Well its a better argument than the one's we faced with Food vs. Fuel. Its logical and seems to be more results oriented. Hopefully this is a fair debate that moves us beyond the bullet-statement and bumper sticker arguments around ethanol.
From OPISnet.com
BIOFUEL GROUPS CONTINUE TO OPPOSE INDIRECT LAND USE INCLUSION IN RFS
Industry sources continued this afternoon to sift through the voluminous 1,004-page notice of proposed rulemaking for the expanded renewable fuels standard (RFS) that U.S. EPA issued this morning, but it appears as though while biofuel advocates appreciate the establishment of the Biofuels Interagency Working Group, they still oppose EPA's inclusion of indirect land use (ILUC) in the agency's establishment of lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions.
As passed under the 2007 energy bill, the 36-billion gal/yr RFS is broken into four segments: a capped corn-based ethanol requirement of 15 billion gallons by 2015; 21 billion gallons of the overall mandate contains "advanced biofuels" by 2022, with 16 billion gallons of that amount, under the same timeframe, from cellulosic biofuel. For the fourth carve-out, up to 1 billion gallons by 2012 is required to be from biomass-based diesel.
Meanwhile, conventional biofuels would be required to emit 20% fewer lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) compared to gasoline, while "advanced biofuels" would be required to emit 50% fewer lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions and cellulosic biofuel would be required to emit 60% fewer emissions.
In this morning's notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA included emissions from ILUC in its lifecycle requirements, much to the chagrin of the biofuels industry. Biofuel groups, agricultural academics and some lawmakers had asked EPA to delay the ILUC requirements until there was a generally accepted method for determining the regulation.
"If you look at the direct impact of ethanol, from the production of the grain to transportation to the facility to the process of making the ethanol to transporting that to market, there are significant benefits to ethanol over petroleum," about 61% lower than petroleum fuels on average, said Renewable Fuels Association President Bob Dinneen, speaking on a conference call with reporters earlier today. However, "there is so much uncertainty" when trying to factor indirect effects, he said.
Additionally, the proposed ILUC requirements are not being uniformly applied, since there is no similar provision for petroleum production, Dinneen noted. "You'll see no international indirect effect of petroleum applied. EPA should've looked at this when they were creating the baseline. They are willing to count the number of angels on the head of pin for biofuels, [and] they ought to give more than just a cursory look at petroleum production," he said.
But Dinneen said he was pleased EPA would specifically be soliciting scientific feedback and peer review on the ILUC proposal.
Similar comment came from other biofuel groups, including Growth Energy, POET, the American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE), Biotechnology Industry Association and Brazilian sugarcane trade association UNICA.
"As evidenced by the recent debate over the low carbon fuel standard in California, biofuels are greatly penalized by these preliminary calculations,"
said UNICA Chief Representative in North America Joel Velasco. "We know sugarcane ethanol has the lowest carbon emissions of any liquid biofuel produced today. California recognized as much in its low carbon fuel standard.
We are certain that when the EPA considers the best available data and research, these indirect land use effects from sugarcane cultivation in Brazil will be marginal at best," he added.
Meanwhile, the National Biodiesel Board said that a final EPA rule on indirect land use changes "that is based on questionable science and is structured in a manner that restricts the role of sustainable vegetable oils in the program will make it nearly impossible to meet the Advanced Biofuels goals established by statute," according to NBB Vice President of Federal Affairs Manning Feraci. "Hopefully, common sense will prevail in this process and the EPA will issue a workable final rule that is based on sound science and allows the U.S. biodiesel industry to make a positive contribution to the RFS2 program," he added.
Brian Jennings, executive vice president of ACE, said he was pleased that USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack will be co-chairing the Biofuels Interagency Working Group along with the heads of DOE and EPA. "I think this means ethanol remains at the table for the president's energy policies moving forward, despite the political desire of some to box ethanol out. I think the working group will ensure that fossil fuels are finally examined along with biofuels in these LCA [land use change] assessments," he added.
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), meanwhile, is pleased with the inclusion of the indirect land use provision. "We must develop biofuels the smart way, and we are encouraged that EPA Administrator Jackson has offered a science-based proposal to get this done," said NRDC's Nathanael Greene. "The opportunity to review EPA's proposal will help ensure that developing biofuels won't mean using our most fragile forests for fuel and that biofuels provide real benefits. We plan to submit comments on what EPA has gotten right and what must be improved to make sure the outcome serves our environmental and energy needs," he added.
While both the American Petroleum Institute and the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association were still reviewing the proposal, they are concerned with the availability of biofuels that will be needed under the RFS. "While NPRA looks forward to commenting more specifically on the proposed guidelines, the questions of commercial viability, product liability and the lack of adequate scientific review with regard to mandated increased quantities of ethanol remain unresolved," said NPRA President Charles Drevna. The association said it trusts "that EPA will seriously and transparently consider the concerns raised by fuel, public health, environmental, and engine manufacturing interests as it proceeds toward finalizing guidelines for RFS implementation."
Similarly, API spokesman Karen Matusic said it is "surprised and disappointed" that EPA, in relying on industry information, believes there are sufficient plans underway to build plants capable of producing 100 million gal of cellulosic ethanol in 2010 and are therefore not proposing to waive the requirement for next year. "The waiver criteria is not 'plans to build,' but is 'projected volumes of cellulosic biofuels production," she noted. "Information readily available to the government clearly shows that very little cellulosic biofuels will be produced in 2010," she added.
Meanwhile, anticipating that ILUC would, in fact, be included in EPA's proposed rule, U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) introduced legislation last week that would direct EPA to only focus on the direct lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions in its regulation. Speaking on the conference call this morning, Dinneen said these and other congressional efforts are separate from EPA's peer review efforts and aren't likely to be withdrawn.
Once EPA's proposal is published in the Federal Register, the agency will begin to accept public comments for 60 days. Meanwhile, EPA plans to hold a workshop on June 10-11 at the Dupont Hotel in Washington, D.C., to present details of the lifecycle GHG analysis included in the proposal.
