Year-end is a natural time for reflection, particularly as Growth Energy&rsquo;s new CEO, who joined only seven short months ago. As I consider where we&rsquo;ve been and where we&rsquo;re going, I&rsquo;m energized by our industry&rsquo;s willingness to reach outside the comfort zone for the betterment of all. One of our industry&rsquo;s great strengths is the support we&rsquo;ve built within the Corn Belt and the Capital Beltway (what Washingtonians affectionately refer to as the policy community in Washington, D.C.). Our base is tremendous, propelling us from a start-up industry with fledgling support to being established with a defined and growing marketplace. We will continue to engage and rally our base and that will never change. Growing our industry and selling considerably more ethanol gallons requires broadening our base of support, however. It requires connecting with consumers across the country, in all states and districts and localities, with urbanites, millennials, moms and grandmothers. Our industry isn&rsquo;t just good for farming communities, it&rsquo;s good for every community, they just may not know it yet. I can assure you, however, they soon will. Ethanol, typically E10, is in nearly 97 percent of our fuel, and higher blends are becoming increasingly prevalent. Access to higher blends is good for Americans&rsquo; pocketbooks, their engines and the air we all breathe. Since I became CEO in May, Growth Energy has started new conversations on why American ethanol is such a benefit to all Americans and why options at the pump matter.&nbsp; Growth Energy traveled to the Southern Women&rsquo;s Show in Charlotte, North Carolina, to talk with women about ethanol. Women and mothers are interested to know that ethanol displaces harmful chemicals in gasoline known to cause cancer, asthma, groundwater contamination and smog. We met with over a dozen influential female bloggers and marketers to begin a dialogue, and we brought along The Bachelor star Chris Soules and fourth-generation auto mechanic Audra Fordin, the first female head of her family-owned auto repair shop, to help us tell the story in attendee meetings and radio interviews. In October, we worked with some of our great retail partners in the &ldquo;Pink Out&rdquo; campaign. Sheetz, Minnoco, Protec and Murphy USA turning fuel nozzles and pump toppers around the country pink to alert consumers that what they put in their tank matters. We raised awareness for breast cancer, and our retailer partners donated 2 cents of every gallon of E15 sold to fight breast cancer. Choosing E15 isn&rsquo;t just a fuel choice, it is a health and lifestyle choice. Filling up with E15 during Breast Cancer Awareness Month meant consumers were actively contributing to an amazing cause. But beyond that, choosing E15 on any given day is also an active contribution to keeping our environment cleaner and each other healthier.&nbsp; In further efforts to reach consumers, we launched a new website: GetEthanol.com that connects drivers with their closest E15 and E85 stations. It also provides easily digestible content on the home page and affiliated Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Pinterest pages that educate and energize followers about the benefits of E15 without overwhelming unfamiliar consumers. The content is meant to be accessible to anyone, especially young people who may not be familiar with biofuels. Looking back on these initiatives, I am excited at what the next year holds. Our work to engage consumers will continue to expand and supplement our efforts on Capitol Hill to maintain a strong renewable fuel standard, support renewable volume obligations set at the Congressionally intended levels and secure a Reid vapor pressure waiver for E15, so it can be sold year-round in all 50 states. The synergy of continued legislative strength and a growing focus on reintroducing the public to ethanol all point to the same goal: Expand the availability of higher ethanol blends so that Americans are free to choose a fuel that promotes cleaner air, keeps their engines running smoothly and saves their hard-earned money at the pump. The ethanol industry has been one of the great American success stories, and I look forward to working on behalf of our members and with all of our partners to ensure the next chapter builds on that success. Author: Emily Skor CEO, Growth Energy 202-545-4000 eskor@growthenergy.org

2016/11/EmilySkor_14782738799658_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/EmilySkor_14782738799658_thumb.jpg

2016/11/EmilySkor_14782738799658.jpg

Growth Energy's CEO  writes about expanding the base of support for ethanol in her column from the December print issue of Ethanol Producer Magazine.

Our Work to Engage Consumers Expands 

You&rsquo;ve seen the commercials. ExxonMobil introduced it with a huge summer Olympic ad buy, and it&rsquo;s been all over the place since. A guy pumps gas and reads a sign saying ExxonMobil gas has seven ingredients for better mileage, and wonders aloud what they are. Suddenly, seven scientisty-looking people appear, offering vague (but technical sounding) answers to his question. I remember &ldquo;detergent additive number one&rdquo; and &ldquo;detergent additive number two,&rdquo; and a guy in an egg-shaped hovercraft (with jets facing the wrong direction) talking about &ldquo;marker molecules,&rdquo; I think. Not sure how any of those help mileage, but you&rsquo;ve seen the ad, right? So, what&rsquo;s the brand being introduced? If you can&rsquo;t remember the ExxonMobil brand, how about one that&rsquo;s been around longer? Can you name Shell&rsquo;s premium brand? No? How about the branded additive Chevron introduced 20 years ago? You know that one, don&rsquo;t you? Of course you don&rsquo;t, unless you&rsquo;re a fuel nerd of some sort, and maybe not even then.&nbsp; After all, you&rsquo;re reading this column in a magazine for people in the ethanol industry. You ARE a fuel nerd of some sort. If you don&rsquo;t know those brand names, who does? Hardly anyone. And even those who do, don&rsquo;t seem to do much with the information. Two-thirds of consumers say price is the most important factor when they buy gas, and 25 percent buy based on location or ease of getting in and out of the retailer&rsquo;s parking lot. About 8 percent of drivers say brand is the most important thing to them. And by brand, they mean the brand name on the big sign in front of the station, not the name of the fuel or an additive. So, you won&rsquo;t be surprised to know, I cringe a little when I hear ethanol people talking about the need for an ethanol &ldquo;brand name.&rdquo; It would be great if a logo or catchy name drew more people to higher ethanol blends, but nothing I&rsquo;ve seen gives me confidence that would happen. I&rsquo;m not sure it matters what WE call our fuel. At the same time, as higher ethanol blends are introduced into more markets, retailers experience varying degrees of success, especially with E15. We should take note of successful E15 marketers. It does matter what they call our fuel. At this summer&rsquo;s American Coalition for Ethanol conference, Mike Lorenz of Sheetz said &ldquo;Customers don&rsquo;t know what E15 is, because they don&rsquo;t know what E10 is.&rdquo; I thought he was describing a regional issue, particular to North Carolina, until I helped out with grand re-openings of c-stores in Iowa, South Dakota and Nebraska, where E15 was being introduced to customers. After talking with drivers and station employees, it became clear E10 and E15 are our terms, not theirs. Stations sell regular or unleaded, not E10. Customers don&rsquo;t know they can use E15, because they don&rsquo;t use E10. They use regular or unleaded. The only fuel drivers are familiar with that starts with an &ldquo;E&rdquo; is E85, so most assume E15 is a flex fuel. To date, most retailers reporting success selling E15, offer it as &ldquo;Unleaded15&rdquo; or &ldquo;Unleaded Plus.&rdquo; They make information on new blends available, but &ldquo;unleaded&rdquo; and a lower price seem to be all most drivers need to know. Ironically, the way to sell more ethanol as E15 seems to be reminding motorists less about ethanol and more about the gas they&rsquo;ve always used. That&rsquo;s disappointing, but remember, after spending hundreds of millions promoting brands like Synergy, V-Power, and Techron, pumps at major branded locations still say &ldquo;unleaded&rdquo; and &ldquo;regular,&rdquo; too. Author: Ron Lamberty Senior Vice President &nbsp;American Coalition for Ethanol &nbsp;605-334-3381 rlamberty@ethanol.org

2016/11/Lamberty-Ron_14782734215624_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/Lamberty-Ron_14782734215624_thumb.jpg

2016/11/Lamberty-Ron_14782734215624.jpg

How consumers understand fuels is important in understanding the power of a brand for E15 sales, writes ACE's Lamberty in his column for the December print issue of Ethanol Producer Magazine.  

What's in a Name?

As the ethanol industry has matured and paid off significant amounts of debt in the past few years, it is becoming more common for plant managers to consider expansions or upgrades to enhance efficiency. Many consider new technologies for processing alternative, value-added products from corn.&nbsp; Some older plants simply need to reinvest in the plant, bringing it up to state-of-the-art.&nbsp; The lender&rsquo;s point of view of such projects is not all that different from the evaluation by the management team and board of directors. It starts with projected return on investment (ROI).&nbsp; What are the costs?&nbsp; What are the potential returns and how might additional gallons affect the local corn basis?&nbsp; Unlike the investor, the lender generally only has downside risk to the stated interest rate on the loan and no upside in the form of greater returns, thus the lender&rsquo;s tolerance for risk is generally not as great as equity investors. When discussing a capital infrastructure project with a lender, be prepared to discuss the short- and long-term benefits and risks.&nbsp; Prepare a three- to five-year projection with the key assumptions used in the analysis.&nbsp; Consider stress testing those assumptions, as the lender definitely will be doing so in its evaluation. Consider the ROI under different scenarios and how it makes the plant more competitive in the long run.&nbsp; The goal of most projects is to drive down costs to be more competitive or to capture higher-margin revenue products. Thus, understanding the plant&rsquo;s performance drivers and how the facility ranks on the performance curve are important, typically stated as EBITDA (earnings before income taxes, depreciation and amortization) per gallon.&nbsp; History has shown that the most efficient gallons will have less volatility to earnings during down cycles. When considering a new technology with new market opportunities, expect pushback for expenditures with the serial number &ldquo;001.&rdquo; While we have seen great successes, such as corn oil extraction, not all projects experience universal success, nor does one size fit all.&nbsp; For instance, there may be geographical differences that impact success.&nbsp; Another example: Cellulosic production is still an evolving path. Often, it&rsquo;s better to be patient and ride out the infancy phase of new technology, so initial bugs can be corrected and performance data accumulated. As with all commodity-related industries, the project&rsquo;s impact on the business&rsquo;s working capital will be a key discussion point, especially in an expansion where more working capital may be required.&nbsp; Working capital in the 15- to 20-cents-per-gallon range generally is considered healthy. Higher working capital levels, however, can mitigate the additional risk a capital investment project may bring.&nbsp; Expect your lender to have covenants around this financial metric.&nbsp; Striking the right balance among asset investment, a strong working capital position and distributions back to investors is the biggest challenge as new projects are discussed. While the historic and projected financials of the plant are central to a lender&rsquo;s credit decision, equally important is the strength of a management team. Strong economic periods can hide management deficiencies, but good performance during challenging times highlights strong management teams.&nbsp; Not all adverse factors can be controlled, but strong management positions the facility to better navigate them.&nbsp; An ethanol plant&rsquo;s debt level is usually a combination of historic and projected cash flows, working capital and management strength. The level of debt generally ranges between 50 and 65 cents per gallon, depending on the project.&nbsp; As it relates to expansion, there is always the discussion on whether the industry needs more gallons.&nbsp; This is no different from many other commodity-based businesses and is a function of supply and demand.&nbsp; A business expansion must include plans on how to survive an oversupplied market.&nbsp; This correlates with being an efficient producer with working capital to absorb acceptable losses and a strong management team that can adapt to changes to the market. Having a good lender relationship establishes management&rsquo;s credibility and generally creates a more open dialog as capital projects are discussed.&nbsp; Lenders do not like surprises, so keep them informed and let them know what the business sees as potential risks and why the business is comfortable with the risk. Cultivating this relationship on an ongoing basis will position you for a more productive, honest and beneficial discussion when the time comes for project financing. &nbsp; Author: Jason Johnson Vice President, Team Leader, AgStar Financial Services&nbsp;&nbsp; 952-997-1278 Jason.Johnson@agstar.com&nbsp;

2016/11/JohnsonJason-AgStar_14782705699591_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/JohnsonJason-AgStar_14782705699591_thumb.jpg

2016/11/JohnsonJason-AgStar_14782705699591.jpg

AgStar Financial's team leader reviews best practices for building good lender relationships. This Business Matters column appears in the December print issue of Ethanol Producer Magazine.

