cited lost investors and lost funding as the primary reason development stopped. For Don Land, co-owner of Process and Storage Solutions, these findings are not surprising. &ldquo;The thing is, when you&rsquo;re looking at wood pellet plants, the big issue is the relatively small number of plants out there with large capacities (350,000 tons) that have had success,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;There were different problems with projects that stopped, but for investment bankers and the companies out there&nbsp; putting money into the industry, the problem they&rsquo;re having right now is seeing a lot of struggles, and plants that take two, three, or up to five years to get up to nameplate capacity.&rdquo; From both Land&rsquo;s and Curci&rsquo;s perspectives, a handful of recurring themes are emerging from these halted projects. First among them is planned capacity. The average capacity of the 16 projects that Biomass Magazine learned are no longer under development was 325,000, and five of the projects were targeting annual production of over 500,000 tons. &ldquo;Developers are landing on these planned capacities because they believe that production volumes at that level will be necessary to land an offtake agreement with a European utility,&rdquo; Land says. The assertion makes sense. An offtake agreement with a utility with a sizeable balance sheet provides lenders and project investors with confidence, and pellet buyers have shown a preference for procuring pellets from large, multifacility producers. The challenge, however, lies in the feedstock logistics required to consistently feed a facility with that kind of capacity. &ldquo;If I build a plant right here where I&rsquo;m standing, and I&rsquo;m looking to produce 500,000 tons a year, I&rsquo;m going to need 1 million to 1.2 million tons of green product per year,&rdquo; Curci says.&nbsp; &ldquo;In order to get that, based on where I am, I&rsquo;m going to have a radius of 75 or 100 miles to procure all of that material, being mindful that I&rsquo;m in Florida and everywhere I turn I&rsquo;m looking at pine trees.&rdquo; This challenge, Land observes, extends beyond projects being developed, and includes projects that have already been built. &ldquo;There&rsquo;s not a single new plant that I know of that has been able to reach their nameplate capacity within two years,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;You just can&rsquo;t open a facility, throw open the gate and expect that the amount of material you&rsquo;ll need will just show up.&rdquo; For Curci, plants planning on outputs of this scale will struggle with what he calls the &ldquo;Three Ms&rdquo; of pellet plant project development: money, material and market. &ldquo;I&rsquo;d say 50 percent of the phone calls I receive are from people who don&rsquo;t have all Three Ms in place and well understood,&rdquo; he says. The project development funnel within the pellet sector did not completely empty, but the projects that remain look different than those that struggled and ultimately failed to maintain momentum.&nbsp; According to Biomass Magazine plant data, 30 projects are still under development, representing over 4 million tons of capacity. Just five of these 30 are being planned with capacities over 300,000, and the average capacity amongst the remaining projects is less than 150,000. &ldquo;What we&rsquo;ve seen work are those 180,000- to 200,000-ton facilities,&rdquo; Curci says. &ldquo;The logistics are far easier to manage, and the capital required is significantly less.&rdquo; What remains to be seen is whether foreign pellet buyers will have any appetite to engage in offtake agreements with producers in this capacity class. According to both Land and Curci, the projects that stand the best chance of maintaining investor interest, successfully capitalizing and moving into construction are plants that recognize the impact of inbound and outbound logistics, and allow that to influence their development strategy. &ldquo;I think you&rsquo;re going to see the small- and medium-sized mills have more success,&rdquo; Land says. &ldquo;You&rsquo;re going to see them on waterways and close to good rail infrastructure that connects them efficiently to a port. Finally, I think the projects that are ultimately successful will be staffed by people with a working knowledge of wood processing.&rdquo; Author: Tim Portz Executive Editor, Biomass Magazine 701-738-4969 tportz@bbiinternational.com

A LOGISTICAL CHALLENGE: A debarking machine is assembled at Draxâ€™s  Amite BioEnergy facility near Gloster, Mississippi. Production facilities under development with capacities similar to Amiteâ€™s (500,000 tons) are struggling to hold investor atte

2016/02/ALogisticalChallenge-BMM0316_14552098574932_largethumb.jpg

2016/02/ALogisticalChallenge-BMM0316_14552098574932_thumb.jpg

2016/02/ALogisticalChallenge-BMM0316_14552098574932.jpg

Challenging market conditions and the realities of bringing large production facilities to nameplate capacity are thinning a once-crowded pellet project development herd.

Pellet Capacity Shake Out

The apparent simplicity of making wood pellets has and continues to cause many project developers to fail to incorporate the knowledge, skills and wisdom gained from experience into the plant designs and operations protocols. It is much more cost-effective to get it right the first time, rather than to retrofit, or worse, fail. Errors in feedstock procurement strategies, plant design, equipment choices, process flow, operations methods, and transportation strategies lead to outcomes that fail to meet the benchmarks set in the spreadsheets that justified the project&rsquo;s development. Every step of a wood pellet manufacturing project, from feasibility analysis, fiber procurement, design and engineering, commissioning, full operations, to mill-to-user logistics, should benefit from the lessons learned by many years of seeing all the wrong ways of trying to make and market wood pellets. Wood pellet projects, whether for the heating markets or for producing industrial pellets, are far more complex than process schematics and rosy spreadsheets suggest. For example, if the procurement strategy is poorly crafted, the average delivered wood costs may exceed expectations and fiber quality may not match expectations. A few fiber-related guidelines will prevent problems with production volumes and project cash flows. Secure consistent volume for 24/7 operations, regardless of supplier interruptions, seasonal harvesting interruption, and weather or road conditions. Site the plant within a 50-mile radius of the majority of the fiber supply. Have knowledge of sustainability requirements and compliance costs, as the wood basket must be able to supply certified fiber at volumes and pricing as expected. Avoid fiber baskets that have competing pulp mills, board plants or other wood pellet plants that may demand the same wood. Strategize to have as consistent a species mix and quality as possible. The feedstock should be clean and free of dirt, stones or foreign debris, as low-quality feedstock deteriorates pellet quality and durability, and lower-quality feedstock and variable species mix also stresses the equipment and increases operating costs. We often say that the manufacturing process of wood pellets is 70 percent technical, and 30 percent art. Engineers may get the 70 percent right, but if the 30 percent art (experience, knowledge and skill, wisdom) is not acknowledged, the project could spend many years in its commissioning phase or be scuttled due to impatience on realizing the expected rate of return on the investment. We know from experience that in most cases, having the project design and process equipment selection reviewed by an expert in pellet plant operations will result in a project that transitions from construction to full operation faster, and is much more likely to meet or exceed industry benchmarks. Relying on an engineering, procurement and construction company claiming to have the knowledge and experience to deliver an operating plant on time and on budget is a gamble. They may have several projects under their belt, but they typically do not have the benefit of operations experience. Project developers who tap into the wisdom of those who have seen it all, know all the wrong ways of doing things, and advise the engineering firm on design and equipment specifications are more likely to have far fewer headaches. Final informed decisions on selecting process equipment for the correct size and capacity for the desired performance should be the responsibility of the project developer under the guidance of a seasoned pellet making expert. All project developers have learned or will learn that building the wood pellet plant is the easy part. Commissioning a wood pellet plant and bringing it to its expected capacity and pellet quality is like the &ldquo;valley of death&rdquo; that many startups experience. Cash flows the wrong way while in the valley of death. Some never emerge, while others see the internal rate of return degrade as the investments needed to get it right mount. Getting it right early in the development cycle can shorten the commissioning phase and get the cash flowing in the right direction faster. A state-of-the-art plant built correctly only operates and performs as well as the people who operate it. A well-trained and disciplined operations team is essential. Training by seasoned operations experts, prior to startup and during commissioning, is critical. Even if all of the criteria for fiber supply and plant design are on the mark, the operation is much more likely to emerge from the valley of death sooner if the operators are not learning from their own mistakes, but benefiting from the wisdom of seasoned experts. All of the above aside, assuming there is a market for the pellets at prices that support a project, making wood pellets can produce decent margins. But just one large or a few small surprises can erase those margins. The best way to avoid surprises and losing money is to involve a seasoned expert as early in the project cycle as possible and to ask challenging questions that are informed by operational experience. Author: John Swaan Senior Associate, FutureMetrics Inc. www.futuremetrics.com 207-824-6702

2016/02/JohnSwaan-BMM0316_14552099680978_largethumb.jpg

2016/02/JohnSwaan-BMM0316_14552099680978_thumb.jpg

2016/02/JohnSwaan-BMM0316_14552099680978.jpg

The apparent simplicity of making wood pellets has and continues to cause many project developers to fail to incorporate the knowledge, skills and wisdom gained from experience into the plant designs and operations protocols.

