When Cassandra Moseley, Max Nielsen-Pincus and the rest of the team at the University of Oregon&rsquo;s Ecosystem Workforce Program (EWP) first started their research into the impact of the state&rsquo;s biomass producer and collector (BPC) tax credit, they had no preconceived notions about whether the tax credit was good or bad.
 They were interested in forest restoration and intrigued by the job creation possibility of a policy linked to biomass. And they planned on letting Oregon&rsquo;s policymakers decide whether a tax credit that awards $10 for every green ton of biomass delivered to a bioenergy facility is worth the money. But that was before the team, which also included members of Oregon&rsquo;s Department of Energy, finished its work.
 Now, after biomass prices and regression analyses simulating a world without the BPC tax credit, the results are in. And they show that policymakers have an easy choice to make.
 The Main Effects 
 When the team&rsquo;s research into the BPC began in 2010, the amount of information on wood fuels markets and the economics of biomass collection was limited. With the help of Forest2Market, the research team compiled biomass prices dating back 10 years. The team also reached out to several Oregon businesses to discuss the typical costs of transporting woody biomass. &ldquo;We tried to tie any information that did exist to this particular tax credit program,&rdquo; Pincus says.
 Moseley says the researchers had three goals. First, determine if the tax credit was actually financially affecting the wood fuels market. Second, find out if the amount of biomass flowing into the market was fluctuating in relation to the BPC. And the third goal was centered around employment. &ldquo;We wanted to know whether it was creating or sustaining any new or existing jobs,&rdquo; Moseley says.
 To satisfy those goals, the team created a statistical model based on figures from before the tax credit, and then projected the fuels market pricing out through 2010 as if the credit had never been implemented. The team then compared the fuel pricing market conditions, with the tax credit versus without.
 &ldquo;What we&rsquo;ve learned is that the tax credit has helped prices in the wood fuels market,&rdquo; Pincus says. But that&rsquo;s only one of the ways the BPC tax credit impacted the state. The research by EWP shows the tax program also supported between 32 and 73 jobs in 2010. The most powerful testament to the effectiveness of a state&rsquo;s commitment to the growth and health of the biomass industry, however, is a comparison between what the state got out of the BPC and what it had to put in.
 At an average price of $30.11 per bone dry ton (BDT), the EWP calculated that 10,000 BDT equaled $301,000, and would be eligible for $178,571 in tax credits. That means 10,000 BDT of forest biomass delivered to a bioenergy facility would support roughly 5.1 jobs, $241,000 in wages and benefits, and $868,000 in direct, indirect and induced economic activity. The net tax expenditure cost of all that is about $143,000.
 &ldquo;This study shows that the tax credit seems to have generated more economic activity than it cost the state in tax,&rdquo; Moseley says. &ldquo;The credit moderated the price increases that would have happened otherwise in the wood fuels market caused by the economic downturn.&rdquo;
 As of March 2011, 52 biomass providers and collectors requested nearly $6.6 million in BPC tax credits for fiscal year 2010, according to the research. About $5.5 million of that came from more than 550,000 green tons of woody biomass. The average amount request by each participant totaled $126,931.
 And it all came at a time of economic peril, during a downturn in the housing market that was creating typical sources used in bioenergy facilities, such as hog fuel and mill residues. But, decreased demand didn&rsquo;t follow the decrease in supply. &ldquo;The demand (for biomass) was still growing because of our increasing demands for renewable energy,&rdquo; Pincus says.
 That steady demand for biomass-based energy was still met, however, through the BPC tax credit. &ldquo;The credit essentially allowed for material to come out of the woods that wouldn&rsquo;t have otherwise come out,&rdquo; Pincus says. &ldquo;It allowed that demand for wood fuels and for biomass to continue to grow.&rdquo; And without the BPC in place, the price of woody biomass would have climbed during the decrease in supply. According to the research, the price of forest biomass would have been roughly 20 percent higher, and availability would have been 20 to 30 percent lower.
 The BPC not only helped sustain the health of the woody biomass supply market in Oregon, but it also helped sustain jobs involved with the handling, delivering and storing of biomass.
 The Future 
 Matt Krumenauer is a senior policy analyst at the Oregon Department of Energy and an integral part of the BPC program. Krumenauer helped assemble the team tasked with analyzing the effectiveness of the tax program. He was responsible for implementing and evaluating the BPC credit, and says he&rsquo;s happy it has been extended through 2018.
 But a few changes have been made to the program. Most notably, the unit of measure will switch from green tons to bone dry tons. In addition, stand alone electricity generation sites will not be eligible for the tax credit because combined-heat-and-power facilities will better assist in reaching energy efficiency standards set by the state&rsquo;s DOE.
 Krumenauer doesn&rsquo;t envision any more changes to the BPC program in the foreseeable future, and is already working to implement more biomass programs. In the past, his department created incentives for equipment, or for the construction of new facilities, and now is looking at the biomass thermal sector. &ldquo;We are starting to focus more on our heating sector&hellip;trying to provide our communities with access to biomass heating systems,&rdquo; he says. That could include applications in hospitals, schools, commercial buildings and prisons.
 But for now, Krumenauer and his EWP team have one more major task at hand: analyze the effect of the BPC tax credit in the absence of major federal incentives such as the USDA&rsquo;s Biomass Crop Assistance Program. Although the analysis is still in progress, Moseley, Pincus and Krumenauer agree that the information for 2010, and most likely for 2011, shows that the BPC undoubtedly stimulates at least one important part of the market: the middle of the supply chain. &ldquo;It doesn&rsquo;t stimulate final demand, it doesn&rsquo;t create more consumers, nor is it directly building any new production facilities,&rdquo; Moseley says. &ldquo;But it could potentially create some investment decisions.&rdquo;
 &ldquo;One could imagine that with a time horizon of this particular tax credit being here until 2018, that that might impact somebody&rsquo;s investment decision about building new biomass capacity,&rdquo; Pincus adds. And, although neither Pincus nor Moseley believe the BPC program is a silver bullet, they do adamantly argue for its strengths. The link the team found between the BPC and the wood fuels market is more than merely casual, they say. They both believe the market would have been far less fiscally successful and sustainable over the past few years without such a program in place.
 For Krumenauer, the choice to extend the program through 2018 was an easy one, given its economic sustainability factor. &ldquo;I think that being a resource-dependant state, the value that the legislature saw was really being able to put loggers and farmers and contractors back to work creating energy products when the markets for housing products, timber and forest products markets declined.&rdquo;
 And, of course, the program will lower Oregon&rsquo;s carbon impact through the next six years of its life. But in today&rsquo;s economic climate that starts and ends with jobs, the research by the EWP team proves bioenergy affects more than just greenhouse gas emissions.
 &ldquo;(Legislators) extended it through two other legislative cycles and I believe they wanted to provide some assurance that the program would be available so that they could begin to make business decisions,&rdquo; Krumenauer says. Author: Luke Geiver Associate Editor, Biomass Power &amp; Thermal <a href="mailto:lgeiver@bbiinternational.com">lgeiver@bbiinternational.com</a> (701) 738-4944

PROFITABLE ALTERNATIVE: Oregon's BPC tax credit encourages the use of biomass slash piles that would have otherwise been burned. 

2012/02/13298615537369.jpg

SEE FOR YOURSELF: The results and products of the BPC program are clear, and are showcased during Oregon biomass resource tours.


2012/02/13298616094513.jpg

Clean Forest Floor: The program incentivizes the removal of usable biomass from forest thinning.


2012/02/13298616140272.jpg

HITTING THE TARGET: The BPC tax credit created biomass handling jobs in an otherwise slow 2010 economy.