Game Plan for Capital Project Financing Discussions with Lenders

Maximizing ethanol production is the top priority for fuel ethanol producers. It is, however, a process that requires tremendous effort by well-trained, experienced operators who understand both the many variables that affect production and the many new production-enhancing technologies on the market. Given the importance of maintaining high production levels, the last thing ethanol plant managers want is bacterial infections compromising their production process and decreasing yields. In a typical corn-to-ethanol, dry-grind process, corn is converted to sugar, which is consumed by the yeast to produce ethanol. Unfortunately, yeast are not the only hungry organisms looking for a sugar fix. Any bacteria present will also consume the sugars.&nbsp; Because they typically grow at rates much faster than yeast, a small number of bacteria will quickly multiply and outcompete the yeast for vital nutrients. As a result, there is less sugar to produce alcohol. Additionally, the byproducts secreted by the bacteria, lactic and acetic acids, act as stressors that are harmful to the yeast. Bacterial problems can have expensive consequences. For example, in a 100 MMgy&nbsp; fuel ethanol plant, a moderate level of bacterial contamination can lead to an annual revenue loss of $4.5 million at current ethanol prices. Excessive bacteria can cost as much as $190,000 if a single fermentor is entirely lost. Unfortunately, fuel ethanol plants were not designed to be sterile environments, thus eliminating bacterial infections is cost prohibitive, if not impossible. Not only are bacteria introduced with the incoming corn, but they also find their way into the fermentors from other sources, such as cooling tower water, which may be added to the cook water. While the raw water might be fine, any time a tank or yeast propagator is filled with water and additives, there is the potential to introduce bacteria. &emsp; First Line of Defense Good plant hygiene is the first line of defense against bacteria. Plant managers who keep their plants as clean as possible will reduce places for bacteria to hide, thrive, and then be transferred to the production process via surface contacts or simply in airborne dust. A robust clean-in-place (CIP) program to remove deposits, such as beer stone, or organic fouling, such as scum, which form at the liquid-air interface in tanks, is critical. Cleaning piping, heat exchangers and tank surfaces to bare metal eliminates places where bacteria persist before rapidly infecting the production process when the next tank is filled. This is very important because the fewer bacteria in the propagator at the start of propagation, the greater the head start for the yeast. The quality of the water used in the ethanol production process is also very important in controlling bacteria. Reuse of wastewater streams, such as cooling tower blowdown or scrubber water, benefits the environment, including the water table on which the local community depends. However, while reuse of wastewater is the right thing to do from an environmental perspective, it may not be right from a production perspective, because wastewater streams can be a significant source of bacteria. Making the right choice regarding where and how best to reuse water can be difficult given the numerous variables. Technology providers, like Solenis, are an excellent source of information that can help facilitate this decision-making process. These plant hygiene practices play a critical role in maximizing ethanol yields, but may still not be sufficient to control a bacterial infection. As a result, a traditional course of action for ethanol plants looking to maximize yields is a bacterial control strategy based on antibiotics. Antibiotic-Based Treatments Many plant managers opt for treatment programs using antibiotics that have a solid track record in reducing both the number of bacteria present in the fermentation process and the bacteria&rsquo;s ability to grow. Among the benefits of these programs are that they are easily incorporated into the production process and they effectively arrest bacterial growth, reducing the risk of a costly problem. While there are many positives associated with antibiotic programs, they are not without their drawbacks. Some of these issues have received attention from the media, consumers and corporate America. The highest-profile concern is over the presence of antibiotics in meats and poultry from animals fed with distillers grains sourced from fuel ethanol plants where antibiotics are used to control bacteria in fermentation. Whether these antibiotics find their way into the human food chain or can potentially confer antibiotic resistance to strains of bacteria in livestock and poultry is widely debated in scientific circles. Nonetheless, these matters are understandably concerning to consumers, consumer advocates and companies like Subway, McDonald&rsquo;s and Walmart. Lastly, managers of some fuel ethanol plants have expressed concerns about potential time-consuming documentation of antibiotics use that will likely be required under increasingly stringent government regulations, such as the Food Safety Modernization Act. Antibiotic-Free Alternatives In an effort to address these drawbacks, there are a growing number of antibiotic-free additives for controlling bacterial infections available in the marketplace. One choice for plant managers is a novel technology from Solenis that uses a patented, synergistic combination of iso-alpha acids derived from hops and organic acids to control bacterial infections. These products, which are marketed as Solenis fermentation aids, have proven to be an economical way to eliminate antibiotics from the ethanol production process and ease the concerns of consumers and other important influencers in the marketplace about antibiotics in the food chain. Another advantage of this technology over other antibiotic alternatives is that, like antibiotics, it exhibits differential toxicity. This means that it will negatively impact unwanted organisms, such as Lactobacilli, but will not harm yeast. The fermentation aids are also cost-effective, safe to handle, sustainable, biodegradable, designated as generally regarded as safe (GRAS) and Kosher certified. An important differentiator for the fermentation aids is that each product is a liquid and can easily be dosed automatically. As part of its offering, Solenis provides its customers with an automatic feed system to eliminate manual product dosing and operator error, enable plant operators to achieve more precise control of the chemical feed, help them optimize the results of the program over time, and reduce health and safety risks in the facility. In-Plant Test Results The efficacy of Solenis&rsquo; fermentation aids has been demonstrated recently in trials conducted at a new customer&rsquo;s 55 MMgy corn ethanol plant in the U.S. Corn Belt. The goal of the trials was to confirm for the customer that the antibiotic-free fermentation aid would control bacterial infections and deliver equal or better plant performance at no additional cost. The first step in the process was a detailed audit of the plant&rsquo;s ethanol manufacturing process and an evaluation of its historical performance data. Among the things reviewed were details of the plant&rsquo;s fermentation process, the additives being used, yeast counts and viabilities and concentration profiles of ethanol, sugars, lactic and acetic acid and glycerol. The results of these assessments indicated that the fermentation aid program would be a good fit for this customer. The second step was for Solenis field and technical staff to work with the plant personnel to carefully develop a trial plan that would not negatively impact the plant&rsquo;s production. Elements of the plan included a process for gradually converting from antibiotics to the fermentation aid program and contingency plans if production performance began to slip. The final step was for the Solenis technical team to be on-site in order to work closely with the plant personnel during the trial to monitor and evaluate the program&rsquo;s performance. Over the course of the trial, ethanol production was maintained (see graph on page 45) and DP3 and sugar profiles were not negatively impacted. The concentrations of bacterial byproducts, lactic and acetic acids, which are common indicators of bacterial infection, did not increase (see graph on page 46). Glycerol concentration, an indicator of yeast stress, did not increase either. Collectively, these data confirmed production levels using the fermentation aids were equal to or slightly better than the plant&rsquo;s previous performance. The test protocol called for a six- to eight-week trial but, based on the very positive initial results, the customer chose to fully convert to the Solenis fermentation aid program in just two weeks. It was clear that the program was a viable way to cost-effectively eliminate the use of antibiotics in the ethanol production process without impacting productivity, easing marketplace concerns regarding antibiotics in the distillers grains generated at the plant. Author: Scott Lewis Biorefining R&amp;D Scientist, Solenis 866-337-1533 srlewis@solenis.com Contributing authors: Andrew Ledlie Biorefining Marketing Manager, Solenis; Paul Shepperd, Biorefining Applications Project Manager, Solenis;

2016/11/FermValves-DecEPM16_14782708517132_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/FermValves-DecEPM16_14782708517132_thumb.jpg

2016/11/FermValves-DecEPM16_14782708517132.jpg

Lactic Acid Concentration at the End of Fermentation: Each point represents one fermentation with antibiotics (black circles) or the Solenis fermentation aid program (blue squares).  Solid lines represent the average lactic acid concentrations and th

2016/11/Fermentation-EPM1216_14782709227072.jpg

Ethanol Concentration at the End of Fermentation: Each point represents one fermentation with antibiotics (black circles) or the Solenis fermentation aid program (blue squares).  
Solid lines represent the average ethanol and dotted lines represent t

2016/11/Fermentation2-EPM1216_14782709217717.jpg

Cleanliness comes first, but then plants must evaluate multiple approaches to remain free of infections.  This contribution appears in the December print issue of Ethanol Producer Magazine.

Options Expand for Effective Bacterial Control  in Ethanol Production  

One of the biggest technology upgrades for the ethanol industry in the past decade has been corn oil extraction. If Virginia Klausmeier and the team she leads at Sylvatex have their way, the next will be upgrading that corn oil, combined with first-generation ethanol, into a new advanced biofuel, applying ethanol&rsquo;s well-known oxygenate benefits to improve emissions in diesel fuels.&nbsp; The process for creating low-emission diesel fuels is similar to gasoline: Blend oxygenates with diesel fuel to reduce the overall carbon content and emissions of harmful substances released into the air. Klausmeier is CEO of San Francisco-based Sylvatex Inc., a company founded by her father, who developed a process to create an alternative diesel fuel that blends ethanol with free fatty acids (FFAs) to produce a low-emission fuel that not only reduces NOx (nitrogen oxides) and particulate emissions when blended with ultra-low sulfur diesel and B100, but does so without affecting engine performance. Sylvatex&rsquo; process takes ethanol and encapsulates it in a nanosized particle that enables suspension in a mid-distillate product. It creates an alternative fuel blend that is not a mainstream renewable diesel nor biodiesel. &ldquo;Using ethanol as the oxygenate in this alternative fuel blend allows for increased emission reductions. It also allows there to be a secondary use for a product that is available in large supply. Opening new markets for ethanol producers can increase energy security, use more local resources, and upgrade diesel fuel for the users,&rdquo; Klausmeier says. Nanostructure Key The sizing aspect of this proprietary blending technology is what creates stability in the end product and gives it functionality. Nanoparticles behave as a small system and act as a whole unit with respect to its transport and properties, Klausmeier explains. &ldquo;Sylvatex is a nanotechnology company. We know how to create nanoparticle applications that are important for industry, and understand how nanotechnology can be used with biomass as key inputs, which is a novel approach compared to other companies.&rdquo; The resulting end product, MicroX, is a blendstock that can be considered an additive, a blended fuel or a drop-in fuel that can be blended into gasoline and any diesel fuel, biodiesel or other middle-distillate fuels. &ldquo;It is not used at 100 percent, but is blended. Successful demonstrations have been completed at 15 to 20 percent and more than 40 percent, but the current focus is to blend at 10 percent for use in diesel engines,&rdquo; she says. &ldquo;It also looks like a drop-in because it blends with existing diesel fuels and can go into current diesel engines as well as advanced diesel engines. Some consider it an additive, but the U.S. EPA reserves that terminology for substances that are blended with small percentages less than 1 percent, so Sylvatex calls it a blended fuel.&rdquo;&nbsp; &ldquo;It&rsquo;s important to realize that ethanol is not blended directly into diesel fuel, it&rsquo;s not stable,&rdquo; she continues. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s separated out and encapsulated into a stable nanostructure. These nanoparticles are so small that they remain intact as they go through the fuel system until combustion. They&rsquo;re not filtered out, and fuel that has these particles behaves the same until they combust. The nanostructure is an important part to creating a low-carbon fuel overall and lower emissions at the tailpipe.&rdquo; As produced, the blendstock is very dense. In order to measure the size, distribution and structure of the nanoparticles created, it has to be diluted in a base solution. The National Institute of Standards and Technology performed an optical analysis of MicroX that was blended into diesel fuel, showing the process produces 10 micron spherical particles. Other techniques that blend macrosized molecules or bubbles into diesel fuels cause problems because the molecules are so large that they are trapped when the fuel passes through fuel filters, which typically screen out particles that are larger than around 500 microns. Macrosized molecules are 100,000 times larger than nanoparticles, which is why nanoparticles have no problems passing through the system. Easy Integration Producing MicroX blendstock involves a simple process with two key inputs, a blending tool and one output. The ethanol and FFA inputs, both renewable, are combined in the microblend technology utilizing trace amounts of proprietary components that stimulate the reactions. In the past year, Sylvatex and its partners developed a way to use FFAs from corn oil, which over the past five years has become a commodity coproduct of ethanol production. The eventual goal and advantage of colocation is to obtain both inputs from the ethanol facility. &ldquo;A 50 million-gallon ethanol facility produces about 3 million gallons of corn oil, which after being hydrolyzed and treated, could be used directly as an FFA input,&rdquo; Klausmeier says. &ldquo;By being located on-site, it is possible that both key inputs can come from the ethanol production&rsquo;s back end.&rdquo; Sylvatex has demonstrated the process with ethanol from a wide range of feedstocks and even FFAs that aren&rsquo;t yet well-optimized for biofuel reactions. To produce the blendstock, low-cost, low-maintenance, splash-blending equipment mixes the liquid inputs together in a two-step chemical reaction at room temperature in Sylvatex&rsquo;s proprietary blending module. &ldquo;Being low cost and having a small footprint are two strong reasons to be located on-site at ethanol production facilities where space is at a premium,&rdquo; she says. &ldquo;It also creates a new value pathway for ethanol producers who use ethanol and corn oil and can take advantage of existing delivery logistics.&rdquo; Blending modules can be added into whatever modular space is desired for producing clean diesel fuel, making it easy to manage, permit, control and scale up. Not only does the process work with any type of ethanol, it also works with most nonedible corn oils from any extraction processes, both front end or after distillation. Currently, Valicor is supplying the corn oil coproduct for the colocation pilot testing. &ldquo;We&rsquo;ve evaluated a number of suppliers with multiple types of extraction systems and found them all to be suitable during small-scale piloting at the Advanced Biofuels Demonstration Facility in Berkeley and through grants from the USDA,&rdquo; Klausmeier says. &nbsp; Industry Potential &ldquo;Even though the ethanol industry is well-developed, there is an opportunity for first- and second-generation ethanol manufacturers to expand into new markets with an advanced diesel fuel. The diesel fuel base is extremely large, so this could be game-changing for ethanol producers. Like corn oil was in the past, this modular colocation approach is the next step for ethanol producers to create new clean diesel fuel products that can upgrade the industry so it can continue to grow and thrive,&rdquo; she says. Klausmeier believes using green nanoparticles for low-carbon diesel fuel will be a $1.8 trillion market that can meet the needs of the petroleum industry, end users and biofeedstock providers and provide many benefits. Ethanol producers creating low-carbon fuels can take advantage of low-carbon credits. End users who use low-emission diesel and marine fuels can extend the lives of their fleets and access emission-controlled areas quicker. Feedstock providers can diversify and enter new growing markets that value carbon. &ldquo;Our process produces a very low-cost product and is scalable. Ethanol can come from any feedstock, so as ethanol producers evolve over time, they can continuously satisfy the diesel fuel market as they grow,&rdquo; she says. Sylvatex is working with biomass leaders on the West Coast and commercial ethanol producers to prove technical and commercial feasibility. &ldquo;We are starting small, getting the process moving and obtaining accreditation before scaling up. We expect our colocation model will begin to produce fuel on-site in the pilot stage and generate modest revenue at our large ethanol producer partner in early 2018,&rdquo; she says. With testing labs housed at Lawrence Berkley Laboratories and collaborations across the U.S., including the USDA, NIST and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Sylvatex is developing technical specifications, evaluating fuel properties and validating emissions and other mandated criteria. It has received funding from state and federal sources and grants as well as private angel investors and family funding. Sylvatex is also working with a number of thought leaders to develop standards and pathways for approval at the state and federal level, and has been successful in California so far, Klausmeier says. It is also performing demonstrations of emission-reducing biofuels on the end-user side, with engineering partners and end-user support in industries such as mining. Klausmeier welcomes working with ethanol producers who may be interested in colocation. She hopes that combining Sylvatex&rsquo;s new technology with the innovative business structure of working inside existing ethanol producers&rsquo; infrastructures will create low-cost fuels that reduce pollution and have global impact. Author: Debbie Sniderman CEO, VI Ventures LLC info@vivllc.com

New Blendstock: Sylvatex's new diesel fuel blendstock, MicroX, promises to reduce emissions and provide oxygenate benefits.     

2016/11/Sylvatex-DecEPM16_14782710721176_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/Sylvatex-DecEPM16_14782710721176_thumb.jpg

2016/11/Sylvatex-DecEPM16_14782710721176.jpg

2016/11/Blendstock-process_14782710682209.jpg

2016/11/EthanolPlant-CoLocation_14782712495998.jpg

2016/11/Klausmeier-DecEPM16_14782710700866.jpg

NANOPARTICLES: The Sylvatex proprietary blending process combines free fatty acids from corn oil with ethanol to produce nanoparticles that have a reverse micelle structure and diameters around 10 microns.   

2016/11/Nanoparticles-DecEPM16_1478271071093.jpg

COLOCATERS: The Sylvatex team and ethanol partners consider good locations for collocating a Sylvatex blending module to mix ethanol and treated corn oil.    

2016/11/SylvatexTeam-EPM16_14782712517248.jpg

A California company develops nanotechnology combining ethanol with corn oil for a new blendstock that reduces diesel emissions. This article appears in the December print issue of Ethanol Producer Magazine. 