For more information on the proposal, visit:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/renewablefuels/index.htm#regulations.
--Robert Gough, OPISnet
--Rachel Gantz, OPISnet
Showing posts with label Press Release. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Press Release. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Monday, July 21, 2008
Ethanol Industry Responds to OPEC
OPEC's members and official spokespersons have been claiming publicly for a few month now that ethanol was partially to blame for high crude oil prices. The ethanol industry has responded to these claims from the oil producing nations by taking out an advertisement explaining their perspective (ad shown above).
That perspective being simple. Ethanol increases and extends petroleum supplies and that existence in the market place puts a downward pressure on petroleum prices. Additionally (my words not theirs) its my impression that the Ethanol Producers are also implying that ethanol will soon be a real competitor for petroleum worldwide offering choice.
I saw the initial story at the Biobased News and followed it over to the RFA's Press Release.
The groups –- the Canadian Renewable Fuels Association (CRFA), the European Bioethanol Fuel Associations, the Brazilian Sugarcane and Ethanol Industry Association (UNICA) and the US Renewable Fuels Association – were answering the charges by OPEC that ethanol was in part responsible for the soaring price of crude oil, a price that will fetch OPEC nations more than $1.2 trillion dollars this year alone.
Also worth noting is the advertisement's citing of the Merrill Lynch study which claims that ethanol's effect on prices is downward. As without ethanol the world's petroleum producers would need to produce one million additional barrels of crude a day. The price effect of ethanol in the marketplace is believed to reduce overall crude prices as much as 15% according to the Merrill Lynch report.
Monday, April 28, 2008
How do you know the US Ethanol Tariff might be going away?
When major refiners starts investing in Ethanol South America.
I saw it over at the Biobased News where they cited a BP Press Release.
BP announced today that it intends to take a 50 per cent stake in Tropical BioEnergia SA, a joint venture established by Brazilian companies Santelisa Vale and Maeda Group, which is constructing a 435 million liter (115 million gallons) a year ethanol refinery in Edéia, Goias State, Brazil.
Quite the bet on BP's part. Or maybe that's the only way to play in Brazil. To build strategic partnerships with local biofuel producers. The Press Release points to sugar cane and sugar cane waste as the feedstocks. It also mentions the plants markets to be both domestic Brazil and export abroad.
NOTE: I have no basis for this speculation beyond my initial gut reaction when first reading the news. BP, Shell, Chevron, and Exxon Mobil have all been making good-sized biofuel bets as of late. Something about his one just seemed to run of the mill to be just another "bet on the future" PR move by major oil refiners.
I saw it over at the Biobased News where they cited a BP Press Release.
BP announced today that it intends to take a 50 per cent stake in Tropical BioEnergia SA, a joint venture established by Brazilian companies Santelisa Vale and Maeda Group, which is constructing a 435 million liter (115 million gallons) a year ethanol refinery in Edéia, Goias State, Brazil.
Quite the bet on BP's part. Or maybe that's the only way to play in Brazil. To build strategic partnerships with local biofuel producers. The Press Release points to sugar cane and sugar cane waste as the feedstocks. It also mentions the plants markets to be both domestic Brazil and export abroad.
NOTE: I have no basis for this speculation beyond my initial gut reaction when first reading the news. BP, Shell, Chevron, and Exxon Mobil have all been making good-sized biofuel bets as of late. Something about his one just seemed to run of the mill to be just another "bet on the future" PR move by major oil refiners.
Friday, April 4, 2008
From the PMAA News
The PMAA is the Petroleum Marketers Association of America E-Newsletter.
The reason I posted this up was the last paragraph which states that there are three factors affecting high energy prices:
All adding as much as 30 to 40 percent to the cost of crude oil.
HOUSE SUMMONS OIL EXECUTIVES TO TESTIFY BEFORE CONGRESS
On Tuesday, the House Select Energy Independence and Global Warming Committee held a hearing to address oil companies’ profits, current gasoline prices and alternative energy. Testifying before the committee were: Mr. J. Stephen Simon, Senior Vice President of Exxon Mobil Corp; Mr. John Hofmeister, President of Shell Oil Company; Mr. Robert A. Malone, Chairman and President of BP America, Inc.; Mr. Peter Robertson, Vice Chairman of Chevron and Mr. John Lowe, Executive Vice President of ConocoPhillips.
As in the past, the hearing served as political theatre to criticize major oil companies. Members asked oil companies to invest ten percent of their profits in renewable energy and biofuels. Currently, House leaders are trying to repeal $18.1 billion in oil production tax incentives to create tax breaks for alternative energy companies.
PMAA applauds Representative John Larson (D-CT) for focusing attention on the futures markets. Representative Larson argued that, “speculators are driving energy costs,” and asked oil executives if they agreed that excessive speculation has artificially raised energy prices. Mr. Simon, Senior Vice-President, Exxon Mobil Corporation explained that there are three factors affecting high energy prices: U.S. monetary policy, geopolitical events, and speculation which may add as much as much as 30 to 40 percent to the cost of crude oil.
The reason I posted this up was the last paragraph which states that there are three factors affecting high energy prices:
US Monetary Policy
Geopolitical Events
Speculation
All adding as much as 30 to 40 percent to the cost of crude oil.
Think about that. That would mean that oil should be below $70 a barrel given the economics of the pre-Bush Presidency. See the actual release below.
HOUSE SUMMONS OIL EXECUTIVES TO TESTIFY BEFORE CONGRESS
On Tuesday, the House Select Energy Independence and Global Warming Committee held a hearing to address oil companies’ profits, current gasoline prices and alternative energy. Testifying before the committee were: Mr. J. Stephen Simon, Senior Vice President of Exxon Mobil Corp; Mr. John Hofmeister, President of Shell Oil Company; Mr. Robert A. Malone, Chairman and President of BP America, Inc.; Mr. Peter Robertson, Vice Chairman of Chevron and Mr. John Lowe, Executive Vice President of ConocoPhillips.
