2021/04/f3-ethanol-lede-0621_16197109924327_largethumb.jpg

2021/04/f3-ethanol-lede-0621_16197109924327_thumb.jpg

2021/04/f3-ethanol-lede-0621_16197109924327.jpg

RED RIBBON: Angus Ballard, president of Lallemand Biofuels & Distilled Spirits, cuts the ceremonial ribbon to open the expo hall at the 2019 International Fuel Ethanol Workshop & Expo. Tim Portz, BBI International program director (left), hosted the 

2021/04/f3-ethanol-f19-0621_1619710992364.jpg

CROWD COLLAGE: Attendees mill around the expo hall at the 2019 FEW. 

2021/04/f3-ethanol-f19E1-0621_16197109923895.jpg

2021/04/f3-ethanol-f19E3-0621_16197109924735.jpg

COOPER'S KEY: Geoff Cooper, president and CEO of the Renewable Fuels Association, was the keynote speaker at FEW in 2019. 

2021/04/f3-ethanol-f17-0621_1619710992509.jpg

2021/04/f3-ethanol-f19E2-0621_16197109925412.jpg

2021/04/f3-ethanol-f19S1-0621_1619710992616.jpg

The 2021 International Fuel Ethanol Workshop & Expo, slated for July in Des Moines, Iowa, will bring its traditional slew of experts and information. This guide will help attendees decide which panels to take in. 