Nanoscale Blending

Optimism is growing among Canadian biofuel producers as the federal government is embracing carbon reduction strategies in its climate change action plan. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a pretty exciting time for us now,&rdquo; says Jim Grey, board chair of Renewable Industries Canada (RICanada, formerly the Canadian Renewable Fuels Association). &ldquo;I think it&rsquo;s going to bode very well for our industry.&rdquo; In early October, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced all provinces will have to choose between implementing a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system to address climate change. The action plan includes targeted greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions throughout all emitting sectors, including transportation, Grey says. &ldquo;Obviously, they&rsquo;re promoting the use of electric vehicles and public transportation, but clearly they understand that blending more ethanol or biodiesel into the fuel pool will have an immediate positive impact on the greenhouse gas reduction targets.&rdquo; Grey, who is CEO of Ontario ethanol producer IGPC Ethanol Inc., reports that his province will be blending up to 4 percent biodiesel in 2017 and the industry is asking for the ethanol mandate to be raised from 5 to 10 percent, coupled with a GHG reduction component, such as a low carbon fuel standard. It&rsquo;s not that there aren&rsquo;t biofuel critics in Canada, but Grey reports they are definitely not as loud as those in the U.S. Early in October, RICanada criticized a report from the Ecofiscal Commission that called for a rethinking of Canadian biofuels policies.&nbsp; In its response, RICanada described the commission&rsquo;s report as skewed and flawed, pointing out Canada&rsquo;s 26 biofuels production facilities (about half ethanol producers) are great supporters and users of emerging low-carbon technology. &ldquo;If anything, now is the time to double-down on the success of renewable fuels mandates, not abandon the single largest guaranteed source of emissions reductions from our transportation sector.&rdquo; Some of the arguments echo those heard south of the 49th parallel. RICanada criticized Ecofiscal&rsquo;s finding that the economic costs of the renewable fuel mandates exceed benefits by pointing out the commission used only one report from 2010. &ldquo;Farm income has actually tripled since biofuels became a significant part of the Candian economy,&rdquo; RICanada said. Ecofiscal recommended moving away from subsidies, but RICanada pointed out federal support for most biofuels ended in March 2015. Furthermore, Ecofiscal claimed the effect of biofuels on improving air pollution is negligible when in Ontario, the province&rsquo;s ethanol growth fund reported a reduction in annual smog days from 15 to 20 per year to two or three. IGPC Grey&rsquo;s company, for one, is getting ready for higher mandates. In October, the board of IGPC Ethanol Inc. approved the doubling of the Aylmer, Ontario, plant&rsquo;s capacity from 200 MMly to 400. &ldquo;If all goes well, we should put shovels in the ground in April and start up in October 2018,&rdquo; Grey says.&nbsp; The expansion will be highly integrated into the existing plant, he adds, which makes it a more complex engineering project than just building a second plant alongside the existing one. Engineering and permitting activities have begun, and additional capital is being raised. The expansion plans come on the heels of two major upgrades. IGPC has installed ICM&rsquo;s FST technology, which removes the fiber at the front to increase throughput, potentially becoming the feedstock for cellulosic ethanol production. In that upgrade, IGPC boosted its capacity from 170 MMly to 200 MMly. It also installed generating capacity, adding a steam turbine generator to produce roughly 1 MW electric power from existing excess steam energy, along with adding a natural gas fired internal combustion generator to produce 3 MW power. &ldquo;Ontario has very expensive electricity,&rdquo; Grey says. Becoming self-sufficient in electric power has brought the plant&rsquo;s power costs in line with U.S. Midwest producers. The planned expansion will include expanded generating capacity as well. GreenField IGPC isn&rsquo;t the only producer making big investments. Canada&rsquo;s largest ethanol producer, GreenField Specialty Alcohols, has several innovative projects unfolding at its four facilities. The company is among Canada&rsquo;s oldest producers, starting out with a single plant in Tiverton, Ontario, in operation since 1989. In 1998, it opened its first large-scale plant in Chatham, Ontario, and a third plant in Varennes, Quebec, in 2007. Its largest plant, a 254 MMly corn ethanol plant in Johnstown, Ontario, came online, in 2008, along the St. Lawrence Seaway. While GreenField&rsquo;s ethanol production is still primarily for fuel, its 2013 name change to GreenField Specialty Alcohols signaled a shift in the business model for the company. Today, 175 MMly of its total 675 MMly capacity is industrial ethanol. Not only is a big part of its ethanol production distilled to industrial specifications, the company has developed its own packaging and distribution network for its commercial alcohol that is used in more than 4,500 consumer and industrial products. In Canada, the company operates packaging facilities for commercial alcohols at Boucherville, Quebec, and Brampton, Ontario. In the U.S., GreenField&rsquo;s Pharmco-AAPER division owns and operates facilities in Shelbyville, Kentucky, and Brookfield, Connecticut, manufacturing and packaging a wide range of pure and denatured ethanol products. Pharmco-AAAPER also has two warehouses in California, along with warehouses in North Carolina, Texas and Washington. With a solid distribution network and expanding export sales beyond North America, GreenField boosted its industrial ethanol capacity with a recently completed expansion of its industrial-grade distillation capacity in Chatham, increasing the fuel-industrial split from 50-50 to 25-75, for an industrial capacity of 42 MMly. Along with the industrial-grade expansion, GreenField also invested in a second cogen unit at the plant to begin generating all of the plant&rsquo;s electric demand, feeding the surplus into the grid. Chatham&rsquo;s carbon-reduction strategy goes far beyond cogeneration and even the capturing and purification of carbon dioxide by Praxair. In the past year, the ethanol plant has begun sending its surplus carbon dioxide from fermentation to greenhouses next door. GreenFields&rsquo;s vice president of business development Barry Wortzman reports work is nearly completed on the system that will deliver the ethanol plant&rsquo;s waste heat off the stack to help heat the Truly Green Farms greenhouses. The company has other innovative projects in development. GreenField and Enerkem announced a joint venture to build a 10 MMly cellulosic plant at Varennes, which will use municipal solid waste as the feedstock for Enerkem&rsquo;s thermochemical conversion process. GreenField also is working on other integrated second-generation technologies, Wortzman adds, that the company expects to roll out in the new year. Other Producers GreenField is the largest, but not the only Canadian ethanol company with unique business models. In Lanigan, Saskatchewan, Pound-Maker Agventures was established in 1970 by 50 area farmers looking for alternative markets for their grain, who built a 2,500-head feedlot. A 1991 expansion to 10,000 head included a 10 MMly ethanol plant. Today, the company feeds out 26,000 head of cattle and produces 14 MMly of ethanol.&nbsp; Permolex International Ltd.&nbsp; at Red Deer, Alberta, found a different mix to prosper from, since its ethanol plant was completed in 1998. It integrates three traditionally independent manufacturing processes&mdash;flour milling, gluten extraction and ethanol production&mdash;that allows the byproducts of one process to be utilized as feedstock for the next, using about 110,000 tons of wheat a year.&nbsp; The oil industry&rsquo;s share of ethanol capacity is slightly higher in Canada than in the U.S. with Husky Energy and Suncor&rsquo;s combined capacities representing 19 percent of the country&rsquo;s total while Valero, Flint Hills and Sunoco&rsquo;s combined capacities are 14 percent of the U.S. total ethanol capacity. Both large integrated oil companies, Suncor operates the country&rsquo;s largest ethanol plant, the 400 MMly St. Clair Ethanol facility in Mooretown, Ontario.&nbsp; Alberta-headquartered Husky Energy operates two, 130 MMly ethanol plants in western Canada at Lloydminster, Saskatchewan, and Minnedosa, Manitoba. The Manitoba plant primarily uses corn along with some wheat, while the Saskatchewan plant primarily uses wheat. At Lloydminster, the ethanol plant is integrated with Husky&rsquo;s heavy oil upgrader and an on-site cogeneration power facility to increase energy efficiency and reduce emission. In 2012, Husky began capturing carbon dioxide at Lloydminster to reduce emissions and aid in enhanced oil recovery. Other active ethanol producers include Kawartha Ethanol Inc. operating an 80 MMly corn ethanol plant in Havelock, Ontario. Two Saskatchewan producers use wheat:&nbsp; North West Bio-Energy Ltd., a 25 MMly plant in Unity and Terra Grain Fuels Inc., a 150 MMly plant in Belle Plaine. Canada also is represented by second-generation biofuel producers Enerkem, Iogen Corp. and Woodland Biofuels all developing cellulosic technologies. Author: Susanne Retka Schill Managing Editor, Ethanol Producer Magazine sretkaschill@bbiinternational.com 701-738-4922

2016/11/Canada-DecEPM16_14782716260767_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/Canada-DecEPM16_14782716260767_thumb.jpg

2016/11/Canada-DecEPM16_14782716260767.jpg

2016/11/CanadianEthanolNumbers_14782716271263.jpg

The state of the Canadian ethanol industry at year end. This feature article appears in the December print issue of Ethanol Producer Magazine. 

Canadian Producers Poised for Carbon Reduction Era

As the ethanol industry has evolved and grown, so, too, has the response of the chemical companies that provide the plants with the products they need to process the biofuel and coproducts. &ldquo;The ethanol industry is fairly young and still maturing, so they&rsquo;re continuously learning new ways to make themselves more efficient and trying new ways to do things.&nbsp; There are a lot of opportunities in the ethanol industry,&rdquo; says Todd Emslander, vice president of U.S. Water&rsquo;s ethanol process technologies team. &ldquo;The continuous search for improvement is motivated by industry drivers such as regulatory compliance, risk mitigation, asset integrity, brand assurance, increased efficiency and profitability.&nbsp; Every plant wants to reduce variability in processing, so plants are interested when new products or services allow them to run more smoothly. Many of the chemicals used in these plants today help protect the equipment in place, allow the facilities to maintain their product quality and consistency for their customers,&rdquo; Emslander says. Changing to Meet Demand One of the steps chemical companies that supply products to the ethanol industry have taken to accommodate their plant customers is to offer certain commonly used chemicals, such as sulfuric acid and enzyme amylase in bulk. Bulk handling is becoming increasingly available to the ethanol industry as it matures, says Paul Shepperd, Solenis biorefining applications project manager. &ldquo;I view the evolution of the industry in the (United) States, particularly, is the steel was put on the ground, you learned how to use it to make ethanol, and, beyond that, you were looking for ways to take costs out and make your operation more efficient, and I think that&rsquo;s really an indication of the maturity of the industry at this point. &nbsp;&ldquo;I&rsquo;ve seen this happen in the pulp and paper area, in the textile area, and many other industries, as you learn and understand what you&rsquo;re going to be using in the long-term, folks look at the bulk purchase as a way to take costs out in terms of the tote bins,&rdquo; Shepperd says. &ldquo;You eliminate that cost.&rdquo; Bulk handling can also aid the controls and tracking of chemicals that potentially become part of the feed coproduct.&nbsp; &ldquo;Generally, it gives the plant a good handle on what&rsquo;s going on.&rdquo;&nbsp; Another important reason that plant managers purchase chemicals in bulk is that storing the products in, and distributing them from, tanks reduces safety risks, Shepperd adds. &ldquo;We&rsquo;ve got a lot of bulk tanks,&rdquo; says Ryan Carter, general manager of Tharaldson Ethanol in Casselton, North Dakota While some products, such as dry urea, are not available in bulk, other ones, such as sulfamic acid, are. &ldquo;If you can get it in bulk, you typically get a better price on that chemical, so we put bulk systems in our plant. Keeps it cleaner, keeps it more organized. Keeps it safer. We&rsquo;re trying to get operators from having to handle totes of chemicals as much as possible.&rdquo; Another improvement in process chemical handling is the use of better and more sophisticated automation and feed control, says Andrew Ledlie, Solenis biorefining marketing manager.&nbsp; It used to be fairly common for pumps to be controlled manually or with a timer, he says, but now there is more use of data, the plant distributed control system (DCS) and in-line sensors to help improve and optimize the dosage of different chemicals. &ldquo;This is an area where we have invested heavily in, to add value as a chemical technology provider.&rdquo; Chemical Innovations When it comes to the chemicals that are used in ethanol plants, the most recent innovations are those used in corn oil extraction, Carter says. &ldquo;I would say that has been a big game changer in corn oil products for efficiencies out of the plant.&rdquo; &ldquo;The value for the corn oil itself is higher per pound than our DDGS, than the animal feed,&rdquo; Shepperd says. Value propositions like that drive innovation, particularly among equipment suppliers, to develop technologies for separating individual streams which then have the potential to be higher value.&nbsp; Ultimately, the value of coproducts will be determined by the market for them, Shepperd notes. If there is a viable market, &ldquo;then the question becomes can you put the equipment in place and do you do need a chemistry to help make the equipment work?&rdquo; Rules and Regs Another driver of innovations in the chemistries that ethanol plants use is regulations. For example, the Food and Drug Administration&rsquo;s Food Safety and Modernization Act has required that ethanol plants change some of their testing and cleaning methods, Emslander says. New FDA rules suggest that sulfamic acid, which traditionally has been used as a clean-in-place chemical for equipment may not be acceptable for use in animal feed, so ethanol plants are looking at other chemicals they can use to replace it, he notes. Producers like Tharaldsons are taking a close look at the new products. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re in the process of running trials with approved chemicals to take over sulfamic acid,&rdquo; Carter says. &ldquo;We are working with some different companies right now.&rdquo; Becoming FSMA compliant requires some work, but he believes it is well worth it. &ldquo;There are some hoops we have to jump through,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;But, I think in the long run, it will help us with a positive spin on what we do in the industry and what we do in the livestock feed market. We can say we&rsquo;ve gone through all of these steps. This is clean. This is good. This is what FDA wants us to do.&rdquo;&nbsp; Tharaldson plant employees are now undergoing training, Carter says, &ldquo;to make sure that we&rsquo;re certified to do in-house checks and balances and make sure we&rsquo;re compliant with that.&rdquo; Chemical companies assist ethanol plants in complying with FSMA by offering alternative products, Emslander says. For example, sulfuric acid, which is used in cleaning and adjusting pH in some ethanol plants, can be replaced with other chemicals. A U.S. Water product called pHyOUT, for example, mitigates some of the deposits that plants typically required sulfuric acid to treat, Emslander notes. Safety Training Training employees in the safe handling of chemicals is an integral part of the operation of Tharaldson Ethanol, Carter says. &ldquo;These guys do multiple safety training every single month, so we&rsquo;re always up-to-date. When there&rsquo;s a new chemical we&rsquo;re working with, it&rsquo;s part of my policy that the vender of that chemical comes in and supplies some training and all the data sheets that go with that chemical, so we understand what we&rsquo;re dealing with. [Employees have] to understand the product before we allow them to work with it. The operations department works with the chemicals at first, but there are times when, obviously, the maintenance department has to go out and repair something. They&rsquo;ve got to be familiar with the chemicals because when they are breaking into a flange or a pump, they&rsquo;ve got to understand the hazards that could be there potentially.&rdquo; The maintenance crew meets with the operations manager or shift lead, reviews pertinent information and suits up with safety gear, if needed. &nbsp; On-site Assistance Working with plant managers and employees to teach them how to properly use chemicals and other inputs is something all providers put high on the priority list. Solenis, for example, has an in-the-field workforce available for its plant customers, Ledlie says. One of the challenges some plant managers face is what he calls the &ldquo;knowledge gap&rdquo; or finding employees who are experienced and knowledgeable about handling chemicals. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re seeing more customers who want to partner, especially if they do have that knowledge gap.&rdquo; Emslander sees it as a win-win situation for chemical companies to work together with the plants they serve to improve the industry as a whole. &ldquo;From what I have been seeing, the industry is trying to get better. There are a lot of vendors just like us trying to help the industry improve,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;In turn, we&rsquo;re getting a lot of support from the industry as we learn and work together to continue to help the industry grow, become more efficient, and have a greater impact on the overall market&rdquo; Emslander says. Right now, he adds, &ldquo;Regulatory compliance is a key driver of innovations in the chemistries used by ethanol plants.&rdquo; Author: Ann Bailey Associate Editor, Ethanol Producer Magazine abailey@bbiinternational.com 701-738-4976

2016/11/Storage-DecEPM16_14782724303273_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/Storage-DecEPM16_14782724303273_thumb.jpg

2016/11/Storage-DecEPM16_14782724303273.jpg

HANDLING SYSTEMS: At Tharaldson, urea comes in bags, while other chemicals supplied in totes are fed through piping. Tharaldson Ethanol buys chemicals in bulk when possible because it is a safer and more cost-effective   

2016/11/BulkFeed-DecEPM16_14782724284813.jpg

2016/11/BulkStore-DecEPM16_14782724295299.jpg

2016/11/forklift-DecEPM16_14782725814584.jpg

BULK PRACTICE: Handling as much as possible in bulk is the goal at Tharaldson Ethanol, the U.S.'s sixth largest ethanol plant located west of Casselton, N.D.     

2016/11/TheraldsonPlant_14782725823177.jpg

Ethanol plants and chemical companies work together to improve profits 
and enhance industry.  This feature article appears in the December print issue of Ethanol Producer Magazine.

