Qi BioEnergy

I am responding to Jeremy Madden’s May column in the Aspen Daily News, as well as other news concerning corn-based ethanol fuels.

The accusation that ethanol fuels from corn is causing food shortages and raising food prices is now an issue on the nation’s front burner. Much of the news on this subject is mostly surface talk. This is a very complex issue going much deeper than just blaming the agricultural sector. This was inevitable at this point in time, given the demand for corn and rising gasoline prices.

The public needs to realize that this is the initial phase of the renewable energy development in the United States. This is something that cannot be just shut off and on like a faucet. This development was set in motion a long time ago in the Midwest. Farmers have been waiting years for the corn ethanol fuels development to reach a high level of development.

As the director of the first ethanol fuels commission (Nebraska Gasohol Commission) in the 1970s, we foresaw that corn ethanol fuels would be only a Midwest region development. We did not intend to blanket the nation with this product. Many farmers are actually making real money for the first time in ages. Corn-based ethanol fuels will not go away any time soon. Consider that there are an average of 10-12 large corn ethanol plants in each of the Midwestern states, and they are building more.

I (have) listened to Al Gore being interviewed on the National Public Radio network about many national issues. Now, this is one of the smartest people on earth when it comes to the environment and energy. When asked about the corn ethanol-food issue, he said “you can’t throw the baby out with the bath water.” He went on to imply that corn ethanol fuel needs to be given a chance to work itself out. He made a very strategic point regarding this issue: He pointed out that no one has considered the fact that the commodities market and traders are causing much of this price impact on our food prices — not so much the corn ethanol fuels development.

Let’s also blame the oil companies for adding to the price of all of our delivered goods, especially food. Now we are looking at $4 and $5 gasoline prices. Nothing more should be said. Also, let’s throw in the fact that oil production is now on a steep downward trend. Why do you think that General Motors, Chrysler, and Ford have invested heavily in manufacturing flex fuel (ethanol fuels) vehicles? Now Toyota is planning to introduce ethanol fuel-capable trucks soon. I am very confident that this corn ethanol fuels issue will work itself out in the very near future.

Be ready to hug a farmer everyday when we run out of petroleum oil. Farmers have the capability of producing ethanol fuels on their own farms as well as in group efforts called co-operatives. If we run out of oil, farmers will have their applications into ATF faster than you can spell “corn.”

One solution might be to form renewable energy co-operatives. Consumers could invest in their own co-ops. Members could drive into a renewable energy park where there would be tanks of ethanol and bio-diesel available at huge discounts. At the other end of the park, there would be a bank of solar-powered outlets where hybrid cars could juice up. Renewable energy tax credits or rebates should be made available for these types of businesses.

We need to control our own destinies by investing in this type of American-owned renewable energy. I’m ready! How about you?

Randy Fricke
Basalt

Posted from the Aspen Daily News

Greenfuel website

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

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

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.

Oklahoma State University’s sorghum-related biofuels research is taking a localized approach, with the aim of making possible the effective production of ethanol in the farmer’s own field.

Sweet sorghum can be grown throughout temperate climate zones of the United States, including Oklahoma. It provides high biomass yield with low irrigation and fertilizer requirements. Corn ethanol, in contrast, requires significant amounts of water for growing and processing.

Best of all, producing ethanol from sweet sorghum is relatively easy, said Danielle Bellmer, biosystems engineer with the OSU Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources’ Robert M. Kerr Food and Agricultural Products Center.

“Just press the juice from the stalk, add yeast, allow fermentation to take place and you have ethanol,” Bellmer said. “Unfortunately, the simple sugars derived from sweet sorghum have to be fermented immediately.”

Throw in the expense of constructing and operating a central processing facility that would only operate the four to five months of the year when sorghum would be available in Oklahoma and the challenge multiplies.

