Biomass meeting and tour in Tennessee

I was fortunate enough to be able to attend a biomass meeting in Tennessee last month (February 15-17).  On the third day (Thursday, Feb 17), after two days of meetings in Knoxville, the group had a chance to visit a switchgrass farm and a cellulosic ethanol demonstration plant, both in Vonore, TN, which is about 45 min south of Knoxville.  We were informed that there are just over 5,000 acres of agriculture land now planted to switchgrass in Tennessee.  The nearby ethanol plant is capable of producing 250,000 gallons per year of ethanol from switchgrass, corn cobs, and other cellulosic sources.  More details are available at this link.  There is still a gap (locals called it the "valley of death") between the State and Federal funding of switchgrass production and conversion to ethanol versus actually having a viable, self-sustaining cellulosic ethanol industry.  Further improvements in efficiency are being worked on in several key areas, both on the farms and at the plant.  As a side note, I got a kick out of asking one of the locals how to say the name of the town we were in.  I asked, "Is it Vonore, like 'manure'?"  He replied, "You have to emphasize the first syllable...VON-ore.  It's just like the word, McDonalds.  Here, we say MAC-donalds."

Excess sugarcane bagasse -- what to do with it

Bagasse is the fibrous residue remaining after crushing/shredding sugarcane and washing the sugar out of it.  Bagasse provides the power required to run the sugarcane mills that process the sugar from sugarcane, thus making sugar production from sugarcane one of the most energy efficient operations in the plant crop world.  In Florida and Hawaii, energy derived from burning bagasse not only powers the mills, but is also sold to the public as electricity.  This is referred to as co-generation.  When burned in the mill boilers, the energy derived from one ton of bagasse is roughly equivalent to the energy obtainable from one barrel of oil.  In Louisana, electricity is still too inexpensive for mill owners to make a profit burning the excess bagasse, generating electricity and selling it to the public.

Now that the sugarcane harvest season is over, and mill yards are no longer obscured by standing cane, one is struck by the huge piles of bagasse that build up next to them.  The photo above was taken of the mill yard at Raceland Sugar Co., Raceland, LA, from Hwy 90 (future I-49) overpass over Hwy 1 after most of the cane was harvested, and after the occurrence of a killing freeze on Dec. 15.  Note how the massive bagasse piles obscure the view of the mill.  One needs only to drive next to these piles of bagasse to appreciate just how massive they really are. A list of Louisiana's mills and their locations is found on the website of the American Sugar Cane League. 

In the green fuels debate, there has been much discussion about conversion of fibrous residue from plant products into cellulosic ethanol.  It would seem that, if cellulosic ethanol production or the production of some other fuel, such as butanol, from plant fiber is close to becoming economically viable, a great place to test its potential is in an already existing industry where the fibrous residue is a by-product that has already been gathered into central locations.  One issue facing sugarcane breeders, and ultimately the sugar industry, is whether it is an asset or a liability to the industry to develop and release sugarcane varieties possessing higher fiber levels than the current standard of 11-12%.  Perhaps it is a question that gets answered differently depending on whether we are taking the short-range or the long-range view.

Verdict on crop-based ethanol

There is a lot of controversy surrounding ethanol these days, and it will be interesting to see how all of this plays out. Two scientists from our Sugarcane Research Unit just returned from Brazil. They were obviously impressed by what they saw and were told while they were there. Sugarcane continues to be the model crop for ethanol production, with its impressive energy output/input ratio. The Brazilians claim a ratio of 8:1, which is far superior to the less than 2:1 ratio for corn in the midwest. Apparently the Brazilians are continuing to increase their ethanol production capacity from sugarcane, building new ethanol plants and increasing acreage. The Brazilians are quick to point out that these increases are in non-Amazon regions of Brazil. So what we see happening in Brazil could be thought of as THE best case scenerio for ethanol production from a crop.