2012/02/13298616234216.jpg

A producer and collector tax credit has improved economic sustainability in Oregon's biomass industry 

Biomass Sustains Business

Any visitor to the U.S. Midwest knows the region isn&rsquo;t recognized for glorious mountains, warm weather or sunshine. It does, however, boast flat and vast plains, long stretches of grassland, and highly productive soil that allows it to produce an abundance of cereal crops.
 To some, that&rsquo;s an ideal scenario for growing a biomass energy industry off the back end, and numerous industry experts are busy examining its viability and potential impacts. As with any emerging industry, there are some hurdles and kinks to be worked out, but there is a resounding consensus across the scientific community that Midwestern crop residue and cattle manure will play a key role in the region&rsquo;s energy future. In fact, one recently published, USDA-backed study has determined that biomass alone could be used to produce 15 percent of the Midwest&rsquo;s electricity.
 Assessing Availability
 Authored by Chicago Council Senior Energy Fellow Steve Brick, &ldquo;Harnessing the Power of Biomass Residuals: Opportunities and Challenges for Midwestern Renewable Energy,&rdquo; considers the residual biomass resources of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin. According to Brick, the year-long project involved three main steps: preparing a regional residual biomass inventory, developing an assessment of conversion technology readiness and economics, and developing policy recommendations.
 Brick&rsquo;s team arrived at its 15 percent of Midwest electricity conclusion by converting all of the &ldquo;ecologically available&rdquo; biomass to dry tons, and assuming it would be burned in a conventional boiler.&nbsp; &ldquo;This was done as a way to bind the total contribution that waste biomass could make to the regional energy supply,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;We made the same calculation for ethanol&mdash;assuming all the biomass could be converted&mdash;and found that 17 percent of the region&rsquo;s gasoline could be supplied from biomass residuals.&rdquo;
 Residuals included in the report are crop residues such as corn stover, soy straw and wheat straw; manure from swine, cattle and poultry; and forestry, primary mill and urban wood residues. While corn stover leads in crop residue annual tonnage at 106 million tons, Brick points out that the logistics of harvesting, transporting and storing corn stover are uncertain. &ldquo;Questions of how much stover can reasonably be harvested, who harvests it, how it is harvested, transported and stored must be addressed before a new industry can take shape,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;We really need to consider biomass energy systems in the broader landscape contexts in which they occur. The land-water-air-wildlife-human interactions are critical, but easy to ignore if we just consider biomass as an energy resource. A landscape perspective is harder to develop and talk about, but it is really the key to smart protection and utilization of our natural resources.&rdquo;
 Unlike corn stover-to-energy, the anaerobic digestion (AD) industry isn&rsquo;t new to the Midwest. It is already home to 52 of the nation&rsquo;s 169 anaerobic digestion projects. Most of the digesters are concentrated in the Great Lakes region, but the 33 MW contribution to the regional energy supply represents only 2 percent of installed capacity, according to Brick. He believes AD energy potential in the region is huge, even though it is challenging financially. &ldquo;AD is a great technology for producing biogas for use in a turbine, as a boiler fuel or a transport fuel, and a great way to reduce water quality issues associated with manure and reduce greenhouse gases,&rdquo; he says.
 Digest This
 Currently, only about 1 percent of the Midwest&rsquo;s cattle manure is managed through AD, and digesters are found on only about 10 percent of the region&rsquo;s largest dairy farms. With the amount of manure available&mdash;14 million tons annually from cattle alone&mdash;why aren&rsquo;t more farms taking advantage of the technology?
 &ldquo;I think there are several reasons why,&rdquo; says Amanda Bilek, energy policy specialist for the Great Plains Institute. &ldquo;Part has to do with public policy, and a lack of support in individual Midwestern states with the exception of Wisconsin, which is a shining example for the other states. They&rsquo;ve done better than any other Midwestern state by collaborating with state agencies, producer associations, and leveraging some federal resources.&rdquo;&nbsp;
 Wisconsin has the most AD installations of any state in the country, according to Bilek. Outside of the policy realm, another factor influencing the lack of AD projects is the low price of electricity in the Midwest. &ldquo;A lot of AD project models have been focused on producing renewable electricity, but we have very low prices in the Midwest overall,&rdquo; Bilek says. And because digesters require a large capital investment, selling the resulting electricity in the Midwest often means a really slow return on investment. &ldquo;That deters some producers from installing them, because they can be viewed as risky.&rdquo;
 Biogas doesn&rsquo;t have to be converted into electricity, though. &ldquo;It can also be a source of renewable natural gas, cleaned and compressed even further into vehicle fuel, or a source of heat in certain applications,&rdquo; Bilek says. &ldquo;If we only look at one specific type of utilization of the gas&mdash;electricity&mdash;we&rsquo;ve really missed the potential opportunities there.&rdquo;
 The low price of natural gas is another AD hindrance, according to Brett Hulsey, president of Better Environmental Solutions, a Wisconsin-based clean energy consulting, managing and development firm. &ldquo;Actually the biggest challenge in the biomass industry as a whole is cheap natural gas&mdash;at $2.50 per 1,000 cubic feet, energy efficiency barely pays,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;I&rsquo;ve been at this 30 years, and I&rsquo;ve seen natural gas take a wild swing.&rdquo;
 Hulsey, also a Wisconsin state legislator and a Dane County board supervisor, served as an environmental policy advisor to President Bill Clinton and worked as an environmental educator and advocate for the Sierra Club for 17 years. He says another hurdle to widespread AD implementation and bioenergy in the Midwest is getting farmers to understand the right amount of manure and corn stover to put back on the soil. &ldquo;Any more than [the right amount] results in more phosphorus and nitrogen pollution,&rdquo; he explains. &ldquo;This industry is also part of a water quality improvement solution, because when you have too much manure or corn stover on the soil it creates water pollution.&rdquo;
 &nbsp;For corn stover, the adequate amount is about two to three tons per acre, but manure varies greatly. &ldquo;A lot of soil in Wisconsin doesn&rsquo;t need more phosphorous,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;So if we can separate the biomass out of the manure&mdash;we&rsquo;re actually doing that at a pilot project in Dane County, separating liquids from solids after the digester&mdash;the phosphorus stays with the solids.&rdquo;
 Despite the aforementioned challenges, AD development has continued in the Midwest over the past decade. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s been slowly increasing, and there are some real pockets of significant development, especially in Wisconsin,&rdquo; Bilek says, adding that since the state is home to a manufacturer of an AD technology, producers likely feel more secure having someone in their backyard to help with trouble shooting.
 In Minnesota, the number of digesters has tripled from two to six in the past 10 years, and other states in the region have had similar increases. &ldquo;That&rsquo;s not a huge amount of growth, but its growth,&rdquo; Bilek says. &ldquo;We just have to get the technology over the first hump. Creating more incentives would help, at least to get over the initial economic barrier until more systems are installed and the costs come down.&rdquo;
 And once the AD and biomass energy industry in general gets rolling in the Midwest, so will new employment.
 Jobs and More
 A 2007 analysis performed by Hulsey found that the industry could create 100,000 jobs in Wisconsin alone. &ldquo;We import $12.5 billion worth of energy per year for coal, oil, and natural gas, and conservatively that&rsquo;s a 100,000 job loss,&rdquo; he explains. That&rsquo;s following a rule of thumb for one job created for every $50,000 kept in state. &ldquo;Iowa generates about 39 million tons of corn stover per year, and they are already generating more fuel than they use,&rdquo; Hulsey says. &ldquo;They import about 20 million tons of coal a year, but they could be almost energy self-sufficient. That&rsquo;s one of the next studies I may do, an energy import study, to really hone in on the jobs question.&rdquo;
 Speaking of replacing coal, in another of Hulsey&rsquo;s 20 studies, &ldquo;Cellulose Prairie: Biomass Fuel Potential in Wisconsin and the Midwest,&rdquo; he found 12 Midwestern states generate up to 231 million tons of potential excess biomass each year that could replace 37 percent of the coal used in those states, 50 percent in Wisconsin alone. Hulsey says coal replacement conversions were a key concept in the study, as previous data hadn&rsquo;t put information in such real terms.
 Moving on to other Midwestern benefits, one environmental advantage not often associated with biomass energy is reduced flooding. &ldquo;Many studies have shown that planting cropland to grasslands, combined with other conservation practices, can reduce 100-year floods by 15 to 39 percent,&rdquo; Hulsey says. &ldquo;Basically we&rsquo;re restoring nature&rsquo;s sponges&mdash;especially with grassy biomass&mdash;that store flood waters. I worked on a project two years ago where we restored a wetland area to both willow and switchgrass, and the idea there was to build more of nature&rsquo;s sponges to reduce water on the land and in people&rsquo;s living rooms.&rdquo;
 While biomass is usually snubbed in the energy portions of typical presidential speeches touting home-grown fossil fuels and other sources of renewable energy, it plays a significant role in the country&rsquo;s current energy portfolio. &ldquo;Biomass is the Rodney Dangerfield of energy&mdash;&lsquo;we don&rsquo;t get no respect,&rsquo;&rdquo; Hulsey jokes. &ldquo;But really if you look at (U.S.) DOE numbers, it equals about half of renewable energy in the U.S., especially here in the Midwest and in Wisconsin.&rdquo;
 Overall, the important thing to remember about biomass fuel is that it&rsquo;s all local.&nbsp; &ldquo;You have to set your fuel systems up according to what you have,&rdquo; Hulsey adds. &ldquo;For example, Iowa has corn stover. The Saudi Arabia of America is right here in the Midwest, and while we aren&rsquo;t a Silicon Valley, we can be the &lsquo;cellulose prairie,&rsquo; making our own energy and jobs.&rdquo; Author: Anna Austin Associate Editor, Biomass Power &amp; Thermal <a href="mailto:aaustin@bbiinternational.com">aaustin@bbiinternational.com</a> (701) 751-2756

GROUNDWORK: A local farmer and researchers from Better Environmental Solutions, University of Wisconsin Soil Center, and Veridian Homes, work on a 2010 hybrid willow biomass restoration project in Wisconsin. 