Good Chemistry

The Renewable Fuels Association has announced the election of officers for the board of directors. Mick Henderson, general manager at Commonwealth Agri-Energy LLC, was elected as chairman of the board of directors. Neil Koehler of Pacific Ethanol will serve as vice chairman, while Jim Seurer of Glacial Lakes Energy LLC will serve as treasurer. Bob Dinneen will continue as president of the RFA. The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association recently recognized Absolute Energy, a 125 MMgy ethanol production facility in St. Ansgar, Iowa, for producing its 1 billionth gallon of ethanol. The facility began operations in 2008.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Green Biologics Inc. recently announced the branding and product development strategy for its high-purity biobased n-butanol and acetone, as well as associated downstream products.&nbsp; The company aims to market all 100 percent biobased chemicals under the brand BioPure, a descriptive brand name that encapsulates both the purity and sustainability of its biobased chemistry. Green Biologics has also registered the trademark GreenInside for cobranding opportunities with its collaboration partners, who will use the mark on a wide range of consumer and industrial products making sustainability claims based on Green Biologics&rsquo; technology. In addition, Green Biologics recently announced a distribution agreement with Caldic B.V., a global distributor headquartered in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Caldic will distribute Green Biologics&rsquo; biobased, high-purity chemicals, including n-butanol, acetone and other associated product to customers in Europe, Africa and the Middle East for a variety of key markets, including CASE (coatings, adhesives, sealants and elastomers), HI&amp;I (household, industrial &amp; institutional cleaners), PCI (personal care intermediates), food ingredients and energy chemicals. RaceTrac announced it has expanded E15 sales to four locations in Florida. The company also recently joined a list of major retailers as part of the Prime the Pump initiative, which works in collaboration with Growth Energy to expand consumer choice for higher blends of ethanol, like E15, to Americans across the nation. Minnoco, Sheetz, Kum &amp; Go, Thorntons, Cenex, Protec and Murphy USA are among the members of the Prime the Pump coalition. The Renewable Fuels Association has announced Director of Regulatory Affairs Kelly Davis has been reappointed to the U.S. Department of Commerce&rsquo;s Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Advisory Committee, which advises the agency on U.S. renewable energy and energy efficiency products and services. Davis was one of 34 members appointed in October. REEEAC members advise the Commerce Secretary regarding the development and administration of programs and policies to expand the competitiveness of U.S. exports of renewable energy and energy efficiency goods and services. Gevo Inc. recently announced that it has completed production of more than 1,000 gallons of cellulosic renewable jet fuel that is specified for commercial flights. The company adapted its patented technologies to convert cellulosic sugars derived from wood waste into renewable isobutanol, which was then further converted into Gevo&rsquo;s alcohol-to-jet fuel (ATJ) fuel. This ATJ meets the ASTM D7566 specification, allowing it to be used for commercial flights. Alaska Airlines is expected to fly the first commercial flight using this cellulosic jet fuel within the next few months. The E85prices.com website, managed by the Renewable Fuels Association, now includes E15 in its services. The website is a crowdsourced service and now allows consumers to toggle between E15 and E85, locating information and reporting prices on either fuel blend. The improvements also allow consumers to review E15 prices reported by others, price spreads for each state, historical statistics and more, giving them access to the lowest-price gasoline available. The website also maintains a database of blender pump locations and an online forum. Green Plains Inc. has acquired Fleischmann&rsquo;s Vinegar Co. for $250 million. The company is the largest manufacturer and marketer of food-grade industrial vinegar. Headquartered in Cerritos, California, Fleischmann's Vinegar is an all-natural ingredients company serving markets and end-use applications, including food and beverage ingredients, antimicrobials, bioherbicides and cleaning products across the food, beverage, agricultural, industrial and wholesale markets. Growth Energy recently presented Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, with its 2016 Fueling Growth award, which the group called its &ldquo;highest honor given to congressional leaders who advocate for renewable fuels like ethanol and consumer choice at the pump.&rdquo; In addition, former Growth Energy CEO and current co-chairman of the Growth Energy board of directors, Tom Buis, was presented with the America&rsquo;s Fuel award. The award is the highest honor given by Growth Energy, and is presented to an individual who has made significant contributions to the growth and well-being of the ethanol industry. The Renewable Fuels Association has announced the addition of Siouxland Ethanol to its membership. Siouxland Ethanol is a locally owned company near Jackson, Nebraska, that began production in May 2007. The ethanol plant currently processes 24 million bushels of corn per year into 70 million gallons of ethanol, 2,000 tons of corn oil and 175,000 tons of distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) used by local cattle feeders. Siouxland Ethanol is also moving ahead with a planned expansion to boost production capacity by 15 percent, which is expected to be completed by the end of this year. Eastern Instruments has introduced the CentriFlow BWS, an economical and accurate gravimetric in-line mass flow meter that serves as an alternative to impact flow meters and belt scales for the dynamic measurement of solids while in process. The BWS can be used to measure granular solids such as grains, pellets, beans, wood chips, pet food and free-flowing granular powders, such as sand. The U.S. Department of Energy&rsquo;s Bioenergy Technologies Office has established the Agile BioFoundry, a new consortium of nine DOE national laboratories working to standardize and streamline the entire biomanufacturing pipeline by uniting computer-assisted biological pathway design, process integration, process scale-up, and machine learning.&nbsp; The consortium is led by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

2016/11/Buis_14782729853824.jpg

2016/11/Davis_14782729861726.jpg

2016/11/Dinneen_14782729871791.jpg

2016/11/Grassley_14782729881551.jpg

2016/11/Henderson_14782729891762.jpg

2016/11/Koehler_1478272990123.jpg

2016/11/Seurer_1478272991194.jpg

Business Briefs

It is hard to believe we are approaching the end of the year.&nbsp; And what a busy year it has been. At the Urban Air Initiative, we have been relentless in our efforts to open the market for higher ethanol blends. The road to that market runs a little north of us, right through the U.S. EPA fuels office based in Michigan. We have mailed our Christmas wish list, but we generally get a lump of coal! We have written extensively in this column that the EPA has the authority&mdash;and the obligation&mdash;to break down regulatory barriers holding ethanol back. At UAI we have identified those barriers and offered solutions. But being heard has not been easy. During 2016, we have worked hard to understand where EPA has gotten it wrong. We have challenged the agency to open its eyes to the best available science that shows ethanol to be significantly better than EPA&rsquo;s models and ingrained beliefs would indicate. One of the less glamorous things we do is to comment on EPA rules and actions. Our comments on the renewable fuel standard focused on the health benefits and CO2 reductions from ethanol. We also invoked the Information Quality Act which requires the EPA use the most accurate, up-to-date science and information, submitting an outstanding compilation of the most contemporary information available on ethanol's positive impact on the environment. We continued to target EPA emissions modeling that is based on a flawed study conducted with the petroleum industry. Through emails UAI obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, we see how the petroleum industry has influenced virtually every major ruling impacting ethanol. Based on these internal EPA documents, we submitted a Request for Correction on the study, while preparing to challenge EPA in court over the use of its modeling. Similarly, through another FOIA request, we found that an EPA researcher skewed the results of a study with the Harvard School of Public Health by downplaying the significant health risks from gasoline aromatics. We submitted comments on the Technical Assessment Report that is the key to the midterm evaluation of federal fuel economy and carbon reduction requirements. We provided substantial, documented information that calls on EPA to look beyond vehicle technology and recognize that fuels&mdash;notably clean-burning ethanol&mdash;can be a valuable tool. We are pleased to be offering technical assistance to former Sen. Tom Daschle's High Octane Low Carbon Alliance on this particular issue. UAI also is sharing technical and educational information with the E30 Challenge in Watertown, South Dakota, as participants demonstrate that simply splash-blending ethanol with E10 can provide a clean, high-octane premium fuel that is compatible with today's vehicles and reduces a range of pollutants.&nbsp;&nbsp; We also are communicating the benefits of higher ethanol blends to the public, the medical community, academia and the media. We launched two websites this year, fixourfuel.com and fuelingthetruth.com. We continue to support the Clean Fuels Omaha campaign that has resulted in the first major metropolitan area recommending higher blends to combat ozone. We produced white papers, fact sheets and technical assessments on a range of critical issues. We are actively involved with the American Society of Testing and Materials, the Society of Automotive Engineers and the Coordinating Research Council.&nbsp; We presented about aromatics in Mexico City and to others at international workshops sponsored by the USDA and U.S. Grains Council to educate about and advocate for higher ethanol blending. We sponsored conferences such as the outstanding panel of auto and health experts at the International Fuel Ethanol Workshop. We&rsquo;ve helped bring panel discussions to Congress in Washington and placed articles and thought pieces with media across the country. UAI staff is working with ethanol producers nationwide and coordinating with industry and commodity groups to share our findings. We will be supporting a Health Effects Institute event later this month and have more outreach efforts planned for 2017.&nbsp; Like I said, we have been busy.&nbsp; We appreciate the support for Urban Air from so many organizations. I wish everyone a blessed Thanksgiving and Merry Christmas and let&rsquo;s continue to work together to tell the real story of ethanol and the benefits it provides. Author: David VanderGriend President, Urban Air Initiative, CEO, ICM Inc. DaveV@icminc.com 316-796-0900

2016/11/VanderGriend_Dave_14782731671696_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/VanderGriend_Dave_14782731671696_thumb.jpg

2016/11/VanderGriend_Dave_14782731671696.jpg

Urban Air Initiative's work in 2016 covered many bases. This column appears in the December print issue of Ethanol Producer Magazine. 

2016: Looking Back on a Busy Year 

The Paris Agreement on Climate Change entered into force in September, starting a coordinated effort by the world&rsquo;s governments to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and limit climate change impacts. It&rsquo;s far from the end, though. Entering into force starts the hard work&mdash;meeting each nation&rsquo;s decarbonization targets. Every country&rsquo;s intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs) will reduce emissions and expand economic opportunities for clean energy. More than any other nation, Brazil&rsquo;s INDC relies on biofuels to meet these goals. Brazil&rsquo;s INDC targets 37 percent lower emissions by 2025 compared to 2005, with further reductions by 2030. This assumes biofuels supply approximately 18 percent of the country&rsquo;s energy mix by 2030 through greater sugarcane ethanol production, expanded second-generation biofuels and additional biodiesel for transportation. Biofuels can meet this challenge. Ethanol and bioenergy produced from sugarcane already constitute 15.7 percent of Brazil&rsquo;s energy mix, replacing more than 40 percent of gasoline and avoiding 600 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions since the beginning of the ethanol program in the 1970s. Just this past harvest, Brazil produced 7 billion gallons of advanced ethanol and 15 million megawatt-hours of bioelectricity from cogeneration. While Brazil&rsquo;s INDC and its related biofuel goals are ambitious, experience shows they are also realistic. Ultimate success relies on three fundamental pillars: predictable policy, sustainable production and technological innovation. First, government policy must be clear and stable. Well-established rules of the road fostered Brazil biofuels with the first wave of ethanol&rsquo;s growth government driven from the mid-1970s to the 1980s. The second wave of growth, starting in 2003, resulted from the introduction of flex-fuel vehicles. In the past few years, however, regulatory uncertainty has reduced investments and inhibited technological development. The lack of predictable policy has its cost and instead of having 10 to 30 new mills built per year, we see mills shutting their doors.&nbsp; Brazil should maintain a regulatory framework, incorporating the positive externalities of renewable fuel into prices via consumption mandates or tax differentials favoring biofuel over gasoline. Second, we must ensure sugarcane production continues to expand sustainably. Brazil&rsquo;s Agro-Ecological Zoning policy prevents sugarcane expansion in the most sensitive biomes and in native vegetation, while authorizing expansion into 64.7 million hectares of suitable land. That&rsquo;s about 7.5 percent of Brazil&rsquo;s territory, compared to the one percent of land currently used for sugarcane production. Sustainability extends to paying sugarcane growers fair prices for their product. Brazil&rsquo;s current approach is very effective, with the Council of Sugarcane Industry and Growers creating clear rules for cane prices and minimizing potential conflicts. While there&rsquo;s no sustainability silver bullet, Brazil&rsquo;s current policies are a good start and must be maintained. In addition, we should consider innovative models like self-regulatory commitments and third-party certifications. Third, we must enhance research and development to unlock next-generation biofuels and increase ethanol&rsquo;s competitiveness. Second-generation ethanol is a reality in Brazil. Raizen is producing ethanol from cane bagasse in Sao Paulo and Granbio is producing ethanol from bagasse and straw in Alagoas. The Center for Sugarcane Technology has demonstrated we can quadruple ethanol&rsquo;s productivity through innovation in the near future. Optimizing production, advancing genetic enhancements and expanding agronomy to increase feedstocks, on top of industrial re-engineering of our first-generation production to second-generation ethanol, can raise production from 1,850 gallons per hectare to 6,500 gallons per hectare. From the beginning of Brazil&rsquo;s ethanol program, technological innovations multiplied ethanol production by 20-fold, doubled cane yields and cut prices in half. We believe current innovations will create similar results in the next few decades, if research and development continue on track. Reducing power sector emissions is an important start to slowing climate change, but to truly decarbonize, we must tackle transportation emissions. Earlier this year, U.S. transportation emissions passed power sector emissions for the first time since 1979 as new clean energy came online, and this trend will likely play out elsewhere as countries decarbonize. Biofuels are a proven solution to replace fossil-based transportation fuel. Together, America and Brazil have built a global biofuels market, showing how stable policy can create economic growth and environmental benefits. Author: Leticia Phillips North American Representative Brazilian Sugarcane Industry Association, UNICA 202-506-5299

2016/11/Leticia-Phillips_14782733020185_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/Leticia-Phillips_14782733020185_thumb.jpg

2016/11/Leticia-Phillips_14782733020185.jpg

UNICA spokesperson describes Brazil's climate change strategy and its reliance on biofuels in her column that appears in the December print issue of Ethanol Producer Magazine. 

Biofuels Play Central Role in Brazil's Climate Goals 

As the holidays approach, it&rsquo;s the time of year we take stock, mentally rewinding the past 12 months and years past. Have you been naughty or nice? Did you meet your New Year&rsquo;s goals? I decided to reminisce about 2016 to the tune of &ldquo;The Twelve Days of Christmas,&rdquo; however, sticking to the repetitive chorus is completely optional. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; On the first day of Christmas &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; By Congress decree: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A strong RFS for the country . &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; On the second day of Christmas &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; From both of our parties: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Support for biofuels. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; On the third day of Christmas &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Per an RFA study: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Proof of boat safety. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; On the fourth day of Christmas &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The RFA did lead: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Webinars on octane. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; On the fifth day of Christmas &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Thanks to a company: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Terminals that offer E15. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; On the sixth day of Christmas &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; To Crappy Masters Glee:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Six E10 boats racing. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; On the seventh day of Christmas &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Managed by the RFA: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; E85prices.com. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; On the eighth day of Christmas &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; From the USDA: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Eight years with Vilsack. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; On the ninth day of Christmas &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Led by the EPA: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Nine robust RFS years. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; On the tenth day of Christmas &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The RFA sponsored: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Bikers with E10. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; On the eleventh day of Christmas &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Thanks to the RFS &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Eleven years of consumer savings. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; On the twelfth day of Christmas, &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Thanks to the industry: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; New Technology &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Eleven years of consumer savings &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Bikers with E10 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Nine robust RFS years &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Eight years with Vilsack &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; E85prices.com &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Six E10 boats racing &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Terminals that offer E15 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Webinars on octane &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Proof of boat safety &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Support for biofuels &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; And a strong RFS for our country. Author: Bob Dinneen President and CEO, (Assisted by the musical stylings of Maureen Dinneen) Renewable Fuels Association 202-289-3835

2016/11/Bob-Dineen-NEW_1478273941962_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/Bob-Dineen-NEW_1478273941962_thumb.jpg

2016/11/Bob-Dineen-NEW_1478273941962.jpg

RFA president and CEO takes stock of the year past to the tune of a well-loved tune. This article appears in the December print issue of Ethanol Producer Magazine.