Chief among ethanol detractors are David Pimentel and Tad Patzek. One question I am sure has been frequently posed to them whenever they have argued against ethanol production from a crop, is this. "What about Brazil? You say it can't be done, yet Brazil is successfully doing it on a grand scale!" Pimentel and Patzek have taken the 8:1 output/input claim head on, presumably with the expectation that if they can debunk the 8:1 output/input claim, they can pretty much take the wind out of the the sails of any argument for biofuels. They recently published a paper basically aimed at raising doubts about the Brazilian sugarcane output/input ratio. Based on their own calculations, they reported the output/input ratio for sugarcane-based ethanol industry in Brazil to be no better than 1.38:1, claiming that important energy inputs were not accounted for, to get the 8:1 ratio. Most of the unaccounted for energy costs that Pimentel and Patzek allude to are associated with the factory component, rather than the field component. Using their numbers, it wouldn't matter what the yields are in the field; you couldn't improve much on their ratio even if the cane and sugar yields were triple or quadruple what they are today. Personally, I think their numbers in the factory component need a closer inspection. From the massive amount of fibrous residue (bagasse) produced when sugar is extracted from sugarcane, mills around the world today provide all of their own power and feed excess power into the electric grid of the surrounding community, and in some cases, a lot of excess power into the electric grid. There are huge differences in boiler efficiencies. It makes a huge difference if the factory energy input numbers were meant for production of crystallized sugar rather than production of ethanol. So I am skeptical of the Pimentel and Patzek numbers, especially knowing that they have an agenda to begin with. I don't believe they adequately account for the energy output potential of baggase in their calculations.

The 8:1 ratio may be inflated, but 1.38:1 when factories are net exporters of energy before the energy from ethanol is even factored in...you've got to be kidding!

We had a field day on Friday. I was asked to discuss some of the energy crop activity we are involved in. We highlighted sugarcane, energy cane (behind me in the photo), sugarbeets, sweet sorghum, and tropical maize (non-flowering tropical maize in my right hand; a so-called sugarcorn hybrid from Illinois in my left hand). The corn I was holding for demonstration purposes was planted only 60 days ago (April 8). Needless to say, the topic stimulated a lot of interest and questions. When I passed the tropical maize plant around, people couldn't believe how heavy it was. It will be interesting to see how tall our tropical maize gets before it finally decides to flower. Right now, it is about 8 feet tall. Believe it or not, it was only 18 inches tall 30 days ago.

Designing engines to exploit ethanol's important advantage over gasoline

In the January 20, 2009 post of Robert Rapier's R-Squared Energy Blog (one of my energy-blog favorites), Rapier makes a compelling case that ethanol-fueled engines need to be designed to exploit the much higher octane rating, thus greater efficiency of ethanol over gasoline. With its higher octane rating, ethanol does not easily pre-ignite. Thus, if an engine were designed with a much higher compression ratio to exploit this advantage, it is conceivable that cars could actually go further on a gallon of ethanol than on a gallon of gasoline, even though ethanol only has 2/3 the BTU's per gallon that gasoline has. This is an interesting observation from Rapier who has to remind people from time to time that he really isn't anti-ethanol in spite of some earlier posts. This particular post is well worth reading, as is Rapier's entire blogsite. The above picture is of a high-compression ethanol/biodiesel engine built by Swedish automaker Scania.

Obama-Biden Energy Plan for America

I will be following with interest how steadfast the Obama-Biden ticket holds to the energy plan they have outlined on their “New Energy for America” webpage once in office, particularly as it relates to support for ethanol. Obama and McCain have differed sharply on the ethanol issue, an issue that has become increasingly controversial in recent months. Obama represents a corn-growing ethanol-producing state, Illinois, and to this point, supports the continuation of ethanol subsidies. He sees the need to move in the direction of cellulosic ethanol (2nd generation biofuel) that has been touted as being more sustainable, more environmentally friendly, and less controversial than corn (food vs. fuel). McCain, on the other hand, represents a desert state, Arizona, and has been critical of agricultural subsidies generally, and ethanol subsidies in particular. During his presidential campaign, when asked about cutting excessive government spending, ethanol subsidies were right at the top of his short list.