FEW Technical Sessions Planner

Two researchers from the University of Nebraska&ndash;Lincoln are eager to continue sharing their results from a study that evaluated the impact of E30 in 50 non-flex fuel state fleet vehicles. The results: Nothing. Over the course of the one-year study, fueling with E30 instead of E15 showed no change in vehicle adaptability, performance, emissions or fuel efficiency. The research was a partnership between the Nebraska Department of Administrative Services and the university to determine long-term usability of E30 in non-flex fuel vehicles. It was not a conventional research project, says lead researcher Rajib Saha, assistant professor in UNL&rsquo;s Department of Chemical &amp; Biomolecular Engineering. The volume of data never before collected is the most exciting part, he says, adding that the results weren&rsquo;t surprising. &ldquo;We expected this to happen. We expected that, at least with E30, we don&rsquo;t expect to see a lot of differences in a non-flex fuel vehicles.&rdquo; The research is likely to aid and encourage other state- and even federal-level moves toward low-carbon fuel legislation, says Roger Berry, administrator of the Nebraska Ethanol Board. &ldquo;It specifically points out the decrease in carbon emission from just 10% of the 1.7 million registered non-FFVs in Nebraska. Just think what that number would be if it was every ICE vehicle in the U.S.!&rdquo; &nbsp;Several states worked through bills this year and their supporters are hopeful to reach finish lines in 2022. And this time, they&rsquo;ll be armed with this U.S. EPA-approved proof that long-term E30 use is not harmful to vehicles. The Research Saha and graduate research assistant Adil Alsiyabi began their study in 2019, at the request of the Nebraska Department of Administrative Services. It was the first study of its scale and kind, and its main value is in the sheer amount of data and statistical significance, Alsiyabi says.&nbsp;&nbsp; The full report will appear in an academic journal soon, but the findings released thus far are encouraging, Saha and Alsiyabi say. &ldquo;What we did is scientifically sound,&rdquo; Saha says. &ldquo;If it&rsquo;s published, that means our peers have looked into this. If it&rsquo;s published, it means we went through this due process, and it should give people higher confidence.&rdquo; For the study, 26 vehicles were fueled with E15 and 24 were fueled with E30. Through cold and warm weather, on-board data collection, as well as logs from the state employees regarding maintenance and efficiency, showed clearly that the four parameters studied&mdash;adaptability, performance, emissions and fuel efficiency&mdash;remained constant between both fuels. All four are tied together, Alsiyabi explains. The engine should detect extra oxygen in ethanol and optimize its air-to-fuel ratio. &ldquo;Due to the higher oxygen content, we saw the fuel shrink, which is the car&rsquo;s way of detecting the air-to-fuel ratio,&rdquo; Alsiyabi says. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s what we expected.&rdquo; This adaptability is the main parameter the vehicle will try to control, he says. And it does. That adaptability of course lends to high performance, which is linked to fuel efficiency, Alsiyabi says. &ldquo;You maintain that optimal performance and make use of that higher octane in ethanol.&rdquo; As far as emissions, ethanol shows a 7-pound reduction in carbon emissions per gallon over pure gasoline, Saha and Alsiyabi report. Additionally, with a 2.5% cost difference between E30 and E15, economics come into play, as well, Alsiyabi says. While Alsiyabi and Saha focused only on emissions from the vehicles, they will discuss in their final report the implications of a life cycle analysis. Meanwhile, Saha is hopeful for a second phase of this work, using vehicles owned by citizens. A wider selection of automobiles with varied owners would present even more confidence, he says. &ldquo;Even if we have 20 vehicles, if we could include that kind of a group, it could be become more impactful. We are not talking about vehicles from a fleet. That would be great.&rdquo; Further research would be contingent upon EPA approval, he says. But it would provide more detailed data on the benefits of E30, he says. &ldquo;We deeply care about data and what we can do with it.&rdquo; On the State Level The implications of the study and its value to the ethanol industry are vast. Outside of Nebraska, several states in all parts of the country are working on their own low-carbon fuels legislation. California, of course, leads the way with its Low Carbon Fuel Standard, with Oregon having enacted a program in 2016, and Washington following close behind. In Washington, the State Senate passed the Clean Fuel Standard in early April, following the House&rsquo;s passage of a similar bill. The House also had passed the legislation in 2019 and 2020 legislative sessions, but this is the first time the Senate held a vote on it. Graham Noyes, executive director of the Low Carbon Fuels Coalition, expects more movement in 2022. Gov. Jay Inslee is onboard, Noyes says, so once a compromise bill is settled and approved, it should be a win. &ldquo;This is the third legislative session we&rsquo;ve been in in Washington State,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;This has been a really hard-fought state for the industry. &ldquo;The petroleum industry has really opposed this, to the tune of millions of dollars of anti-LCFS spending. We have, the industry has, really put together some very effective coalitions to address the issues, get public involvement and educate legislators. So this is a real breakthrough from a Pacific Coast perspective. It establishes a standard from California to British Columbia.&rdquo; Noyes cautions, though, that &ldquo;one must not count their chickens before they hatch.&rdquo; Still, it&rsquo;s a breakthrough that creates colossal momentum for the industry. &ldquo;I think that it is a situation now where this conversation and this policy structure is just moving forward and gathering momentum year to year. We now have tremendous attention on GHG reduction from the Biden administration, which is a real shift. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re seeing standards go well beyond Oregon and the West Coast,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re seeing them in the national discussion, we&rsquo;re seeing them in the western states. This all provides an additional revenue stream for carbon value and the steady demand and steady market we&rsquo;ve seen out of California.&rdquo; The Renewable Fuel Standard beyond 2023 will be crucial, and state policies will help shape that standard, Noyes says. &ldquo;We are encouraged. RFS will be important. That&rsquo;s been an extremely valuable program for the industry and we certainly don&rsquo;t want to disrupt that.&rdquo; State policies will help determine the best interaction between federal and state low-carbon programs, he says. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a complicated design question that people are looking at now.&rdquo; Model Minnesota Minnesota&rsquo;s Future Fuels Act was introduced this year, with key changes from California&rsquo;s legislation designed to help model a federal policy that&rsquo;s more ideal for Midwestern states. &ldquo;We know this conversation is happening at the federal level as well,&rdquo; says Brian Jennings, CEO of the American Coalition for Ethanol. &ldquo;We don&rsquo;t want Congress and President Biden to simply look to California as the way to go. &ldquo;Part of the strategy for pushing for a Midwest clean fuel policy is also to influence decisions that are made down the road at the federal level.&rdquo; The Future Fuels Act is the first of its kind to be introduced in a Midwest state, is bipartisan and bicameral, Jennings says. Further, he adds, it improves on California&rsquo;s LCFS in four key ways. First, it allows E15 and higher blends, whereas California&rsquo;s Air Resources Board prohibits them. &ldquo;The analysis we&rsquo;ve done shows that the quickest, lowest-cost way to get to a 20% or a 15% reduction in carbon intensity in a state like Minnesota over 10 or 15 years is to rapidly increase the use of ethanol: E15, E30, E85,&rdquo; Jennings says. Second, the Future Fuels Act is genuinely technology neutral. &ldquo;The government doesn&rsquo;t pick the winners and losers,&rdquo; Jennings says. &ldquo;The market does. &ldquo;The California program tips the scales dramatically to favor electric vehicles over other low-carbon technology. We&rsquo;re not going to embrace that in the Midwest.&rdquo; Third, the life cycle analysis in the Future Fuels Act is more accurate and scientific. &ldquo;California selectively uses the GREET model and widely overcites the carbon intensity of corn ethanol because they use an outdated assumption about landuse change,&rdquo; Jennings says. &ldquo;The Future Fuels Act contains language that requires the use of the most recent GREET model. It will make sure ethanol and biodiesel get a much fairer shake under the Midwest approach.&rdquo; And fourth, farmers would be able to benefit from the Minnesota program. &ldquo;Currently, California prohibits any carbon credits to reward farmers for practices that eventually lower the CI of ethanol. The Minnesota legislation contains language that would allow carbon credits to be used by farmers for no-till and more efficient use of nitrogen fertilizer. Those are the two big ones that bring down the carbon footprint of ethanol.&rdquo; Noyes says the policy goal is to keep carbon in the ground for good, and the Midwest policy structure is optimal for that. The soil has massive capabilities for carbon sequestration, he says. &ldquo;We need to send the market signal clearly to the farming community that there is revenue to be made by keeping the carbon in the soil and taking carbon into account as a value. Farmers have access to that carbon sequestration resource, and right now they do not have policy structures to make them pay attention and make the effort and expenses that require them to sequester carbon.&rdquo; These key features of the Future Fuels Act are monumental and make it dramatically different from California&rsquo;s, as well as dramatically better, Jennings says. &ldquo;Not only do we hope the Minnesota legislation is a better model for other states to consider, we hope that the Minnesota legislation is the model that Congress and the Biden administration look at when they get around to doing this.&rdquo; The bill has had two hearings but no votes. &ldquo;That wasn&rsquo;t necessarily our goal in 2021,&rdquo; Jennings says. &ldquo;We got started a bit late. Our goal was to get a bipartisan bill introduced. To have some hearings, to better inform public about what we&rsquo;re trying to accomplish, to answer questions that get raised. Pique the interest of other states that they can try to do this too. &ldquo;That means we will be working as a coalition to resurrect this legislation in future sessions and make a more concerted effort to get it across the finish line, have it signed into law.&rdquo; Noyes says, &ldquo;I&rsquo;m optimistic we&rsquo;ll move forward and get a policy in place in Minnesota at the beginning of 2022, and we&rsquo;ll see other states looking at the same thing.&rdquo; And thanks to Saha and Alsiyabi, the research backs up the bills. Author: Lisa Gibson Editor, Ethanol Producer Magazine 701.738.4920 lgibson@bbiinternational.com