As in the past, the hearing served as political theatre to criticize major oil companies. Members asked oil companies to invest ten percent of their profits in renewable energy and biofuels. Currently, House leaders are trying to repeal $18.1 billion in oil production tax incentives to create tax breaks for alternative energy companies.
PMAA applauds Representative John Larson (D-CT) for focusing attention on the futures markets. Representative Larson argued that, “speculators are driving energy costs,” and asked oil executives if they agreed that excessive speculation has artificially raised energy prices. Mr. Simon, Senior Vice-President, Exxon Mobil Corporation explained that there are three factors affecting high energy prices: U.S. monetary policy, geopolitical events, and speculation which may add as much as much as 30 to 40 percent to the cost of crude oil.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
25x25 Responds to Time Magazine Article
FROM AN EMAIL ADDRESSED: "To all 25'x25 Partners, April 2, 2008
Responding to widespread inaccuracies in this week's Time magazine cover story, the 25x'25 National Steering Committee is responding with a letter to the editors of Time expressing disappointment with the questionable characterization of biofuels and their role in the issue of greenhouse gas emissions in "The Clean Energy Scam," by Michael Grunwald. The letter was authored by steering committee member and former Congressman Thomas W. Ewing, who is also the Immediate Past Chairman of the USDA and DOE Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory Committee. The entire letter follows:
As a former Member of Congress and a leader in a diverse alliance of agricultural, environmental and conservation organizations working together to advance clean energy solutions, I am greatly disturbed with Time magazine's April 7th feature story on biofuels. In this article, Michael Grunwald criticizes biofuels yet offers no alternative to using petroleum to meet our energy needs - much of which comes from the Middle East.
Members of our alliance share the author's anxiety for the continued health of the Amazon rain forest and other "carbon sinks" that nature has provided around the globe. As champions of many forms of land-based renewable energy (biomass, wind energy, solar power, geothermal energy and hydropower, in addition to biofuels), we agree that environmentally sensitive lands should not be exploited in pursuit of renewable fuels.
Unfortunately, the story's message of concern is undermined by misinformation about biofuels and an over-simplified analysis of complex systems. The implication that biofuel production is responsible for the destruction of the Amazon rain forest ignores the reality that ever increasing worldwide demand for food and fiber is the primary cause of land use change in this and other regions. Simply eliminating biofuels will not stop land use changes from occurring, and in countries like Haiti that have already lost their forests, biofuels could help reestablish forests and offer more affordable and sustainable energy options. Similarly, information in the story about a recent study, which claims land-use changes brought about by increased biofuel production are producing more greenhouse gas emissions (Searchinger et al.), only tells half the story. What is missing is that Searchinger's methodologies have been widely questioned by respected biofuel life-cycle analysis researchers such as Michael Wang, with the Center for Transportation Research at the Argonne National Laboratory, who counter that Searchinger et al. used outdated, if not incorrect, data to reach their conclusions.
The story's reference to a UN food expert's dramatic condemnation of biofuel production fails to mention that the UN Food and Agriculture Organization almost immediately distanced itself from the remarks. The head of the UN Food Program recently noted that higher energy costs, erratic weather and low stocks are big factors contributing to the high cost of food around the globe.
Of particular concern is the ready dismissal of emerging technologies that will allow us to produce next generation biofuels from non-food feedstocks sustainably grown on underutilized and marginal lands not suited for food production. Conservation tillage and other agriculture and forestry residue management practices used to produce biomass energy feedstocks can also provide a constant buildup of soil organic carbon. Researchers at Ohio State have concluded that the total potential of carbon sequestration in U.S. soils, counting croplands, grazing lands and woodlands, is nearly 600 million metric tons of carbon, or the equivalent of more than 2,200 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions - about 33 percent of total U.S. emissions.
We encourage the editors of Time to contribute to a much-needed discussion of the role renewable resources will play in improving national security and the environment while moving us closer to energy independence. We simply ask that they demand a basic level of accuracy and balance from the stories that they run.
The Full Press Packet and no doubt more will be coming at the 25x25 main website shortly.
Responding to widespread inaccuracies in this week's Time magazine cover story, the 25x'25 National Steering Committee is responding with a letter to the editors of Time expressing disappointment with the questionable characterization of biofuels and their role in the issue of greenhouse gas emissions in "The Clean Energy Scam," by Michael Grunwald. The letter was authored by steering committee member and former Congressman Thomas W. Ewing, who is also the Immediate Past Chairman of the USDA and DOE Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory Committee. The entire letter follows:
As a former Member of Congress and a leader in a diverse alliance of agricultural, environmental and conservation organizations working together to advance clean energy solutions, I am greatly disturbed with Time magazine's April 7th feature story on biofuels. In this article, Michael Grunwald criticizes biofuels yet offers no alternative to using petroleum to meet our energy needs - much of which comes from the Middle East.
Members of our alliance share the author's anxiety for the continued health of the Amazon rain forest and other "carbon sinks" that nature has provided around the globe. As champions of many forms of land-based renewable energy (biomass, wind energy, solar power, geothermal energy and hydropower, in addition to biofuels), we agree that environmentally sensitive lands should not be exploited in pursuit of renewable fuels.
Unfortunately, the story's message of concern is undermined by misinformation about biofuels and an over-simplified analysis of complex systems. The implication that biofuel production is responsible for the destruction of the Amazon rain forest ignores the reality that ever increasing worldwide demand for food and fiber is the primary cause of land use change in this and other regions. Simply eliminating biofuels will not stop land use changes from occurring, and in countries like Haiti that have already lost their forests, biofuels could help reestablish forests and offer more affordable and sustainable energy options. Similarly, information in the story about a recent study, which claims land-use changes brought about by increased biofuel production are producing more greenhouse gas emissions (Searchinger et al.), only tells half the story. What is missing is that Searchinger's methodologies have been widely questioned by respected biofuel life-cycle analysis researchers such as Michael Wang, with the Center for Transportation Research at the Argonne National Laboratory, who counter that Searchinger et al. used outdated, if not incorrect, data to reach their conclusions.