2012/02/13298619101613.jpg

2012/02/13298620858907.jpg

2012/02/13298620887132.jpg

The U.S. Midwest has considerable biomass energy potential, specifically in anaerobic digestion applications

The Breadbasket's Biomass Belt

The word sustainability has broad definitions, but many of us in the bioenergy industry&nbsp; associate it with ensuring the health and vitality of the feedstock source after a biomass harvest, whether it&rsquo;s cropland, forestland, forestry residue, or another resource.
 It certainly isn&rsquo;t a new concern and is a vital aspect of every biomass project&rsquo;s feasibility study. But sustainability doesn&rsquo;t only revolve around feedstock. A successful, well-planned and well-executed biomass project can bring economic sustainability, also. A biomass producer and collector tax credit in Oregon has done just that, and therefore, has been extended through 2018. The credit has created jobs along the woody biomass supply chain, enhanced forest health, and brought revenue to the state. A research team discovered the positive impacts while analyzing the economy with and without the tax credit. The results are clear. Read more about it in a feature article by Associate Editor Luke Geiver, beginning on page 18.
 Elsewhere, however, the biomass industry is facing the loss of many incentives supporting development. In February, leaders from the Biomass Power Association, National Hydropower Association and Geothermal Energy Association wrote a letter to Congress urgently calling for an extension of the renewable energy production tax credit, set to expire in 2013. Don&rsquo;t wait until the end of this year to extend it, they say, as it would mean the loss of an entire construction season for all their industries. I like to see renewables groups pushing together for support and I see it happening more, as concern about incentives mounts among all of us. The federal government could take a lesson from Oregon.
 As the state has shown, the biomass industry has an abundance of advantages to offer citizens, communities, states and even entire regions. The U.S. Midwest, for example, could benefit from existing resources in agriculture and purpose-grown biomass. In another feature in this issue, beginning on page 24, Associate Editor Anna Austin explores and expands upon existing research into the region&rsquo;s cropland biomass resources and their ability to jumpstart a robust bioenergy industry that stimulates the economy.&nbsp;
 The biomass industry is continually discovering more potential to flourish and make a difference in the U.S. domestic energy sector. This issue of Biomass Power &amp; Thermal highlights just a few intriguing opportunities in a growing list that includes feedstock options, as well as expansions of successful financial incentives.

2012/02/13298622252559.jpg

An Abundance of Opportunities 

In the age of abundant calls for smaller government and consolidated agencies, you&rsquo;d think that government agencies would be heeding the calls to scale back and cut unnecessary regulations that would cost significant time and funding for very little gain.
 The U.S. EPA is proposing to do just the opposite. The agency has refused to classify the waste wood used to generate biomass energy as a fuel, its historical classification. Instead, EPA may treat the material as a waste in the same category of material that goes to a landfill.
 This seemingly small change has surprisingly large implications for our industry. It would render unusable several types of traditionally accepted materials used for biomass power generation. Materials like urban waste wood, such as pallets after they are used for construction, would be redirected from biomass facilities to landfills. This would cause the twin consequences of clogging up the precious little space in landfills, and the release of methane gas, a greenhouse gas that&rsquo;s 25 times more harmful than carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere.
 Using these materials in the generation of biomass energy, however, allows for the capture of harmful gases along with the support of hundreds of jobs and the production of thousands of megawatts of renewable energy. This is why many states, including Maine, New York and California, recognize urban waste wood and other similar materials as fuel instead of waste, allowing the biomass industry to use them to their full potential.
 If the EPA were to codify this regulation, besides limiting the materials available to the biomass industry, the agency would be required to devote untold hundreds of hours of manpower to monitor and enforce these rules.&nbsp;
 The EPA is, by any measurement, currently stretched thin. Administrator Lisa Jackson has repeatedly acknowledged that the agency does not have the resources available to properly monitor the process of hydraulic fracturing if the EPA finds it contaminates drinking water. &ldquo;There is no EPA setup that allows us to oversee each and every well that&rsquo;s drilled,&rdquo; she said during a February teleconference hosted by the American Sustainable Business Council, before going on to say that the agency will continue to focus on the &ldquo;big things.&rdquo;
 The re-regulation of certain types of wood waste as waste instead of fuel is a small thing that will reap very little in terms of improved air or water quality, at the big cost of removing a sizable portion of fuel used by the biomass industry. Author: Bob Cleaves President and CEO, Biomass Power Association <a href="http://www.USABiomass.org">www.USABiomass.org</a>

2012/02/13298623442233.jpg

Small Government, Big Changes to Biomass Regulations 

According to the U.S. DOE&rsquo;s Billion-Ton Update, more than 500 million tons of solid biomass waste is produced in the U.S. annually, and that figure is estimated to expand beyond 1 billion tons by 2022. As the country's energy policy evolves and the biomass waste industry continues to grow, solid biofuels will become a staple of American energy. In order for that to occur, biomass energy projects need to continue to be successful, and that requires consideration of several factors.
 A successful biomass project should have a well-defined fuel source, as well as properly sized and selected equipment. The primary focus at the front end of every solid biofuels project is identifying the potential feedstock source. Currently, potential biomass sources must always be verified through chemical and physical analysis to ensure the fuel is compatible with the thermal equipment for achieving complete combustion and emissions compliance. Solid biofuels can vary in calorific value, moisture content, and ash content based on class, region, and climate, even on a load-to-load basis. Because of these variations, equipment performance and project economics are at risk of degradation without a proper, uniform definition for solid biofuels.
 Currently, domestic feedstock sources are defined by thermal conversion equipment suppliers or by solid biofuel producers, generally according to different terms.&nbsp; Equipment suppliers are typically focused on a performance-basis, while solid biofuel producers are focused on a value-basis. Unfortunately, this leads to inconsistencies in definitions of solid biofuel quality, quantity, and value, creating uncertainty for both users and providers. This uncertainty creates a level of perceived risk from an economic perspective.&nbsp;
 At the Pacific West Biomass Conference &amp; Trade Show in January, much discussion was focused on the standardization of a solid biofuels definition, with the goal of achieving commoditization. A proper definition on a standardized basis is needed to ensure that the user is able to source compatible solid biofuels of a consistent quality, quantity, and value. The European Commission has developed and implemented standardized specifications and classes for solid biofuels according to CEN/TC 335. They eliminate the ambiguity between users and providers for sourcing and selling solid biofuels. Establishing solid biofuels as commoditized products also allows for a consistent basis of trade throughout the U.S., independent of localized factors.
 Universities and energy policy advocates are the most likely candidates to implement this level of standardization in the U.S. The development of terms and definitions is the first step, followed by advocacy and acceptance by the industry. When this occurs, consumers and producers will have a standardized basis to fulfill performance and value requirements while mitigating biomass energy project risks. This will accelerate the growth of the solid biofuel market and effectively utilize the 1 billion tons of solid biomass waste estimated to be produced annually over the next 10 years. Author: Joshua Holmes Vice President for System Development Alternative Energy Solutions International, Inc. BTEC member <a href="http://www.aesintl.net">www.aesintl.net </a>