PROBING AT THE PUMP: University of Nebraska-Lincoln researchers found E30 is safe in non-flex fuel vehicles. The results are crucial at a time when several states have low-carbon fuel legislation in the works. 

2021/04/f2-ethanol-E30-0621_1619711250873_largethumb.jpg

2021/04/f2-ethanol-E30-0621_1619711250873_thumb.jpg

2021/04/f2-ethanol-E30-0621_1619711250873.jpg

2021/05/f2-ethanol-map-0621_16213512575376.jpg

2021/04/f2-ethanol-graphic-0621_161971124992.jpg

University of Nebraska Researchers have proven E30 is safe for long-term use in non-flex fuel vehicles. The findings could bolster the push for state- and federal-level low-carbon fuel legislation.

More Research To Back the Bills

The stalled U.S. EPA approval of corn kernel fiber-to-ethanol pathways could be having a $1 billion impact on a 15-billion-gallon-per-year ethanol industry, says Jim Ramm, director of engineering for EcoEngineers. That&rsquo;s assuming 3% of overall production could be from fiber and a $2 premium. It&rsquo;s worst-case scenario, yes, but it&rsquo;s realistic, nonetheless. EPA approved its last fiber-to-ethanol pathway in December of 2017. At that time, EPA, led by Administrator Scott Pruitt, outlined concerns around the accuracy in measuring the cellulosic portion of ethanol production. The slammed door has forced ethanol producers to distribute their cellulosic volumes to California or Oregon markets (where fuel standards recognize the pathways), and technology developers to overcome the volume measurement challenge. &ldquo;I think that the industry has really responded to that in terms of the methods that are out there,&rdquo; Ramm says. &ldquo;The methods that are out there can demonstrate high degrees of accuracy. It&rsquo;s really accurate in terms of determining the converted fractions of starch and cellulose in the fermenter.&rdquo; The first five pathways approved before December 2017 were Edeniq 1.0. &ldquo;That was a baseline methodology and really very few of those pathways are still operating today,&rdquo; Ramm says, adding that developers, including Edeniq, are now offering non-baseline pathways. Edeniq executives declined to be interviewed for this article. &ldquo;The industry has moved on to pay attention and focus on California,&rdquo; Ramm adds. &ldquo;California has been very supportive and has included these gallons in their tier 1 GREET (Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions and Energy use in Transportation) model and continue to approve pathways and gallons into California.&rdquo; EPA&rsquo;s outdated GREET model is the problem, says Nick Bowdish, president of Siouxland Ethanol LLC in Jackson, Nebraska, and Elite Octane LLC in Atlantic, Iowa. Both plants have corn fiber capabilities recognized in California. &ldquo;GREET is one of many items the EPA can take action on right now.&rdquo; The Accuracy Issue The problem is complex, says Justin Sluiter, a cellulose carbohydrate chemist at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. And it starts with variations in starch measurements. It&rsquo;s easy to mislabel starch as cellulose when working with a poor starch assay, he says. The current methodology uses acid hydrolysis to compare a batch of starch glucans to a batch of both starch and cellulose glucans, thereby estimating overall cellulose glucans. So, a poor starch glucan measurement results in an inaccurate cellulose measurement. With this concern in mind, Sluiter conducted a test of industry labs. &ldquo;We solicited analytical labs that claim to be able to measure starch well,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Each was to measure and tell us how they did it. The labs struggled to get anywhere near the real value. That is concerning to me because measuring starch can end up contributing more to cellulose. I believe these data was what concerned EPA. What I would want to see is the labs having some agreement.&rdquo; Sluiter pitched a better way, but EPA was more concerned with finding a cellulose-specific method that doesn&rsquo;t compare cellulose glucans against starch glucans. After more than a year of research, Sluiter released a publication earlier this year, &ldquo;Direct determination of cellulose glucan content in starch-containing samples,&rdquo; outlining a new measurement method that removes compounding errors of the two-measurement methods, according to his paper. But the new method does overestimate cellulose when yeast bodies are present, he adds. &ldquo;I did not have an assay available to measure yeast body glucans accurately.&rdquo; Sluiter&rsquo;s paper describes his method as a &ldquo;concise in-series procedure with minimal measurements. Sample preparation consists of a starch extraction employing enzymatic hydrolysis followed by a simple filtration and wash,&rdquo; the paper continues. &ldquo;The samples are then subjected to a two-stage acid hydrolysis. The concentration of glucose is determined by ion exchange high-performance liquid chromatography with a Pb2+ column and a refractive index detector. The cellulosic glucan content is calculated based on the initial dry weight of the starting material.&rdquo; Sluiter says, &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a slightly different analytical procedure that approaches the process differently. And people are pointing at that as a better way. &ldquo;What the new method does is remove the &lsquo;starch&rsquo; from the material prior to the acid hydrolysis so that only cellulose glucan is present during the reaction. This eliminates the need to quantify and mathematically correct for starch with a potentially imprecise measurement.