The story's reference to a UN food expert's dramatic condemnation of biofuel production fails to mention that the UN Food and Agriculture Organization almost immediately distanced itself from the remarks. The head of the UN Food Program recently noted that higher energy costs, erratic weather and low stocks are big factors contributing to the high cost of food around the globe.
Of particular concern is the ready dismissal of emerging technologies that will allow us to produce next generation biofuels from non-food feedstocks sustainably grown on underutilized and marginal lands not suited for food production. Conservation tillage and other agriculture and forestry residue management practices used to produce biomass energy feedstocks can also provide a constant buildup of soil organic carbon. Researchers at Ohio State have concluded that the total potential of carbon sequestration in U.S. soils, counting croplands, grazing lands and woodlands, is nearly 600 million metric tons of carbon, or the equivalent of more than 2,200 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions - about 33 percent of total U.S. emissions.
We encourage the editors of Time to contribute to a much-needed discussion of the role renewable resources will play in improving national security and the environment while moving us closer to energy independence. We simply ask that they demand a basic level of accuracy and balance from the stories that they run.
The Full Press Packet and no doubt more will be coming at the 25x25 main website shortly.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Renewable Energy Group Pulls Back from IPO
Wow, looks like the biodiesel sector isn't going to do so hot in the eyes of Wall Street. Renewable Energy Group (normally referred to as REG in the industry) is a little skittish about the black and white future of biodiesel producers in an Annual Report. That's the second IPO implosion in the last few months (first Imperium backed away and swapped management and now this).
My source was OPIS which offers a news email service which I'm on right now. I've pasted the news piece below.
From OPIS BIOFUELS UPDATE:
Iowa biodiesel marketer and producer Renewable Energy Group (REG) withdrew its plan to file an initial public offering (IPO), it told the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) this morning.
Eight months after announcing plans to raise up to $150 million in common stock, REG said it withdrew the filing "on the grounds that current market conditions do not support a public offering ... at this time."
No further information was provided in the SEC filing. Credit Suisse, Goldman, Sachs & Co, Banc of America Securities and Thomas Weisel Partners had been listed as underwriters on the IPO. A handful of biofuel companies have announced plans to halt or stop production, until high feedstock costs are reduced.
Over the weekend, the 30-million gal/yr SoyMor biodiesel plant in Albert Lea, Minn., was the latest company to halt production. "Due to current biodiesel economics, the board of governors of SoyMor Biodiesel, LLC are suspending the production of biodiesel at this time," according to a notice posted on the company's website. "SoyMor's board of governors has reviewed all possible alternatives regarding the plant's operations and have concluded that the suspension of production is the most prudent decision to ensure long-term viability of SoyMor," the notice added.
SoyMor is one of four biodiesel plants that REG operates, but which is owned by third parties. REG bills itself as a full-service biodiesel company, including biodiesel production, management, marketing, sales and plant construction management. The REG network currently includes seven operating biodiesel plants, accounting for more than 222 million gal of annual biodiesel production, with three additional plants under construction. However, in its IPO filing, REG said it planned to use some of the net proceeds to finance half of the expected construction costs for the three new biodiesel plants. With the IPO withdrawn, it's unclear whether REG will scale back its plans for the three new facilities.
Well. When the big dogs start backing up a little its a good sign that tough times are immediately ahead. Time to batten down the hatches and get ready for the rough weather.
My source was OPIS which offers a news email service which I'm on right now. I've pasted the news piece below.
From OPIS BIOFUELS UPDATE:
Iowa biodiesel marketer and producer Renewable Energy Group (REG) withdrew its plan to file an initial public offering (IPO), it told the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) this morning.
Eight months after announcing plans to raise up to $150 million in common stock, REG said it withdrew the filing "on the grounds that current market conditions do not support a public offering ... at this time."
No further information was provided in the SEC filing. Credit Suisse, Goldman, Sachs & Co, Banc of America Securities and Thomas Weisel Partners had been listed as underwriters on the IPO. A handful of biofuel companies have announced plans to halt or stop production, until high feedstock costs are reduced.
Over the weekend, the 30-million gal/yr SoyMor biodiesel plant in Albert Lea, Minn., was the latest company to halt production. "Due to current biodiesel economics, the board of governors of SoyMor Biodiesel, LLC are suspending the production of biodiesel at this time," according to a notice posted on the company's website. "SoyMor's board of governors has reviewed all possible alternatives regarding the plant's operations and have concluded that the suspension of production is the most prudent decision to ensure long-term viability of SoyMor," the notice added.
SoyMor is one of four biodiesel plants that REG operates, but which is owned by third parties. REG bills itself as a full-service biodiesel company, including biodiesel production, management, marketing, sales and plant construction management. The REG network currently includes seven operating biodiesel plants, accounting for more than 222 million gal of annual biodiesel production, with three additional plants under construction. However, in its IPO filing, REG said it planned to use some of the net proceeds to finance half of the expected construction costs for the three new biodiesel plants. With the IPO withdrawn, it's unclear whether REG will scale back its plans for the three new facilities.
Well. When the big dogs start backing up a little its a good sign that tough times are immediately ahead. Time to batten down the hatches and get ready for the rough weather.
Monday, March 3, 2008
The Diesel Hybrid Cometh - Go VW!
I was blown away to see it. Now I just prey it sees the US market. Check it out at Wired Magazine's blog.
VW is bringing on a TDI electric hybrid power train to challenge Toyota's dominance. This vehicle will be seen at the Geneva Auto Show later this week so I would expect the chatter to cross over into the mainstream after the show.
Claiming a 69.9 mpg, if this vehicle delivers as promise it will be big for us B99 lovers. Its clean enough to meet both EU and California tailpipe standards so a new era might be approaching. The Toyota Prius emits 104/kg of CO2 compared to this diesel which kicks out 89/kg. This is the future of diesel we all have been expecting.