2012/02/13298624924445.jpg

Fueling America: The Need for Standardization of Solid Biofuels

As I described in my February Biomass Power &amp; Thermal column, the Energy &amp; Environmental Research Center has built and tested a mobile system for converting wood waste into liquid products such as methanol. The system uses a unique gasifier to convert the wood waste into synthesis gas, which is cleaned, compressed, and converted in a reactor to a variety of possible liquid products. We have initially focused on the production of methanol because it can easily be reformed into hydrogen to power fuel cells to make electricity at remote sites distanced from the biomass resource. The gasifier was specifically designed by the EERC to handle wet wood waste with up to 40 percent moisture, thereby eliminating the need to separately dry the wood before gasification, as most commercial gasification units require.
 We have found that the maximum wood feed rate of the system is largely determined by the size of the compressor that can fit on the trailer. The production rate of methanol is greatly enhanced at higher pressures, so we compress the gas to 900 pounds per square inch (psi) before it enters the gas-to-liquids reactor. Given our current configuration, we are limited to converting approximately 160 standard cubic feet per minute of gas into methanol liquids using a system mounted on a single trailer. This is the amount of gas produced from gasifying approximately 200 pounds of wet wood per hour. The information gained from recent tests was used to validate a computer model of the system based on gas production rates and composition. Using the model results, engineers have come up with several improvements to the system that should increase the hydrogen content of the syngas and permit production rates as high as 100 gallons per ton.
 At that production rate, the 300,000 tons of unused forest residue produced each year in Minnesota could be converted to approximately 30 million gallons of methanol. A fuel cell uses approximately 1 gallon of methanol to create 5 kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity, so 30 million gallons of methanol could be used to create 150,000 megawatt hours (MWh) of electricity by fuel cell in remote locations. The system is primarily operated via computer control that can be largely automated. This method, rather than continuous monitoring, significantly reduces labor requirements of handling upset conditions such as plugged filters. Therefore, the system is designed for sites where labor is available sporadically from other ongoing activities, significantly reducing labor costs.
 One of the biggest operating costs comes with the electricity needed to run the compressor. One way to reduce this cost is to use excess syngas to fire a modified generator to produce the electricity on-site, a technology that the EERC is currently developing in cooperation with a generator manufacturer. If we assume that electricity is purchased at 7 cents per kWh, then production cost predictions are $1.58 per gallon using grid power, but as low as 95 cents per gallon if electricity is produced using excess syngas. Both of these costs are based on using wood waste that has no commercial value and is, therefore, free of charge.
 In addition to the operating cost, the capital cost of the system must be paid off. We estimate that the cost of the trailer-mounted system with an additional syngas-fired generator and other improvements to increase the production rate to 100 gallons per ton would be approximately $1 million. Assuming an 8 percent interest rate and payoff of the loan over 10 years, the combined capital and operating cost is approximately $3.05 per gallon using grid power, or $2.59 per gallon using onboard generation. These costs are considerably higher than the current delivered cost of methanol created from natural gas, especially because of the low cost of shale gas being produced. In some situations, however, even these relatively high costs are acceptable. This is particularly true of operation in remote locations where the delivered cost of methanol may be very high, or in cases where additional incentives, such as carbon credits, are available. More commonly, production of other liquids, such as Fischer&ndash;Tropsch fuels or other organic chemicals, might be more economical at this time than methanol, at least at the scale of a mobile system mounted on a single trailer. Project funding is provided by Xcel Energy customers through a grant from the Renewable Development Fund and the U.S. DOE. Author: John P. Hurley Senior Research Advisor, EERC (701) 777-5159 <a href="mailto:jhurley@undeerc.org">jhurley@undeerc.org</a>

2012/02/13298626930774.jpg

Economic Analysis of a Mobile Indirect Biomass Liquefaction System

Biomass facilities are a great source of renewable energy, but difficult to develop and finance. Despite their typically smaller size (usually 50 MW or less) their complexity is significant. Developers must secure financeable fuel supply agreements outlining appropriate term, quantity, quality and price with a creditworthy counterparty, obtain a financeable power purchase agreement, and have a thick skin and capital to get through permitting and the inevitable public relations fight.
 With a financeable project, the developer can arrange permanent financing, which can be leveraged or unleveraged. Recently, most transactions have been leveraged to achieve the desired returns, with the equity component comprising 30 to 50 percent of the total capital costs. The balance of the permanent financing will be debt financed.
 Debt financing for biomass projects will usually be structured as non-recourse, relying on the project&rsquo;s assets as collateral and looking to the cash flow for debt service. The lenders will generally not have any recourse to the sponsor or other equity investors. Leverage at the project level will increase equity returns but also require higher tax equity returns and increase complexity. For these reasons, sponsors will sometimes seek to instead back lever projects.
 Banks or institutional lenders are the primary sources of debt financing. The lenders active in the space are experienced and knowledgeable, which is critical to successfully completing the debt financing. For banks, tenors have recently lengthened to as long as 15 to 17 years for a fully amortizing loan. Institutional lenders will typically be longer term, 20 to 25 years, but with higher rates.
 Perhaps the cheapest debt, but easily the most time consuming, is commercial loans backed by the USDA and the U.S. DOE. The terms of the loan will be determined by the commercial bank but the loan guaranty increases the credit support and reduces the interest rate. Significant downsides to these loan guaranty programs include the time, upfront cost and complexity of getting them completed.
 Other federal financing programs include tax-exempt bonds, such as Clean Renewable Energy Bonds, bonds backed by loan guaranties under USDA Section 9003, and New Market Tax Credits. The CREBS have not been widely used for various reasons. The Section 9003 program was not overly successful because lenders did not offer terms to successfully finance projects. As recently revised, Section 9003 loan guaranties can backstop bonds issued by the company in a private placement to qualified buyers. The funds are then held by a commercial bank as a trustee.
 The New Market Tax Credits program allocates tax credits to community development organizations (CDO) to create jobs and economic development in low-income areas. An investor will fund a developer&rsquo;s project through the CDO in return for federal tax credits at 39 percent. A CDO typically allocates about $10 million to a single project. If a project needs $50 million of NMTCs, the sponsor will need five CDOs to participate. NMTC transactions are very complex and a developer needs to work with experienced advisors.
 Equipment vendors and EPC (engineering, procurement and construction) contractors may also be a good source of permanent financing, as well as equipment or construction financing. Foreign vendors generally will have limited or no ability to use federal tax credits, so may not be a source of tax equity. Vendors who invest in the project may also have concerns about accounting treatment for various items, including consolidation of the project liabilities and the character and timing of revenue recognition.
 Finally, debt financing through private placements of debt or bond offerings are gaining attention with very low rates and terms of 25 to 30 years. Securitization is difficult to combine with tax equity in a single project, so is more efficient for financing a portfolio of projects to achieve the scale needed by institutional investors.
 With so much complexity, it can be nearly impossible to determine the right approach (or approaches) and to secure that particular type of financing. A sponsor would be well-served to focus on a few key items. First, make sure your project is solid and financeable. Second, understand your financial model and what cost of capital is needed to make the project successful. Finally, make sure your advisors and counterparties have experience with the development of biomass projects and the financial structures being proposed. Development and financing of a biomass project is complex. Don&rsquo;t reinvent the wheel unless it is your only option, or there is a very real and significant benefit. Author: David Benson Partner, Stoel Rives LLP (206) 817-7470 <a href="mailto:dlbenson@stoel.com">dlbenson@stoel.com</a>

2012/02/13298628376625.jpg

Arranging Debt Financing for Biomass Projects

Negroponte joins Greenwood Energy as senior advisor John Negroponte, former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State and Ambassador to the United Nations, has joined Greenwood Energy as senior advisor and board member. Negroponte will provide strategic advice and senior counsel to Greenwood&rsquo;s management as it continues to build its platform of investment in both the renewable fuel and clean energy sectors. Founded to repurpose industrial waste into fuel pellets, Greenwood Energy is now a growing provider in North America that incorporates a clean power division deploying the latest research in fuel cell technology and energy efficiency. Negroponte also serves as an advisor to the board for the Libra Group, Greenwood&rsquo;s parent company, which has additional renewable energy interests in EuroEnergy, the European operator of wind farms, solar parks and biomass plants.&nbsp;
 DP CleanTech expands into the UK biomass market DP CleanTech has set up an office in Wolverhampton, U.K., the company&rsquo;s fourth strategic investment in the past year. The announcement follows the recent opening of new offices and manufacturing facilities in Thailand and Poland. DP CleanTech executives expect the U.K. market to be promising because of its energy initiatives, including the Renewable Heat Incentive. The world's largest straw-fired plant, a 38 MW facility in Ely, Cambridgeshire, uses DP CleanTech&rsquo;s highly acclaimed straw-firing technology.&nbsp; Founded in 2004, DP CleanTech designs, engineers, manufactures and commissions biomass and waste-to-energy power plants, providing complete solutions for turning waste materials into clean energy. Partners introduce gasification burner system Green Clean Heat of Newton, N.H., and Nord Energy Systems, Rowayton, Conn., have formed a joint venture aimed at providing economical, high-efficiency heating systems. The Nord Energy Gasification Burner is a heating unit designed to replace oil burners in furnaces and boilers used in residential and small commercial applications. Green Clean Heat will provide ready-to-install systems for schools, municipal buildings, hospitals, condominiums, and other commercial and industrial facilities. The Gasification Burner uses computer controls to ensure the high-efficiency gasification and combustion of biomass resources such as pellets and wood chips. Nord Energy Systems is a research and development organization specializing in high-efficiency biomass-based heating and power generating systems.
 Ineos Bio chooses AMEC as license support engineering firm Ineos Bio has selected AMEC, an international engineering company, to be its global license support engineering firm, as the company rolls out its licensing program for the Ineos Bio advanced bioenergy technology. AMEC will work with Ineos Bio to develop engineering design packages for future Ineos Bio technology licensees.&nbsp; AMEC was selected following an extensive evaluation process of qualified global engineering firms. The value of the contract has not been announced. AMEC&rsquo;s experience in similar markets, along with its dedication to sustainable business practices makes it an ideal license support contractor for Ineos Bio. The two companies are currently working together on the first commercial-scale facility to deploy the waste-to-bioenergy technology. Slated to come online this year, the Indian River BioEnergy Center in Vero Beach, Fla., will produce 8 million gallons of advanced cellulosic ethanol and 6 MW of power, while providing a solution for dealing with waste that would normally end up in a landfill.&nbsp; Koller joins Vecoplan as sales, project management engineer Lars Koller joined Vecoplan LLC, a size-reduction technology supplier, as a sales and project management engineer. Koller earned an advanced mechanical engineering degree from the University of Hannover, Germany, in 2001. He brings 10 years of engineering experience from Focke &amp; Co., having first worked in research and development at Focke&rsquo;s Verden, Germany, headquarters and then as manager of the design department at Focke&rsquo;s Whitsett, N.C., facility. Koller&rsquo;s responsibilities will include coordinating the design and development of turnkey shredding systems for the recycling sector. He will also oversee the manufacturing and implementation of his projects once the engineering phase has been completed, ensuring continuous quality control throughout the process.