&rdquo; Part of the reasoning for the development of an NREL analytical method was to have a transparent analytical method that can be discussed and critiqued, Sluiter says. Several labs have analytical procedures, but keep them proprietary. &ldquo;This makes evaluation of the procedure very difficult,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;They may be perfectly accurate, but they are a black box and will always generate doubt. A public and transparent method, such as the new NREL method, allows the critiques that improve it, such as is happening right now with discussion of the yeast body glucans.&rdquo; The reaction to his results? Sluiter isn&rsquo;t certain. &ldquo;My publication is new enough and is causing enough talk in the industry that I&rsquo;m not sure where it will go. Right now, half a dozen major players in the area are trying to figure out what this means for them. I can&rsquo;t comment on that. I literally have no idea.&rdquo; Sluiter says the goal is to get to the right number. &ldquo;I don&rsquo;t care if you&rsquo;re using shamans to get it, as long as it gets to the right number. And we don&rsquo;t have a right number right now.&rdquo; Sluiter says he wants to be helpful to the ethanol industry and hopes he can be with the new suggested NREL method. &ldquo;The direction I was given was &lsquo;Go forth and do good science.&rsquo;&rdquo; Beyond Measure The starch standard developed by NREL helps improve the cellulose measurement already, Ramm says. &ldquo;We already have accuracy in measuring cellulosic production volumes. &ldquo;So the accuracy is there and I think there&rsquo;s hope that a (Michael) Regan-led EPA will take a different approach to corn fiber gallons.&rdquo; Producers are required to recertify every 500,000 gallons of kernel fiber ethanol produced, a guideline designed to account for fluctuations in fiber conversions, and even crop variability, Ramm says. &ldquo;There&rsquo;s always been some variability. The 500,000 recertification has been used to account for variations from year to year and season to season.&rdquo; D3Max is the only fiber-to-ethanol system that produces a separate stream of cellulosic ethanol, thereby raising no concerns about measurement accuracy and exempting it from recertification every 500,000 gallons, says Mark Yancey, chief technology officer for D3Max. &ldquo;We make our cellulosic ethanol in a separate ferm, put in distillation and measure what comes off that column,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s high enough concentration that it can be measured accurately.&rdquo; The system is installed at Ace Ethanol LLC in Stanley, Wisconsin, and hasn&rsquo;t been vulnerable to the EPA accuracy concerns. But ethanol producers with in-situ corn fiber ethanol are hopeful that EPA will begin looking at applications again. Many have reapplied or are reapplying. &ldquo;They want to put a number of registration requests in front of EPA to send a signal that this is important to industry,&rdquo; Ramm says. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re working on those registration packages so that when Regan&rsquo;s EPA is looking at how they&rsquo;ll move forward, at least there&rsquo;s going to be a significant number of new applications.&rdquo; Bowdish says Siouxland and Elite Octane have applications pending. Elite Octane came online in 2018, so did not apply for pathway approval under Pruitt. Siouxland, however, first applied in 2017. &ldquo;Nothing ever happened with that and so, really, it was just a decision by our company that with the change in political leadership in Washington DC, we wanted to freshen up our registration package.&rdquo; EPA could update the GREET model now for all fuels, including corn starch ethanol, to reflect the actual greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction and relax costly and complex approval processes for a clearly beneficial fuel, Bowdish says. &ldquo;We have an industry that today is entirely running at GHG emissions well beyond 20% reduction.&rdquo; A recent Harvard study, in fact, estimates ethanol has an average GHG reduction of closer to 46%. The red tape on approvals wastes resources and people, both at plants and at EPA, Bowdish says. &ldquo;There are tremendous resources that could be freed up and better put to use on other tasks. &ldquo;Looking forward to Administrator Regan&rsquo;s leadership, we want to be a good partner and provide all the data to help Regan&rsquo;s administration provide the marketplace with a lower GHG fuel,&rdquo; he adds. Ramm shares the frustration. &ldquo;The idea is the kernel fiber feedstock that enters the front end of the plant, that fiber is like the skin on the kernel that sticks to your teeth,&rdquo; Ramm says. &ldquo;That fiber just passes through the plant. It even passes through a cow. Here we have this low-value feedstock that we can turn into really high-value ethanol, really low-carbon ethanol and also increase the protein in the feed. It&rsquo;s really got tremendous ties to what the economy is calling for now: Higher-protein feed and lower- and lower-carbon ethanol.&rdquo;&nbsp; The economics have always been the spread between the value of D6 and D3 RINs, plus the second-generation tax credit, Bowdish says. &ldquo;And so, for each plant, whether 50 or 150 MMgy, it&rsquo;s millions of dollars per year. And more importantly, it&rsquo;s a solution that could be lowering GHG emissions today, that policy hurdles continue to get in the way of. &ldquo;I am encouraged when I read Administrator Regan is going back to the science and has the desire and intent to let the science guide where the policy evolves,&rdquo; Bowdish says. &ldquo;As he&rsquo;s building his team and putting staff back in place, where for the past four years, a significant reduction of EPA staff occurred, I&rsquo;m hopeful that those staff members will look at the tremendous benefits of corn kernel fiber ethanol and look more toward climate change.&rdquo; Author: Lisa Gibson Editor, Ethanol Producer Magazine 701.738.4920 lgibson@bbiinternational.com