The 12 Days of Biofuels 

It&rsquo;s no surprise that the careful use of process chemicals has evolved on plane with other advancements in ethanol production over the past two decades. Our industry&rsquo;s continuous quest for improvement has made smart chemical utilization a useful and necessary tool for yield optimization, product quality, consistency and more. However, we learn in this month&rsquo;s cover story &ldquo;Good Chemistry,&rdquo; on page 28, that it&rsquo;s not only the effectiveness and versatility of process chemicals that have improved, but the way in which chemicals are purchased, stored and dispensed. As EPM Associate Editor Ann Bailey reports, the industry&rsquo;s drive to be better, leaner, safer and more efficient has resulted in chemicals being purchased in bulk, for example, and dispensed through sophisticated automation. Plus, rather than bemoaning change, producers tend to leverage regulatory compliance solutions to drive innovation into their plant chemistries. At press time, the U.S. presidential election had not yet occurred. However, by the time you read this column in print, one of the most polarizing elections in modern history will be behind us&mdash;I hope. With so much focus on emails, temperament, salacious accusations and name calling before, during and after the presidential debates, climate change and carbon reduction strategies were given little attention. Perhaps that&rsquo;s because the candidates&rsquo; views on climate change differed so vividly; perhaps the subject simply didn&rsquo;t need parsing. In Canada, on the other hand, there is less political and public discord over climate change, and ethanol plants there are now jockeying for a seat at the low-carbon energy table. As EPM Managing Editor Susanne Retka Schill reports in &ldquo;Canadian Producers Poised for Carbon Reduction Era,&rdquo; on page 34, some of Canada&rsquo;s top ethanol producers are now expanding and upgrading their plants in anticipation of greater demand brought on by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau&rsquo;s recent dictum on carbon reduction.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Our coverage of ethanol&rsquo;s carbon-cutting attributes carries into our anchor feature, &ldquo;Nanoscale Blending,&rdquo; on page 38. In this story, we introduce Sylvatex, a California company that has discovered a way to combine ethanol and corn-oil-based free fatty acids, suspended in nanoparticles, to produce an oxygenated blendstock for gasoline, diesel fuel, biodiesel or other mid-distillates. The current idea is to blend it with diesel at 10 percent, but much higher blends are possible. Ethanol producers should like the idea. After all, our industry manufactures the product&rsquo;s two key ingredients.&nbsp; Author: Tom Bryan President &amp; Editor in Chief tbryan@bbiinternational.com

2016/11/Tom-Bryan-Ethanol_14782740088007_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/Tom-Bryan-Ethanol_14782740088007_thumb.jpg

2016/11/Tom-Bryan-Ethanol_14782740088007.jpg

Ethanol Producer Magazine's editor in chief reviews the lineup of articles in the December issue, adding commentary on the ethanol industry. 

Elegant  Solutions 

The economics of power generation, combined with the need to keep the grid energized under all scenarios, can provide guidance for determining the least costly way to avoid carbon emissions while maintaining grid reliability. The metric that should inform decision-making as to how to best lower carbon emissions is based on the total investment and operating cost per avoided ton of CO2.&nbsp; A recent FutureMetrics white paper compares analytics of two scenarios that provide on-demand dispatchable power: retire coal power plants and replace them with new, natural gas combined-cycle (NGCC) generating stations, or modify existing pulverized coal power plants to use renewable industrial wood pellets as a substitute for coal.&nbsp; When comparing the two scenarios and factoring in the CO2 emissions reduction from each technological solution, the solution that provides significantly higher CO2 reduction at a lower net monetary cost per avoided ton is repurposing existing pulverized coal power plants to run on industrial wood pellets. As governments legislate policy with the goal of reducing carbon emissions, lower-carbon-emitting generation is required. Wind and solar power provide a zero carbon-emitting solution, but also variable, and sometimes zero, power output. If the power grid is to remain reliable constantly, it needs generation sources that can be depended upon at any time to provide, in worst case scenarios, nearly 100 percent of the demand. Because of low natural gas prices and natural gas&rsquo;s lower-carbon emissions versus coal, many utilities are choosing to build new high-efficiency, natural gas combined-cycle plants.&nbsp; This is a relatively easy-to-deploy pathway to lowering carbon emissions while keeping reliable baseload or peaking power on the system.&nbsp; Policymakers and utilities often see natural gas generation as a compromise between coal and the need for reliable on-demand low-carbon power. While natural gas (NG) is a fossil fuel, it offers lower CO2 emissions per MWh than coal. But if CO2 reduction is the primary goal of policy and the utility, the correct decision metric is not simply the capital cost for the plant and operating costs to make power. It should include a recognition of the impact that the project will have on CO2 emissions. Comparing the cost of each scenario with the avoided CO2 emissions realized from using a lower-carbon-emitting fuel yields a decision metric based on both financial and environmental concerns. Calculating the lowest cost per avoided ton of CO2 combines good environmental policy with good business. The alternative to building a new (NGCC) plant is to leverage existing power plants that are designed to efficiently combust pulverized coal (PC).&nbsp; Modern PC power plants can, with easy-to-deploy modifications and additions to the equipment, substitute industrial wood pellets for coal.&nbsp; The carbon reduction from a fully converted pulverized coal power plant using wood pellet fuel versus coal is significantly better than that from a new NGCC plant versus coal, and is the least-costly pathway for achieving the goal of lowering carbon emissions. The conversion scenario results in a 23.1 percent lower cost per ton of CO2 not placed into the atmosphere. Operating costs, due primarily to the higher cost per unit of energy for wood pellet fuel, are higher for the converted plants. That is why government policy with respect to the revenues of the generating entity are essential. Decarbonization policies are necessary to address climate change. The best strategic plans should be broader than only including support for wind and solar generation. If policymakers&rsquo; primary goal is to lower carbon emissions, it makes better economic and environment sense to choose the pathway with the lowest total cost per avoided ton of CO2. That suggests that complimenting any decarbonization policy should be support for converted PC power plants, which will have higher fuel costs. If there is no policy support to compensate the utility for maximizing CO2 reduction via the lowest net cost pathway, NGCC will be favored.&nbsp; As a result, the aggregate quantity of CO2 emitted will be significantly higher, and the total net cost per avoided ton will also be higher. Those outcomes are worse for the environment, and worse economically than the conversion alternative. Converting coal plants to pellets cannot replace all of the on-demand generation fleet. The quantity of industrial wood pellets that could be produced is limited by the sustainability requirements that govern the sourcing of the pellet fuel feedstock. Within sustainability boundaries, there is the potential for many power plants to consider conversion from coal to pellets.&nbsp; But policy mechanisms must compensate generators for higher fuel costs. When comparing NGCC and coal-to-pellet conversions, and factoring in the reduction in CO2 emissions from each technological solution, the solution that provides significantly higher CO2 reduction at a lower net monetary cost to society per ton avoided is by repurposing existing PC power plants to run on industrial wood pellets. Author: William Strauss President, FutureMetrics William.strauss@futuremetrics.com 207-824-6702&nbsp;

2016/11/WilliamStrauss_14797518051309_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/WilliamStrauss_14797518051309_thumb.jpg

2016/11/WilliamStrauss_14797518051309.jpg

The economics of power generation, combined with the need to keep the grid energized under all scenarios, can provide guidance for determining the least costly way to avoid carbon emissions while maintaining grid reliability.

Maximizing Decarbonization, Maintaining Grid Reliability

Boardman Power Station is feeling the heat. The last operating coal-burning power station in Oregon, the relatively young, 550-MW plant has faced much pressure and scrutiny regarding its ultimate fate, which must be decided and underway by 2020. While several potential options have been ruled out&mdash;including a half billion-dollar pollution control equipment upgrade, and repowering with natural gas and wood pellets&mdash;one option has remained on the table since Portland General Electric began exploring possibilities: replacing Powder River Basin coal with torrefied biomass. After years of research and tests, the project, which has garnered attention from energy stakeholders of all kinds, has reached a new level: a full-scale, 24-hour test burn using 100 percent torrefied biomass. Besides wood, torrefied energy crops such as arundo donax will be fired, as the utility has been growing and harvesting energy crops on test plots around the plant the past several years. An exact date for the test hasn&rsquo;t been nailed down yet, but it will happen before the end of the year, and may occur relatively suddenly. Spokesman Steve Corson explains the time has to be just right&mdash;not only because the 8,000 tons of torrefied material required for the burn has to be on-site and ready for consumption by the plant&rsquo;s Rankine cycle coal boiler, but Boardman remains a working plant that still plays an important role in the utility&rsquo;s power supply. &ldquo;We need to time the test to occur during a window when generation from the plant is optional for us to meet our customers&rsquo; needs&mdash;for example, when we&rsquo;re not experiencing extreme weather that could drive peak loads, and when other generating resources are available to meet demand.&rdquo; In these days leading up to the test burn, plant staff and expert consultants are working to determine the most effective execution. &ldquo;This includes examining the safety implications of a new fuel, coal transport testing, pulverizer grinding performance and ash characteristics,&rdquo; Corson says. &ldquo;And included in this will be test instrumentation, coupled with plant instrumentation to assess the burn performance.&rdquo; Those engaging in the test burn will assess overall plant stability as the plant burns the biomass, according to Corson. &ldquo;We believe the test can be completed without undue risk,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;We already confirmed that the plant&rsquo;s existing equipment can handle torrefied biomass, with our cofiring test burn last year. Nevertheless, there&rsquo;s uncertainty involved in any unusual procedure of this sort, so we need to account for that uncertainty and minimize it through careful planning.&rdquo; Though torrefied biomass has characteristics very similar to coal and tests to date has shown compatibility with the plant&rsquo;s mechanics, PGE wouldn&rsquo;t escape having to make changes&mdash;capital investments&mdash;to accommodate the fuel switch. &ldquo;Part of the attraction here is that the conversion could be completed with minimal modifications to the existing plant, to the conveyors, silos, pulverizers, burners and boiler,&rdquo; Corson says. &ldquo;There are also advantages from an emissions standpoint, with little or minimal sulfur dioxide or mercury emissions expected, for instance. That said, we&rsquo;d expect the plant to need additional emissions controls for oxides of nitrogen, so an SCR (selective catalytic reduction) [system] would likely be required, and thus is part of the math in deciding if the conversion will make sense.&rdquo; Even though the test burn will be the most extensive to date, Corson emphasizes that even a full-day test burn won&rsquo;t answer all of PGE&rsquo;s questions. At least, not yet. &ldquo;It will give us some additional information about the plant&rsquo;s emissions profile when fueled by biomass, plant chemistry, and how the plant&rsquo;s equipment handles the fuel,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Presuming all goes well, that will point us toward areas where we need to focus our attention in future test burns, and will begin to give us a more complete picture of what will be required if we decide to proceed with a conversion.&rdquo;&nbsp; By the time that happens&mdash;likely 2020 or sooner&mdash;Oregon Torrefaction, the company PGE has hired to supply the fuel needed for the upcoming test burn, hopes to see a more developed torrefied biomass market in the country. Working with the utility to determine if the potential is real, and whether the long-term operation of Boardman on biomass could be feasible and economic, could help grease the track. Building a Market Oregon Torrefaction has been working on the fuel-gathering project for PGE for about a year and a half, according to Matt Krumenauer, CEO. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re working to produce and procure the torrefied material, and we&rsquo;ve got a number of facilities working with us,&rdquo; he says, explaining that the company isn&rsquo;t manufacturing torrefied material itself, but to churn out the 8,000 tons needed, has brought on board several companies with a variety of technologies, including New Biomass Energy in Mississippi, Airex Energy in Quebec and Reklaim in Boardman. &ldquo;We&rsquo;ve also borrowed a mobile torrefaction system from Idaho National Energy Lab&mdash;we&rsquo;ve moved that to Boardman and its producing material for us,&rdquo; Krumenauer says. &ldquo;Then, we&rsquo;re densifying it in a cuber that we are contracting another company to run for us. We&rsquo;ve got a number of different efforts going on, to really see if this is a viable opportunity and whether it will perform technically at the power plant.&rdquo; Krumenauer highlights the variety of torrefaction technologies involved, all of which result in end products with similar characteristics. &ldquo;We have a rotary kiln&mdash;a pretty standard type of torrefaction system, the Reklaim system is a Wyssmont Turbodryer, which is a fairly standard thermal treatment application, and Airex has its own propriety technology, as does New Biomass Energy,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Not only do we have a range of different technologies, but we&rsquo;re also using many different types of woody biomass.&rdquo; &nbsp;In Oregon, the company is sourcing 100 percent of its material from national forest restoration treatments and stewardship contracts, small-diameter biomass, and plans are to test some of PGE&rsquo;s purpose-grown energy crops. On the task of delivering the material PGE needs in the desired timeframe, Krumenauer says things are on track to deliver by the year&rsquo;s end, and the process is going fairly well. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re learning a lot&mdash;this is a fairly large proof-of-concept run, and we&rsquo;re going to be completing a full economic analysis after the burn is completed, and hopefully help PGE determine if this is a viable opportunity.&rdquo; Related to the initiative is a consortium Oregon Torrefaction has formed, the Consortium for Advanced Wood to Energy Solutions, an effort by the U.S. Endowment for Forestry Communities, the U.S. Forest Service and a number of different academic institutions and private sector companies that are working to help advance torrefaction in a precompetitive manner. &ldquo;The point is to help advance the market,&rdquo; Krumenauer says. &ldquo;That&rsquo;s the mission-driven aspect behind this effort&mdash;to create and advance a market for these low-value biomass residuals, primarily from national forests. Our hope is that if this is successful, and we&rsquo;re able to help PGE and other utilities, it will open up opportunities for companies like Airex and New Biomass Energy. We don&rsquo;t view it at all as competitive, we view it as something that will help break that chicken-and-egg scenario.&rdquo; Meanwhile, the focus after delivering the torrefied material to Boardman will be to analyze the test burn results. &ldquo;Immediately after, we have to evaluate the technical aspects, the economic aspects, and the feedstock sustainability aspects to really understand what the true cost would be, to try to supply a facility the size of Boardman,&rdquo; Krumenauer says. &ldquo;Our next steps will really be analysis-based. After that, I think we will look at helping supply larger, longer-duration test burns, and sharing this information with the broader industry. There are other power plants that could certainly cofire or convert. While the Boardman&rsquo;s potential conversion investigation is taking a great deal of time, excitement is building, Krumenauer adds. &ldquo;I have to give PGE a lot of credit for sticking with this. It&rsquo;s been a long, hard path, but we&rsquo;re getting there. We&rsquo;re going to get through this test burn&mdash;I&rsquo;m certain it will be successful, it&rsquo;s just a lot of work&mdash;and we&rsquo;ll see what comes after that.&rdquo; Author: Anna Simet Managing Editor, Biomass Magazine asimet@bbiinternational.com 701-738-4961

BIOMASS OR BUST: The 550-MW Boardman Power Station is the last coal-burning plant in Oregon, and will likely shut down by 2020 if it renders torrefied biomass as uneconomic or unfeasible fuel replacement.  