2012/02/13298629633627.jpg

Business Briefs

The third annual Pacific West Biomass Conference &amp; Trade Show, held in San Francisco, Calif., Jan. 16-18, welcomed more than 400 attendees, exhibitors, and presenters to examine and discuss the region&rsquo;s most pressing, innovative and challenging bioenergy industry issues and ideas.&nbsp;&nbsp;
 Keynote speaker Mike Hart, CEO of Sierra Energy, emphasized the versatility of synthesis gas, and how the value of biomass&mdash;particularly municipal solid waste (MSW)&mdash;will drastically increase over the next couple decades.
 Hart believes trash will become a valuable commodity as waste conversion technologies become widely implemented.&nbsp; &ldquo;As time goes on, we&rsquo;re going to be buying it and making competitive bids,&rdquo; he said, adding that feedstock flexibility will become a dominant factor in the biomass energy industry.
 Hart sees a game changer on the horizon for feedstock procurement: suppliers paying biomass plants to take feedstock, rather than plants paying for their feedstock. As trash becomes a commodity, companies that designed technologies based on a feedstock that was typically free will realize the economics of their system no longer work. &ldquo;This is because people with waste products will realize they have another product to sell,&rdquo; Hart said. &ldquo;My expectation is that we will see this with garbage.&rdquo;
 He added that landfills will become a thing of the past because of carbon taxes, decreased tip fees, and local governments looking for ways to turn waste into a profit, or reduce the substantial cost of paying somebody to take it.
 Following Hart, the event&rsquo;s opening general session featured current trends in financing mechanisms. The panel, titled &ldquo;Financing Strategies for Biomass-Derived, Energy, Fuels and Chemicals in a Tight Capital Market,&rdquo; offered three very different investment perspectives.
 Bill Lemon, senior vice president of investment banking at Source Capital Group Inc., opened the discussion by noting that biomass developers are in the big leagues now, and attracting investment will be a challenge. &ldquo;There is a lot of money at stake, lots of technical complications, political complications, and lots of headaches,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;But, the basics of good projects haven&rsquo;t changed.&rdquo;
 Different types of investors are attracted to different aspects of a project, Lemon said, and developers need to understand the type of investor they are hoping to attract.
 John May, managing director at Stern Brothers and Co., said biomass projects have traditionally trailed behind other types of renewable energy when it comes to access to capital. He also noted that the bond market is wide open. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a trillion dollar market, it&rsquo;s very liquid&hellip;and it&rsquo;s a market that will look at projects that are trying to get technology commercialized&hellip;or trying to scale,&rdquo; he said.
 New biomass conversion and energy projects will seem risky in an investor&rsquo;s eyes, May continued. &ldquo;The issue is how can we attack the perception of that risk, and how do we mitigate that risk,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;I think [the reason] we haven&rsquo;t gotten that many biomass projects financed with non-recourse debt and with traditional institutional equity is we haven&rsquo;t solved that problem yet.&rdquo;
 Paul Tantillo, managing member of Enervation Advisors LLC, an alternative energy advisor and investor, finished up the general session describing several ways a company can better attract interest from his firm and other potential investors. Most important, he said developers should be bold, but also honest and direct. &ldquo;Don&rsquo;t sugarcoat the situation,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;If the pitch seems too good to be true, it probably is.&rdquo;
&mdash;Anna Austin and Erin Voegele

SETTING THE STAGE: Speakers on the first general session panel at the Pacific West Biomass Conference & Trade Show included (from left) moderator Bruce Manchester, McGladrey Capital Markets LLC; John May, Stern Brothers & Co.; Bill Lemon, Source Capi

2012/02/13298633265049.jpg

More than 400 professionals gather to talk biomass in The City by the Bay 

Golden Gate to Biomass  

The Pacific West Biomass Conference &amp; Trade Show kicked off with a day-long tour that featured one of the country&rsquo;s most innovative wastewater treatment plants, as well as an on-farm dairy digester power system.
 The city of Santa Rosa&rsquo;s 21-million-gallon-per-day Laguna Wastewater Treatment Plant houses four 1-million-gallon anaerobic digesters that turn sludge separated from the water into Class B biosolids, which are sent across the street to a facility that transforms them into Class A biosolids.
 Biogas emitted from the digesters is blended to a 50/50 mix with utility gas and is then combusted by three 0.8 MW engines to create a total of one-third of the plant&rsquo;s electrical needs. A combined-heat- and-power (CHP) project to replace the existing facility is expected to be finished in December, according to Cayden Hare, city intern and aquatic biomass program lead researcher.
 When that&rsquo;s complete, four 1 MW engine generators will burn the biogas, and serve as standby power for the plant&rsquo;s needs during utility outages.
 Uniquely, some of the plant&rsquo;s wastewaster is diverted to six channelized wetlands, where aquatic biomass cleans the water, absorbs pollutants and is allowed to grow. The biomass is eventually transferred into two 1,500-gallon vertical anaerobic digesters, Hare explained, along with waste glycerol and winery leaves. The resulting biogas is used to power small cars used on site, according to Hare, and the remaining half of the materials are composted.
 At the Giacomini Dairy at Point Reyes, Calif., tour attendees viewed an ambient temperature, covered lagoon anaerobic digester fueled with manure from about 350 cows.
 With financial aid from the USDA and other government grant programs, the digester has been operating 24/7 for the past two years, according to digester technician Douglas Williams. Biogas emitted from the digester is captured through a gas collection system and then piped to a gas handling system.
 Electricity produced from the biogas via an 80 kilowatt generator powers the farm&rsquo;s operations, and excess electricity is purchased by electric utility PG&amp;E, according to Williams. &ldquo;There&rsquo;s also a CHP aspect, as heat coming off the engine is used in the dairy and creamery,&rdquo; he said.
&mdash;Anna Austin

'TANK' IT ALL IN: Anaerobic digesters at the Laguna Wastewater Treatment Plant process aquatic biomass, waste glycerol and winery leaves.

2012/02/13298634315986.jpg

Conference tour visits wastewater treatment plant, dairy digester


Digesting California's Innovations

During the second-day plenary session of the Pacific West Biomass Conference &amp; Trade Show in San Francisco, the hot topic was wood-to-energy carbon cycles and their relation to forest management. Session speakers presented and dissected new research and the most recent studies relating to biomass carbon accounting, including a widely publicized report authored by Oregon State University College of Forestry researchers. Titled &ldquo;Regional Carbon Dioxide Implications of Forest Bioenergy Production,&rdquo; the study concluded that production of bioenergy from U.S. West Coast forests would increase carbon dioxide emissions from 2 to 14 percent over the next 20 years.
 Although not one of the study&rsquo;s authors, presenter Norm Johnson of the same OSU department discussed the findings, pointing out that the key phrase repeated in media headlines was &ldquo;biofuel production will increase carbon emissions.&rdquo; &ldquo;Now that&rsquo;s counter to what has been said and understood by many people, including myself,&rdquo; he said.
 Emphasizing that the report was performed by top-of-the-line scientists, Johnson referred to it as &ldquo;wild science,&rdquo; but pointed out that if researchers didn&rsquo;t do studies such as this one, people might still believe the sun revolved around the earth. &ldquo;It opens up new avenues of thought, analysis and controversy, and it&rsquo;s not going away soon; it&rsquo;s not easily dismissed, it&rsquo;s a serious work.&rdquo;
 However, the report has a very specific point of view and looks out only 20 years&mdash;a very short time&mdash;and the outcome would be different if it accounted for a more expanded time period, according to Johnson. &ldquo;They don&rsquo;t look at the longer picture, and it&rsquo;s hard to argue that harvesting trees reduces carbon emissions in the short term, unless it results in greatly reduced mortality in the forests due to various threats, or through selection of building materials,&rdquo; he said. &ldquo;We have shorter-term goals that are important, and we&rsquo;re headed into a pretty intense period of discussion of what all this means.&rdquo;
&nbsp; Joining Johnson on the panel were Jeremy Fried, research forester at the U.S. Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, and Bill Stewart, cooperative extension specialist at the University of California&ndash;Berkeley.
&mdash;Anna Austin

EXPLAINING EMISSIONS: Norm Johnson speaks to conference attendees about wood-to-energy carbon cycles. 