FIBER PIPE: Corn fiber-to-ethanol pathway approvals were shut down in 2017, under then U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. Elite Octane in Atlantic, Iowa, is one of many plants with corn fiber-to-ethanol capabilities that have applied for approval u

2021/04/f1-ethanol-pipes-0621_16197114987337_largethumb.jpg

2021/04/f1-ethanol-pipes-0621_16197114987337_thumb.jpg

2021/04/f1-ethanol-pipes-0621_16197114987337.jpg

SAMPLE SORT: NREL researcher Katie Michel prepares cellulose measurement samples in NRELâ€™s Analytical Characterization Lab. (60907.jpg) 

2021/04/f1-ethanol-girl-0621_16197114986285.jpg

PUCK POUR: NREL researcher Alexa Schwartz inserts a sample puck into a sample reactor at NREL's Analytical Characterization Lab in the Integrated Biorefinery Research Facility. (60912.jpg) 

2021/04/f1-ethanol-fiber-0621_16197114986592.jpg

METHOD MAPPING: Justin Sluiter, a researcher at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, studies cellulose measurement processes in NRELâ€™s Analytical Characterization Lab. Sluiter and his team of researchers were tasked to find an improved method 

2021/04/f1-ethanol-guy-0621_16197114986995.jpg

The U.S. EPA hasn't approved a corn fiber pathway in more than four years, but hope is renewed with a new administration. Meanwhile, NREL has pitched a new cellulose volume measurement method to help address EPA's concerns with accuracy.   