The beginnings of a possible solution presented itself when entrepreneur Lee McClune, president of Sorganol Production Co. Inc., approached FAPC scientists seeking their assistance in testing his newly designed field harvester capable of pressing and collecting juice from sweet sorghum. His proposed Sorganol process involved using the harvester, large storage bladders for fermentation and a mobile distillation unit for ethanol purification.

OSU’s initial involvement in the project was to look at the feasibility of fermenting the juice in the field.

“We’re examining such things as juice extraction efficiency, whether or not pH (acidity) or nutrient adjustment of the juice is needed and various environmental factors,” Bellmer said.

The goal is to make production of ethanol from sweet sorghum economically viable by using an in-field processing system that minimizes transportation costs and capital investment.

Equipment such as the harvester and other technology could be owned individually or cooperatively with a number of producers sharing and possibly helping one another process ethanol from sweet sorghum.

In Oklahoma, the potential processing scenario might look like this: Plant sweet sorghum around mid-April, and then stagger plantings for two to three months. This would provide a harvest window of August through November.

“Ethanol yields in Oklahoma could range from 300 gallons to 600 gallons per acre, depending on biomass yield, sugar content and juice expression efficiency,” said Chad Godsey, biofuels team member and OSU Cooperative Extension cropping systems specialist with the department of plant and soil sciences.

Godsey said the team is working to determine the maximum possible harvest window for sweet sorghum in Oklahoma.

“Obviously, the longer the harvest window, the more ethanol state farmers will be able to produce,” he said.

OSU Biofuels Team researchers also are studying environmental parameters that may affect the feasibility of on-farm fermentation. A producer must be able to ferment the juice in the field during Oklahoma’s harvest season for sweet sorghum, which occurs in the fall when temperature extremes are highly possible.

“Temperature can speed up, slow down or derail the fermentation process,” Godsey said.

Weather data for Oklahoma indicate an average low temperature of about 44 degrees Fahrenheit and an average high temperature of approximately 98 degrees Fahrenheit during the August-through-October period over the past 10 years.

Six test plot sites are maintained at Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station facilities across the state, allowing OSU scientists to conduct research on sweet sorghum under local conditions.

“We would like to do with sweet sorghum what the Brazilians have done with sugar cane: In Brazil, sugar cane ethanol provides a large percentage of their fuel needs,” Bellmer said.

The idea of using sweet sorghum for commercial ethanol production is not new. The reason sweet sorghum is not as popular as corn in terms of being a source of ethanol in the United States has been the need to ferment its simple sugars immediately and the high costs associated with a central processing plant that is operated only seasonally.

“By determining a process by which agricultural producers can create ethanol in the field from sweet sorghum, that barrier is removed,” Bellmer said. “Producers will then have a much higher value product to sell.”

By Jim Jubak

Yikes! Oil at $117 a barrel. It has to go down from here, right?

Wrong. In the short term — say, the next two years or so — we’re looking at bad news about global oil supply that could take the price of a barrel of crude to $180.

Needless to say, today’s $3.50-a-gallon gasoline would look cheap if oil prices hit $180 a barrel. At that price for a barrel of oil, gasoline would cost somewhere north of $5.50 a gallon.

The good news is that’s about the price, experts now say, that would send global consumption tumbling and oil prices into retreat, as drivers scrambled to find ways to conserve.

Of course, experts once thought $3-a-gallon gasoline would lead to a drop in consumption. The latest forecast from the International Energy Agency calls for global oil demand of 87.2 million barrels a day this year. That would be an increase in consumption of 1.3 million barrels a day from 2007 — despite a U.S. economic slowdown and soaring oil prices.

So why do I think oil prices will keep climbing for two more years at least?

A terrible coincidence of geology and geopolitics. Just when oil is getting more expensive to produce, the oil industries in three key countries — Mexico, Russia and Nigeria — find themselves short of cash. And without that cash, oil production in these countries, and global oil production in general, is headed into a decline.

The Russian oil industry, for example, announced that production had fallen 1% in the first quarter of 2008. According to the Russian energy ministry, oil production for the full year could be lower than in 2007.