2016/11/BoardmanPowerStation-DecBMM16_14797520969256_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/BoardmanPowerStation-DecBMM16_14797520969256_thumb.jpg

2016/11/BoardmanPowerStation-DecBMM16_14797520969256.jpg

READY FOR THE RANKINE: This torrefied fuel product will be tested in PGEâ€™s upcoming daylong-test burn. It was made from biomass generated on national forest restoration activities under the Malheur National Forest 10-year stewardship contract.  

2016/11/DensifiedMaterial-DecBMM16_14797520978411.jpg

ON-SITE SERVICE: Idaho National Energy Laboratory provided a mobile torrefaction unit to help produce the 8,000 tons of torrefied biomass Portland General Electric needs for its upcoming test burn. 

2016/11/WyssmontTurbodryer-DecEPM16_14797520987974.jpg

Continuing its years-long investigation of whether torrefied biomass could extend its life, Boardman Power Station is prepping to undergo a substantive test burn. 

Trial by Fire

I believe I was not alone in being surprised with the results of the 2016 elections. President-elect Trump alongside a Republican majority Senate and House&mdash;a far cry from the outcome predicted by so many&mdash;is what we are now preparing for. There are some clear opportunities for biomass under the new circumstances, but also many questions about how the new government will impact bioenergy.
While the new administration takes shape, here are a few of the key issue areas we at Biomass Power Association are watching closely: Investments in infrastructure and rural America.&nbsp; &ldquo;It&rsquo;s the economy, stupid.&rdquo; This pearl of wisdom has stood the test of time, and applies well to 2016. Trump based much of his campaign on the need to address the uncertainty of rural working Americans, and they responded by voting for him. He has promised billions of dollars in investments for infrastructure improvements, and in his acceptance speech announced a program to put unemployed Americans back to work within his first 100 days in office. With biomass facilities located primarily in rural areas, we are making our case that biomass investments should be part of any infrastructure package. Trump has also criticized trade deals as part of his platform. We expect to see a new emphasis on securing American borders and on American-made products, including energy. On his transition website, he has listed energy independence as a top priority under &ldquo;Making America Secure Again,&rdquo; with the goal of making full use of domestic energy resources.&nbsp; New environmental regulatory regime. For much of the Obama administration, the biomass industry has been working toward full recognition of our environmental benefits by the U.S. EPA. We have spent considerable time and energy talking up the carbon benefits of biomass. While this is still important work, we do not anticipate that the Trump administration will place nearly as high an importance, if any, on carbon emissions. This is a mixed bag for biomass. For the time being, we can shift our emphasis from carbon onto other biomass benefits, like rural jobs and support for the forestry supply chain. On the other hand, the Clean Power Plan&rsquo;s chances for success have now been downgraded considerably. That means that any potential investments in biomass as a baseload replacement for coal and natural gas are less likely. New Congressional priorities. With the Republicans now enjoying a majority in both Congressional houses, there are new possibilities for some of its top priorities that had previously been considered DOA. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell mentioned comprehensive tax reform in his first post-election interview. Few specifics have been discussed, but the outlines of tax reform traditionally proposed by Republicans often include a lower corporate tax rate and the elimination of tax credits. This could potentially place the Section 45 Production Tax Credit in jeopardy, but could open up other opportunities for biomass. USDA and U.S. Forest Service priorities. Under the Obama administration, the USDA has been a staunch advocate of investing in farms, forestry and rural locations, and we expect that to continue. The U.S. Forest Service has begun a program to emphasize the benefits of building with wood, which the agency is hoping to continue under President Trump. On a related note, the Forest Service has teamed up with the Softwood Lumber Board to curate an exhibit at the National Building Museum in Washington, D.C. The exhibit addresses the role of biomass in using the whole tree harvested, and is worth checking out! We will be keeping a close eye on all of these developments and will share them with our members and here at Biomass Magazine. If you are interested in joining the association to ensure that your interests are being heard on Capitol Hill, please contact Carrie Annand at carrie@usabiomass.org.
The Biomass Power Association wishes all involved in biomass a happy and healthy holiday season. We look forward to working with all of you in 2017. Author: Bob Cleaves President, Biomass Power Association bob@biomasspowerassociation.com www.biomasspowerassociation.com

2016/11/Bob-Cleaves_14797524176774_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/Bob-Cleaves_14797524176774_thumb.jpg

2016/11/Bob-Cleaves_14797524176774.jpg

While the new administration takes shape, the Biomass Power Association is watching the key issue areas that may affect the industry.

Trump Wins, Now What?

On an acre of land bordering the small town of Goodfield, Illinois, a 70-foot wide by 100-foot long industrial building has slowly, but steadily, taken shape. Designed to collect locally available, undervalued biomass, the biomass conversion facility (BCF) will convert these materials into useful products such as wood pellets, briquettes and logs, or even animal bedding, erosion control socks and mulch. Its unique purpose coincides with the fairly uncommon building approach of assembling 60 recycled steel intermodal shipping containers like giant LEGO blocks some 60 feet into the air. &ldquo;We have well over a million of these containers in the U.S. that are underutilized&mdash;you buy them for scrap,&rdquo; says Paul Wever, Chip Energy Inc. CEO. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s actually a very rapid construction process that takes place. It&rsquo;s taken me about four years, but that&rsquo;s because I&rsquo;m building the first one in the world, and I&rsquo;m financing it myself&mdash;we&rsquo;re expecting that these can be put together on-site within less than a year.&rdquo; Descriptors like &ldquo;first in the world&rdquo; can give a project an edge in the industry it hopes to serve, but can also leave supporters and financers on-edge to contribute to its development. It can be &ldquo;a double-edged sword,&rdquo; Wever acknowledges. &ldquo;I&rsquo;m building something that&rsquo;s unique to the industry, so I have to prove myself.&rdquo; Wever&rsquo;s day job is a heavy metal fabricator with his company Paul Wever Construction Equipment Co. Inc. &ldquo;Chip Energy is just a hobby right now,&rdquo; he lightheartedly admits. The BCF is slated for completion next June, and will be capable of bringing in 100 tons (about 10 semi loads) of raw material each day, then turning around and producing 100 tons of fuel pellets or other value-added products. Wever&rsquo;s ultimate hope is that this effort provides a basic foundation to start a sustainable bioeconomy. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s vitally important that we build an infrastructure that can use the most sophisticated logistical system that exists today, and that was invented in the 1950s and has been improved immensely&mdash;it is our intermodal logistical system,&rdquo; Wever says. As he researched his design concept, &ldquo;it became obvious that the cube of an intermodal shipping container and the commodity-type issues that we have with the logistics of biomass were a marriage made in heaven,&rdquo; he says. Vision to Reality Chip Energy&rsquo;s story dates back to 2006 when Hurricane Katrina devastated the U.S. Gulf Coast. &ldquo;I had several customers down there who had issues, so we started looking into what we were going to do to help them,&rdquo; he says. The abundance of salvageable wood debris that accumulated in the aftermath of the hurricane got Wever looking into ways to utilize wood waste, as well as the advantages of designing and building with recycled shipping containers. Chip Energy broke ground in June of 2013 on the BCF, or the &ldquo;prototype working model&rdquo; for what Wever envisions could be thousands of strategically placed BCFs across the nation. Each BCF within this proposed distributed network would source biomass from about a 30-mile radius. &ldquo;We do feel that it&rsquo;s realistic that anywhere from a three- to five-county region would end up with a facility that would be turning this material into something of higher-value, put it on a rail siding and ship it anywhere in the continental U.S. at an economical price, and a greenhouse gas reduction rate that is sustainable,&rdquo; Wever says. Within a 30-mile radius of Chip Energy is a multitude of manufacturing processes, and woody biomass feedstock has been piling up on the project site since 2006. Early collection has been instrumental to the project&rsquo;s progress, as the tipping fee associated with gathering the material has helped finance the $2 million facility&rsquo;s construction. Currently, an 8 million-pound pile of woody biomass material lies next to the facility from a number of contracted suppliers, including Case New Holland, Vermeer and John Deere. All need an outlet to recycle their woody biomass waste streams, which can amount to upwards of 100 tons of useable material every month. According to Wever, in his home state of Illinois, 5 million pounds of biomass are landfilled every day. &ldquo;Instead of throwing that material into a dumpster and Waste Management hauling it to the landfill, Chip Energy said, &lsquo;For 7 cents per pound, we&rsquo;ll put a container at your facility, you fill it up and we&rsquo;ll pick it up, and we can guarantee you that material will be recycled&rsquo;,&rdquo; Wever explains. &ldquo;What I&rsquo;ve found out is that all of the places that I do business with, they&rsquo;re willing to pay me the same price that they were paying Waste Management to bring that material to my facility and recycle it.&rdquo; On the other hand, Wever adds, when it comes to going into the forest or a farmer&rsquo;s field, those potential biomass suppliers require payment for the right to take the material. Wever likens his efforts to the transformation biodiesel production had on waste vegetable grease. &ldquo;It [waste vegetable grease] went from people having to pay 5 cents per pound for people to haul it away to people basically being willing to pay that customer 5 cents per pound to put it in their container,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;To me, that&rsquo;s the best example of what I&rsquo;m trying to do. Once we get into a situation to where the manufacturing infrastructure exists, the recycling infrastructure exists, there will become a demand for the recyclable materials and then we will basically say we&rsquo;ll pay you to bring that material to us.&rdquo; Infrastructure As Wever is using this facility as a prototype working model, his priority is to encourage others to develop similar BCFs. &ldquo;I&rsquo;m not looking at getting rich by making pellets or briquettes from this particular facility, I&rsquo;m looking at making sure my customers see what they&rsquo;ll get if we deliver them a facility,&rdquo; he says. Wever emphasizes that his facility will operate using a different approach than the typical pellet mill, focusing on energy efficiency, rather than speed. &ldquo;We looked at this from a different point of view&mdash;we want the lowest amount of energy put into the product to get the highest value material based on the customer&rsquo;s specifications,&rdquo; Wever says. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re maintaining two, 10-hour shifts at 5 tons per hour&mdash;we have a four-hour maintenance shift, too.&rdquo; Wever adds that they&rsquo;ll plan on incorporating a 50-horsepower, low-speed, high-torque grinder. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s not fast, it&rsquo;s not noisy, it&rsquo;s not dusty, but it&rsquo;s super-efficient&mdash;it grinds the material to the size that we want and it meets our 5-ton-per-hour minimum requirement,&rdquo; he explains. The facility will have the capability of sizing, densifying, protecting and delivering the material customer&rsquo;s request. Production of these various end products has been vertically aligned, with the operations separated by function into three floors. According to the company, material cascades as it progresses through each process. The third floor is where the equipment for size reduction and blending is kept, the second floor houses equipment for pelletizing and briquetting, and the ground level will have packaging equipment and warehouse space. There are six bulk areas inside the building, amounting to nearly 70,000 cubic-feet of total bulk volume for the storage of mulch and densified material ready for bulk sale, with up to 700 tons of wood pellet capacity in controlled, dry storage. There are also 26 silos, which form two walls of the building. These are used to segregate different raw materials: wood chips, sawdust, energy crops, leaves, brush, paper, etc. The silos are connected by a tube chain conveyor in a configuration that allows for 80 percent of the belt to convey material at any given time. Wever estimates the facility reserves room for about one week of production at near maximum throughput. Right now, Wever says Chip Energy plans to produce a three-eighths-inch pellet and a 1-inch commercial pellet. The briquetter will have two die sizes, manufacturing around a 1.5-inch and 2-inch briquette. Markets Wever hopes the company will be able to focus on selling these fuels for cofiring at coal plants. &ldquo;Our main goal is to make a predictable emissions briquette,&rdquo; Wever says. Besides serving energy customers with a densified biomass product, Chip Energy plans on producing products for those involved in the feed and cellulosic ethanol industries. Wever says companies like ADM and Monsanto have approached him about collecting corn stover for conversion into a cellulosic ethanol fuel feedstock or feed supplements. &ldquo;That market is actually exponentially larger than any other market right now because it already exists&mdash;$30 billion worldwide market,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;You&rsquo;re not going to find that kind of a number in biomass combustion with coal, but we hope to get there, and I hope to put the infrastructure in place for that to happen.&rdquo; Wever believes he can provide a solution to the problems associated with collecting, storing and preparing stover for cellulosic ethanol production. He envisions integrating the intermodal shipping system &ldquo;at the field&rsquo;s edge.&rdquo; Cellulosic ethanol producers can spend anywhere from $5 to $10 million on-site to unbale the stover material, separate out unwanted materials, appropriately size it to technology specs and then commence with conversion processes, Wever says. &ldquo;Thirty to 60 percent of the final cost of that product that comes out of that plant was the delivery of the raw feedstock,&rdquo; he notes. &ldquo;That&rsquo;s what&rsquo;s holding back our bioeconomy. Someone has to come in with a 30 to 60 percent improvement in those costs.&rdquo; Wever believes he can offer at least a 30 percent improvement by implementing the intermodal distributed feedstock depot system. His company has approached DuPont about the possibility of siting a facility within 30 to 60 miles of Nevada, Iowa. &ldquo;We would be delivering the product not in a bale form, but in a form specified by their chemists, so that when they take it out of the intermodal shipping container, it can be poured directly into their reactor and that&rsquo;s not what they can do today,&rdquo; Wever says. Next June, Wever isn&rsquo;t sure which product he&rsquo;ll be making, but he&rsquo;s optimistic he&rsquo;ll be making something. &ldquo;It depends on the market,&rdquo; he acknowledges. &ldquo;I have just as many people asking me to take corn stover and convert it to a feed product as I do people wanting me to take a woody biomass and convert it into a briquette for fuel.&rdquo; Wever hopes to take his hobby and turn it into something that can change the world. &ldquo;We just have to think about this differently to where we build smaller, super-efficient facilities that can rationalize taking these low-hanging fruit materials, convert them into products that we combust or co-combust with coal, and then save the Earth and ourselves.&rdquo; Author: Katie Fletcher Associate Editor, Biomass Magazine 701-738-4920 kfletcher@bbiinternational.com

Vertical Integration: Upon completion of the biomass conversion facility, an overhead crane will be able to access all the storage and production spaces, using a clamshell bucket to scoop product into a load-out conveyor, which fills a semi-truck at 

2016/11/OverheadCrane-ChipEnergy_14797516910229_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/OverheadCrane-ChipEnergy_14797516910229_thumb.jpg

2016/11/OverheadCrane-ChipEnergy_14797516910229.jpg

Chip Energy's unique biomass recycling venture will turn waste wood into wood pellets, briquettes and more. 