Fiber Frustration

Doggett joins USGC as communications manager Morgan Doggett joined the U.S. Grains Council as a communications manager in the organization&rsquo;s Washington, D.C., headquarters. In this role, Doggett will be responsible for the development, implementation and maintenance of USGC&rsquo;s publications, website, social media presence and other internal and external outreach, in cooperation with other members of the global staff. &ldquo;We are very excited to have Morgan come on board in this pivotal position,&rdquo; said Bryan Jernigan, USGC director of communications. &ldquo;Morgan&rsquo;s previous experience has prepared her to step into this demanding role, and I am confident she will hit the ground running.&rdquo; Prior to USGC, Doggett served as the manager of communications at the National Propane Gas Association. There, she relaunched the association&rsquo;s 80-year-old brand and led its media relations efforts, managed its website, wrote press releases and steered social media. Morgan is also an operations associate on her family&rsquo;s farm in Illinois, a five-generation, tri-county row crop and beef cattle farm. Doggett holds a bachelor&rsquo;s degree in agriculture and consumer economics with a concentration in policy, international trade and development and a second bachelor&rsquo;s degree in agriculture leadership education, both from the University of Illinois &ndash; Urbana- Champaign. Poet expands into plant-based consumer products Poet has expanded its production of all-natural, 100% plant-based purified alcohol. Poet also unveiled a suite of biobased products under a new label, Poet Pure. Poet Biorefining &ndash; Leipsic will produce up to 35 million gallons of purified alcohol annually, which will include grain neutral spirits and USP-grade alcohol. A second expansion at Poet Biorefining &ndash; Alexandria is also scheduled to come online in the second quarter of 2021. Purified alcohol is a fundamental ingredient in thousands of well-known products including foods and beverages, personal care products, cleaning supplies, hand sanitizers and industrial applications. Poet&rsquo;s purified alcohol is a beverage-grade grain neutral spirit that meets pharmaceutical-grade specifications as well. &ldquo;We are excited to announce Poet&rsquo;s continued expansion into plant-based consumer products,&rdquo; said Jeff Broin, Poet founder and CEO. &ldquo;As a worldwide leader in sustainable innovation with a footprint that spans more than 40 countries, Poet has the unique ability to supply consumers across the globe with Earth-friendly bioproducts. We&rsquo;re proud to say that ethanol and its coproducts are continually being utilized in more ways that will enable us to live cleaner, healthier lives while being better friends to our environment.&rdquo; &ldquo;Poet&rsquo;s purified alcohol was developed using advanced, top-tier technology to ensure the highest levels of quality and purity,&rdquo; said Darin Cartwright, Poet&rsquo;s vice president overseeing this new market development. &ldquo;Poet&rsquo;s expansive commercial footprint and 30-plus years of experience in the bioethanol sector guarantees a reliable and competitive supply of top-quality products for our customers.&rdquo; ERI Solutions, DBI merge to form PROtect LLC ERI Solutions LLC and DBI Inc. have merged to form PROtect LLC. ERI and DBI are two professional service companies with a deep history of providing safety, reliability and compliance services to high-hazard industries such as biofuels, chemical, oil and gas, power generation, pulp and paper, and allied industries.&nbsp; PROtect&rsquo;s combined service categories include advanced and conventional non-destructive testing; mechanical integrity; heat treatment and stress relief; environmental, health and safety; process safety; and insurance program management.&nbsp; &ldquo;We are thrilled to bring the industry-leading talent together under one company to better serve the biofuels industry.&rdquo; said Nathan VanderGriend, PROtect president and CEO. &ldquo;With over 200 team members and 100 individual services, the merger has strengthened our team, our service offerings, while diversifying our customer base, making it a smart move to ensure we are a sustainable partner to our customers for years to come.&rdquo;

2021/04/b-ethanol-Doggett-0621_16197117370099.jpg

2021/04/protect-Logo-2020_16197117370348.jpg

2021/04/Poet-logo-cmyk_16197117369718.jpg

USGC hires new communications manager; Poet expands product portfolio; and ERI, DBI merge. 