If this touches down and out performs the mileage of gasoline/electric hybrids its only a matter of time before clean diesel becomes a standard option in smaller sedans. Now lets just make sure it doesn't take a nose dive due to uneducated technology biases.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Ford Festiva 1.4L Diesel
Ford is bringing back the Festiva. More pictures and an better description over at Wired's Autotopia.
But will it make the US? If you read Ford's own press release I get the impression that it won't.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
CO2 + Sunlight = Liquid Fuels
Saw this bit of news over at Wired.com.
Described as "Sunlight to Petrol" or S2P, this project essentially reverses the combustion process, recovering the building blocks of hydrocarbons. This technology has been demonstrated to create methanol and gasoline. On the drawing board this technology can make a host of other liquid fuels as well.
Originally conceived as a way to generate hydrogen the research took another turn recently. Moving from steam as a feedstock (the source for hydrogen) to CO2. The research and development work is being done at the Sandia National Laboratory. Their press release on this technology is available here.
According to the Wired article this is not a new concept. In fact moving CO2 to CO and then forcing hydrogen into the mix to make a hydrocarbon has been around for some time. The technology and process is described below:
The prototype will be about the size and shape of a beer keg. It will contain 14 cobalt ferrite rings, each about one foot in diameter and turning at one revolution per minute. An 88-square meter solar furnace will blast sunlight into the unit, heating the rings to about 2,600 degrees Fahrenheit. At that temperature, cobalt ferrite releases oxygen. When the rings cool to about 2,000 degrees, they're exposed to CO2.
Since the cobalt ferrite is now missing oxygen, it snatches some from the CO2, leaving behind just carbon monoxide -- a building block for making hydrocarbons -- that can then be used to make methanol or gasoline. And with the cobalt ferrite restored to its original state, the device is ready for another cycle.
Fuels like methanol and gasoline are combinations of hydrogen and carbon that are relatively easy to synthesize, Stechel said. Methanol is the easiest, and that's where they will start, but gasoline could also be made.
The team researching this project are looking to field it in connection with coal fired electricity. This is the market these researchers forsee for the technology. The target market being a CO2 scrubbing application that creates a usable off-take of liquid fuels.
Yet another technology that requires CO2 be regulated to be viable in the US. Seems a great deal of smart people are betting on this assumption. I seem to be seeing alot of those these days. Makes you wonder if all these big DOE dependent mucky-mucks know something I don't.
Friday, January 4, 2008
UK Announces "Super Grid" and Massive Wind Power Investments
"Next year we will overtake Denmark as the country with the most offshore wind capacity." - John Hutton, UK Business Secretary
One of wind powers big shortfalls is it's inconsistent nature. The unpredictable speed it blows and therefore the hard to model contribution it might provide to a nation's energy grid are an entry level issue many wind projects deal with. There are several technology fixes for this short coming of wind the most promising being smart grid technologies.
The "Smart Grid" being those electrical grid tying and coordinating technologies that allow a next generation power infrastructure that is much more efficient, distributed, and smart enough to move power to where its needed far more efficiently than it currently is today.
It looks like the UK is moving forward with such a plan to weave distributed wind power generation significantly into the island's energy portfolio. With initial estimates of 7,000 new wind turbines and a willingness to raise the cost of electric bills to do so this is no small undertaking. Read the story at Plenty Magazine's website as well as the BBC.
According to the articles a company called Airtricity is responsible for the actual development and welcomes this type of project as the future path for all of Europe. At Airtricity's news page they have a series of press releases with several discussing the "Super Grid" concept.
For more in depth and easy to follow information about smart grid technologies I emphatically recommend The Clean Tech Revolution. Ron Pernick and Clint Wilder cover this market opportunity smart grid technology offers to today's investors. The authors of this awesome book also have a blog worth checking out as well.
One of wind powers big shortfalls is it's inconsistent nature. The unpredictable speed it blows and therefore the hard to model contribution it might provide to a nation's energy grid are an entry level issue many wind projects deal with. There are several technology fixes for this short coming of wind the most promising being smart grid technologies.
The "Smart Grid" being those electrical grid tying and coordinating technologies that allow a next generation power infrastructure that is much more efficient, distributed, and smart enough to move power to where its needed far more efficiently than it currently is today.
It looks like the UK is moving forward with such a plan to weave distributed wind power generation significantly into the island's energy portfolio. With initial estimates of 7,000 new wind turbines and a willingness to raise the cost of electric bills to do so this is no small undertaking. Read the story at Plenty Magazine's website as well as the BBC.
According to the articles a company called Airtricity is responsible for the actual development and welcomes this type of project as the future path for all of Europe. At Airtricity's news page they have a series of press releases with several discussing the "Super Grid" concept.
For more in depth and easy to follow information about smart grid technologies I emphatically recommend The Clean Tech Revolution. Ron Pernick and Clint Wilder cover this market opportunity smart grid technology offers to today's investors. The authors of this awesome book also have a blog worth checking out as well.
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Imperium Backs Off IPO
See Imperium's Press Release here.
My thoughts... Imperium just took itself private before it even went public.
The decision was made a few weeks ago not to go public. Martin Tobias said "Then why am I here if I'm not going to cash out in under 18 months?" Tobias exits, the team retools for a new cash flow and growth business model, and the rest is for the business papers to speculate.
See news below from Fox Business News online:
SEATTLE, Jan 03, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Imperium Renewables, Inc., a leading producer of environmentally friendly biodiesel fuel, today announced that it is delaying its plans for an initial public offering. It has withdrawn its registration statement on Form S-1 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
John Plaza, Imperium's founder, president and interim CEO, said, "Given the current market conditions, our Board has determined that it is not the right time to pursue a public offering. We look forward to building on our success in 2007, during which we constructed and opened the nation's largest biodiesel plant."
In addition to operating its biodiesel plant in Grays Harbor, Washington, Imperium is focused on identifying and commercializing next-generation feedstocks and fuels at its research and development lab located at the original Seattle Biodiesel facility. Imperium is committed to continuing to innovate the renewable fuels industry, demonstrated by its proprietary biodiesel production processes that have been implemented at Grays Harbor, to its new work in alternative feedstocks.