Preventing Pellet Plant Failures

Nestled where the Nicola and Coldwater rivers join, Merritt, British Columbia, is the first major community along phase one of the Coquihalla Highway, which serves as a portal to all other major highways to the B.C. interior. Lying 450 miles&nbsp;northeast of Merritt is district municipality Fort St. James, which rests on the shore of Stuart Lake in the Omineca Country. Forestry is a leading economic contributor in each of these small communities, which are in the process of becoming homes to twin biomass power plants. Canadian investment fund Fengate Real Asset Investments and Veolia North America are in the latter stages of completing the two 40-MW power facilities, projects that could further interest in wood residues, roadside debris and sawmill waste as viable feedstocks. The pair of $235 million, biomass-fired electricity generation facilities will generate power for B.C. Hydro under 30-year power purchase agreements (PPA). The Fort St. James facility may become operational as soon as July, with the Merritt facility coming online by late this year. Upon completion, the two plants will be among the largest woody biomass energy plants in North America. Veolia will operate the facilities under an operations and maintenance contract, while also securing a steady supply of biomass for each of the plants, material that will be supplied by local partners. The facilities are being designed and constructed by Iberdrola Energy Projects Canada Corp. under an EPC contract.&nbsp;Each facility is expected to consume some 200,000 dry tons of biomass, mostly sawmill waste, and each generate more than 285,000 megawatt-hours to power more than 40,000 homes for a year.&nbsp; The projects were initiated after Veolia and Fengate won a public tender offer by B.C. Hydro for construction and operation of the two plants, along with a PPA. Debt financing of $180 million for each facility was secured from five banks, with the partnership expected to generate some $800 million in revenue over a 30-year period. &ldquo;These 40-MW plants will generate continuously, but that still makes up less than 1 percent of B.C. Hydro&rsquo;s total power output on any given day,&rdquo; says Fadi Oubari, vice president and head of development and western operations at Veolia Canada. Oubari says there are no differences between the two plants other than their wood yards, and they are the same for a reason: to optimize operation costs. At Fort St. James, which is roughly 75 percent complete, there are three biomass silos, whereas at Merritt, there is a fuel yard of biomass piles, says Brandon Tracey, Fengate Canada&rsquo;s manager of power and utilities.&nbsp; Merritt is about 80 percent of the way done, he notes.&nbsp;&nbsp; At Merritt, construction around the boiler is moving along, Tracey says. The conveyors that will move the raw feedstock into the plant are about two-thirds of the way finished. The steam turbine building is constructed and the offices are up, he says, and a lot of the major equipment is on-site, but piping and electrical connections are yet to be made.&nbsp; As Oubari is only too aware, these are complex, time-consuming projects.&nbsp; &ldquo;We have a lot of biomass projects in Europe and these are our first two in North America,&rdquo; he says. Perhaps the biggest challenge and variable is in securing and managing the feedstock itself, from collection to getting it to the boiler.&nbsp; Forest to Fuel Once raw material arrives by truck at the facility, Oubari says it is exposed to magnets to ensure that it is metal-free, as metals wreak havoc on the plant&rsquo;s state-of-the-art Siemens boilers. The wood is then analyzed for moisture and goes into a sieve that captures chips that are too large to be processed in the boiler. These &ldquo;overs&rdquo; go into a bin and are later recrushed into smaller chips, according to Oubari. The right-sized material is conveyed into an FSE grate stoker boiler and burned to produce high-pressure steam that expands into a Siemens condensing steam turbine that generates up to 40 MW. A small amount of the generated power is used to meet the plant&rsquo;s needs, but the lion&rsquo;s share is sent to the B.C. Hydro grid at substations only a few kilometers from each plant.&nbsp; Once the steam has expanded, it is sent through air-cooled condensers and re-liquefied, and then circulated back into the boiler. Oubari points out the closed-circuit nature of the process, in that it requires only a limited amount of water that is recirculated; there are no cooling towers and few chemicals involved. Fuel gases are treated in an electrostatic precipitator to remove fly ash as it goes through the plants&rsquo; fuel exhaust stacks, he adds. In all, the plants will directly or indirectly create some 160 new jobs over the course of the projects&rsquo; three decades of operation, during which power will be purchased by B.C. Hydro at a standard offer price of $109 per MWh. &ldquo;Our job has been to make sure this plant has enough biomass for the duration of this PPA and that we&rsquo;re going to be able to generate power at the price B.C. Hydro is willing to pay,&rdquo; said Oubari. For large biomass plants, it&rsquo;s not so easy to find a 30-year resource, says Taraneh Sowlati, a professor and expert in woody biomass supply chain management at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver. Gauging Supply At least part of the impetus for B.C. Hydro&rsquo;s tender offer was prompted by the government of British Columbia&rsquo;s efforts to get rid of dead trees decimated by the mountain pine beetle, according to Oubari. Dead trees create a fire hazard that most foresters would like to see alleviated, and many believe it makes sense to remove and use the dead and dying wood.&nbsp; Lodgepole pine is most affected by the beetle, and if it&rsquo;s not disposed of within a few years, it cannot even be used for pulp.&nbsp; And, as Sowlati points out, once a tree is dead, the beetles will move to another healthy tree and kill that one as well. Thus, if a plant relies on residues and chips from trees killed by the beetle, Sowlati says, the maximum feedstock it could supply may only be five or 10 years. So, while beetle kill is a good start for a large plant&rsquo;s multidecade needed fuel supply, it hardly represents a resource panacea.
 But Oubari remains bullish on woody biomass, if only because of its renewable benefits. &ldquo;We are using a fuel that has [heretofore] been burned as waste, and then we are displacing energy created by coal-fired plants,&rdquo; he says. But that doesn&rsquo;t mean that North America is ready to fund woody biomass power plants in the same way that it has solar and wind. Oubari points out that Europe is definitely ahead in woody biomass energy, especially in France and Scandinavia.&nbsp; &ldquo;Europe has bought into the notion of going to greener fuels and is in the process of mixing wood with coal or replacing coal with wood entirely,&rdquo; says Dan Parrent, regional biomass coordinator with the U.S. Forest Service in Anchorage, Alaska. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s not all economic in Europe, some of it is socially driven.&rdquo; It&rsquo;s a tougher sell in North America. For example, in Alaska, coal-burning plants are still economically viable in a way that woody biomass isn&rsquo;t, says Parrent.&nbsp; And in coal-rich states like Wyoming, West Virginia and Pennsylvania, the same logic applies. Bankers see the fuel procurement as a big risk, Oubari contends.&nbsp; And he notes that it&rsquo;s challenging to find a one-stop shop that can put the project together&mdash;manage fuel procurement, engineering, construction and operation. &ldquo;We are this one-stop shop, and that&rsquo;s why we have been successful in biomass,&rdquo; he says.&nbsp; &ldquo;Veolia has been successful because we can manage all the components of a project.&rdquo; U.S. investors are wary of woody biomass projects that don&rsquo;t involve an experienced operator. &ldquo;Most of the time, these projects are promoted by someone who is generating the waste, but has no experience putting together a complex biomass project,&rdquo; Oubari says.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Parrent agrees, noting that large steam power plants are mostly fueled by natural gas or coal. &ldquo;Right now, those fuels are very inexpensive relative to wood,&rdquo; he says. Since Veolia and Fengate have a locked-in PPA, the partners say fluctuations in the price of more conventional energy commodities, such as natural gas, oil and coal, will have little impact on their operating revenue.&nbsp; Even so, the economics of the larger energy markets can still have an impact on decisions to construct woody biomass plants. Sowlati says the economics of woody biomass electricity plants can vary greatly from region to region and each case, because woody biomass plants depend on a ready supply of woodchips and residues within an acceptable distance of the site itself.&nbsp; Parrent says for a 40-MW plant, suppliers will likely need to reach out beyond a 100-mile radius to obtain the necessary woody biomass. &ldquo;That&rsquo;s a long way to ship wood; you can ship a lot more Btus shipping coal per unit of weight,&rdquo; he says. Even so, there may be other ways to economize on operating costs as Veolia is demonstrating.&nbsp; For example, ashes created by the boilers can also generate marginal revenue via use in farming, silviculture and in the case of the lighter fly ash, as an additive in cement, says John Turner, Veolia&rsquo;s vice president of operations for British Columbia. Veolia is constructing three deepwater wells in the Fort St. James area, Turner adds, and water needed for the Merritt facility will come from the city of Merritt itself. Any wastewater that emerges from the facility will be clean, he says. Neither partner seems to be dissuaded from working with each other again, if a new woody biomass opportunity arises. Both Veolia and Fengate say that they would welcome the development of similar wood biomass energy projects. &ldquo;Our relationship has been good, but projects like this are pretty unique,&rdquo; Tracey says. Oubari adds that he and his partners are betting that a combination of the recent beetle kill and a healthy logging industry in north central British Columbia will keep these two new plants sufficiently fueled for the next three decades. Author: Bruce Dorminey Science Journalist/Author brucedorminey@gmail.com Twitter:@bdorminey

GOING VERTICAL: The biomass boiler at Veolia and Fengate Capital Managementâ€™s Fort St. James plant is identical to the one being installed at its Merritt facility, both more than three-quarters complete.

