Tag Archives: energy
Cellulosic Technology— Pulp and Paper Style
By Chris Hanson | June 26, 2013 API’s demonstration plant in Thomaston, Ga., uses its stand-alone AVAP technology. PHOTO: AMERICAN PROCESS INC Though a relative newcomer to the ethanol world, Georgia-based American Process Inc. is no stranger in the forest products industry. The company has demonstrated its consulting expertise in 500-some projects, logging more than 2 million work hours of project experience in nearly two decades. Founded in 1995 by Theodora Retsina as an engineering consulting firm, API has been increasing its presence in the cellulosic ethanol market with its bolt-on and stand-alone technologies utilizing woody biomass and crop residues to produce cellulosic sugars. In 2006, API began investing its own funds into developing two technologies for cellulosic sugar production. Kim Nelson, vice president of governmental affairs at API, says the move was spearheaded by the need to keep the forest products industry thriving and viable. “We were consultants to the pulp and paper industry,” Nelson says, adding that it’s fairly unusual for consulting firms to develop their own processes. “Most of our employees at the time had advanced degrees in pulp and paper science engineering, biomass chemistry, wood chemistry, etc. If they did not have those advanced degrees, they had worked in the industry for many years. So we had this great understanding of the existing processes, and in handling, treating and extracting biomass. So it was kind of a unique resource that we had and took advantage of.” Bolt-on Conversion API’s GreenPower Plus and AVAP (which was originally developed as American value-added pulping) technologies are utilized to extract sugars that may be used to produce biofuels and biobased chemicals from a variety of feedstocks. The GreenPower Plus technology first treats biomass, including hardwood, softwood or bagasse, through a hot water extraction process. The hemicelluloses are removed from the wood in this process and then treated with acid to form sugars. Last, the sugars are concentrated until it can be converted into biochemicals or fermented into cellulosic ethanol by organisms able to process C5 and C6 sugars. Any residual solid material containing lignin and cellulose is then processed to create pellets, combusted in a boiler or used for pulp and paper applications. Retsina, CEO of API, describes GreenPower Plus as a bolt-on technology for plants that are already aggregating biomass, such as a first-generation sugar-to-ethanol plant. Basil Karampelas, president of API, says one of the main benefits of using GreenPower Plus is it upgrades a portion of the biomass to a higher value product at a capital cost of less than $10 per annual gallon of capacity. “We are only taking the hemicellulose fraction of the biomass, which is typically 20 to 25 percent,” Karampelas adds. “Whatever we’re not using goes back to the original user. You have the possibility to generate cash flow from that 25 percent that could be approximately equal to the cash flow from the burning of the other 75 percent of the biomass in the boiler or pelletizer.” Currently, API’s GreenPower Plus technology is being demonstrated at the Alpena Biorefinery in Alpena, Mich. Co-located at the Decorative Panels International hardboard facility, the refinery began operating in the second quarter last year utilizing a DPI waste stream of woody biomass extract. It has a nameplate capacity of 894,000 gallons of cellulosic ethanol and 696,000 gallons of potassium acetate per year. The project was named a Center of Energy Excellence and a Renewable Energy Renaissance Zone by the state, and awarded $22 million in 2010. Stand-alone Technology AVAP is API’s stand-alone technology that converts biomass into sugars for cellulosic ethanol or biochemical production. It uses sulfur dioxide and ethanol pretreatment chemistry to extract hemicelluloses and lignin, Nelson explains. The lignin and hemicelluloses are processed by autohydrolysis. The hemicellulose is used to produce sugars while the lignin is transported to a boiler to generate energy for the facility. Meanwhile, the separated cellulose is either sold as a coproduct or is processed through enzymatic hydrolysis to produce cellulosic sugars, which can be converted along with the hemicellulose sugars into biochemicals or biofuels such as cellulosic ethanol. On the AVAP technology, Retsina says it “takes any biomass, it is completely feedstock agnostic, and converts all the biomass to fungible intermediate feedstock, which is sugars. Those cellulosic sugars can be converted to chemicals and fuel on site or shipped to another site and dropped into another operation.” API set up an affiliate in 2011, AVAP Co. LLC, to commercialize the AVAP technology it uses at its demonstration plant in Thomaston, Ga., which