Business Briefs

In January, India announced its intent to move to a 20% ethanol blend by 2025. If realized, this would be one of the higher blend rates achieved globally, putting India at the forefront of reducing overall greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as countries look to greater blends to meet their Paris Agreement commitments. In fact, Prime Minister Modi fast-tracked by five years what would have been a 2030 E20 policy, looking to seize the benefits for India in terms of rural development for their own feedstock producers, the environmental aspects of use and air quality improvements. The announcement, while huge, will take considerable effort in getting the policy right, aligning stakeholders and implementing in the fast-tracked timeline. The U.S. Grains Council, with its global presence, stands ready to help the country achieve its ambitious blend goals. The Council and its partners have drawn on and aggregated ethanol best practices globally that support domestic industry expansion for countries in similar situations. India is no stranger to announcing ambitious blending targets for biofuels. Achieving them has proven elusory. According to USDA estimates, in 2020, India had a national blend rate of about 5.2%. India&rsquo;s most recent biofuels policy, the National Biofuels Policy, updated in 2018, has an aspirational goal of E10 blending by 2022. That policy update included an expansion of feedstock that could be used for ethanol production, but still overall nameplate capacity to date does not meet the requirements for a 10%, let alone 20%, blend rate. To that end, policy enforcement will be key for India to meet its goals and lead in the ethanol space. The transition from aspirational policies to enforced policies is readily achievable in the market through a two-tier system.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; For India, the two-tier procurement model first defines its pathway to E10 and then successively expands that same process to move to E20. The first tier involves using the existing tender system to procure ethanol from domestic sources. Upon the draw-down of domestically produced product, the second tier allows sourcing the remaining ethanol needs from the global market. Enforcement of the policy would shorten the period of closure for ethanol facilities in India, support a more rapid build-out of infrastructure, bolster the country&rsquo;s aim to diversify energy sources, all while casting India as a leader in global decarbonization of the transport sector. Actual implementation of E20 in India would be a boon in a year when countries will submit their progress reports on their initial nationally determined contribution (NDC) goals under the Paris Agreement. Countries around the world, including the U.S., are demonstrating the critical role ethanol can play. The United Kingdom recently announced plans to double its ethanol use. Canada and Brazil have done the same as each works to finalize and implement its biofuels policy. Higher blend rates would be a real achievement for India, and the ethanol industry congratulates the country on its fast-tracked policy, standing ready to help the country meet its ambitious E20 goal. Author: Brian Healy Director of Global Ethanol Market Development U.S. Grains Council 202.789.0789 bhealy@grains.org

2021/04/Healy-Brian2019_16197118073627_largethumb.jpg

2021/04/Healy-Brian2019_16197118073627_thumb.jpg

2021/04/Healy-Brian2019_16197118073627.jpg

If India realizes its goal of 20% ethanol by 2025, it would be one of the higher blend rates achieved globally, putting India at the forefront of reducing overall greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

With E20, India Could Lead  Global GHG Reduction

It sure didn&rsquo;t take long for the howling to start. President Biden had been in the White House less than a month, and already oil refiners were crying wolf about the Renewable Fuel Standard. This is ironic because the refiners themselves had a large hand in the creation of compliance flexibilities under the RFS. Indeed, at their request, the RFS includes provisions allowing refiners to comply without ever physically blending a drop of biofuel. As an alternative to blending biofuels, refiners can purchase compliance credits&mdash;RINs&mdash;from other parties that blended more than their required share of biofuel. Despite this, the refiners have never liked the RFS because it cracks open the monopolistic fuels market and allows biofuels to compete on a level playing field with the fuels they refine from crude oil, much of which still is imported from places like Saudi Arabia and Russia. The result of the competition created by the RFS isn&rsquo;t just lower fuel prices and more options for consumers; it&rsquo;s also reduced carbon emissions and greater energy security. The policy has helped cut U.S. oil imports by 41% between 2006 and 2020, reduced carbon emissions by nearly 1 billion metric tons, and knocked at least 22 cents off the cost of every gallon of gasoline. Still, refiners have attempted to scapegoat the RFS for every malady that has befallen them over the past decade. The first cry of wolf came in 2013, when Delta Airlines subsidiary Monroe Energy blamed the RFS for the poor performance of its oil refinery in Trainer, Pennsylvania. In reality, high crude oil prices, antiquated technology and refining inexperience were the culprits behind Monroe&rsquo;s struggles. But rather than addressing those issues, Monroe looked for an easy way out. First, they sued the U.S. EPA, the agency responsible for administering the RFS. When that didn&rsquo;t work, Monroe asked then-Rep. Patrick Meehan, R-Pa., and other Pennsylvania politicians to intervene with the White House and EPA. Ultimately, EPA caved to the pressure and lowered the RFS requirements for 2014 through 2016. EPA&rsquo;s action was later struck down by the courts, but not before significant damage had been done to the renewable fuels industry. The second cry of wolf occurred in 2018, when Philadelphia Energy Solutions absurdly blamed the RFS for its abysmal performance and decision to seek bankruptcy protection. United Steelworkers piled on, and even Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, flew in to speak at an anti-RFS rally at the south Philly eyesore, the oldest refinery in the country. But again, it was all a charade. A deep-dive analysis of the PES situation by energy policy experts at the University of Pennsylvania revealed that the refinery&rsquo;s woes had nothing to do with the RFS and everything to do with the lifting of the U.S. crude oil export ban, poor management and century-old technology. The latest cry of wolf comes from PBF Energy, which has a major refinery in Delaware. Its president told investors in February that the RFS and the rising cost of RIN credits would somehow accelerate &ldquo;refinery closures and the loss of jobs.&rdquo; PBF says it is &ldquo;actively engaged in Washington in regards to the RFS program,&rdquo; which most assuredly means they are again appealing to their elected officials, as well as the former six-term Delaware senator who now happens to occupy the White House. PBF&rsquo;s howls about the RFS are made even more unbelievable by the fact that there is no &ldquo;sunk cost&rdquo; associated with purchasing RIN credits. Even the American Petroleum Institute, Marathon Petroleum, and the Trump administration conceded this point. API says &ldquo;RIN costs are largely recovered by refineries, both large and small, through the increased value of gasoline and diesel fuel they supply to the market.&rdquo; And Wells Fargo argued that because RIN costs are recovered by refiners, &ldquo;investors should not spend much time and effort on the risks to refining margins&rdquo; posed by the RFS. Likewise, the Biden administration and members of Congress should not spend any time or effort listening to the refiners crying wolf again about the RFS. Author: Geoff Cooper President and CEO Renewable Fuels Association 202.289.3835 gcooper@ethanolrfa.org