2016/02/GoingVerticle-BMM0316_14552102890136_largethumb.jpg

2016/02/GoingVerticle-BMM0316_14552102890136_thumb.jpg

2016/02/GoingVerticle-BMM0316_14552102890136.jpg

Two firms with long histories of investment in alternative energy are partners in a Canadian biomass power venture. 

Building Big in British Columbia

Officially, this issue of Biomass Magazine is dedicated to project development and plant construction, a theme we have returned to annually for many years. Unofficially, this issue outlines and celebrates project risk. New projects are the lifeblood of the biomass-to-energy industry, offering the single best opportunity to grow market share and prove new technologies and business models in the field. They also bring with them risks of all kinds: market volatility risk, technology risk, feedstock risk and many others. To successfully develop a biomass project, usher it toward a groundbreaking and bring it online, these risks must be accounted for and mitigated to the greatest degree possible. Each project featured this month faced different risks, and the real takeaway from this issue are the inventive ways developers accounted for and protected themselves from them. While writing her page-36 story on the conversion of a Little Falls, Minnesota, corn ethanol plant to n-butanol production, Associate Editor Katie Fletcher learned that in addition to repurposing many of the working components of the facility, Green Biologics is taking great comfort in the familiarity that area corn producers already have with the plant. This relationship not only solidifies the feedstock picture once the plant is in production, but it has also generated project momentum, as many of these producers have come aboard as investors. Senior Editor Ron Kotrba&rsquo;s page-22 feature, &ldquo;The Ultimate Biomass Heating Package,&rdquo; examines how new business models can be leveraged to mitigate risk&mdash;not so much for the developer, but for the customer. Biomass heating offered High Mowing School in Wilton, New Hampshire, an alternative to the fuel oil heat it was using, but the upfront capital costs were bottlenecking the project. School trustee Philip Brooks told Kotrba, &ldquo;We felt that with global warming it was important for us to do that, but financially, it wasn&rsquo;t possible.&rdquo; Enter Xylogen, a joint venture between Froling Energy and Optimal Energy Solutions LLC, that, in return for a 20-year heat supply contract, financed and installed a new biomass boiler and district heat solution at the school. Risk is inherent in any energy project. Current market conditions certainly underscore that simple fact. This issue of Biomass Magazine asserts that this risk offers some real utility to the industry, and should be at least be accepted, if not embraced. Risk drives project developers to more carefully consider every aspect of a project, identify potential problems within it, and develop and deploy measures to protect against them whenever possible.
Author: Tim Portz Vice President of Content &amp; Executive Editor tportz@bbiinternational.com

2016/02/Tim-Portz_14552107311119_largethumb.jpg

2016/02/Tim-Portz_14552107311119_thumb.jpg

2016/02/Tim-Portz_14552107311119.jpg

Risk drives project developers to more carefully consider every aspect of a project, identify potential problems within it, and develop and deploy measures to protect against them whenever possible.

Risk Abated

Some important and slightly unexpected developments occurred during the negotiations on the Senate Energy Bill. In the context of a lot of uncertainty around the role of biomass in the Clean Power Plan, the U.S. Senate used the Energy Bill to register resounding support for the carbon benefits of biomass. In a unanimous vote, the Senate agreed to an amendment to the 2016 Energy Policy Modernization Act, which recognizes the carbon neutrality of biomass when it comes from forested lands that haven&rsquo;t been converted to another use. This is a remarkable bipartisan achievement, led by Maine Sens. Susan Collins and Angus King, along with Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minnesota, and cosponsored by Sens. Al Franken, D-Minnesota, Kelly Ayotte, R-New Hampshire, Steve Daines, R-Montana; Mike Crapo, R-Idaho; and James Risch, R-Idaho.&nbsp; During discussions that followed passage of the amendment, Sen. Ed Markey, D-Massachusetts, weighed in, submitting a statement for the record saying in part, &ldquo;Biomass energy is already contributing to the U.S. energy mix in ways that help reduce carbon pollution that causes global warming.&rdquo; This was largely a message of support for the industry, softening the senator&rsquo;s previous positions on biomass. While he did not support the amendment, Sen. Markey positively cited biomass projects including plants in Gainesville, Florida, and Ft. Drum, New York, calling them &ldquo;the type of project we need to encourage.&rdquo; At press time, the Senate&rsquo;s final Energy bill had not yet had its final vote, but was expected to pass. The Senate&rsquo;s vote of confidence was much-needed and well-timed. The U.S. EPA announced in late January that it will hold its biomass workshop on April 7 in Washington, D.C. The workshop will explore how biomass will fit into State Implementation Plans, and will take into account input from all types of stakeholders&mdash;industry, government and NGOs. The BPA, along with several other industry groups, is advocating for deference to current state policies. States already have in place sustainability standards, as well as procedures for tracking biomass feedstocks, and EPA does not need to create yet another standard for biomass facilities to meet. What we really need at this point is clarity; it&rsquo;s been about five years since the EPA began its process to determine how to account for biomass emissions, and sometimes it seems that we haven&rsquo;t gotten very far. In early February, the Business Council for Sustainable Energy released its annual report on sustainable energy in the U.S., highlighting how much policy can help&mdash;and hurt&mdash;a given industry. Since 2008, the wind industry has tripled in size, thanks in part to the double-sized production tax credit its producers are eligible for. Biomass, which is eligible for half the credit, has grown only 15 percent during that time. While significant growth would be welcome news for biomass, what we need now is solid help for existing facilities that are facing challenging market conditions. The bipartisan support we have built in the Senate, and in the U.S. House of Representatives with the Biomass Caucus, gives us hope that we can achieve this in the coming year. &nbsp; Author: Bob Cleaves President, Biomass Power Association bob@biomasspowerassociation.com www.biomasspowerassociation.com

2016/02/Bob-Cleaves_BMM0316_14552104301733_largethumb.jpg

2016/02/Bob-Cleaves_BMM0316_14552104301733_thumb.jpg

2016/02/Bob-Cleaves_BMM0316_14552104301733.jpg

While significant growth would be welcome news for biomass, what we need now is solid help for existing facilities that are facing challenging market conditions.