An Unconventional Conversion Facility

In months, Vancouver&rsquo;s largest suburb, Surrey, British Columbia, will be collecting 65,000 metric tons of organic waste a year from 105,000 single-family households and 35,000 multifamily high-rise units with collection trucks running on biogas generated from that very same waste&mdash;sort of. According to Rob Costanzo, manager of engineering operations for the city of Surrey, the estimated 120,000 gigajoules of biogas to be produced at the Surrey Biofuel Facility currently under construction adjacent to the Surrey Transfer Station will be sold to the local gas utility, FortisBC, and injected into the grid. Then, the fleet of up to 50 compressed natural gas (CNG) collection trucks will fill up on CNG at stations throughout the city at the same price. Costanzo says the city had the option to build a renewable natural gas delivery station on a 4-acre parcel at the biogas plant, &ldquo;but that didn&rsquo;t make much sense to us,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;The facility is located in the Northeast corner of the city, and it&rsquo;s a large city geographically&mdash;320 square kilometers (124 square miles) in size&mdash;so to fuel all of Surrey&rsquo;s CNG fleet there did not make logistical sense.&rdquo;&nbsp; The project, spurred by a regional mandate to divert 70 percent of waste from landfills, began in 2013 with a bid request. Eleven bids were received and narrowed to the top three, after which the city chose the experienced Netherlands-based Orgaworld, part of the Shanks Group, in a public-private partnership (P3) to design, build, finance, operate and maintain the facility under a 25-year contract. The cost of the plant is estimated at nearly CA$68 million, but through the P3 arrangement, Canada&rsquo;s federal government has agreed to pay up to 25 percent ($17 million). The Surrey Biofuel Facility will be sized to take in up to 115,000 tons of organic waste per year&mdash;including both yard waste and kitchen scraps. Costanzo says the city of Surrey is contracted to provide a minimum of 57,000 tons a year, and if, for whatever reason, it cannot meet that obligation, it&rsquo;s a &ldquo;put or pay&rdquo; arrangement. Conversely, Orgaworld is obligated to produce a minimum of 100,000 gigajoules of biogas in a &ldquo;produce or pay&rdquo; agreement, Costanzo says. However, the city expects to supply on average 65,000 tons, and the facility anticipates producing 120,000 gigajoules of biogas. The facility is sized to take in organics from surrounding municipalities as well, to make up the difference between what Surrey can provide and the plant&rsquo;s production capacity. The city plans to consume upwards of 65,000 gigajoules of biogas per year for its collection trucks and another 10,000 gigajoules per year for maintenance vehicles. Sales from the remainder will be split between Surrey and Orgaworld. &ldquo;We had a really robust education program when we converted from a two-bin system to a three-bin system,&rdquo; says Bruce Hayne, a Surrey City Councilor. &ldquo;Quickly, we got to 70 percent participation. When we make it easy for them, people want to do the right thing.&rdquo; Hayne says the city hasn&rsquo;t had to fine nonparticipating residents in the green-bin program&mdash;yet. &ldquo;Each bin has bar codes and there&rsquo;s cameras on the trucks,&rdquo; he says, &ldquo;so if we wanted to, it would be quite easy to track compliance.&rdquo; The city&rsquo;s risk may seem low compared to Orgaworld&rsquo;s&mdash;essentially providing land, feedstock and tipping fees, the net cost of which Costanzo says is $65 a ton&mdash;considering Surrey owns the plant while Orgaworld designs, builds, finances, maintains and operates it. After 25 years, the contract may be renewed or not. The choice is the city&rsquo;s. Surrey&rsquo;s tipping fees are offset by what it charges residents for the three-bin pickup service, which is $283 a year for single-family households and $35 for apartment units. Orgaworld does not get revenue from gas sales, but Costanzo says sales from the finished compost from digestate&mdash;40,000 tons annually&mdash;goes entirely to Orgaworld. &ldquo;We didn&rsquo;t know where the market would sit when we made the contract,&rdquo; Costanzo says. &ldquo;The average cost then was $15 to $18 a ton, but fast forward to now, most municipalities are doing this, so we put a zero-dollar value on it. So Orgaworld is 100 percent responsible to produce and market that, and the sales go to them.&rdquo; The city may use around 2 tons a year of the compost for parks, medians and boulevards. Through the facility, the city may also be eligible to cash in on carbon offsets.&nbsp; Orgaworld Project Manager Ryan Lauzon says the biogas plant uses dry anaerobic digestion (AD) in a batch process with 10 dry tunnel-like digester vessels. &ldquo;The primary reason we use dry AD is it allows more flexibility for contaminants,&rdquo; Lauzon says. &ldquo;With the mixture of leaf, yard and food waste, we don&rsquo;t have to worry about particle size.&rdquo; For wet AD using this mixture, the feedstock would have to be pulped, using energy and water resources, and then the water must be dealt with. &ldquo;Here, we use no water or energy to pulp,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;We take the waste in, put it through a rough 4-inch grind and fill a tunnel.&rdquo; Each batch digests for 21 to 28 days, and every few days a new batch is started in one of the 10 vessels. Orgaworld has a wet digester, or fermenter, on-site and stores the liquid fermentate from the dry AD for recirculation on top of the digesters to keep breakdown active during the process. After day four, gas begins to be withdrawn from the vessel for cleaning and grid injection. Lauzon says Greenlane Biogas supplied the gas cleanup system on-site, which is a water-wash setup. FortisBC conducts gas quality checks routinely, and if any is rejected, it goes back into cleanup or is flared. The odor control technology used is state-of-the-art, Costanzo and Lauzon say. Everything is enclosed including compost vessels, unlike many sites where compost is windrowed and the pungent smell burdens those nearby. The building is kept under negative pressure, and the compost vessels use air from inside the facility for aerobic composting. Then, air from composting vessels goes through ammonia scrubbers after which the ammonia is stripped and the air is cooled and humidified before entering the biofilters, which consist of hardwood, root-wood torn branches. Finally, the air is forced up the 230-foot stack. The end result is 1 ppm odor at the property line. &ldquo;The odor mitigation is a big deal,&rdquo; Costanzo says. The Surrey Biofuel Facility broke ground May 2015 and is on track to be fully operational late April 2017. Today, Surrey residents&rsquo; organics are taken to a neighboring Richmond composting site. Tomorrow, they will power the city&rsquo;s collection fleet. &nbsp; Author: Ron Kotrba Senior Editor, Biomass Magazine 218-745-8347 rkotrba@bbiinternational.com

CLEAN ENERGY: The Surrey Biofuel Facility outside of Vancouver, British Columbiaâ€”designed, financed, operated and maintained by Orgaworld but owned by the cityâ€”is a new biogas plant that will use source-separated organics as feedstock. 

2016/11/SurreyBiofuelFacility-DecBMM16_14797509452176_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/SurreyBiofuelFacility-DecBMM16_14797509452176_thumb.jpg

2016/11/SurreyBiofuelFacility-DecBMM16_14797509452176.jpg

The Canadian city of Surrey, British Columbia, prepares to open a new biogas plant fed by its residents' kitchen scraps and yard waste, the fuel from which will power its collection fleet of CNG vehicles.  

28 Days Later: Waste to Fuel

North Carolina has the potential to gain $2.7 billion in new capital investment, nearly 24,300 construction and maintenance jobs, and a multitude of related industry-service jobs. How is that possible? By taking advantage of one of our most overlooked, yet very abundant, energy sources: biogas.&nbsp; Those statistics reported by the American Biogas Council represent an enormous opportunity for North Carolina's citizens, businesses and local governments to harness methane from our agriculture, landfills, wastewater and food waste. If fully realized, this biogas energy could power nearly 500,000 homes and create greater value for our state.&nbsp; We have already begun to see the economic benefits of diversifying North Carolina&rsquo;s energy mix as our utilities increase their use of solar, and most recently, wind energy. These renewable energy projects and businesses have provided exciting new economic opportunities for communities all across our state. As an engineer who loves to come up with better ways to do things, North Carolina&rsquo;s biogas potential motivates me as I design and refine anaerobic digester (AD) technology to use animal waste from farms, or trash in our landfills, to make power, which in turn converts an economic burden into a valuable resource. As we look for where we can continue to innovate and keep our economy robust, bioenergy projects offer an incredible prospect.&nbsp; As of 2015, the American Biogas Council ranked North Carolina No. 3 for methane production potential (MPP) from biogas sources and identified 75 operational biogas projects.&nbsp; Of the 75, 10 were classified as agriculture projects.&nbsp; By comparison, another big ag state, Wisconsin, has 135 operational biogas projects, 35 of which are farm-based. While its MPP is much lower at 27, Wisconsin has made harnessing biogas a priority for its state&rsquo;s energy mix in large part because of the state&rsquo;s renewable portfolio standard&nbsp; law. Like Wisconsin, the venture into biogas projects will both help rural communities in the Tar Heel State thrive while aligning perfectly with the North Carolina Renewable Energy &amp; Energy Efficiency Portfolio Standard law. Considering the fact that agriculture brings $84 billion to North Carolina's economy, and many communities rely on ag to stay afloat, we must find new and reliable ways to sustain ag through new&nbsp; markets, like bioenergy. As an engineer who helps design AD technology to capture methane on farms to create electricity from animal waste, I have seen firsthand that the benefits go well beyond economics.&nbsp; For operations like Loyd Ray Farms in Yadkinville, North Carolina, a facility that houses nearly 9,000 pigs, harnessing biogas from waste has multiple benefits for the farm and the surrounding community.&nbsp; Beyond the most obvious benefit of generating electricity from animal waste, installing AD technology to capture methane helps power nearly half of its operation. As such, it reduces utility bills, and reduces ammonia for better air quality for livestock.&nbsp; For nearby communities, the completely enclosed system also results in improved air and water quality. With 15 agricultural biogas projects online in N.C., we have only just begun to take advantage of the renewable supply of waste and make it into something more valuable.&nbsp; Experts estimate we have the potential to bring 900 biogas projects online.&nbsp; Of those, over 700 would benefit agriculture and the surrounding communities in Duplin,&nbsp; Sampson, Bladen, Lenoir and Johnston counties, just to name a few. As we work toward creating a solid roadmap to bring more farms online, it is abundantly clear we are making great strides in making waste-to-value technology a reality for a multitude of animal operations across our state, improving water and air quality, creating on-farm efficiencies, and helping our rural communities flourish. Author: Gus Simmons Director of Bioenergy, Cavanaugh Gus.simmons@cavanaughsolutions.com 877-557-8923

2016/11/Gus-Simmons_14797510383627_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/Gus-Simmons_14797510383627_thumb.jpg

2016/11/Gus-Simmons_14797510383627.jpg

North Carolina has the potential to gain $2.7 billion in new capital investment, nearly 24,300 construction and maintenance jobs, and a multitude of related industry-service jobs, by taking advantage of biogas.

Capturing Power Above the Dirt

On May 9, the sun rose in Stockholm, Sweden, at 4:28 a.m., and wouldn&rsquo;t set for well over 16 hours. Temperatures that day flirted with 80 degrees Fahrenheit, unseasonably warm weather. The guests on hand to witness the inauguration of the city&rsquo;s new biomass-powered combined-heat-and-power (CHP) plant could be forgiven for having difficulty imagining a day when the city&rsquo;s residents would need heat, and lots of it. Reality, however, is that those warm spring and summer days in Stockholm eventually yield to fall and winter, and on the winter solstice, residents in the city will be just halfway through their afternoon when the sun sets at 2:48 p.m. The historical average daytime high on that day is 32 degrees F. It is then that Fortum V&auml;rme, jointly owned by the city of Stockholm and Fortum, a Finnish energy company, will be called upon to provide heat via a district energy system to nearly 200,000 homes in Stockholm. In 2012, work began on the new facility, which is located at the site of the V&auml;rtaverket CHP plant, a coal-burning facility that had served the city since the late 1960s, when it was linked into the city&rsquo;s growing district energy grid. Cost estimates for the construction of the facility approach &euro;500 million ($543 million). During the inauguration, Pekka Lundmark, Fortum CEO, addressed the biomass supply chain that will be relied on to deliver the 12,000 tons of feedstock the facility will require each day during its peak heating season. &ldquo;Biomass is a renewable, largely local and carbon-neutral energy source,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;Its use increases the share of domestic energy resources particularly in northern Europe, and it is an important building block of a sustainable energy system and the bioeconomy.&rdquo; The facility is positioned in the Hjorthagen neighborhood northeast of the city center, and, as is virtually all of the city, is situated near a busy waterway, teaming with cargo vessels, cruise ships and local passenger ferries. While this enviable proximity to the water would allow the facility to source biomass from all corners of the globe, the plant expects its imported biomass to be sourced largely from the nearby Baltics and Russia. A 200-meter pier was built to be able to simultaneously berth two biomass-carrying vessels at once, and early estimates suggest that about 60 percent of the biomass burned at the facility will utilize the new infrastructure. A crane with a discharge rate of 2,000 to 3,000 tons per hour has also been installed. The capacity at the pier should be more than enough to keep the plant well-stocked with fuel; remaining biomass will be received by rail at an indoor unloading facility to control fugitive dust. Plant officials expect to receive four or five shipments of wood chips via train weekly, with each delivering roughly 4,500 tons of chips. Stolkholm&rsquo;s transition from coal-derived heat and power to biomass fuel typifies a countrywide commitment to decarbonizing Sweden&rsquo;s economy. The country already boasts one of Europe&rsquo;s lowest per-capita greenhouse gas emission levels, and Fortum sees the new facility in Stockholm as a continuation of its decarbonization efforts. &ldquo;After a long process, one of the world&rsquo;s biggest biomass-fired combined-heat-and-power plants has now been inaugurated,&rdquo; said Anders Egelrud, Fortum V&auml;rme managing director. &ldquo;This is an important step towards a sustainable energy system in Stockholm and in Europe.&rdquo; Change of Season On Oct. 10 in Aarhus, Denmark, the country&rsquo;s second-largest city, DONG Energy celebrated a similar inauguration at the Studstrup Power Station, as the facility&rsquo;s transition from coal to wood pellets was complete. &ldquo;I&rsquo;m delighted that we can now open the new, green Studstrup Power Station, which will be able to supply green district heating to Aarhus and green electricity to the Danish grid,&rdquo; said Thomas Dalsgaard, DONG Energy executive vice president. &ldquo;That means a significant contribution to the green revolution, and we&rsquo;re well on the way to establishing an energy system that is green, independent and economically sustainable.&rdquo; The event marked the end of a two-year conversion process, and a new energy era for both DONG Energy and the city of Aarhus. Kristian Wurtz, alderman for the Department of Technology and Environment in Aarhus, sees the conversion not only as Denmark&rsquo;s largest clean energy initiative, but perhaps more importantly, a vital component of the city&rsquo;s climate ambitions. &ldquo;Using wood pellets as fuel at Studstrup Power Station will mean a lot in terms of us achieving our climate targets,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;It gives us the incentive to go further with the green transformation, something we intend to pursue to a greater degree together with residents and businesses.&rdquo; Once operating at full capacity, Studstrup will be capable of meeting the heating needs of over half of the city. Another facility, being built at nearby Lisbjerg, will contribute another 20 percent.&nbsp; &ldquo;The conversion of Studstrup and the new facility at Lisbjerg means that we&rsquo;ve taken a massive and important step towards fulfilling our ambition of becoming a CO2-neutral city by 2030,&rdquo; Wurtz said. For DONG, the conversion at Studstrup is just the first in a series of conversions intended to simultaneously increase the profits from district heating assets and reduce the carbon intensity of delivered energy. According to company data, in 2006, one kilowatt-hour (KWh) of energy generated 638 grams of CO2. By 2014, the company had driven that carbon intensity down to 374 grams, and is well on the way to its goal of 260 g CO2 per KWh by 2020. Two more facilities, CHP plants at Avedore and Skaerbaek, are also tabbed for conversion to biomass inputs, and construction is underway. The company expects both facilities to be fully completed by the 2017-&acute;18 heating season, dramatically increasing the percentage of biomass-derived heat in DONG&rsquo;s portfolio. At the European Bioenergy Future conference in Brussels, Thomas Dalsgaard, executive vice president at DONG Energy, shared with attendees that DONG&rsquo;s aggressive biomass conversion plans will eventually result in 1,400 MW of biomass-based power and 2,200 MW of biomass-derived heat. He told the audience that in 2020, the company intends to be producing over 60 percent of its delivered heat from biomass, an incredible growth plan considering that in 2009, just 14 percent of the company&rsquo;s delivered heat came from biomass. Collectively, these conversions across Scandinavia have firmly cemented biomass-derived heat and power as a viable pathway to the emissions reductions that so many local and national policymakers are seeking. Biomass conversions offer utilities and municipalities a plug-and-play option to bring existing district heating grids, electrical distribution networks, and shipping and receiving assets to bear on their climate goals, preserving those investments and recasting them as models of reinvention as Europe continues its aggressive push towards decarbonization. Author: Tim Portz Executive Editor, Biomass Magazine tportz@bbiinternational.com 701-738-4969

RECAST FOR REDUCTION: Jointly owned by the Fortum and the City of Stockholm, Fortum Varme marks the end of the fossil fuel era for heat and power in the city. The facility will consume nearly 12,000 tons of wood chips per day during Stockholmâ€™s pro

2016/11/RECAST-FOR-REDUCTION-BMM16_14797511622055_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/RECAST-FOR-REDUCTION-BMM16_14797511622055_thumb.jpg

2016/11/RECAST-FOR-REDUCTION-BMM16_14797511622055.jpg

OCTOBER INAUGAURATION: DONG Energy celebrated the conversion of the Studstrup power plant from coal to wood pellets on Oct. 10. The conversion is an important piece of DONGâ€™s efforts to raise the percentage of its delivered heat from biomass from l

2016/11/StudstrupPowerPlant-DONG-Energy_1479751163088.jpg

Leveraging sea routes that connect to vast quantities of regional biomass, combined-heat-and-power stations across Scandinavia are retooling to capitalize on the carbon-neutral fuel.