Biodiesel is a clean-burning alternative fuel made from oils derived from farm crops, and can be used in any conventional diesel engine. It can be used in pure form (100 percent biodiesel) or in a "blended" form, in which it replaces a percentage of petroleum diesel. A U.S. Department of Energy study determined that biodiesel reduces carbon dioxide emissions by more than 50 percent compared to petroleum diesel. Imperium's high-quality fuel meets or exceeds ASTM D-6751 specifications.
About Imperium Renewables Imperium Renewables is a leader in the renewable energy industry. Headquartered in Seattle, Washington, Imperium Renewables currently operates a 100 million gallon per year nameplate capacity production facility in Grays Harbor, Washington, and is the largest producer of biodiesel on the West Coast.
My thoughts... Imperium just took itself private before it even went public.
The decision was made a few weeks ago not to go public. Martin Tobias said "Then why am I here if I'm not going to cash out in under 18 months?" Tobias exits, the team retools for a new cash flow and growth business model, and the rest is for the business papers to speculate.
See news below from Fox Business News online:
SEATTLE, Jan 03, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Imperium Renewables, Inc., a leading producer of environmentally friendly biodiesel fuel, today announced that it is delaying its plans for an initial public offering. It has withdrawn its registration statement on Form S-1 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
John Plaza, Imperium's founder, president and interim CEO, said, "Given the current market conditions, our Board has determined that it is not the right time to pursue a public offering. We look forward to building on our success in 2007, during which we constructed and opened the nation's largest biodiesel plant."
In addition to operating its biodiesel plant in Grays Harbor, Washington, Imperium is focused on identifying and commercializing next-generation feedstocks and fuels at its research and development lab located at the original Seattle Biodiesel facility. Imperium is committed to continuing to innovate the renewable fuels industry, demonstrated by its proprietary biodiesel production processes that have been implemented at Grays Harbor, to its new work in alternative feedstocks.
Biodiesel is a clean-burning alternative fuel made from oils derived from farm crops, and can be used in any conventional diesel engine. It can be used in pure form (100 percent biodiesel) or in a "blended" form, in which it replaces a percentage of petroleum diesel. A U.S. Department of Energy study determined that biodiesel reduces carbon dioxide emissions by more than 50 percent compared to petroleum diesel. Imperium's high-quality fuel meets or exceeds ASTM D-6751 specifications.
About Imperium Renewables Imperium Renewables is a leader in the renewable energy industry. Headquartered in Seattle, Washington, Imperium Renewables currently operates a 100 million gallon per year nameplate capacity production facility in Grays Harbor, Washington, and is the largest producer of biodiesel on the West Coast.
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
The First Wave Energy Project To Get FERC Green Light
Congrats to Finavera. First ever "Hydrokinetic" energy project in the hopper to move past first base.
I saw it first at "The Energy Blog" with more at Finavera's Press Release page, and the FERC Press Release page as well.
The project is described by FERC as follows:
The proposed project, to be located in the Pacific Ocean in Makah Bay 1.9 nautical miles offshore of Waatch Point in Clallam County, Washington, will consist of:
- Four 250-kilowatt steel wave energy conversion buoys and an associated mooring/anchoring and electrical connection system;
- A 3.7-statute-mile-long, direct current underwater transmission cable connecting from one of the buoy’s power cables to the shore station;
- A metal shore station with an access road and parking area; and
- A 20-foot, 12-kilovolt transmission line to connect the shore station to the nearby existing Clallam County Public Utility District distribution line.
Paradigms are shifting no doubt. Now all Finavera and others have to do is make every coastal special interest view their technology as non threatening and safe. Then actually get local permits to build through every litigation hurdle while moving beyond the NIMBY/BANANA stage of development. Oh yeah, and demonstrate that this experimental technology works while not running out of cash.
If it was easy I suppose it would have been done already. I'm excited to see it moving forward and hopefully this will be the first of dozens of new competing tidal and wave technologies competing for ocean resources in the Pacific Northwest.
If your further curious watch a movie short at Finavera's website about their Aqua Bouy generator.
Definitions:
NIMBY - "Not in my back yard"
BANANA - "Build absolutely nothing, at anytime, not anywhere"
I saw it first at "The Energy Blog" with more at Finavera's Press Release page, and the FERC Press Release page as well.
The project is described by FERC as follows:
The proposed project, to be located in the Pacific Ocean in Makah Bay 1.9 nautical miles offshore of Waatch Point in Clallam County, Washington, will consist of:
- Four 250-kilowatt steel wave energy conversion buoys and an associated mooring/anchoring and electrical connection system;
- A 3.7-statute-mile-long, direct current underwater transmission cable connecting from one of the buoy’s power cables to the shore station;
- A metal shore station with an access road and parking area; and
- A 20-foot, 12-kilovolt transmission line to connect the shore station to the nearby existing Clallam County Public Utility District distribution line.
Paradigms are shifting no doubt. Now all Finavera and others have to do is make every coastal special interest view their technology as non threatening and safe. Then actually get local permits to build through every litigation hurdle while moving beyond the NIMBY/BANANA stage of development. Oh yeah, and demonstrate that this experimental technology works while not running out of cash.
If it was easy I suppose it would have been done already. I'm excited to see it moving forward and hopefully this will be the first of dozens of new competing tidal and wave technologies competing for ocean resources in the Pacific Northwest.
If your further curious watch a movie short at Finavera's website about their Aqua Bouy generator.
Definitions:
NIMBY - "Not in my back yard"
BANANA - "Build absolutely nothing, at anytime, not anywhere"
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Martin Tobias Steps Out of Imperium
On the way out last week this Imperium Renewables Press Release came across my email. (Also check out the CNet article as well as the Seattle Post Intelligence article)It was a pretty big surprise to everyone which just drives gossip from every side of the industry. Truthfully I wasn't even thinking about work at all over the holiday. It didn't even strike me as relevant to post this news until a friend from the east coast asked about it.