Senate Recognizes Biomass's Carbon Benefits

AEBIOM elects new leadership, board members The European Biomass Association (AEBIOM) has announced Gustav Melin will serve as president for an additional term, while Didzis Palejs will serve as vice-president. Petar Curic of the Croatian Chamber of Economy, Vanja Curin of BABH, Martin Lindell of Sveaskog,&nbsp; Annalisa Paniz of AIEL, Ilias Papageorgiadis&nbsp; of ARBIO, Pablo Rodero of AVEBIOM,&nbsp; Hannes Tuohiniitty of Bioenergia, and Matthew Willey of Drax have been elected to the board of AEBIOM. In addition, the association has welcomed Finland-based Fortum and Austria-based Wild &amp; Partner as new members.&nbsp;&nbsp; Laurel BioCompsite earns USDA Certified Biobased Product Label Laurel BioComposite LLC has earned the USDA Certified Biobased Product Label for its Bio-Res PLA with 97 percent biobased content, Bio-Res PE with 62 percent biobased content, and Bio-Res powder with 100 percent biobased content. The company first introduced the biomaterial in 2011 as a cost-effective, green replacement with improved performance properties for traditional petroleum-based resins in a variety of plastics manufacturing processes. The addition of Bio-Res powder to the USDA BioPreferred program expands the company&rsquo;s product line-up and range of uses. Senate confirms director of DOE Office of Science Cherry Murray was confirmed by the U.S. Senate in December as director of the U.S. Department of Energy&rsquo;s Office of Science. Murray will oversee research in the areas of advanced scientific computing, basic energy sciences, biological and environmental sciences, fusion energy sciences, high-energy physics, and nuclear physics. She will have responsibility not only for supporting scientific research, but also for the development, construction, and operation of unique, open-access scientific user facilities. The Office of Science manages 10 of the department&rsquo;s 17 national laboratories. Murray previously served as the Benjamin Peirce professor of technology and public policy and professor of physics at Harvard University. Global green bank network formed A group of six green banks and two nonprofit groups recently announced plans to establish a Green Bank Network to help increase and accelerate investment in renewable energy and energy efficiency around the world. Green banks are public entities created to partner with the private sector to increase investment in clean energy and bring clean energy financing into the mainstream. The founding partners of the Green Bank Network include the U.K. Green Investment Bank, the Connecticut Green Bank, N.Y. Green Bank, the Japan-based Green Fund, Malaysian Green Energy Corp., and Australia-based Clean Energy Finance Corp. The National Resources Defense Council and Coalition for Green Capital have been appointed to spearhead creation of the network. ClimateWorks Foundation has agreed to provide seed funding. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development will use its convening power to facilitate the sharing of experience between green banks and countries interested in creating them, building on the OECD-Bloomberg Philanthropies green banks policy guide released in December. ACORE announces president, CEO The American Council on Renewable Energy has selected Gregory Wetstone as president and CEO. Wetstone most recently oversaw government affairs as vice president for Terra-Gen Power LLC. He also previously served as senior director for government and public affairs at the American Wind Energy Association, as director of programs at the Natural Resources Defense Council, and as counsel to the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Wetsone played an important role in crafting the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. Amyris adds board member Amyris Inc. has appointed Margaret H. Georgiadis, president of Americas at Google Inc., as a member of its board of directors. Prior to her current role, Georgiadis held senior-level positions at Groupon, Discover Financial Services, and McKinsey and Co. She has extensive experience and capabilities in technology, marketing, consumer sales, and business strategy and development. Stora Enso opens Innovation Center Stora Enso recently inaugurated its Innovation Centre for biomaterials in Stockholm, Sweden. The center will host research, application, business development and strategic marketing. By creating renewable solutions and products from second-generation biomass, such as wood, in order to replace fossil-based products, the center is addressing societal problems such as climate change, increased urbanization, as well as water and land use issues. By the end of 2017, the center is expected to employ approximately 100 people. It covers 4,900 square meters, with a 1,600-square-meter, state-of-the-art laboratory. AMPH secures funding Aggregated Micro Power Holdings plc recently confirmed that it has secured a second round of funding for its biomass boiler portfolio through Aggregated Micro Power Infrastructure Ltd., which has completed a capital raise of &pound;5.7million ($8.12 million), bringing the total invested by established institutions to &pound;12.4million. Deinove awarded 6 patents Deinove has been granted six new patents in the U.S.&nbsp; One, titled &ldquo;Process for chromosomal engineering using a novel DNA repair system,&rdquo; Deinove&rsquo;s founding patent, is already registered in Europe and describes the mechanism behind the biodiversity and resistance of Deinococcus bacteria, a major discovery made by Miroslav Radman&rsquo;s team and which led to the launch of Deinove. The second, titled &ldquo;Methods for isolating bacteria,&rdquo; protects a method for selecting and identifying bacteria that has enabled the company to build a strain library with over 6,000 bacterial strains, all resistant to UV radiation. The company was awarded four additional patents pertaining to Deinococcus bacteria that are associated with producing biofuels as part of the Deinol program. Deinove now holds a portfolio of 170 patents internationally. Purdue researcher Nancy Ho recognized Nancy Ho, founder and president of Green Tech America Inc. and a research professor emerita in Purdue University&rsquo;s School of Chemical Engineering, has received the National Medal of Technology and Innovation from President Barack Obama. Ho has focused her research on using recombinant DNA techniques to improve industrial microorganisms, particularly for production of renewable biofuels and bioproducts by using renewable cellulosic resources as the feedstocks. Her most noted work has been the development of recombinant Saccharomyces yeast that can effectively produce cellulosic ethanol from all types of cellulosic plant materials such as corn stalks, wheat straws, wood and grasses. The original Saccharomyces yeast used for producing ethanol from corn and other edible feedstocks cannot ferment cellulosic sugars to produce transportation fuel such as ethanol. She founded Green Tech America Inc. in 2006 at the Purdue Research Park to produce and market the yeast and provide other services for cellulosic ethanol production. Veolia acquires Boomeco assets, business Veolia ES (UK) Ltd. has announced that it has completed the acquisition of the business and assets of Boomeco Ltd., a waste wood processor and producer of refuse derived fuel (RDF). Based in Avonmouth, Bristol, the Boomeco site processes a variety of grades of wood into wood chips to be used in combined-heat-and-power plants and produces RDF from residual household waste. Velocys appoints CEO, nonexecutive director Velocys plc has announced the appointment of David Pummell as CEO. With over 30 years of energy and oil industry experience, Pummell joins Velocys from ACAL Energy Ltd., a private equity-backed fuel cell technology company developing products for the automotive and stationary power sectors, where he was CEO. Velocys also announced the appointment of Ross Allonby as a non-executive director. He has also been appointed as a member of the audit committee, remuneration committee and the nomination and governance committee. Allonby is a founder, managing partner, CEO and chief information officer of First River Capital Partners LLP. He was formerly head of emerging markets credit trading at Bank of America Merrill Lynch. Prior to joining Merrill Lynch, he was a director in the Capital Markets Group of Standard Bank, London, and had previously been a vice president at Goldman Sachs.