2021/04/Geoff-Cooper_16197120352455_largethumb.jpg

2021/04/Geoff-Cooper_16197120352455_thumb.jpg

2021/04/Geoff-Cooper_16197120352455.jpg

The RFS creates competition that lowers fuel prices and reduces carbon emissions. Yet, refiners still complain. 

The Refiners Who Cried Wolf

In writing this month&rsquo;s cover story, I gained a tremendous amount of knowledge about the U.S. EPA&rsquo;s inaccuracy concerns surrounding the cellulosic volume measurement methods of corn fiber-to-ethanol pathways. I learned about glucans, assays and complex analytical procedures. And it certainly cemented my childhood dream of being a scientist. But, instead, I get to write about it. As we all know, EPA hasn&rsquo;t approved a fiber-to-ethanol pathway since the end of 2017. The agency says the measurement methods aren&rsquo;t accurate and overestimate the cellulose portion from starch. What I didn&rsquo;t know was that National Renewable Energy Laboratory chemists evaluated the current method, identified the issue and came up with a solution. It was released earlier this year and its lead chemist awaits reactions from industry. It&rsquo;s about transparency, he says. A few labs say they have accurate cellulose-measuring methods, but they&rsquo;re kept close to the hip. How can a process be polished and perfected if it&rsquo;s not open to the public and thereby open to critique and improvement? That&rsquo;s probably my favorite thing about science: unwavering commitment to facts and continuous improvement. (It applies in my line of work, too, but without a lab coat.) So, sure, the method has room for improvement. But doesn&rsquo;t it come down to how EPA looks at ethanol, even from starch? Wouldn&rsquo;t an updated, true Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions and Energy use in Transportation (GREET) model reflect the benefits and low-carbon value of this fuel, allowing relaxation of these complex approval processes? Nick Bowdish, president of two ethanol plants, says it would. I&rsquo;m inclined to agree. I am truly fascinated by the measurement methods, EPA concerns, new method pitches and outdated GREET fundamentals in this cover story. You&rsquo;ll find it on page 14. In keeping with our theme of low-carbon fuels, I looked at state-level legislation. I had the opportunity to talk to two scientists again (I think I concealed my dorky glee and admiration), this time about their work on evaluating the effects of E30 on non-flex fuel vehicles. The study partnered the University of Nebraska-Lincoln with a Nebraska state department for a year of comparisons in a state vehicle fleet. The research could bolster the many state bills seeking to establish clean fuel standards. Check out the map of state legislation, and each bill&rsquo;s progress, on page 28. The story itself starts on page 24. Finally, we bring you the FEW Technical Sessions Planner. I&rsquo;m looking forward to an in-person show this year, and I&rsquo;m eager to see you all. You&rsquo;ll find details about the concurrent panels, starting on page 30. This year&rsquo;s agenda is packed, featuring producers, vendors, executives, technology developers, policy experts and, yes, scientists. (Is it weird to ask for autographs?) See you there. Stay safe and be well. Author: Lisa Gibson Editor lgibson@bbiinternational.com

2021/04/Gibson-Lisa-2020_16197121129752_largethumb.jpg

2021/04/Gibson-Lisa-2020_16197121129752_thumb.jpg

2021/04/Gibson-Lisa-2020_16197121129752.jpg

Editor Lisa Gibson previews the June issue, including features about corn fiber-to-ethanol pathways, low-carbon fuels legislation and a preview of the International Fuel Workshop & Expo coming up in July. 

June 2021

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Columns

With E20, India Could Lead Global GHG Reduction

The Refiners Who Cried Wolf

Solid Science

Featured

FEW Technical Sessions Planner

More Research To Back the Bills

Fiber Frustration

June 2021.css-7jxktu{position:absolute;bottom:0px;left:0px;right:0px;height:3px;border-radius:3px;background-color:var(--chakra-colors-brandBlack);}

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Columns

With E20, India Could Lead Global GHG Reduction

The Refiners Who Cried Wolf

Solid Science

Featured

FEW Technical Sessions Planner

More Research To Back the Bills

Fiber Frustration

June 2021