The sustainability of cellulosic ethanol is controversial as well, as shown in the following blogsites, Treehugger and R-Squared Energy Blog (Nov 9). When it comes to liquid fuels, do we want to cut research dedicated toward improving the sustainability of renewable resources, such as second-generation biofuels, until non-renewable resources (oil and natural gas) are nearly depleted, or do we continue to support this research irrespective of gas price and public mood swings with the expectation that this research will pay off down the road when non-renewable resources become scarce.

BP and Verenium strike a $90 million deal

Verenium is back in the news again, this time after having formed a partnership with British petroleum giant, BP. As part of the deal, BP agreed to provide $90 million for rights to Verenium's technology and to fund research and development until 2010. Beyond the 18-month announced alliance, the two companies said they will establish a joint venture that will build and operate a full-scale production facility. Quoting Sue Ellerbusch, president of BP Biofuels North America, "We believe energy crops like sugarcane, miscanthus, and energy cane are the best feedstocks to deliver economic, sustainable and scaleable biofuel to the world." Verenium just built and started up a 1.5 million gallon per year demonstration-scale cellulosic plant in Jennings, Louisiana. President and CEO Carlos Riva said on Wednesday the company hopes to begin building a commercial plant next year and to start producing fuel from that plant in 2011. I assume this will be a 30 million gallon per year commercial plant when completed.

Flex-fuel vehicles...what say you?

As a matter of course, at 7:00 pm, I find myself switching between O'Reilly's Factor (Fox News) and Olbermann's Countdown (MSNBC). While I'm not in full agreement with the positions of either of these polar opposites, occasionally I get sucked in to issues I have some passion for. Such has been the case with Bill O'Reilly over the past four days, with his Talking Points focusing on our need to reduce our dependence on OPEC Oil, controlled by Mideastern Oil Barons. I agree with him that these people who really don't like us very much, yet they are benefiting enormously from our consumption of their oil at current oil prices. Bill's answer in part is to mandate flex-fuel vehicles, and follow the lead of Brazil in becoming more oil independent through greater usage of home grown ethanol. Bill has been to Brazil several times and I am very happy that he aggressively challenges those who have jumped on the latest bandwagon to pooh pooh ethanol for various reasons.

From my perspective, ethanol has gotten a bad rap, because our ethanol is derived from corn, which is a lot harder to justify socially and energetically than ethanol from crops like sugarcane that have a much better energy balance, and less impact on world food supply.

Could we produce ethanol profitably from sugarcane in the U.S. at present oil prices? Right now, the sugarcane farmer is barely breaking even at the 20 cents a pound he is getting for the sugar he is producing. So, the simple answer would seem to be that if the farmer were getting more than 20 cents a pound for sugar converted to ethanol, and if the infrastructure were already in place, he would be better off producing ethanol. It takes roughly 12 lbs of sugar to produce one gallon of ethanol, and on an equivalent volume basis, ethanol will only take you about 70% as far down the road as gasoline. Therefore 12 lbs sugar x 20 cents/lb = $2.40/gallon or $3.40/gas-equivalent gallon. How much cheaper it would be to produce ethanol directly from sugarcane juice than from fully processed raw sugar? The Brazilians should be able to answer this question. Apparently, they can produce ethanol at around 85 cents/gallon and I believe that they sell sugar at the world market price which is currently around 10 cents/lb. Could molasses and lower strikes of sugar be routed toward ethanol production, while only the highest strike of sugar (A-strike) be used toward the production of traditional sugar products? Is Brazil's claimed 8:1 energy output:input ratio valid? How much different is our ratio?