2016/02/Melin-BMM0316_1455210551207.jpg

2016/02/Murray-BMM0316_14552105521986.jpg

2016/02/NancyHo-BMM0316_14552105532007.jpg

No one buys a furnace because it matches the d&eacute;cor of the room. Boilers and furnaces are purchased because conventional wisdom says they must be bought, fed and maintained to stay warm. Imagine purchasing just the heat that warms your home instead of the costly equipment, the volatilely priced fuel that feeds it, and all the maintenance headaches that come with operating the system. Further envision contracting for a turnkey heating package that, in addition to reliable warmth, provides no-hassle, maintenance-free operation, zero upfront capital expenditures, consistently reliable hot water, multifuel biomass and propane capabilities, and the ability to lower costs year-over-year as energy efficiencies rise and usage or prices drop. This is precisely what a Wilton, New Hampshire-based Waldorf private school bargained for in its new biomass district heating system provided by Xylogen, a joint venture between Froling Energy and Optimal Energy Solutions LLC. &ldquo;Philosophically, the school makes an effort to treat the environment as kindly as possible,&rdquo; says Philip Brooks, a trustee at High Mowing School. &ldquo;We tend our own gardens, grow our own organic foods. We are green and always have been.&rdquo; For years, the school had been providing heat and hot water to its 120 students with fuel oil boilers. &ldquo;We wanted to get off oil,&rdquo; Brooks says. &ldquo;We felt that, with global warming, it was important for us to do that but, financially, it wasn&rsquo;t possible because we didn&rsquo;t have builders or contractors who were interested in financing a biomass system for us.&rdquo; Then he met Mark Froling, president of Froling Energy, which started in 2008 as a residential and commercial biomass boiler company that now predominantly installs wood pellet and chip boilers for the commercial sector. Froling says power purchase agreements (PPA) are common with solar customers, where the customer buys the energy but not the hard assets. &ldquo;So my partner and I were thinking how to copy that,&rdquo; Froling tells Biomass Magazine. With Optimal Energy Solutions&rsquo; principal Henry Spindler, Xylogen was formed in 2012 to provide solar-style PPAs to biomass thermal customers. &ldquo;We are not selling heat per se, but a full-service heating package contract,&rdquo; Spindler says. &ldquo;We don&rsquo;t tell customers, &lsquo;You&rsquo;ve used this number of Btus and this is your bill.&rsquo; We have an annual fee and there are both fixed and adjustable elements based on how much fuel is used. If we or the customer find ways to save energy, then we all end up ahead&mdash;the customer saves and we save. One of the things we thought of quite a bit in setting up Xylogen is how to structure incentives so everyone is enticed to minimize the amount of heat used. That was very important to us. It is unique in any sort of arrangement, where both sides benefit from doing the right thing.&rdquo; Essentially, the 20-year contract between Xylogen and HMS dictates that, as the customer&rsquo;s energy requirements rise or fall, they don&rsquo;t take a huge hit on the upside but they also share the benefits on the downside. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a breakeven situation for us,&rdquo; Brooks says. &ldquo;We pay them a monthly bill equivalent to what we were paying for oil before.&rdquo; The price paid by HMS over the contract period was lowered by the value of renewable energy credits continuously generated by the new biomass system and a grant from the public utilities commission. HMS provided no upfront capital costs for the district heating system under contract with Xylogen, which used Froling Energy to build a new, $800,000 boiler house on campus and install a network of underground piping to, and flat plate heat exchangers in, 10 buildings on-site. Xylogen contracted with Spindler&rsquo;s other company, DCM Logic, to provide automation and monitoring controls for the entire system. Feedstock silos were installed next to the boiler house and Froling Energy provides deliveries of dried wood chips to keep heat and hot water flowing throughout campus as needed. While contract details took about a year to iron out, the entire sales cycle&mdash;from beginning negotiations to operation&mdash;was roughly two years, Froling says. The system is currently in its second winter of operation. The boiler plant houses two side-by-side TX-150 biomass boilers from Austria-based Fr&ouml;ling Heizkessel- und Beh&auml;lterbau Ges.m.b.H. They can run on wood pellets or chips and are plumbed in parallel to a 3,000-gallon buffer tank that&rsquo;s always kept hot. &ldquo;The boilers ramp up and down based on the buffer tank temperature,&rdquo; Froling says. Two HTP500 propane boilers were also installed as backup or for peak-demand situations. &ldquo;There&rsquo;s a lot of security and redundancy built in because it&rsquo;s a boarding school and the kids can&rsquo;t be sent home,&rdquo; Froling says. &ldquo;We even have a standalone backup generator, so if the power goes out, we can still provide heat.&rdquo; Individually, each building can bring power with a handheld or wheeled generator. &ldquo;Our installation goes to a flat plate heat exchanger,&rdquo; Froling says. &ldquo;The heat is piped from the boiler house that&rsquo;s connected to a heat exchanger, and the buildings each have their existing distribution system. Now, instead of a fossil fuel boiler, the buildings are pulling off of the demand side of the heat exchanger, so they&rsquo;re holding all the heat they need,&rdquo; he explains, adding that 13 oil boilers were removed during installation of the new district heating system. Nearly a half-mile of piping was installed four feet below the ground to connect all the buildings. Froling says the boiler house has one central pumping system with double-pump redundancy to circulate hot water to each of the heat exchangers, including valves to regulate flow to each location based on demand. Spindler says DCM Logic&rsquo;s controls are layered on top of the manufacturer&rsquo;s controls to make the boilers perform much better. &ldquo;The monitoring is unique in this industry,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Generally, the boilers are installed and if they don&rsquo;t break or fault in some way, they are left to their own devices. With our consistent monitoring, we can find things that would improve their performance. So we&rsquo;ve been working on that, bringing information to bear to improve the boiler performance. It&rsquo;s quite a synthesized, orchestrated package.&rdquo; Mike Wisnewski, head of maintenance at HMS, says the old oil boilers and hot water heaters were antiquated. &ldquo;There was a lot of messing around with them, the relighting, replacing and ongoing inspections,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Now there&rsquo;s a lot less headaches for me with the heat and hot water.&rdquo; Wisnewski says the automation and remote access make identifying potential issues much simpler. &ldquo;I can call them up if there&rsquo;s an issue and say, &lsquo;Hey, I got a problem in the main building,&rsquo; and if it&rsquo;s our issue they tell us, and if it&rsquo;s theirs, they can fix it.&rdquo; The boilers initially ran on pellets but Froling says their higher cost has put pressure on him to provide greater savings, which is why Froling Energy began manufacturing what the company calls precision dry chips (PDC). &ldquo;We did not develop it, we copied the European standard,&rdquo; he says. In Froling Energy&rsquo;s wood yard the company replicated the European process to screen, rechip and dry local hardwood chips to be uniform in moisture content (25 percent) and size, which is equivalent to a matchbook. &ldquo;We try to be quite precise, it&rsquo;s much easier for the boiler to work,&rdquo; Froling says. &ldquo;And we can provide them at a much more reasonable cost, which is a big advantage to our customers.&rdquo; The chips are dry enough to be blown into vertical silos rather than dumped into underground bunker storage. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s all very different than delivering green chips,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s much cheaper. It increases the cost of fuel a bit compared to a green chip but it decreases the capital costs of storage.&rdquo; He says an underground bunker costs $250,000 to install whereas Froling installed $35,000 worth of vertical silos at HMS. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a big savings on the cap-ex side, and a big breakthrough in terms of logistics,&rdquo; Froling says. &ldquo;All our customers are staying above ground and receive delivery of dry chips with a blower truck.&rdquo; During the height of winter, HMS receives about two deliveries of PDCs a week. PDCs cost about half as much per ton as wood pellets, Froling says, though he adds they&rsquo;re not quite as efficient because of the moisture content. He says his normal delivered cost of wood pellets to customers are $17.20 per MMBtu vs. $9.50 per MMBtu for PDCs. A customer like HMS can save up to $12,000 a year by switching from pellets to PDCs, he says. Both parties benefit from this contract arrangement for a total biomass heating package. For the school, the contract removes the financial and operational risks and burdens. Xylogen finances, installs, operates and maintains the boilers, including ash removal, and HMS can concentrate on what it&rsquo;s good at&mdash;teaching kids. Conversely, Froling Energy ensures long-term customer demand for its PDCs while Xylogen and DCM Logic provide what they do best&mdash;service, monitoring, controls, maintenance and optimization of its system. Spindler says one benefit to Xylogen is they know who is maintaining and working on the units. &ldquo;There aren&rsquo;t other parties coming and going, so it&rsquo;s cleaner that way,&rdquo; he says. Also, over time, operations become optimized, so targeted adjustments can be made to save energy. &ldquo;So there&rsquo;s the possibility for improvement over the term,&rdquo; Spindler adds. &ldquo;This system has a lot of mechanical, moving parts, and operating and maintaining it is a much bigger hurdle than people realize,&rdquo; Froling says. &ldquo;Especially in an institution like this, our format is particularly beneficial. Schools like this have long-term visions, they want this technology, but their budgets don&rsquo;t allow them to bring in the right people to install and operate these kinds of boiler plants. With Xylogen, we bridge that gap.&rdquo; All told, Froling says HMS is saving about $400,000 over the life of the 20-year contract compared to what the costs would have been to maintain its previous network of oil boilers, including replacement costs of units that would have reached end-of-life, the $10,000 in annual maintenance costs, and the price of fuel oil. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a modest savings, but that goes long way on a campus like this,&rdquo; Froling says. This contractual arrangement is unique for biomass heat in the U.S., but not necessarily so for Europe. &ldquo;I don&rsquo;t know why it&rsquo;s unique here,&rdquo; says Froling. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s common in Europe. The mentality here is that people don&rsquo;t like long-term contracts, so it&rsquo;s harder to sell long-term commitments even though we&rsquo;re bringing in the cash and financing, and taking all the risk on the customer&rsquo;s part. They have to have a real long-term vision. Businesses are interested in quarter-to-quarter decisions.&rdquo; Spindler says people are just used to buying and owning their own equipment. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a shift to think about doing it the other way, even though people don&rsquo;t know how to tend their equipment, whether it&rsquo;s oil or biomass. I don&rsquo;t know why it&rsquo;s so hard to move to this setup, it&rsquo;s something we encounter with other customers and it&rsquo;s not always clear why they wouldn&rsquo;t. If they&rsquo;re capable of operating the system at a high level and can provide the capital, then they&rsquo;re better off buying and owning it because there&rsquo;s no one else to pay. But if high performance is key, the customer may not be able to provide that for themselves. And that&rsquo;s where we come in.&rdquo; Froling is an HMS graduate himself, so being able to provide his alma mater with a new biomass district heating system was particularly rewarding. &ldquo;It was very cool,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;You always want to do something that&rsquo;s beneficial to your school, and I&rsquo;m happy with what we&rsquo;ve accomplished there. It is an interesting project. It was our second Xylogen project, but a first of its kind to combine so many buildings and work out the details of such a large district heating plant.&rdquo; Author: Ron Kotrba Senior Editor, Biomass Magazine 218-745-8347 rkotrba@bbiinternational.com

INTEGRATED DESIGN: Under High Mowing Schoolâ€™s 20-year contract with Xylogen, Froling Energy built a boiler house on campus as part of the new district heating system that includes two biomass boilers and two backup propane boilers inside. 