My thoughts. Imperium has a pretty strong wind to its back. This leads me to wonder if this is a positive thing for Imperium as they move forward to their Initial Public Offering. A strategic restructuring to move forward.
A review of Imperium Renewables fortunes:
1) Imperium has lined up a few long term supply agreements (guaranteed off take and quantifiable cash flow).
2) Imperium has lined up a reasonable amount of oil supply from both Canadian canola and Pacific palm farmers (reasonably assured feedstock with a large leveraged buying position).
3) They have a large terminal in the tightest fuel supply region of the US with a mandated biodiesel blend coming in both Oregon and Washington (guaranteed market for their product with a low cost and higher volume capital infrastructure than any other biodiesel producer next to REG).
In short on a fundamental basic of business level they are sitting pretty. They just need to sell a boat load of stock to give them enough operating cash flow to grow as promised.
1) Imperium has lined up a few long term supply agreements (guaranteed off take and quantifiable cash flow).
2) Imperium has lined up a reasonable amount of oil supply from both Canadian canola and Pacific palm farmers (reasonably assured feedstock with a large leveraged buying position).
3) They have a large terminal in the tightest fuel supply region of the US with a mandated biodiesel blend coming in both Oregon and Washington (guaranteed market for their product with a low cost and higher volume capital infrastructure than any other biodiesel producer next to REG).
In short on a fundamental basic of business level they are sitting pretty. They just need to sell a boat load of stock to give them enough operating cash flow to grow as promised.
I think it would be hard for much of anything to be bad news for what they are doing. Regardless of which token, rockstar, legendary executive is their CEO. We will just have to wait and see.
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Bio-Butanol from E-Coli
Butanol Molecule Shown Above; Source: Hydrocarbons TechnologyWired Magazine has one of the best issues ever this month. It is worth buying to check out.
Online they continue it on with even more cool information. In particular they have a list of "Top 10 New Organisms of 2007." Though I went to the article for the butanol producing bacteria I stayed for the glow in the dark cats. Can't argue with science fiction cool.
The E. Coli strain was created by a group of Canadian students from the University of Alberta who were participants in the International Genetically Engineered Machines competition.
For those of you who have never heard of butanol its a promising alcohol fuel. Butanol is significant in biofuel circles for two big reasons. Butanol has a higher btu content than ethanol making it potentially a superior gasoline blend stock and could be a breakthrough additive for biodiesel production as a substitute for methanol in production.
So both sides of the industry look to butanol for next generation potential.
Currently butanol is much more expensive than ethanol or methanol leaving it priced out of the market except in niche applications. With biodiesel production in particular butanol supposedly makes a biodiesel product with winter gelling properties far below freezing (I've heard mention of -20 degrees below 0F).
Quick background in butanol's place in the biodiesel industry its simple to understand. Biodiesel is a diesel product made from vegetable and animal fat feedstocks (follow the link to the wikipedia description).
To make biodiesel an alcohol is mixed with a catalyst (in biodiesel home brewing these are commonly methanol/alcohol racing gasoline and lye) in the proper proportions. This is then mixed with the oil feedstocks and mixed thoroughly producing a reaction.
The end primary products from this reaction is biodiesel and glycerine. Typically the biodiesel molecule is a methyl ester. Causing this same reaction with butanol would cause the end biodiesel product to be a slightly different molecule, a butol ester. The butol ester having superior cold weather properties to a methyl ester.
Monday, December 3, 2007
The Rand Institute Points to Diesel
God I love diesel, and so does the Rand Institute. (Loves in the most clinical, scientific and unbiased sense of the word)
Though this is the research paper which points to ethanol as the weakest of all liquid motor fuels I still like their analysis. (See GM post below)
Check out the Press Release. Also worth checking out is the actual working paper itself: The Benefits and Costs of New Fuels and Engines for Cars and Light Trucks. It offers some in depth cost analysis which lends itself well to citation and simplex presentation.
Though this is the research paper which points to ethanol as the weakest of all liquid motor fuels I still like their analysis. (See GM post below)
Check out the Press Release. Also worth checking out is the actual working paper itself: The Benefits and Costs of New Fuels and Engines for Cars and Light Trucks. It offers some in depth cost analysis which lends itself well to citation and simplex presentation.
GM Responds to USA Today on E85
I was really surprised to see this. GM officially defending ethanol as an extension of their product line.
It looks like the engineers over at GM are looking differently at fuel. In fact on the GM website there is a blog post where a GM official representative points to Brazil as a model for potential ethanol availability.
GM came out in response to a USA Today report that E85 was inferior to all other motor fuels including gasoline. As reported in USA Today:
Graham's team calculated the individual and societal costs and benefits of conventional gasoline vehicles, gasoline-electric hybrids, high-tech diesels and flex-fuel vehicles burning E85 full time. Conclusion: Unless gasoline prices, averaging $3.10 a gallon now, rise above $4 and average $3.50 or more the next few years, or ethanol prices drop a lot, diesel's the best overall solution; E85's the worst.
On Firday, GM stood by the premise of ethanol as a viable substitute/blend-stock to petroleum gasoline. What excites me is the fact that GM is siding behind ethanol as a long term fuel. This is the first I have ever seen a major manufacturer actual come to defense of a biofuel beyond making PR laps whenever oil prices rise.
I saw it first at DomesticFuel.com and followed it over to GM's own page.
“We believe ethanol as a renewable fuel is the best near-term alternative to oil as a transportation fuel and replacing gasoline with ethanol positively contributes to lowering greenhouse gas emissions,” said GM Chief Economist Mustafa Mohatarem in the statement. “You cannot take a snapshot in time and define a mature market.”
This snapshot being a reference to where ethanol can go as a fuel technology. Where the "next generation" ethanol technologies will drive future energy prices (downward) and the performance of vehicle engines able to use the higher octane cleaner fuel (upward).
And again another excerpt from Reuters on the same subject:
"By 2012, it will be easier to say which GM vehicles are not E85-capable than to list which ones are FlexFuel," said Beth Lowery, GM vice president of Environment, Energy and Safety Policy. "And we are just as committed to helping build the infrastructure for E85."