2012/02/13298635280775.jpg

Conference general session hashes out bioenergy carbon cycles

The Carbon Conversation 

Ask Markus Huwener, former investment banker from Germany and now CEO of First Climate, which biomass feedstock is best for power or thermal energy generation, and he might first tell you about First Biomass.
 First Climate is a carbon funds management company that has invested roughly $309 million in emissions reductions technology. Formed through an Australian joint venture between First Climate and Spar Capital, First Biomass functions as an equity investment fund for pelletizing operations across the world.&nbsp;
 It doesn&rsquo;t matter what the biomass resource is. Huwener and his team at First Biomass plan to utilize pellets made from woody residues, straw, bagasse, rice husks and more. The team views Europe as a great offtake user for its pellet supply, but the company also sees China and Japan as intriguing users. The company&rsquo;s strategic investment plan is simple: acquire, hold, manage and trade interests in a portfolio of biomass pellet production investments, all while keeping that portfolio diversified by source biomass, end contractor and geographic location of plants. The company has already made investments in nearly 25 different pellet projects.
 &ldquo;Over the past several years, we have seen a lot of biomass projects that failed due to one or another factor,&rdquo; Huwener says. &ldquo;The main challenge for First Biomass would be to originate good, solid projects.&rdquo; That means projects located in favorable areas that provide a sufficient source of feedstock and can be managed by a proven professional team. Although Huwener&rsquo;s perspective on creating a successful biomass feedstock supply chain seems to meet the status quo of project development in the biomass sector, his company&rsquo;s willingness to overcome the unfavorable capital market conditions might be the main lesson.
 &nbsp;Unfortunately, the pellet plants that would have supplied the demand of Japan or Europe are off the table. Instead, First Biomass has embarked on a $100 million pre-initial public offering (IPO) funding round that will net long-term investors a cash flow return per year of 15 percent, in advance of another shot at a successful IPO slated for 2013. Given that, and the upward trajectory of pellet demand in Europe, the company&rsquo;s unwillingness to test the IPO market to raise the equity needed to create a global supply chain might be a good thing after all.
&mdash;Luke Geiver

STOCKPILE UTILIZATION: First Biomass will help supply global bioenergy demand, using sugarcane bagasse stockpiles. 

2012/02/13298636179294.jpg

First Biomass aims to be a global pellet supplier

Global Supply Chain Glory   

A new partnership program recently launched by Genencor aims to help the protein and enzyme giant &ldquo;establish something that hasn&rsquo;t been here before,&rdquo; according to Stan Mainzer, vice president of business development. That &ldquo;thing&rdquo; Mainzer refers to can be anything, as long as it involves water, energy or air. Mainzer explained the idea behind that partnering program, GNext, and what it might mean for his company and those that are fortunate enough to partner.
&ldquo;GNext is an open innovation platform that offers Genencor a route to expand into fields of air, water and energy&mdash;a few of the major societal needs of the 21st century,&rdquo; he says. To do so, Mainzer and his team are looking for big, medium or even startup companies &ldquo;that have truly breakthrough or disruptive solutions.&rdquo; Those companies from his estimations will be in need of Genencor&rsquo;s suite of services, which include discovery, engineering, scale-up and distribution of enzymes, proteins or microorganisms used for industrial applications.
As an example of a company that Genencor has already worked with through the GNext concept, Mainzer points to DuPont Danisco Cellulosic Ethanol, which used Genencor&rsquo;s enzyme technology to produce fermentable sugars at a competitive price point on a commercial scale. The work of Genencor with DuPont has led the joint-venture to Nevada, Iowa, where a 27 MMgy cellulosic ethanol facility is scheduled to break ground in 2012. But projects on that scale aren&rsquo;t the only kinds the GNext platform will take on.
&ldquo;We are currently working with several startups that require a protein or enzyme as a key element of their development. These companies, for example,&rdquo; he says, &ldquo;discovered that engineering, scale-up and supply of enzymes or proteins is beyond their expertise or capabilities and appreciate Genencor&rsquo;s reliability and competency in providing the needed technology.&rdquo;
For Mainzer and his GNext team, the goal for the future is simple: &ldquo;Develop a portfolio of partner companies who are developing solutions to the big societal needs in the areas of air, water and energy.&rdquo; Why? &ldquo;We&rsquo;ve learned that close collaboration or partnership drives success more easily than attempting these challenges alone,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Finding the right partner with a shared vision, the complimentary experience and the desire to win are a few keys to success.&rdquo;
Although the idea in the bioenergy world that the most efficient and economical approach to making a project reach commercialization is through a partnership, Mainzer also puts it very bluntly. &ldquo;We are looking for people with ideas from the outside to challenge us.&rdquo; To contact the GNext team, visit Genencor&rsquo;s GNext webpage.&nbsp;
&mdash;Luke Geiver