2016/02/IntegratedDesign-BMM0316_14552096326552_largethumb.jpg

2016/02/IntegratedDesign-BMM0316_14552096326552_thumb.jpg

2016/02/IntegratedDesign-BMM0316_14552096326552.jpg

HMS GRADUATE: Mark Froling, pictured here with the unaffiliated FrÃ¶ling Heizkessel- und BehÃ¤lterbau Ges.m.b.H. biomass boilers from Austria, is a graduate from High Mowing School, which made the project particularly rewarding.

2016/02/HMSGraduate-BMM0316_14552096316537.jpg

Via a contractual arrangement unique to biomass heat in the U.S., Wilton, New Hampshire-based High Mowing School replaced fuel oil with a biomass district heating system from Xylogen. 

The Ultimate Biomass Heating Package

Bushels of corn have served as feedstock for Central MN Ethanol Co-op LLC&rsquo;s dry mill plant since 2002, but those days are soon coming to an end. Toward the end of March, ethanol production will cease at the 21-MMgy plant. Corn will still find its way to the Little Falls, Minnesota, site, but rather than ethanol and dried distillers grains production, the corn&rsquo;s sugar will make biobased solvents n-butanol and acetone. U.K.-based Green Biologics Ltd., an industrial biotechnology and renewable chemicals company, acquired the ethanol plant in December 2014, renaming it Central MN Renewables LLC. &ldquo;The Little Falls location was selected for its ideal location relative to our feedstock, which is corn,&rdquo; says David Anderson, global vice president of marketing with GBL. &ldquo;This will be the first renewable n-butanol plant in the U.S., and we do have plans to build at future locations.&rdquo; Although this will be the company&rsquo;s first commercial plant in the U.S., GBL has a one-thirtieth-scale demonstration plant in Emmetsburg, Iowa, and a pilot plant in Gahanna, Ohio, near Columbus. &ldquo;When proving out technology, you start with bench lab, then you step it up multiple sizes to a pilot plant, then to a demonstration plant and then you reach commercial capability,&rdquo; says Dana Persson, GBL president of North America, during an interview from the construction site. &ldquo;I am sure the next plant will be even larger than this one.&rdquo; Anderson says GBL is already in the process of identifying a second plant in the U.S., but the current focus is on starting up this first plant. Following the site acquisition, the company completed permitting in late August and groundbreaking shortly thereafter, enabling the project to remain on track to become operational during the third quarter this year. Despite conditions that often accompany a Minnesota winter, construction crew members are busy on-site, evidenced by the all-too familiar sound of construction vehicles using their back-up beepers, audible even beyond Persson&rsquo;s office window. As part of the retrofit, he says, the plant requires some additional equipment and building infrastructure, including slightly different distillation equipment than what is currently installed at the facility. Even so, the key components of the equipment and existing infrastructure fit in &ldquo;pretty well,&rdquo; Persson explains, with the new manufacturing process being readied for deployment. &ldquo;This plant made sense for Green Biologics because you have existing grain handling and storage facilities, fermentation assets, water treatment capabilities, and the supply chain is already in place,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;If they were going to start from a Greenfield operation, they&rsquo;d have a much larger investment than what they will have with this plant.&rdquo; Persson adds that the feedstock supply will be &ldquo;no different than what we do today&rdquo; and come from area corn suppliers. &ldquo;Prior to being purchased by GBL, the ethanol plant was a cooperative, so many of those corn suppliers were shareholders who have a long history with the plant,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Some of those same farmer shareholders and others invested in the new plant as well.&rdquo; Area growers and the state have demonstrated support of the CMR project, Persson says, including the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development and the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, which awarded the project $500,000 in state Next-Gen funding last year. Besides utilizing the current feedstock supply chain, all of the ethanol plant&rsquo;s existing infrastructure will be leveraged, Anderson says, with the addition of the company&rsquo;s advanced fermentation process (AFP) that can convert a wide range of feedstocks into green chemicals such as n-butanol, acetone and, through chemical synthesis, derivatives of butanol and acetone. The platform combines the AFP with proprietary Clostridium microbial biocatalysts and synthetic chemistry. Anderson says the company&rsquo;s key markets for its products include paints and coatings, adhesives, inks, personal care, cosmetics and fragrances. GBL is currently seeking customers for its commercial facility. &ldquo;We are actively negotiating supply agreements with numerous partners,&rdquo; Anderson says. In November, shortly after breaking ground on the ethanol plant retrofit, GBL received approval for membership to the American Chemistry Council. &ldquo;This raises our credibility as a true specialty chemicals company,&rdquo; Anderson says. The facility currently endures its growing pains as it&rsquo;s readied for retrofit. &ldquo;The focus of my office right now is making sure this plant is ready on time and on budget, and people are brought on and trained properly so that we are ready to produce renewable chemicals,&rdquo; Persson says. Author: Katie Fletcher Associate Editor, Biomass Magazine 701-738-4920 kfletcher@bbiinternational.com

Readying for Retrofit: Since September, Weitz construction crew has been working on preparing the prior Central MN Ethanol Co-op plant to move from ethanol to renewable n-butanol production.

2016/02/ReadyingForRetrofit-BMM0316_14552088508285_largethumb.jpg

2016/02/ReadyingForRetrofit-BMM0316_14552088508285_thumb.jpg

2016/02/ReadyingForRetrofit-BMM0316_14552088508285.jpg

Key to Success: The distillation and fire pump building are part of Green Biologics Ltd.â€™s campus where it will deploy its advanced fermentation process. The green chemicals the company will produce possess a competitive advantage to petroleum-deri

2016/02/KeyToSuccess-BMM0316_14552088497909.jpg

Construction retrofitting a Minnesota ethanol plant to produce renewable chemicals is well-underway.

Ethanol to n-Butanol in the Land of 10,000 Lakes

As the campaign season heats up, one trend we are all familiar with is the criticisms leveled against federal support for new technologies, advanced biofuels and large-scale demonstrations of new processes. Oddly enough, this leads many critics who are normally business-friendly to mock companies for innovation. How many times have we read capitalist and business-friendly politicians or publications criticize companies for leveraging technology, intellectual property and nimbleness to create new markets for their technology? Most recently, I have heard these complaints about companies that started out developing one product, but when market forces changed, they shifted gears to find better markets. The truth is that these types of course corrections happen every day of every year. Smart investors look for companies with nimble technologies, smart management and talented teams to be able to surmount obstacles and succeed. What makes some of them targets for criticism is that they received government funds to create, wait for it&hellip;biofuels. And now that they have shifted gears to find better near-term opportunities, the argument is made that all previous investment and support must have been wasted. Now, it&rsquo;s true that many biotech companies, originally founded to create low-carbon alternatives to fossil fuels, have had a challenging time developing these fuels at a price competitive with fossil oil. As such, these companies have adapted to changing market conditions and changed their business model to create other products, oftentimes with higher value, to enable the company to drive revenue, hire and retain employees, pay taxes and continue to grow the business. Companies looking to create fuels from algae, for example, are finding they are uniquely suited to make these kind of adjustments. Technology advances that more efficiently cultivate and process algae can be applied to fuel products, but they also leverage algae as a platform to make products for markets that no investor would want them to pass up: Human health and nutrition: Algae can more efficiently produce protein, Omega-3s and other nutritional ingredients than any other crop. Algae can even be used to cheaply make drugs for cancer, malaria and other ailments. Animal and fish nutrition: Algae can help us remove the &ldquo;middle fish&rdquo; in aquaculture operations, sparing overtaxed fisheries. Farming algae in the desert as an animal feed can free up agricultural lands for other uses, bypassing the food versus fuel debate. Soil health and productivity: Algae-based fertilizers are proven to improve crop yields, adjust soil nitrogen balances and even turn fields into carbon sinks, reducing costs for farmers and decreasing environmental impacts. Many of these products would not see the light of day had it not been for technology developers working in algae-based fuels. We should not be asking whether federal support for new technologies is worth the effort if the results don&rsquo;t immediately match our preconceived notions.The real question we ought to be asking is: What types of technologies do we want&mdash;and need&mdash;to ensure long-term economic growth, energy security and food supplies and environmental benefits? The answer lies not in continued subsidization for yesterday&rsquo;s technology, but tomorrow&rsquo;s. Advances in biotechnology are opening up unprecedented opportunities to create new products that compete on price, quality and performance. If anything, the cost curve for these technologies continues to bend down, whereas we know the cost curve for extracting fossil oil only goes up. On behalf of the hundreds of companies developing algae technology for a range of solutions, from feed to food to fuel, we welcome the discussion about the proper role for taxpayer support and federal policy. Author: Matt Carr Executive Director, Algae Biomass Organization mcarr@algaebiomass.org 877-531-5512