came online in May. “With any first-of-its-kind facility,” Karampelas says, “we’re anticipating there will be different things we’ll be doing to tweak and optimize as we start up, which is what we did with Alpena.” The plant can handle a variety of feedstocks at rates up to 10 tons per day, with an annual capacity of about 300,000 gallons per year. He mentions one way API is optimizing the site in Thomaston is by relocating API’s corporate R&D capabilities onsite. “AVAP is a technology that will fractionate the entire biomass and in doing so it gives us a lot of optionality around what we can ultimately produce,” Karampelas says. He then clarifies that since the technology is fractionating the feedstock into cellulose, lignin and hemicelluloses, the plant can decide to skip the cellulose-to-glucose conversion stage and use the separated cellulose to produce coproducts, such as fluff pulp, while using the hemicellulose sugars for biochemical or biofuel production. “Our plan for both Thomaston and Alpena for the remainder of 2013 is to really perfect and optimize the two technologies at the demo facilities,” Karampelas says. API was not prepared to share any specific yield estimates, since yield values are dependent on the feedstock and configuration, which can vary from site to site, he adds. In addition to API’s sugar extracting technologies, it has developed two energy management software tools for the pulp and paper industry. Energy Targetter is used to identify energy consumption problems, track performance of projects and improve energy efficiency. The Performance Indicator Benchmarking program is a Web-based tool that utilizes data from mills in the pulp and paper industry to help users benchmark their steam, water, electricity and thermal energy consumption. API’s newest software, apiMax, is a biorefinery simulator developed in 2009 for industries such as cellulosic biofuel and biochemical, pulp and paper and pellet production. API’s website notes 30 companies and 13 institutions are using or evaluating the program that can simulate biorefining and energy equipment. Brazilian Boost API recently got a boost when the Brazil-based biotech company, GranBio acquired a 25 percent equity stake in API, giving the company access to API’s cellulosic sugar technologies. “The association with a demonstrated cleantech leader such as GranBio strengthens American Process and makes it possible to aggressively grow our business,” Retsina said in a press release about the agreement. “We believe that the production of low-cost clean sugars is key to unlocking the potential of biomass as a versatile feedstock for fuels, chemicals and products. We are actively partnering with ‘sugar converters’ to complete the supply chain and convert the sugars to high-value-added products. We are excited and very optimistic about the prospects of building the first commercial-scale plant with API technology in Brazil followed by one in the United States.” Karampelas views the deal as mutually beneficial for both API and GranBio. “The way it benefits API is we’ve got a partnership with a world-class company based in South America, specifically Brazil, where we see tremendous potential for both of our technologies,” he says. He adds that by working with GranBio, API may gain insight in attracting international customers interested in using cellulosic sugars to produce their products. He says the relationship will help GranBio gain more exposure and a better understanding of API’s home market of North America. Author: Chris Hanson Staff Writer, Ethanol Producer Magazine 701-738-4970 chanson@bbiinternational.com Continue reading
Pretreated Biomass for Food and Fuel
By Susanne Retka Schill | June 26, 2013 PHOTO: KURT STEPNITZ, MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY A 1-ton-per-day pilot facility on the campus of Michigan State University geared up this spring to produce pretreated biomass for feed trials. It’s part of a demonstration that professor Bruce Dale hopes will show others how pretreating biomass for feeding animals can be successfully integrated with biofuels production, ultimately producing both more food and fuel. While ethanol skeptics claim it’s obvious that food needs trump the use of agricultural resources for fuel, Dale will tell you biofuels are not optional. As a scientist, he’s ready to back that up with data-based reasoning. His motivation, though, comes from his childhood, growing up in the copper mining town of Ruth in eastern Nevada and seeing what happens when the mine runs out and a ghost town is left behind. He thinks of that when he considers our country’s dependency on oil. “Copper is potentially recoverable and recyclable,” he says, “but when you burn oil, it’s gone.” Dale is far from a doomsday prophet, however. “I’m an optimist. I’d much rather have an optimistic view of the