Oil setting records, sugar in the tank

Anyone who has filled up lately, knows that gas prices are going through the roof, and energy-related stocks seem to have replaced dot.com stocks as the "hottest" investment around. My suggestion, fill up tomorrow, and take your gas cans with you, because it is only going to get worse by this time next week. In the last two weeks, nationwide gas prices have shot up 20 cents. Even in my Nissan pickup that only holds about 12 gallons. Tomorrow, I'll be paying $2.40 more than I was only two weeks ago to fill up. It's time to get out the bicycle, put some air in the tires, and get a little exercize to boot. Oil set another all time record today, closing at nearly $135 per barrel. While all of this is happening, world sugar prices are sliding ever downward. Go figure. Other agricultural commodities, such as corn, soybeans, and wheat are riding the biofuels wave. Why not sugar? In Brazil, it is estimated that 58% of the sugarcane crop will be directed toward ethanol production this year, up from 50% just two years ago.

What caught my attention today was a story in the International Herald Tribune about an ethanol "still" that can be purchased for under $10,000, that looks like good ol' fill-er-up gas tank, and runs on sugar. This led me to the E-Fuel 100 MicroFueler website. Once you have the still, all you need to do is add a sugar solution and yeast. The still is "smart" enough to be able to do all the rest on its own.

At certain times of the year, our research station is collecting a large number of cane juice samples, and either giving away or throwing away a fairly large amount of excess cane juice, following sampling. Perhaps it's time for us to start thinking about taking advantage of this type of technology. Great PR and a way to save money in the long run.

One last thing. If you thought the cartoon at the top of this post was a little on the silly side, check this story out.

Brazil sugarcane in the news

Anyone who tracks sugarcane production and is interested in biofuels produced from sugarcane is well aware that Brazil is the leader of the pack. It was reported at Bloomberg that Brazil is projected to turn a record 58% of this year's cane crop into ethanol, representing 24.3 billion liters (6.4 billion gallons) this year compared to 20.3 billion liters last year. While the best market for Brazilian-produced ethanol is Brazil, Antonio Padua, technical director at Unica, pointed out that rising ethanol prices in the U.S., the world's biggest consumer of the fuel, will encourage Brazilian mills to export more this year. According to Padua, the current price of about $2.70 per gallon is above the $2.50 that makes exports to the U.S. profitable for Brazilian mills.

Also, recently in the news was a report of a joint venture between Amyris (Emeryville, CA), a leading innovator of next-generation renewable fuels, and Crystalsev, one of Brazil's largest ethanol distributors and marketers, to commercialize advanced renewable fuels made from sugarcane including a diesel, jet fuel and gasoline. Quoting variously from the article, "The first product, a renewable diesel that works in today's engines, is targeted for commercialization in 2010. Santelisa Vale, the second largest ethanol and sugar producer in Brazil and majority owner of Crystalsev, has contracted to provide two million tons of sugarcane crushing capacity and plans to adopt the new technology beginning at its flagship mill - Santelisa. Unlike current biofuels, these renewable fuels are designed to meet or exceed the quality of existing petroleum fuels and be fully compatible with existing fuels infrastructure and engines." This will be interesting to follow.

The biofuels debate

An increasing number of articles have recently been critical of biofuels. Two that reached wide audiences are in National Geographic and Time. Both were highly critical of corn-based ethanol in the U. S., but viewed sugarcane-based ethanol in Brazil in a much more positive light. Corn is criticized because, as a major food and feed crop, diversion of the grain toward the production of ethanol has the effect of driving up food prices. Also, the energy balance (output to input ratio) is not that attractive (Nat’l Geog.: 1.3 to 1.0). By contrast, the energy balance for sugarcane, at least in Brazil, was cited as 8 to 1. This begs the question as to why sugarcane is not used for ethanol production in the U.S. If the energy balance for sugarcane were only half as good as in Brazil (4 to 1) this is still much better than for corn. If the energetics really do favor sugarcane, why can ethanol be profitably made from corn, but not from sugarcane? I put together some numbers, based on what I found on the Internet, to compare the sugarcane situation in Brazil and the U.S.