2016/02/MattCarr-BMM0316_14552090419061_largethumb.jpg

2016/02/MattCarr-BMM0316_14552090419061_thumb.jpg

2016/02/MattCarr-BMM0316_14552090419061.jpg

Some companies have adapted to changing market conditions and changed their business model to create other products, oftentimes with higher value,

Supporting New Technology Worth the Effort

In a recent letter to Blue Sphere Corp. shareholders, CEO Shlomi Palas describes 2015 as a standout year for the five-year-old company. The declaration is tough to argue: Blue Sphere&rsquo;s first two stateside anaerobic digestion (AD) projects have reached final stages of construction, and a recent acquisition in Italy adds four more existing AD plants to the company&rsquo;s portfolio; all are operating under long-term power purchase agreements. Palas reflects on the journey he&rsquo;s been on since 2007&ndash;&ndash;the path, of which, has changed course several times&ndash;&ndash;to where he is today. &ldquo;At that time [2007], I was focused on China and working in biodiesel, I helped build an algae farm with a large utility company,&rdquo; he says. A few years later, he founded Blue Sphere. &ldquo;We didn&rsquo;t start with waste to energy, but rather, a project that was supposed to reduce emissions,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;We changed direction when the carbon credit industry in Europe did; we looked for other opportunities. After researching the WTE market, we saw that it was very well-developed in Europe, but in the U.S., it had just started moving forward.&rdquo; Blue Sphere&rsquo;s business development strategy is two-fold&mdash;new development (build-own-operate) in the U.S., and acquisition in Europe, with a focus on Italy. &ldquo;In Europe, there are thousands of biogas facilities,&rdquo; Palas says. &ldquo;The market is good for acquisition and not development. America is good for development, but not acquisition.&rdquo; Italy is home to about 1,200 biogas facilities, thus the appeal. &ldquo;Down the road, our goal is to acquire a few dozen of them,&rdquo; Palas says. &ldquo;There are other markets in Europe in which we are active, such as Holland, but we have about 20 projects in the pipeline in Italy, and our goal is to acquire an additional seven this year.&rdquo; He adds that while Germany, the birthplace of anaerobic digestion, boasts roughly 7,000 biogas plants, it is &ldquo;a huge market, but an exhausted market. There are not many new developments over there, and we&rsquo;ve identified a unique business opportunity in Italy, so that&rsquo;s where we&rsquo;re focused.&rdquo; As for new-build projects, Blue Sphere has narrowed its efforts in the U.S. to the Northeast, where opportunities are unfolding largely in part to the region&rsquo;s support of zero waste initiatives. &ldquo;I can&rsquo;t say too much at this point, as big utilities don&rsquo;t like when we name names,&rdquo; Palas says, when asked to elaborate on Blue Sphere&rsquo;s next U.S. projects. &ldquo;But, I can tell you that our focus is more in New England, for the simple reason that it&rsquo;s very supportive of the waste-to-energy industry&mdash;by regulation, by waste bans&mdash;the area is very advanced in comparison to others. I&rsquo;m not saying we won&rsquo;t do business in California, which is also advanced in its waste-to-energy initiatives, the South or other regions. If an opportunity arises, we&rsquo;ll look at it. But for now, this is where we will initiate business.&rdquo; And Blue Sphere is soon to prove out that business concept, as its pair of flagship AD projects, developed in partnership with an affiliate of York Capital Management, are nearly complete and will be operating by spring. From Dirt to Digestion A visit to Blue Sphere&rsquo;s website provides each plant&rsquo;s construction story via photos that have been posted over the past several months. The latest update provided in December shows a nearly complete Charlotte, North Carolina, facility. &ldquo;The receiving building is there, the gensets, digester, waste treatment is done&hellip;we were actually supposed to finish everything at the end of December, but the weather was so bad,&rdquo; Palas says. &ldquo;We didn&rsquo;t have a choice, we had to hold back a little.&rdquo; Now, the estimated finish date is the end of February or beginning of March, just in time for the facility to open its doors and serve as a tour site at the International Biomass Conference &amp; Expo. &ldquo;I just visited the site and nearly drowned in mud and snow, but we&rsquo;re in good shape,&rdquo; Palas says with a chuckle. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re in the last mile of construction, it looks beautiful.&rdquo; In Johnston, Rhode Island, the plant is at nearly the same stage as Charlotte, the only significant difference being its size. &ldquo;Charlotte is 5.2 MW, and Johnston is 3.2 MW, both are based on food waste. A 5.2-MW plant is huge, we&rsquo;re talking 424 tons of food waste per day&hellip;I believe the largest AD project in the world is 7 MW. Most in the world are less than 1 MW, close to half a MW, maybe 90 percent.&rdquo; Power from Charlotte and Johnston will be sold to Duke Energy and National Grid, respectively, via 15-year power purchase agreements. Building an AD plant and being able to easily replicate the same design elsewhere is a significant advantage, according to Palas. &ldquo;The beauty of this business is that it&rsquo;s almost like cut and paste,&rdquo; he says, emphasizing that Blue Sphere does not own the technology being deployed at its plants, and doesn&rsquo;t plan to at any point. &ldquo;That&rsquo;s part of our strategy&mdash;we want to be able to select the best technology available for each solution, whether it&rsquo;s AD, woody biomass, incineration. For each project we face, we&rsquo;ll choose the technology that will solve that specific problem.&rdquo; The technology provider and engineering, procurement and construction contractor of Blue Sphere&rsquo;s Charlotte and Johnston facilities is Italian company Austep S.p.A. &ldquo;We let them take the reins,&rdquo; Palas says.&nbsp; &ldquo;The way we operate is that we&rsquo;re not constructing the facilities, we hire others to do it. We&rsquo;re more on the management and supervision level.&rdquo; What drew Blue Sphere to the sites of the Johnston and Charlotte plants? A few main components are must-haves when it comes to AD project development, according to Palas, the first being a nearby interconnection. &ldquo;A few hundred feet maximum&mdash;we won&rsquo;t go a mile or a mile and a half. It needs to be near the substation,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;The distance to the grid&mdash;it needs to be close.&rdquo; The site must also be near a major highway, &ldquo;or a railroad,&rdquo; Palas offers. &ldquo;It can&rsquo;t be near any neighborhoods or houses; you don&rsquo;t want 40 to 50 trucks of waste going through a neighborhood. It should be in an industrial zone. There are more, but those are the major criteria when we come in to evaluate a potential site.&rdquo; Additional components important to new projects in today&rsquo;s development climate, Palas says, are incentives and tax credits, and that&rsquo;s particularly to an industry that&rsquo;s relatively young in the U.S., as AD is both state and federal, as well as low-interest loans, renewable portfolio standards and renewable energy certificates and other benefits offered to project developers. Without hesitation, Palas credits the strength of his team of 12 as the key to having accomplished such a great deal in one year. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s very strong, and we have the expertise we need&mdash;financial people, technical people, and business development, all of the skills you need to develop a successful project, that&rsquo;s our main advantage. Some companies are very strong in technology, but weak in finance or business development.&rdquo; Palas says he sees Blue Sphere growing personnel-wise, perhaps doubling or slightly more.&nbsp; And as far as adding facilities to its portfolio goes, 2016 is shaping up to be another productive year. &ldquo;We have a lot of projects in the pipeline in the U.S. and Italy, and a few megaprojects in Asia&mdash;it&rsquo;s going to be an interesting year,&rdquo; he adds. &ldquo;We&rsquo;ve proven our concept under project development, now we need to prove to the market that it&rsquo;s not luck&mdash;we know how to do it again.&rdquo; Author: Anna Simet Managing Editor, Biomass Magazine 701-738-4961<a title="Call: 701-738-4961" style="margin: 0px; border: currentColor; left: 0px; top: 0px; width: 16px; height: 16px; right: 0px; bottom: 0px; overflow: hidden; vertical-align: middle; float: none; display: inline; white-space: nowrap; position: static !important;" href="#"><img title="Call: 701-738-4961" alt="" style="margin: 0px; border: currentColor; left: 0px; top: 0px; width: 16px; height: 16px; right: 0px; bottom: 0px; overflow: hidden; vertical-align: middle; float: none; display: inline; white-space: nowrap; position: static !important;" src="" /></a> asimet@bbiinternational.com