future and try to figure out how to get there. ”In a recent conversation with Ethanol Producer Magazine , Dale expounded on his vision for an agriculture that sustainably provides food, feed and fuel. As a professor of chemical engineering at MSU, Dale is known for a biomass pretreatment process dubbed AFEX, for ammonia fiber expansion. He is also known for his strong advocacy for biofuels, receiving the International Fuel Ethanol Workshop & Expo’s Award of Excellence in 2011. Dale recently co-authored a peer-reviewed paper for the Council for Agricultural Science and Technology called “Food, Fuel, and Plant Nutrient Use in the Future,” along with an economist, a plant nutritionist and a soil scientist. The authors conclude the world will be capable of meeting its needs for food, fuel and fiber in 40 years, and biofuels can play a key role in fostering more efficient use of land resources. Looking ahead to 2050, the paper finds that adequate world food production cannot depend upon expansion of harvested area. “Instead, scientists and food producers need to look at the way land is currently used and the best practices for how to move forward,” the CAST committee writes. The paper examines population dynamics, food demand, land use and productivity and the impact of energy and biomass production. The authors include Dale, David Zilberman, department of agricultural and resource economics, University of California-Berkeley, Paul Fixen, International Plant Nutrition Institute, Brookings, S.D., and John Havlin, department of soil science, North Carolina State University. There is a clear relationship between a country’s wealth and its access to cheap energy, the paper says, pointing out that the “the age of stable, cheap oil is over.” As fossil fuel supplies shrink relative to demand, price volatility is likely to increase. “The world has had cheap food in no small part because it has had cheap energy, led by cheap oil. The production, processing and distribution of all agricultural and food commodities are intimately linked with the price of energy.” Energy Services The importance of biofuels is underestimated, Dale suggests, in large part because people haven’t been trained to think carefully enough. “They just talk about energy, but we don’t pay for energy. What we want are the services energy gives us.” If we paid for energy, he points out, the cost of a Btu would be equal, regardless of its source. Instead, we pay about five times as much for a Btu of oil as for coal. Of the three primary services provided by energy, two—heat and electricity—have multiple options to complement petroleum: natural gas, coal, nuclear, hydro, solar, wind or biomass. But for the third service, mobility, fully 96 percent comes from petroleum, with the remainder coming from biofuels and compressed natural gas (CNG). CNG and electric will play a role in the future, he adds, but both have limitations. “[Electric vehicles] don’t have the power-to-weight ratio. It’s a matter of physics. You can’t pack enough energy in a battery to do certain types of things. You can’t get a jet aircraft off the ground with a battery. You can’t run a long-distance trucking fleet very well on batteries.” In addition, CNG is likely to be more widely utilized only by truck fleets, partly because engine conversions and refueling stations are extremely costly. When thinking carefully about energy, ethanol’s value is much greater than when considering just its energy return on investment. Dale points out that most of the energy used in ethanol production doesn’t come from petroleum, but rather natural gas. “What you get for liquid-out for liquid-in is 20-to-1 for ethanol,” he says. “That’s why biofuels, liquid fuels from plant material, are so critical,” he explains, largely due to the potential to significantly scale up production. “It’s going to be difficult for grains to do it at large scale, but it’s not difficult to do with cellulosic at large scale—it’s grasses and trees, woody material.” Many of the cellulosic feedstocks being considered have multiple benefits, he adds. “If we take reasonable care with how we grow them, how we develop them, then over time you get better water quality because perennial grasses improve water quality. You get more fertile soils because grasses improve soils. You get a lot of greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction because they are essentially carbon neutral and, if they are building up soil organic matter, they are probably carbon negative.” The concerns raised in opposition to biofuels, including food versus fuel and land conversion impacts, are also not being thought through carefully, he says. “Agriculture today is nothing like it was 50 years ago, or 100 years ago,” he says, and it will change again. It isn’t hard to imagine a configuration for agriculture that would provide more