Scandinavian Swap-Out

If you&rsquo;ve been reading the New York Times, the Washington Post, or any number of other sources, you know there&rsquo;s recently been a lot of controversy in the media and the nonprofit world about biomass. Unfortunately, a lot of the pieces discussing the environmental impacts of biomass energy have emitted more heat than light&mdash;if only we could capture that form of thermal energy! To counter the effects of these incomplete narratives, many in the industry feel that we just need Congress to put a simple statement of biomass&rsquo;s carbon neutrality into legislation. This is understandable, especially given that the October meeting of the U.S. EPA&rsquo;s Scientific Advisory Board continued the uncertainty of the details of how EPA should measure biomass&rsquo;s carbon benefits in an agency discussion that has been going on since 2011 with no clear end in sight. There&rsquo;s also a sense from many industry people I have talked to that maybe biomass advocates are simply being outspent and overwhelmed in terms of marketing dollars, and we just need a powerful, well-funded PR campaign blitz of our own to counteract that. Neither of these ideas are wrong or off-base, but neither should they be the centerpiece of the industry&rsquo;s response to alarmist pieces about clearcutting and burning America&rsquo;s forests. That&rsquo;s because we have another tool that is even better: well-researched, factual information. This hasn&rsquo;t always been the case in the biomass heating and cooling industry. In my experience working for a national trade association, it is common for us to get requests for data about issues such as life-cycle analyses for wood chip or pellet heating versus various fossil fuels, or about the size and scope of the biomass heating market or industry in the U.S. or North America. Often we can point people to that information, but there have also been way too many instances where the facts on the ground are scarce and not well-sourced. (Biomass Magazine has been one an exception to this trend, with its perceptive reporting and tools such as its annual pellet plant map.) The strong, solidly founded data that I&rsquo;ve noticed coming out recently is emanating from various sources and has, for the most part, been in the works for a while now. One example of this is the U.S. Energy Information Administration&rsquo;s data from its EIA-63C survey, also known as the Densified Biomass Fuel Report, which surveyed as many of currently operating pellet plants in the USA as possible about their capacity, staffing, and production. EIA expects to release the first month of data from this survey (January 2016) by Thanksgiving, and will release month-by-month survey results after that. One interesting early piece of information that came out about the data collected so far: For the portion of the pellets that are going to the domestic market (which is primarily heating focused, not electricity), by far, the main feedstocks were sawdust and wood manufacturing residuals, with any type of roundwood (including thinnings and small-diameter pulpwood) coming a distant third. Results like this, once the survey data comes out, will be invaluable to really demonstrating the actual size and impacts of the U.S. pellet market, and its economic and sustainability benefits. Also, a couple of great studies have recently come out of the Northeast. They take a hard look at vexed questions such as carbon accounting and economic value. The New Hampshire Wood Energy Council recently analyzed wood fuel use in 2015 in the state&rsquo;s hospitals, schools, municipal buildings, and commercial sector and estimated that 69,091 tons of CO2 were eliminated by switching to wood fuels, generating $35.9 million in the local economy. Another great study is the Northern Forest Center and Spatial Informatics Group-National Assets Laboratory life-cycle assessment of greenhouse gas reductions gained by using wood pellets in Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont and New York instead of fossil fuels. This included a survey of nine pellet mills, a careful accounting of the energy sources those mills themselves used and inclusion of other factors such as modeling the growth of trees and harvesting effects. The study, by Thomas Buchholz, PhD. and John Gunn, PhD., is being prepared for peer review submission, and the full detailed methodology is available to the public on the Northern Forest Center&rsquo;s website. Amidst what seems like a deluge of half-truths and hyperbole about biomass and its effects, it&rsquo;s important for the industry not to shy away from rigorously showing the real-world benefits that this form of renewable energy can bring. Author: Ben Bell-Walker Biomass Thermal Energy Council, Technical Affairs 202-596-3974 Ben.bell-walker@biomassthermal.org

2016/11/Ben-Bill-Walker_1479751286466_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/Ben-Bill-Walker_1479751286466_thumb.jpg

2016/11/Ben-Bill-Walker_1479751286466.jpg

Amidst what seems like a deluge of half-truths and hyperbole about biomass and its effects, it's important for the industry not to shy away from rigorously showing the real-world benefits that this form of renewable energy can bring.

The Difficulty of Getting Good  Biomass Heating Data 

I&rsquo;ve always enjoyed reading the Sierra Club&rsquo;s annual list of the top 20 greenest schools in the U.S.&nbsp; As I was thumbing through it this year, I noticed that many of the top 20 universities heat some or many of their buildings with pellets or wood chips.&nbsp; After comparing notes with colleagues, we found that eight of the top 20 schools use biomass for heating. The Sierra Club uses a wide variety of attributes to assess the greenness of a university. Only 264 out of 1,000 points assess energy use. Of that, only about 50 have to do with generating renewable energy on-site. Looking back at the list for 2014, very few of the top-ranked universities used biomass for heating. The Sierra Club readily admits that the scoring is a reflection of the broader priorities of the organization. For example, they award a significant percentage of points in the areas of campus energy use, transportation, and fossil fuel divestment, because the Sierra Club believes that progress in these sectors is essential for addressing the climate crisis. While it defends its ranking as fair, transparent, and accurate, it makes no claim that it, or its scoring scheme, is the ultimate arbiter of campus sustainability. Colleges and universities are excellent microcosms for observing the wide array of values, economics, and planning that go into energy and sustainability decisions. Moreover, they are the places that train the next generation of energy leaders.&nbsp; The Sierra Club gives high priority to the curriculum and extracirricular activities on campus, which in turn help to shape how the campus generates, acquires, and manages energy.&nbsp; My organization, the Alliance for Green Heat, is one of the beneficiaries of these curricula, as 10 of our research fellows over the past 7 years went to a school on the Sierra Club list. The universities that use biomass for heating have long, fascinating stories about how those heating systems came to be. Most of us are familiar with many of them. Middlebury College in Vermont, ranked No. 12 on the list, may be the most high-profile system. The famous climate activist Professor Bill McKibben, who taught at Middlebury and then started 350.org, was instrumental in championing the high-tech system that heats most of the campus buildings. The No. 1 greenest college in the U.S., as scored by Sierra Club, is the College of the Atlantic, which uses biomass boilers to provide space heating and hot water for many of the dorms. The No. 2 school on the list is the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry, which has a state-of-the-art combined heat-and-power (CHP) system that produces 65 percent of campus heating needs and 20 percent of its electrical needs. The CHP system uses biomass to drive a steam turbine and produce electricity, while natural gas is used for steam heating along with additional electricity. This building alone is responsible for reducing ESF's carbon footprint by an estimated 22 percent. Colby ranked No. 4 on the Sierra Club list and was the only college to get more than 200 points for energy use. The $12 million heating plant is Gold LEED certified and uses 22,000 tons of wood chips to offset 1 million gallons of oil each year. Cyclonic dust collectors and a $480,000 electrostatic precipitator minimize pollutants entering the atmosphere. Green Mountain College ranked No. 10 on the list. The idea for a biomass heat system started with students. In 2005, a freshman honors student wrote a proposal for a biomass facility so the college could stop using No. 6 heating oil, which is one of the most carbon-intensive commercial fuels. The $5.8 million project, a CHP biomass plant, now reduces oil usage by 200,000 gallons per year and heats over 85 percent of the college. The other top 20 greenest universities that use biomass heat include Colgate, Harvard, and Colorado State.&nbsp; For high school students, these 20 universities are all excellent places to immerse themselves in renewable energy technology and policy. At least eight of the top 20 schools give future energy leaders of America the chance to get hands-on experience with modern biomass heating systems. Author: John Ackerly President, Alliance for Green Heat jackerly@forgreenheat.org 301-204-9562

2016/11/John-Ackerly_14797515115743_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/John-Ackerly_14797515115743_thumb.jpg

2016/11/John-Ackerly_14797515115743.jpg

For high school students, these 20 universities are all excellent places to immerse themselves in renewable energy technology and policy. 

The Greenest Universities

Morbark appoints CEO Morbark has appointed David Herr as CEO. In addition to being an active member of the current Morbark board, he has more than 30 years of relevant experience in operations, supply chain management and executive management with major companies, including Navistar, GE Aircraft Engines and BAE Systems. He has diverse business experience in&nbsp; heavy-duty truck manufacturing, commercial avionics, commercial ship repair, munitions production, and information and intelligence analysis. In his most recent role as executive vice president at BAE Systems, Herr was responsible for one of the largest government service sectors in the U.S., with more than 19,000 employees. He also currently serves as a board member for MHI Holdings, a ship repair contractor for the U.S. Navy. Barko adds product manager Steve Talaga has been appointed product manager for forestry equipment manufacturer Barko Hydraulics LLC, part of the Pettibone Heavy Equipment Group. In his new position, Talaga is responsible for product line development, market analysis, and general support and interaction with Barko dealers and customers. Talaga previously worked for sister company Pettibone/Traverse Lift LLC for 4.5 years, first as a service technician and then as a design engineer.&nbsp;&nbsp; Solegear appoints executive Solegear Bioplastic Technologies Inc. has appointed Don Holmstrom to serve as executive vice president and chief financial officer. Holmstrom has more than 20 years of executive management experience and has raised nearly $100 million in capital for businesses he has operated. He has also completed more than 180 merger and acquisition transactions, representing more than $750 million in transaction value. Solegear also recently announced that the reelection of Salil Munjal, Paul Antoniadis, Jim Zadra and Michael Thomson to its board of directors.&nbsp; Eastern Instruments introduces flow meter Eastern Instruments has introduced the CentriFlow BWS, an economical and accurate gravimetric in-line mass flow meter that serves as an alternative to impact flow meters and belt scales for the dynamic measurement of solids, while in process. The BWS can be used to measure granular solids such as grains, pellets, beans, wood chips, pet food and free-flowing granular powders, such as sand.

2016/11/David-Herr_14797525053694.jpg

2016/11/Talaga_14797525064361.jpg

Biomass Magazine was not even one year old when Barack Obama was sworn in as president. The vast majority of the title&rsquo;s issues have unfolded under his administration, and this issue is unique because its planning, reporting and production straddled the election. Articles were decided upon and planned when the outcome of the presidential race was unknown, and they are being finalized, edited and laid out after the country elected to put President-elect Donald Trump in the White House. It is virtually impossible to read the stories in this issue, dedicated to biomass cofiring, conversions and colocations, without viewing them through the lens of a Trump administration. For instance, our power section is anchored by a story from Managing Editor Anna Simet about a planned test burn at Oregon&rsquo;s Boardman Power Station. The facility is the last coal power station operating in the state and our team has been tracking interest and efforts to convert the facility over to biomass feedstock for years. Planners at Boardman are hopeful that before the year is out, they&rsquo;ll be able to complete a 24-hour test burn on torrefied biomass at the plant. There are lots of questions about the feasibility of transitioning the plant to biomass, and this test burn is intended to answer as many of those as possible. The test burn will have little to say about a big, new question, however. Under a Trump administration, what will the appetite be for low-carbon, baseload power be? The Clean Power Plan, already bogged down in challenges to the Supreme Court, seems a likely target for an administration promising eased regulations. That said, was the promise of the Clean Power Plan really the catalyst for the efforts at Boardman? I think the CPP would have been welcomed by the team driving the initiative at Boardman, but I don&rsquo;t think anyone was banking on it. I think the best argument our industry has going for it in the context of a Trump administration is its ability to produce jobs, and for the next four years, we&rsquo;d be wise to build our advocacy efforts on Capitol Hill on that premise. Katie Fletcher&rsquo;s page-14 department, &ldquo;An Unconventional Biomass Conversion Facility,&rdquo; about Chip Energy is a great place to start. Paul Wever, CEO, has been rolling the biomass boulder up a hill for years, and his entrepreneurial zeal would impress and tickle Trump. The story of our industry remains a good one, but the manner by which we tell it likely will require some retooling. Author: Tim Portz Vice President of Content &amp; Executive Editor tportz@bbiinternational.com

2016/11/TimPortz_14797526087507_largethumb.jpg

2016/11/TimPortz_14797526087507_thumb.jpg

2016/11/TimPortz_14797526087507.jpg

The best argument our industry has going for it in the context of a Trump administration is its ability to produce jobs, and for the next four years, we'd be wise to build our advocacy efforts on Capitol Hill on that premise.

December 2016

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Columns

Our Work to Engage Consumers Expands

What's in a Name?

Game Plan for Capital Project Financing Discussions with Lenders

2016: Looking Back on a Busy Year

Biofuels Play Central Role in Brazil's Climate Goals

The 12 Days of Biofuels

Elegant Solutions

Maximizing Decarbonization, Maintaining Grid Reliability

Trump Wins, Now What?

Capturing Power Above the Dirt

The Difficulty of Getting Good Biomass Heating Data

The Greenest Universities

Out With the Old, In With the New

Featured

Nanoscale Blending

Canadian Producers Poised for Carbon Reduction Era

Good Chemistry

Scandinavian Swap-Out

Contributions

Options Expand for Effective Bacterial Control in Ethanol Production

Departments

Trial by Fire

An Unconventional Conversion Facility

28 Days Later: Waste to Fuel

December 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

Our Work to Engage Consumers Expands

What's in a Name?

Game Plan for Capital Project Financing Discussions with Lenders

2016: Looking Back on a Busy Year

Biofuels Play Central Role in Brazil's Climate Goals

The 12 Days of Biofuels

Elegant Solutions

Maximizing Decarbonization, Maintaining Grid Reliability

Trump Wins, Now What?

Capturing Power Above the Dirt

The Difficulty of Getting Good Biomass Heating Data

The Greenest Universities

Out With the Old, In With the New

Featured

Nanoscale Blending

Canadian Producers Poised for Carbon Reduction Era

Good Chemistry

Scandinavian Swap-Out

Contributions

Options Expand for Effective Bacterial Control in Ethanol Production

Departments

Trial by Fire

An Unconventional Conversion Facility

28 Days Later: Waste to Fuel

December 2016