Any decline would mark a huge turnaround. Russian production has grown steadily over the past 10 years, and in its supply-and-demand projections the International Energy Agency has been counting on growth in Russian production of 5% by 2012 to offset big declines in older fields in the North Sea and Mexico.

Determine the amount of crop residues (e.g., corn stover, cover crop) that must remain on the land to maintain soil organic carbon (SOC) and sustain production. Through a series of experiments with factors including tillage and residue removal conducted under several environments, measure biomass production, grain yield, and change in soil organic carbon, and from these measurements estimate the amount of residue needed to maintain soil organic carbon and productivity. Click here to read the study which runs through 2011

April 14, 2008 (Market Wire) On April 9, 2008, Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc. (NASDAQ and AMEX: GPRE) received preliminary approval from the Iowa Power Fund for a $2,315,407 grant to fund research and development of algae-based biofuel feedstock production. The award is subject to negotiation and completion of definitive agreements among Green Plains, GreenFuel Technology Corp. and the State of Iowa.

Green Plains’ proposal was submitted in cooperation with GreenFuel Technology Corp., a Massachusetts-based firm with expertise in algae-based biofuels. The grant will allow Green Plains and GreenFuel Technology to conduct a 195-day test to determine the viability of algae production at Green Plains’ ethanol plant site in Shenandoah, Iowa. The project is expected to utilize the plant’s carbon dioxide to produce approximately eight kilograms of algal biomass per day. If the test is successful, the project could be expanded for feasibility and commercialization.

“Algae production compliments ethanol production,” said Wayne Hoovestol, Chief Executive Officer. “The algae project involves recycling heat and water, while mitigating carbon dioxide. Additionally, there is strong evidence to suggest that Iowa has ideal environmental conditions for commercial algae production.”

Algae offers potential as an alternative feedstock for biodiesel. According to GreenFuel Technology, oil yields from algae are estimated at several thousand gallons per acre, while oil yields from soybeans are approximately 65 gallons per acre. No genetically-modified organisms are involved in the proposed production process. By-products include feed ingredients and biomass for energy generation.

“GreenFuel Technology has run several projects at major power plants in the United States,” said Cary Bullock, Vice-President of Business Development for GreenFuel Technology. “However, we are especially excited about the Green Plains project because of the natural synergies between the algae and ethanol industries. The Green Plains project provides an opportunity to use an operational ethanol plant to further the body of knowledge of algae-based biofuels.”

“Green Plains thanks the Iowa Power Fund and Office of Energy Independence for their support,” said Hoovestol. “We thank Governor Chet Culver for his visionary leadership in promoting biofuels. And, we thank the community of Shenandoah, Iowa, for its tireless support of Green Plains.”

About Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc.

Ethanol is a high-octane fuel that is blended with gasoline to provide superior engine performance as well as help to reduce harmful tailpipe and greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming. Ethanol has also become a prime source of value-added income for American farmers.

Green Plains, based in Omaha, Nebraska, has the strategy of becoming a vertically-integrated, low-cost ethanol producer. Green Plains operates a 50 million gallon corn ethanol plant in Shenandoah, Iowa. A second 50 million gallon corn ethanol plant is under construction in Superior, Iowa. The Superior plant is scheduled to begin production later this spring. Green Plains has grain storage capacity of approximately 19 million bushels and provides complementary agronomy, seed, feed, fertilizer and petroleum services at various sites in the Corn Belt.

About GreenFuel Technology Corp.

Headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts, GreenFuel Technology Corp. is a privately-held venture-backed firm. Founded in 2001, GreenFuel recycles carbon dioxide from flue gases to produce biofuels and feed. Harvesting algae for biofuels enhances domestic fuel production while mitigating carbon dioxide.

Company Contact:
Scott B. Poor, Corporate Counsel / Director of Investor Relations
Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc.
(402) 884-8700

Investor Contact:
John Baldissera
BPC Financial Marketing
(800) 368-1217