food, more fuel and more environmental benefits. “It’s actually quite easy to image win-win-win scenarios once you start thinking that way.” Dale lays out a vision for the agriculture of the future that will use land resources more efficiently. He points out that currently 85 to 95 percent of U.S. agricultural land is used to feed animals, and not to feed humans directly. There are a number of ways in which biofuel production can utilize biomass resources without competing with feed use, and actually enhancing supplies. Biofuel production would allow the early harvest of feedstocks such as alfalfa and grasses when the protein content is high, utilizing the cellulosic fraction for biofuel production and concentrating the protein for animal feed. Additional feed protein can be coproduced with biofuels via the spent yeast. In addition, a ready market for biomass would stimulate double cropping, turning cover crops utilized for their environmental benefits into cash crops. Biomass Processing Dale envisions the development of regional biomass processing depots that serve both the livestock feeding and biorefining industries. MSU is part of a research effort looking at ways of converting biomass into dense, stable, shippable intermediate commodities with uniform characteristics. Also researching the concept are Iowa State University, Idaho National Laboratory and Pennsylvania State University. At MSU, a pilot facility began operating in late May, making feed pellets from AFEX-treated biomass. “I’ve always known it would increase the animal feed value,” Dale says of the pretreatment process he and his colleagues have developed and refined over three decades. They are getting a boost from the Michigan Biotechnology Institute, formed at MSU to help move the commercialization process forward on university research. “They’ve made some notable advances in reducing the cost of the AFEX process and because of what they’ve done, we’re now in a position to commercialize animal feed first,” Dale says. “Then we can use the animal feed markets as a pull-through for the biofuels market.” MBI obtained more than $5 million in funding from the U.S. DOE and the MSU Foundation to build a pilot-scale AFEX reactor at its facility in Lansing, Mich. The goal is to produce 10 to 15 tons of AFEX-treated biomass, which will be used in large animal feed trials being led by Stephen Rust with the MSU animal science department. “After pretreatment, we pelletize the material and it essentially has the behavior of corn,” Dale says. “It’s as dense as corn, it’s stable like corn, it flows like corn.” He adds that preliminary feed trials indicate it will have 80 percent of the value of corn in convertible sugars. “If all goes well—and we have smaller-scale ruminant feeding tests that show us it will—there’s a lot of people who are interested in licensing it. We intend to license it very broadly and let as many people use it as want to,” he says. Ultimately, building a base market as livestock feed will allow the supply of pretreated biomass pellets to build to a point where a biorefinery would be assured of sufficient feedstock, solving the chicken-and-the-egg problem of building out the cellulosic ethanol industry. A Challenge Dale lays out a challenge to the ethanol industry—both the corn-based and nascent cellulosic industry. “We need to start being proactive in the development of these fuels,” he says. “The thing is, in the U.S., the people who have the most easily converted and most abundant cellulosic material are the corn farmers with corn stover.” It is essential that corn stover for biofuel be done right, he emphasizes. He also thinks there is an opportunity to promote double cropping as a way of tapping into the benefits of cover crops while growing biomass for biorefineries. He urges biofuel producers and farmers to “start embracing a positive vision of the future.” The vision to communicate, he suggests, goes like this: “We understand the environmental concerns, we want to improve the environment too. We’re going to start harvesting our corn stover, and at same time we’re going to plant cover crops and double crops. We’re going to build up soil organic matter, reduce erosion and we’re going to trap some of those nitrates so they don’t get into water and head down to the Gulf of Mexico.” Globally, similar systems for animal feed coupled with biofuel production can play an important role. “We underrate people’s ability to produce from the land if they have the right incentives and the right tools,” Dale says. Well-intentioned hunger programs of the past that distributed cheap surplus U.S. grains in developing countries had the unfortunate side effect of undermining local agricultural systems. “Here’s the bottom line. Those are places that are essentially without fossil fuels. They’re too late. They’re not going to get into the