NEARING THE FINISH LINE: Pictured is Blue Sphereâ€™s Charlotte, Virginia, 5.2-MW anaerobic digestion facility, as of Jan. 21. The facility is nearly complete and is slated to be operational by early March. 

2016/02/NearingTheFinishLine-BMM0316_14552092250339_largethumb.jpg

2016/02/NearingTheFinishLine-BMM0316_14552092250339_thumb.jpg

2016/02/NearingTheFinishLine-BMM0316_14552092250339.jpg

HAPPY CAMPER: A worker stops work to pose for a photo outside of Blue Sphereâ€™s Johnston, Rhode Island, 3.2-MW anaerobic digestion facility, where construction 
is keeping pace with the companyâ€™s Charlotte facility. 

2016/02/HappyCamper-BMM0316_14552092237133.jpg

LOOKING BACK: In this photo taken just nine months ago, rebar installation of one of the two digesters in Charlotte was complete. The next step was pouring of the first half of the digester concrete.

2016/02/Rebar-Instillation-BMM0316_14552092260459.jpg

SPACE FOR WASTE: A view is shown from inside of one of the Johnston plantâ€™s 
digestion tanks.

2016/02/SpaceForWaste-BMM0316_14552092270357.jpg

Blue Sphere Corp.'s two-prong business development strategy in the global waste-to-energy industry is proving to be fruitful.

Circling Opportunity

Operating a biogas plant is a big commitment, but the work comes with a sizeable reward. Unlike other renewable energy sources, biogas is largely independent of external influences such as wind or sunlight. As a stable form of renewable energy, the demand for biogas is continually on the rise. Canadian programs like Ontario&rsquo;s feed-in-tariff are continually developed to encourage the use and production of renewable energy sources in each province. The use of renewable raw materials to produce energy sources provides a unique opportunity for farms across Canada, but how can an operator tell whether it is getting all that it can from its plant?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; What&rsquo;s in Your Gas? In order for a biogas plant to be considered ecological, economical, and safe to operate, it is crucial to know the exact composition and levels of the biogas produced. The analysis of biogas can be carried out with either mobile multigas detectors or a stationary measuring device. Detection technology must be capable of discovering various gases with different properties. This feature of detection devices is particularly important to the safety of the plant and to the production efficiencies within your system. Without such technology, operating a plant can be fatal.&nbsp; For this reason, a comprehensive operating system is necessary in every plant. The advantage of mobile gas detectors lies in the ability to measure the composition and ranges of the biogas at various points throughout the plant. This technology is predominantly useful for ensuring consistency throughout the plant. In most cases, it is possible to store the measurements internally on the device before transferring to a computer for analysis. Stationary devices are user-friendly and low-maintenance, but can limit the amount of locations for composition testing. Anaerobic digestion, the process in which mediums like manure are converted into gas, produces a variety of byproducts, including gases such as methane, carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and hydrogen. These gases can be odorless, which disguises dangerous properties during production. Even in small concentrations, the dangers range from irritation of the eyes, to nausea, to potential fatality through asphyxiation. Gas detection equipment is designed specifically to protect you, as well as the environment, from harmful emissions. Check for Leaks, Regularly To further enhance efficiency of the systems and to reduce emissions of harmful greenhouse gases, it is imperative to check the entire plant regularly for leaks and structural defects. Leaks in a system mean two things: First, not all biogas is being converted successfully, and second, environmentally harmful emissions have the potential to make the plant hazardous. Running a system below optimal capacity simply means less energy to produce, and therefore, less to use or sell. Plants need to be inspected in all areas, including pipes, flanges, transitions and seals. Portable leak detection devices are beneficial to minimizing emissions of climate-impacting greenhouse gases, as well as ensuring the plant is containing the maximum amount of gas. These portable devices are easy to use, and highly effective in optimizing the efficiency of your plant. Pay Attention to Self-Protection One thing that is often underestimated in biogas plants is self-protection. Biogas can have dramatic consequences to operators and workers if not handled properly. Safety devices are available, both for personal protection and other security-related functions such as free-measuring shafts. These devices can be calibrated to detect specific concentrations of gas at only a few parts-per-million, which are undetectable without specialized equipment. Gases such as methane, the most common gas produced in biogas plants, can be odorless, and thus extremely hazardous to the human body, containing explosive and asphyxiating properties. Having equipment on hand to detect such gases is essential to the safety of the plant, and most importantly, the workers. Technology Supports You Biogas testing technology is available to help operators achieve the highest possible plant efficiency, while contributing to the reduction of emissions that can be harmful to the environment. Devices designed for leak detection, quality inspection and self-protection are continuously being developed in order to benefit any size of plant. Expanding the presence of this technology will continue to increase the demand for renewable energy in Canada, and the reward for the people who produce it. Can you be sure you are getting the most out of your biogas plant? Author: Dominik Klaus Product Manager, Hermann Sewerin GmbH 49-5241-934-237 dominik.klaus@sewerin.com

2016/02/Dominik-BMM0316_14552094270937_largethumb.jpg

2016/02/Dominik-BMM0316_14552094270937_thumb.jpg

2016/02/Dominik-BMM0316_14552094270937.jpg

The use of renewable raw materials to produce energy sources provides a unique opportunity for farms across Canada, but how can an operator tell whether it is getting all that it can from its plant?    

March 2016

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Columns

President signs tax extenders, government funding legislation

Let's not leave the discussion in Iowa

Biofuels “here and now” solution

“The best lobbyists aren”t really lobbyists”

Going full throttle with ethanol

Pushing back against misinformation

Oil consumers puppets on a string

The energy behind ethanol

Utilizing Urban Wood Waste

Preventing Pellet Plant Failures

Risk Abated

Senate Recognizes Biomass's Carbon Benefits

Supporting New Technology Worth the Effort

Optimizing a Biogas Plant

Featured

Meeting the California low carbon challenge

E25, E40 for the masses

Powering up with a let-down turbine

Technology harnesses waste gases for power

Building Big in British Columbia

The Ultimate Biomass Heating Package

Circling Opportunity

Contributions

Promising jet fuel market looms for upgraded bioethanol, butanol

Energy center enhancements deliver more steam

Departments

Pellet Capacity Shake Out

Ethanol to n-Butanol in the Land of 10,000 Lakes

March 2016.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

Business Briefs

Columns

President signs tax extenders, government funding legislation

Let's not leave the discussion in Iowa

Biofuels “here and now” solution

“The best lobbyists aren”t really lobbyists”

Going full throttle with ethanol

Pushing back against misinformation

Oil consumers puppets on a string

The energy behind ethanol

Utilizing Urban Wood Waste

Preventing Pellet Plant Failures

Risk Abated

Senate Recognizes Biomass's Carbon Benefits

Supporting New Technology Worth the Effort

Optimizing a Biogas Plant

Featured

Meeting the California low carbon challenge

E25, E40 for the masses

Powering up with a let-down turbine

Technology harnesses waste gases for power

Building Big in British Columbia

The Ultimate Biomass Heating Package

Circling Opportunity

Contributions

Promising jet fuel market looms for upgraded bioethanol, butanol

Energy center enhancements deliver more steam

Departments

Pellet Capacity Shake Out

Ethanol to n-Butanol in the Land of 10,000 Lakes

March 2016