Qi BioEnergy

Hello Casey,

Sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you. I sent your questions around to some of the other researchers I work with. Prof. Vance Morey and Dr. Nalladurai Kaliyan have been doing a lot of work on biomass densification here at the UofMN
Here are some answers to your questions:

what does HHV stand for? I am trying to figure out what is the yearly input in tons of biomass needed to just fuel the heat needs of a plant?

HHV stands for Higher Heating Value which is the amount of heat released during combustion. See this link for more detail: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_of_combustion
You can find a graph showing the amount of biomass fuel needed to supply the heat needs of a 50 million gallon per year dry grind ethanol plant in the ASABE paper I have attached. If you use only corn stover it is about 400 tons (363 metric tonnes) per day

When you all are looking at this study do you envision bales being stored at the field through out the year and a fleet of trucks will delivery them to the ethanol plant at the time they are needed rather than bulk storing at the ethanol plant?

We assumed that the biomass would be densified into pellets or briquettes at a facility separate from the ethanol plant. The ethanol plant would have enough storage to hold about a weeks worth of densified biomass fuel.

Densification, is grinding the way to go with that in order to keep transportation costs lower or can you just delivery bales to the plant where you have a stationary grinder on site?

A response from Prof. Morey:
Grinding is a preliminary step in densification. Grinding probably leads to lower bulk density than bales in the first step. That is something we are working on. I not a big fan of moving a pelleting or briquetting device to the site of the bales to make the pellets or briquettes. I think there is an intermediate stage of grinding followed by compacting the material at the local site, but not forming briquettes, in order to transport to a central facility for making the briquettes. I think this will be operated like a separate business even if it owned by the same people who own the ethanol plant.
He asked the question that a lot of people ask which is if you get the bales delivered to the ethanol plant why do you need to densify. I think we will find that feeding densified material (pellets or briquettes) in to the combustor or gasifier will be important to have predictable performance at the plant. The cost reductions resulting from predictable performance will justify the densification cost. We still need to do the analysis to see if this turns out to be true.

Pellets? Do they add another unnessecary step in this process? Could you turn the biomass to pellets in order to store in a silo on site using the bulk delivery to the site scenario?

Portable pelleting operation, what do you think of a semi trailer with a pelleting system built on it to grind and pellet at the feedstock location and you delivery pellets instead of ground biomass?

This is going to require a lot of trucks and baling equipment, do you see an opportunity for a contract company to provide these services to an ethanol plant. Essentially creating a partnership where a secondary company sources feedstock to the plant and the plant makes the investment in the gasification equipment. Or do you see the ethanol company trying to take on this whole process?

We assume it will be a contracted company, but the ethanol plant will be very closely involved.

Let’s say you are trying to meet the needs of a 50 million gallon facility, what is the radius in miles of the plant that you would need to collect from. I understand this will be based on a % of land you are harvesting off.

This depends on how much biomass farmers are willing to take off their land each year.
Lets say the plant is surrounded by corn fields. The corn yield is 150 bushels/acre, half the above ground weight of the corn plant represents grain, the other half is corn stover. If the farmer is willing to take off 50% of the corn stover each year you would have about 2.1 tons per acre available. The plant needs 132,000 tons per year. So you need about 63,000 acres to draw from. If the area is pure corn ground the radius would be 5.6 miles.

Thanks for taking the time to reply

Phin here… I know many of you are concerned about the use of corn ethanol (E85) and we hear you loud and clear. We share your concerns. That is why we want to stress that our campaign goals are to increase auto fuel efficiency to stop global warming and reduce dependence on oil.

We know that ethanol produced from corn is only one near-term solution to our dependence on oil. Other low carbon fuels, such as cellulosic ethanol, biodiesel, electricity (with the development of plug-in hybrid vehicles) and hydrogen, will play a larger role in our path to long-term energy independence.

So why, you ask, do we have so much corn imagery and references in our videos?

We were looking for a message that would get all of you to take notice of the urgency of these issues and make your voices heard, loud and clear. I think we have done that.

As for corn, well, putting Ben Affleck into a corn suit is just plain funny. He was a real sport to do it and we are grateful to him for doing it.

And while a lot of people are writing us to say corn is not the answer, everyone is writing to tell us what they think we can do to increase fuel efficiency and reduce pollution. And that is what this campaign is all about.

We understand that cellulosic ethanol (made from agricultural waste and crops such as switchgrass) is preferable to corn ethanol because it requires less water and energy to produce, does not directly affect food prices, and emits fewer greenhouse gases. However, while we already know how to produce corn ethanol, scientists are still figuring out the best ways to produce affordable cellulosic ethanol.

Further, Congress has mandated the production of ethanol. Auto companies plan to have 8 million flex fuel cars on the road by the end of next year. Therefore, the Center for American Progress Action Fund believes that E-85 (85% ethanol, 15% gasoline) ought to be available so that drivers can use this cleaner fuel in their flex fuel car, and achieve reductions in oil use and global warming pollution. The Wall Street Journal and others documented the road blocks that big oil companies put in the way of service stations to limit the sale of E-85 since it competes with their gasoline. Our videos urge the removal of these roadblocks by Congress.

Our aim in these videos was not to single out corn ethanol as “the answer” to our dependence on oil. We simply intended to start a discussion and increase awareness about alternative low carbon fuels, and to have a little fun in the process. After all, it is harder to dress up as agricultural waste than an ear of corn.

The more we holler about the issue, the more likely Congress will notice and do something real about it. So keep hollering. We like it. Even if you think corn is not the answer. And remember, the other half of this campaign, 35 miles per gallon fuel economy standards by 2020, could reduce more oil use and global warming pollution than either type of ethanol.