“We believe ethanol as a renewable fuel is the best near-term alternative to oil as a transportation fuel and replacing gasoline with ethanol positively contributes to lowering greenhouse gas emissions,” said GM Chief Economist Mustafa Mohatarem in the statement. “You cannot take a snapshot in time and define a mature market.”
This snapshot being a reference to where ethanol can go as a fuel technology. Where the "next generation" ethanol technologies will drive future energy prices (downward) and the performance of vehicle engines able to use the higher octane cleaner fuel (upward).
And again another excerpt from Reuters on the same subject:
"By 2012, it will be easier to say which GM vehicles are not E85-capable than to list which ones are FlexFuel," said Beth Lowery, GM vice president of Environment, Energy and Safety Policy. "And we are just as committed to helping build the infrastructure for E85."
For more on GM's E85 Flex Fuel Vehcile support check out their official E85 website: Live Green Go Yellow.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Green Star and the "Food vs. Fuel" Debate.
I saw this press release in the Biobased News.
Recently a UN report blasted the effect biofuels would have on food (commonly referred to as the "Food vs. Fuel debate"). From what I understand the biggest criticism being hoisted towards ethanol production's push on recent corn prices. In rebuttal, Green Star Products issues a press release citing soy as an example of a Food and Fuel opportunity.
In short = Green Star blasts ethanol from corn, points to soy as a good feedstock to be developed in farming rotations, and that algae has a huge potential future to make all these issues moot (note that Green Star also has high hopes for algae).
The coolest fact in the press release:
For each bushel (60 pounds) of soybeans produced only 10 pounds of extracted oil is used in making biodiesel. The other 50 pounds (the soy meal) is used to feed the hungry of the world as one of the best high protein foods available.
Recently a UN report blasted the effect biofuels would have on food (commonly referred to as the "Food vs. Fuel debate"). From what I understand the biggest criticism being hoisted towards ethanol production's push on recent corn prices. In rebuttal, Green Star Products issues a press release citing soy as an example of a Food and Fuel opportunity.
In short = Green Star blasts ethanol from corn, points to soy as a good feedstock to be developed in farming rotations, and that algae has a huge potential future to make all these issues moot (note that Green Star also has high hopes for algae).
The coolest fact in the press release:
For each bushel (60 pounds) of soybeans produced only 10 pounds of extracted oil is used in making biodiesel. The other 50 pounds (the soy meal) is used to feed the hungry of the world as one of the best high protein foods available.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Saab's Bioethanol Bet
In the news.For those of us who follow such things we have heard talk of the Bioethanol Saab for a few years now. Well its debuting in Australia. The first modern E85 designed car rolled out for mass purchasing and marketed as an E85 vehicle.
Very timely given the fact that ethanol is selling for $0.50 a gallon less than petro in many places (no subsidy required).
Monday, October 29, 2007
New "Green Build" Standard Announced
From the Environmental Leader
The National Association of Home Builders is launching a National Green Building Program at the 2008 NAHB International Builders’ Show in Orlando in February.
The national initiative will link dozens of state and local green building programs with a universal online certification tool, national registry of green homes and green builders. To date, about 100,000 green homes have been built through programs run or supported by local building associations around the country.
“We are bringing green building into the mainstream,” said NAHB President Brian Catalde, a home builder in Southern California. “The NAHB National Green Building Program isn’t a new way to build green. However, it’s a low-cost administrative and certification system that will help keep green affordable – and that’s the key to market acceptance.”
NAHB’s standard would compete with the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED rating tools for residential and commercial buildings, Greenwire reports (via WBCSD).
The National Association of Home Builders is launching a National Green Building Program at the 2008 NAHB International Builders’ Show in Orlando in February.
The national initiative will link dozens of state and local green building programs with a universal online certification tool, national registry of green homes and green builders. To date, about 100,000 green homes have been built through programs run or supported by local building associations around the country.
“We are bringing green building into the mainstream,” said NAHB President Brian Catalde, a home builder in Southern California. “The NAHB National Green Building Program isn’t a new way to build green. However, it’s a low-cost administrative and certification system that will help keep green affordable – and that’s the key to market acceptance.”
NAHB’s standard would compete with the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED rating tools for residential and commercial buildings, Greenwire reports (via WBCSD).
Fw: PRESS RELEASE: Fueling Oregon with Sustainable Biofuels - A new report from the Oregon Environmental Council
For Immediate Release
For More Information:
Jeremy Graybill, Communications Director
503-222-1963 ext. 111
Fueling
A new report from the
and pitfalls associated with
However, not all biofuels are equal from a sustainability perspective. Fueling Oregon with Sustainable Biofuels makes the case that biofuels can and must be produced – from "field to wheel" – with environmentally and socially sound practices. The report suggests ways to maximize the environmental potential of biofuels, from practices on the farm to practices in biorefineries. The report discusses the many different types of biofuels feedstocks feasible in
To capitalize on
- Support only biofuels that reduce greenhouse gas emissions on a life-cycle assessment basis
- Process biofuels with minimum fossil fuel inputs
- Protect air and water quality
- Grow biofuel feedstocks using sustainable agricultural practices
- Conserve water
- Protect biodiversity
- Avoid conversion of native ecosystems
- Support socially responsible and locally owned biofuels production
- Provide consumer information
In the near-term, one of the most important steps the state can take is to adopt a Low-Carbon Fuel Standard, which would require all fuel providers to gradually reduce the greenhouse gas intensity of the fuels they sell. The Oregon Environmental Council hopes that Fueling Oregon with Sustainable Biofuels will provide the analysis and tools needed to help make
Biofuels are only as sustainable as the agricultural and industrial processes that produce them. "Biofuels can clearly provide positive environmental benefits," said OEC director of programs
NOTE: The report Fueling Oregon with Sustainable Biofuels is available for download and reading online at www.oeconline.org/economy.
About the Oregon
The Oregon Environmental Council safeguards what Oregonians love about
###
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