A new partnering program could help Genencor, and you

Genencor Wants a Challenge

To say that there was a sense of excitement or a positive buzz at the 2011 Algae Biomass Summit would be a gross understatement. Spending four days in Minneapolis amidst the largest and most impressive gathering of algae experts in academia, private business and government institutions, would convince anyone that in the algae industry today there is a whole lot more to the story than buzz or excitement. As the summit revealed, the industry is shifting to a more serious context and real-time vision of what the algae industry is, and what it has already accomplished, more so than the simple promise of dreams. More than anything, in those four days of talking with people, listening to them, admittedly overhearing conversations, it became clear that this sector is best described by two words, one of which is diversity. And the executives of five well-established algae companies exemplify the vast diversity that exists.
On a featured panel designed to update attendees on the state of several major algae companies, one executive explained plans to farm and refine algae on a massive scale to provide liquid transportation fuel; another provided proof that co-locating an algae growing operation at an ethanol plant works; and yet another executive detailed an operation that simply uses algae to produce ethanol.
From the number of different utilization approaches alone, the outlook for 2012 cannot be defined by one pathway as that feature panel showed, rather it needs to include everything from nutraceutical use to fish feed to algae crude oil. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s going to be a very interesting story in 2012,&rdquo; said Paul Woods, founder of Florida-based algae-to-ethanol producer Algenol, adding that it will be an exciting year. Even so, the real story of the algae industry today and tomorrow wouldn&rsquo;t be complete without the other word that best describes the general mood during the conference: opportunity. Payback Potential
Cynthia J. Warner, former BP executive and now president of Sapphire Energy, says there is nothing like feeling the actual vibration of 200,000 barrels a day of petroleum flying by you in a pipeline. Part of the reason she left petroleum and joined the algae team at Sapphire was because she realized the oil industry was not only maturing, but also depleting. &ldquo;The bottom line is that we have a need for a sustainable source of liquid transportation fuel to supplement the world&rsquo;s supply of crude oil,&rdquo; she said.
According to Warner, the world crude oil demand of today is roughly 87 million barrels per day&mdash;the U.S. uses 20 million of those&mdash;&ldquo;a number that is a lot like the national debt,&rdquo; she explained. &ldquo;You can&rsquo;t actually relate to it because it is just so big.&rdquo; By 2030, demand will reach roughly 115 million barrels per day, making the payback potential &ldquo;enormous,&rdquo; she said.
Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., got a loud cheer from the crowd during his opening remarks about the need for new energy. &ldquo;We need to stop subsidizing dirty energy,&rdquo; Franken told the audience. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., also provided a clear vision regarding algae&rsquo;s potential in relation to fossil-based energy. &ldquo;Americans have shouldered these costs (oil subsidies) for too long,&rdquo; she said. &ldquo;Those companies no longer need those tax breaks and we can&rsquo;t afford them with the debt we are facing. This isn&rsquo;t about whether those oil companies deserve a profit. It&rsquo;s a question about whether the American people should pay the cost of providing preferential tax treatment to the five largest oil companies in the U.S., which have racked up almost $1 trillion in profits over the last decade.&rdquo;
Klobuchar insisted that if we are going to develop the next generation of biofuels and biobased products to break our dependence on foreign oils, &ldquo;our tax code needs to reflect that priority.&rdquo; In addition to a revamped tax code that would help algae companies compete with big oil, she also said the continued institution of the RFS2, in which algae-based advanced biofuel would qualify, will help develop not just algae, but the future of America&rsquo;s energy use.
The global consumption demand that Warner pointed out along with the political perspective from both Minnesota senators were just two of many areas in which the idea of opportunity showed up. Amy Bann, director of environment and aviation policy for Boeing spoke about the global aviation powerhouse&rsquo;s need for algae. &ldquo;Algae is really something that Boeing is committed to,&rdquo; she said. &ldquo;But not just Boeing, really the whole aviation industry, and so keep us in mind.&rdquo; For Boeing, she added, &ldquo;this is the alternative solution and we are going to keep pursuing it.&rdquo;
Why? For one, Bann explained, companies like the sustainability aspect of algae &ldquo;because you avoid some of the issues that happen with other pathways.&rdquo; She also explained the infrastructure is already in place to use algal biofuels. &ldquo;What I want for you to keep in mind as you produce algae and you look for end markets for your product,&rdquo; Bann said, &ldquo;is that there is not much here that needs to be done. There are not that many airports, the airlines are very united and there is a demand for this, and you don&rsquo;t need to change infrastructure.&rdquo;
But the opportunity for algae is more than the demand created from a global fossil-fuel source on the decline, political support or even the simple fact that aviation companies looking for an alternative energy source don&rsquo;t have the option of wind or solar power. As Life Technologies&rsquo; new media kit shows, algae companies now have the ability to skip past the tedious task of finding consistent testing methods and developmental lab tools. Dan Schroen of Life Technologies, a global synthetic biology company, says that his team&rsquo;s use of what it calls UCI, user centered innovation, has helped them develop a suite of tools ranging from media growth kits to algae strains to DNA vectors available to everyone from lab directors to industrial scientific companies such as Sapphire to find the next breakthrough. &ldquo;A lot of really smart researchers were spending more time on that&rdquo;&mdash;finding consistent and dependable testing tools&mdash;&ldquo;then developing the next breakthrough,&rdquo; Schroen says. Now, after research in the field and time spent with experts such as Stephen Mayfield from the University of California San Diego, Schroen is developing a kit that would help anyone interested in algae development. A simple catalog order can provide researchers with consistent products, including robust strains that have not been damaged by genetic drift, and vector maps that are up to date, all of which can be customized for specific strains, making the path to commercialization much quicker. How to Get Paid
Although the algae industry outlook for 2012 is based on an ever-growing list of fish food providers, nutraceutical ingredient providers or biofuel producers that are diverse in their vision and approach, all in combination with an overhanging cloud of opportunity, none of it matters if those visions don&rsquo;t produce a profit. To make sure those in the business don&rsquo;t mess up the chance for a positive financial return before their time comes, there are companies like Fortune 500, led by Bill Shireman, president and CEO. Shireman&rsquo;s company helps private companies join up with their &ldquo;enemies,&rdquo; as he said during his talk at the summit, helping to &ldquo;identify risks and find solutions.&rdquo;
One of the major issues facing algae companies and their future ability to turn a profit, he explained, is that &ldquo;the public has no clear perception about algae at this time.&rdquo; But, &ldquo;it will be determined by the actions that you take from here on out.&rdquo; The path from here, he said from experience with other companies, &ldquo;will take one of two narratives.&rdquo; The first narrative looks good, and includes the perception and truth about algae regarding energy, water consumption, CO2 reuse, and the ability to reduce our reliance on foreign oil. The second, however, is much bleaker, and includes the ideas that algae could someday cause more global harm than good, or it will be overtaken by global companies and it will induce major water-use problems.
&ldquo;Those are the two narratives that you can choose from, and the narrative that gets the most play will depend on how well you engage with the stakeholder community right now,&rdquo; he said. It also depends on how well algae companies perform &ldquo;as an industry across the issues that are raised in those narratives.&rdquo;
Shireman&rsquo;s advice is to take all issues seriously, recognizing each before it happens. &ldquo;The big mistake,&rdquo; he said, &ldquo;is when you counterattack,&rdquo; instead of acting first.
Tensie Whelan, president of the Rainforest Alliance, also agreed with Shireman, pointing out the importance of stakeholder involvement early on, as well as the development of common sustainability standards created by all stakeholders as a common point of reference when speaking about an algae-related business.
There are two times when a company should engage with stakeholders: pre-crisis and post-crisis. And there are two models of engagement that work: a more formal stakeholder meeting where a company can pitch itself, or one-on-one conversations with potential stakeholders. The formal approach, although successful, limits a company to the stakeholders that it thinks are right, while the less formal approach allows a company to feel out who the right partners might be based on common interests provided by both parties. When a crisis hits, those stakeholders with a shared interest will be there to help provide positive feedback and positive perspective.
As Tom Byrne, owner of Byrne and Co. Ltd., mentioned at one point during the conference, it might not always matter how well an algae company has aligned its stakeholders, proven out technology or addressed outside issues. &ldquo;You will hear some things you want to hear,&rdquo; he said, &ldquo;and you will hear some things you don&rsquo;t.&rdquo; Given Byrne&rsquo;s perspective, combined with a history of algae companies making big claims without providing results, not to mention recent milestones and small achievements by several of the companies at the summit that have broken ground, proven technology at some level, or achieved what they said they would, the words of Mark Allen, vice president of Accelergy Corp., could be taken two ways. What he said during his introduction of Franken might be, just as Byrne said, something you want to hear, or something you don&rsquo;t. &ldquo;We are on the verge of breaking out on a global scale,&rdquo; he said. For some, this rings positive. Others may hear it as just another statement from an emerging industry perpetually stuck on the verge. Author: Luke Geiver Associate Editor, Biorefining Magazine (701) 738-4944 <a href="mailto:lgeiver@bbiinternational.com">lgeiver@bbiinternational.com</a>