If you are interested in learning more about alternative fuels and how they stack up against each other, check out this article from the Center for American Progress.

Remember, this is about reducing emissions and dependence on oil. We have a lot of work to do and we have to start immediately. If corn helps us start sooner, then great. In the long run, there will be better fuels to use and we should transition to them as soon as possible.

So keep up the buzz and keep the pressure on Congress. Thanks for your support.

Phin

We know that you are visiting here because you want to make a difference and save money on fuel costs. Not only is E85 ethanol motor fuel’s price is cheaper than gasoline, but it is better for the environment. Further, your dollars stay here in the USA since E85 ethanol is American made.

We have purchased other E85 Conversion Kits and tested them in our personal vehicles. As an independent reseller, we have chosen to ONLY sell the FFI Platinum. We will continue independent testing of all brands and should we find one better, we will consider offering that product. We do not accept free test units. We pay for them to keep our testing unbiased.

Your vehicle will have the ability to run on straight gas, straight ethanol, or any combination of the two. The most popular combinations are E85 (85% ethanol and 15% gasoline) or your everyday gas (10% ethanol and 90% gasoline). Please remember that the FFI Platinum will automatically sense the gas to ethanol ratio and make all of the adjustments necessary for a seamless FlexFuel experience

Nexus has been meeting the needs of commercial greenhouse growers for over 35 years. We have built our reputation on structures of uncompromising quality and the best customer service in the industry.

Nexus has a broad range of structures to meet your individual growing needs. All of our structures can be customized to provide growers with the size, covering, heating, cooling, and controls to provide the best possible environment for your crop.

The primary purpose of the greenhouse facility is to serve as a demonstration greenhouse showcasing new technologies in “real world” conditions for economic development. Designed by the Bioresource Engineering Department of Cook College, Rutgers University and built by the County of Burlington’s Board of Chosen Freeholders, the greenhouse has numerous environmental technologies incorporated into its design. These technologies serve to give the greenhouse a soft footprint on the environment. The greenhouse has been operational since 1996. It is one of the largest research greenhouses in the U.S. with over 46,000 square feet of greenhouse production space and 10,000 square feet of support buildings.

Some of the noteworthy features incorporated into the research facility include:

• Sophisticated computerized environmental controls for 5 separate zones that monitor, control, and record the temperature, light level, humidity and carbon dioxide level for each zone while minimizing energy usage
• Heated floors throughout that serve as a thermal storage device and places the heat where it is needed, in the crop
• High Intensity Lighting to supplement natural sunlight and extend the daylegnth during the lower-light periods of the year (September through April)
• Energy curtains that reduce heat loss, during the night, in winter and reduce the cooling loads, during the day, in summer
• High density polyethylene liners under the greenhouse floors to prevent irrigation water from leaving the greenhouse and going into the ground
• Double-wall acrylic sidewalls to reduce heat loss through the sides of the greenhouse
• High pressure fog cooling system
• Dual-fueled boiler for both landfill gas and natural gas
• Landfill gas fired microturbines and waste heat recovery system
• Automated rolling benches or “Dutch trays” that allow the crop to be brought to the workers in the headhouse and also allow for greater space utilization in the greenhouse
• Recirculating hydroponic irrigation system
• Glass and double layer polyethylene roofing in identical sections to allow for comparison of crop production under both covers

Research at the greenhouse focuses on the economic and crop production impacts of the new technologies. The results are then made available for greenhouse growers (and those considering getting into greenhouse production) to evaluate.

For more photos please visit our online photo gallery.

Prepared feedstock (<10% moisture and 1-2 mm particle size) is fed into the bubbling fluid-bed reactor, which is heated to 450–500 °C in the absence of oxygen. This is lower than conventional pyrolysis systems and, therefore, has the benefit of higher overall energy conversion efficiency. The feedstock flashes and vaporizes like throwing droplets of water onto a hot frying pan. The resulting gases pass into a cyclone where solid particles, char, are extracted. The gases enter a quench tower where they are quickly cooled using BioOil already made in the process

The BioOil condenses and falls into the product tank, while non-condensable gases are returned to the reactor to maintain process heating. The entire reaction from injection to quenching takes only two seconds.

100% of the feedstock is utilized in the process to produce BioOil and char. As the non-condensable gases are used as energy to run the process, nothing is wasted and no waste is produced. The uncondensed, flammable gases are re-circulated to fuel approximately 75% of the energy needed by the pyrolysis process.

Three products are produced: BioOil (60-75% by weight), char (15-20% wt.) and non-condensable gases (10-20% wt.). Yields vary depending on the feedstock composition. BioOil and char are commercial products and non-condensable gases are recycled and supply a major part of the energy required by the process. No waste is produced in the Dynamotive process

A fourth product, BioOil Plus, can be produced by adding back the separated char into the BioOil, in a finely ground form of about 8 microns in size.

We have now built a unique pilot-scale reactor that uses a hot sand medium (called a fluidized-bed reactor) to convert perennial grasses to bio-oil and have now tested the reactor on switchgrass. The reactor was able to use switchgrass as a feedstock and produce a quantity of bio-oil that was 60% of the weight of the switchgrass fed into the reactor. We tested the composition and fuel properties of the produced liquid and found that the energy content was about the same as the parent switchgrass but the density was more than 2.5 X greater.

The SSEA is a global organization whose purpose is to promote and develop the use of sweet sorghum, a renewable and sustainable resource, for processing into ethanol and other bio-derivatives.