fossil-fuel bonanza. We will have burned it all up before Malawi or Mali or Kenya or other places in Africa and elsewhere ever get the chance,” he adds. “The only way they are going to develop and have the living standards we take for granted is to figure out how to produce sustainably—and that means in an environmentally sound way—lots of liquid fuels. That’s only going to come from plant matter. As we get this industry going, we’re going to see some very interesting side benefits for countries that don’t have much in the way of liquid fuels. It will help jump-start a lot of economic development there, in the same way that having the cheap petroleum for so many years did here. It’s not cheap anymore, so we’re suffering from that now. But a lot of places that aren’t blessed with the petroleum we’ve had will be able to grow their own fuel. And, because they’ll be incentivized to do it in a land-efficient way, there will be more food as well.” These systems won’t be instantly perfect and mistakes will be made, he predicts. Also, one of the lessons of the past is that productive agriculture often produces price-depressing surpluses for which biofuel production provides an alternative market. “We’ve learned people can only eat so much, but there’s apparently no limit to how much we would like to travel around if we could,” he quips. Author: Susanne Retka Schill Senior Editor, Ethanol Producer Magazine 701-738-4922 sretkaschill@bbiinternational.com Continue reading
Business Leader Calls For Biomass Investment To Power Forest Sector Growth
A PROMINENT South East businessman has come out in support of green energy in the form of biomass electricity as a means to boost the region’s forestry industry and local economy. Adrian de Bruin – who sold his 30.3pc share in the timber giant Auspine back in 2008 – continues to chair the Mount Gambier based de Bruin group, which has branched out to aviation and engineering. With a commitment to the region’s prosperity, Mr de Bruin has called on all tiers of government and private investors to back a biomass electricity plant, which would utilise the forestry’s wood waste to create power. “The opportunity to become a major producer of green energy based on biomass is enormous,” he said. “We are blessed with good rainfall, good soil and good growth rates, but we are just lacking a vibrant timber industry at the moment.” Mr de Bruin said while the forestry sector was suffering, there was still untapped potential. “We’ve got all this available wood fibre and no opportunity for local value adding,” he said. “We could use this surplus material and turn it into electricity that is easy to sell.” He said with significant investment, which he estimated at $150m for a 60 megawatt facility, the plant could generate up to 500 jobs for the ongoing collection and delivery of raw materials. “Collection is where the job generation is because they would need to pick the waste off the forest floor and transport it,” he said. Mr de Bruin said the popular renewable energy source could also generate hot water and steam for the forestry industry, including for kiln drying of timber. “You could place the plant at Tarpeena because it is in a rural area with plenty of land around it,” he said. “It needs a new heat source anyway because the current equipment is getting old.” Mr de Bruin believes a 60 megawatt plant would generate enough electricity for the region as well as enough to be exported outside the South East. “It would need around 600,000 tonnes of raw materials per year but there is plenty out there,” he said. He said the biomass plant, which would be considered a base load energy source, would serve the region’s ongoing energy demand at a constant rate. However with the state and federal governments unlikely to invest, he said they could assist potential investors. “The biggest issue with all green energy is that the costs are higher than it is to produce coal electricity,” he said. “The customer is not going to pay more just because it is green, but the Federal Government could underwrite the carbon credit pricing for the next 10 years so the investor has an assured income. “It is that subsidy that will bring it into a viable economic situation.” He said assisting with planning approvals and providing easy access to water for the plant’s cooling system would also offer added incentive. In addition, Mr de Bruin said a biomass electricity plant would be considered carbon neutral with the carbon dioxide emissions generated by the plant offset by the emissions consumed by the forestry’s plant material. The waste materials used for the plant would also come from existing plantations and would be sustainable and renewable. Meanwhile, the State Government is currently undertaking a $1m study by Finnish experts into the future opportunity for the region’s timber sector. Continue reading