A review of the Algae Biomass Summit and the state of the industry

Four Days in the Algae Epicenter

There was a time about 30 years ago after two debilitating energy crises of the 1970s when bioplastics represented 15 percent of the global plastics industry. Today, bioplastics account for less than 1 percent of the 230 million tons (460 billion pounds) of polymers generated globally. Why? It comes down to price and performance, according to Keith Masavage, chief of strategy and operations for Biobent Polymers, a division of Univenture Inc., headquartered in Marysville, Ohio. The company produces a line of biobased polypropylene and polyethylene resins from inedible soy meal using a Battelle-developed process. &ldquo;When people did start feeling more pressure from ecogroups, lobbyists and consumers to have more ecofriendly products, people came out with [bioplastics], but they always tended to have a fairly high price tag and they tended to be bioplastics that were made with just fillers,&rdquo; Masavage tells Biorefining Magazine. The price was high, the performance was low, and the market shrunk. &ldquo;The real panacea for this industry is a bioplastic that has some level of renewability and has performance on par with petroleum-based resins and can do so with competitive prices,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re trying not to have to invent or expose people to new technologies or new processing techniques that have never existed before. We literally want this to be a kind of a drop in-and-go. I think that&rsquo;s really where the industry needs to go.&rdquo; Enter today&rsquo;s bioplastics: not just crude fillers, but sophisticated biobased polymers that match petroleum plastics in chemistry and performance.&nbsp;
As the price of oil shows no signs of declining, ancillary factors like consumer appeal for sustainable products and packaging, human health concerns coupled with favorable governmental policies likely will drive a surge in global demand for bioplastics in the coming year. As a result, the next decade will see a fundamental shift in global polymer production with a new set of biobased capacities to come online. In a report released earlier this year, industry association European Bioplastics forecasted global bioplastic production capacity to surpass 1 million tons this year with production to more than double from 2010 to 2015. In addition, the report indicated that bioplastics would total 1.7 million tons by 2015, up from around 700,000 tons in 2010.
Central to this growth is the rapid expansion of bioplastics into an ever-increasing number of applications, ranging from beverage bottles in the packaging segment to keyboards in the consumer electronics segment. Depending on the application, the different types of bioplastics are processed in polymers that are either biodegradable such as starch-based plastics or polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHAs) and/or biobased, nonbiodegradable commodity plastics such as biobased polyethylene and polyethylene terephthalate (PET).
According to Massachusetts-based global market analyst firm BCC Research, the global biodegradable polymers market is expected to reach 932 million pounds yet this year and increase to 2.5 billion pounds by 2016 at a compound annual growth rate of 22 percent for the five-year period. The market reached 771 million pounds in 2010. The packaging segment accounted for 70 percent of the market in terms of total volume in 2010. This sector reportedly will reach 656 million pounds this year and should increase to 1.7 million pounds by 2016, according to BCC Research.
Although the outlook for bioplastics looks promising, cumulative annual projected growth rates for bioplastics should be taken with a grain of salt due to its size relative to the petrochemical-based polymer market, according to Jim Lunt, managing director for Jim Lunt &amp; Associates LLC, a consultant firm that specializes in the polymer, fiber, foams, thermoplastic elastomers, films and molded products industries headquartered in Wayzata, Minn.
&ldquo;The reason that you&rsquo;re seeing such high growth rates goes back to the fact that the industry is so small,&rdquo; Lunt explains, providing the applied analogy, &ldquo;If you have one penny and you make two pennies, then you&rsquo;ve grown 100 percent.&rdquo;
Market Share Showdown
According to Lunt, the existing conventional plastics market is divided into five primary segments: polypropylene, polyethylene, polystyrene, PET, thermoset urethanes and thermoset polyurethanes, all of which are becoming targets for biomaterials. The first-generation of bioplastics like NatureWorks LLC with its biobased polylactic acid, and starch-blend resin manufacturers like Cereplast Inc., Novamont, Biome in the United Kingdom, to name a few, are dominating the bioplastic market, accounting for nearly 90 percent of the entire bioplastic market combined between them, according to Lunt.
NatureWorks currently owns and operates a 300-million-pound-per-year bioPLA manufacturing plant in Blair, Neb., where it produces its trademarked Ingeo brand of bioplastic. Now 50 percent owned by PTT Chemical Public Co. Ltd., Thailand&rsquo;s largest chemical producer, Steve Davies, NatureWorks&rsquo; global director for marketing and public affairs, says the company has its sights set on building a second PLA production facility together with PTT Chemical in Thailand, slated to come online by 2015.
&ldquo;With our current growth&mdash;20 to 30 percent this year&mdash;it&rsquo;s clear to us we need more capacity to meet the market demand in the next two to three years,&rdquo; Davies says. While bioPLA has established a global presence as NatureWorks&rsquo; first platform, Davies says, &ldquo;We never intended that being all that we look at.&rdquo;
Another major bioPLA contributor is Dutch-based Purac, which continues to make strides in the global market. Purac, a subsidiary of global bakery ingredients supplier CSM, currently has five lactic acid production units globally, including a facility owned and operated by Purac in Blair, Neb. At a capacity of 150 million pounds per year, the plant produces lactic acid through a sugar-based fermentation process. Previously, the Nebraska facility was a joint venture between Purac and Cargill&rsquo;s North American Corn Milling Division.
According to Francois de Bie, Purac&rsquo;s global marketing director of PLA and biobased building blocks, the company saw rapid growth of PLA-based products this year and expects to see increased growth in 2012, much of which is expected to occur in Europe. &ldquo;For 2011, the growth versus 2010 was in excess of 50 percent,&rdquo; de Bie says. &ldquo;With many key brand owners now actively using PLA, we expect this high growth rate to continue.&rdquo;
For Cereplast, the company believes regulatory restrictions in areas such as outlawing plastic bags will drive global demand for bioplastics. Cereplast entered into seven distribution agreements in Europe since the beginning of 2011. According to Nicole Cardi, vice president of marketing and communications, the surge in demand for bioplastic materials in the region has been fueled by new governmental policies, which started with restrictions on the use of traditional plastic bags and is now moving toward changes in legislation on use of flexible and rigid packaging. &ldquo;As these laws are passed, European manufacturers need to identify alternatives to comply with these new mandates,&rdquo; Cardi says, adding that the U.S. could follow suit soon. &ldquo;The ban on plastic bags is becoming more common and widespread in the U.S. That said, an increasing number of cities and municipalities will need to consider alternative materials for providing bags to their customers.&rdquo;
The extension of first-generation PLA and starch blends, according to Lunt, are biobased PHAs, such as what Telles, a joint venture between Archer Daniels Midland Co. and Metabolix, is producing. The companies have a 50,000-ton-per-year plant in Clinton, Iowa, where it manufactures its Mirel brand of PHA-based polymers. Lunt thinks PHAs will struggle heading into next year as the average selling price for PHA is about $2.50 per pound. In contrast, PLA sells for around 85 cents to $1.10 per pound in the U.S.
The remaining 10 percent of the bioplastic market, according to Lunt, consists of &ldquo;others.&rdquo; Those that fall under this category would be DuPont&rsquo;s trademarked brand of renewable polytrimethylene terphthalate (PTT), Sorona, Coca-Cola-Heinz&rsquo;s Plant Bottle, BASF&rsquo;s EcoFlex, Brazilian oil and gas firm Braskem&rsquo;s sugarcane-derived polyethylene, soy-based polyol for making ecofriendly poleurethanes, and so on. Trends to Watch
Until now, most plastics have been in single-use compostable and disposable products. In fact, statistics from European Bioplastics suggest that durables will account for almost 40 percent of bioplastics this year compared with approximately 12 percent in 2010. With the advent of biobased polyethylene and some of the soy-based polyols, Lunt expects to see an increasing amount of durable products coming to market in 2012. &ldquo;The trend in the bioplastics industry will be to move from these single-use durables and PLA, which will still exist and capture markets, toward a trend of making an existing plastic from renewable resources cost-effectively that&rsquo;s exactly the same as the plastic people use today,&rdquo; Lunt says.
The inertia anticipated to thrust this trend, according to Lunt, will be due in large part to the ever-growing synergy between the bioplastics segment and the advanced biofuels and biochemical industries. For example, Colorado-based isobutanol developer Gevo Inc. formed a partnership with Torray Industries Inc. to produce paraxylene, a direct precursor to terephthalic acid production, which accounts for about 70 percent of PET&rsquo;s monomer component. Gevo also formed a partnership with Lanxess to produce biobased butyl rubber. Another is Madison, Wis.-based Virent Energy Systems Inc., which announced earlier this year it had successfully converted plant sugars into biobased paraxylene at its 10,000-gallon-per-year demonstration facility in Madison. The company said it intends to have commercial-scale paraxylene production online by 2014.
Another side effect brought on by the tightening confluence between the bioplastic and advanced biofuel and biochemical industries is the myriad of new biobased chemical monomers in development that are aimed at replacing petroleum-derived chemicals with renewable molecules. Companies like Dutch firm Avantium have discovered a route using its furanics-based platform, called YXY, to make methoxymethylfurfural (MMF) and other hydroxymethlyfurfural (HMF) ethers from glucose and fructose. The company has another catalyst that transforms the ethers into furan-based dicarboxylic acid (FDCA), a biobased chemical that can be reacted with ethylene glycol to make polyethylene furanoate (PEF), which can be used as a renewable replacement for making PET. According to Avantium CEO Tom van Aken, FDCA can also be used to make polyamides, plasticizers and coating resins, adding that, &ldquo;everywhere you see terephthalic acid you can use FDCA basically as a green replacement for it,&rdquo; he says.
Other emerging biobased building blocks that could see increased visibility in 2012 for their biopolymer applications, Lunt says, include the rising interest in biobased succinic acid to make polybutylene succinate (PBS), which is compostable and can be blended with PLA and starch blends. Companies involved in this area include BioAmber, Roquette Freres and DSM, BASF and Purac, Myriant Technologies, PTT Chemical, Mitsubishi Chemicals and others. Not only can succinic acid be used to make PBS, it can also be used to make adipic acid, a valuable precursor for making 6,6 nylon, and for making butanediol. &ldquo;Succinic acid markets are already known and so is PBS, but they&rsquo;re not used a lot today. But if it were renewable and cost-effective, it will become a player,&rdquo; Lunt says.
With increased volumes of new biobased building blocks expected to contribute to the production of more biopolymers, several bioplastic resin manufacturers see bioplastic resin innovation driving away from using starch-based feedstocks to using second- and third-generation inputs such as algae. Both Cereplast and Biobent have conducted trial production runs using algae in their respective line of bioplastics and both look to continue this shift in 2012. Cardi says Cereplast is seeing an increased demand for resin grades that are suitable for durable applications such as with its line of Hybrid Resins. &ldquo;Cereplast algae bioplastics have the ability to absorb and minimize greenhouse gases from the industrial process, creating up to 45 percent fewer greenhouse gases than traditional plastics,&rdquo; she says, adding that the company has partnered with an accessories company that recently launched an entire line made from Cereplast&rsquo;s algae bioplastics.
Masavage says shifting to nonfood feedstocks like algae enables Biobent to not be tied exclusively to soy for its biobased resins. &ldquo;If the biomaterial contains a significant amount of protein, it will work in our process,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;And guess what has a lot of protein? Algae. We can take algae and we can make resins out of it the same way we do soy meal.&rdquo;
Some, like Waltham, Mass.-based Novomer, see value in an abundant nonbiomass material for producing polyethylene carbonate and polypropylene carbonate, the result of reacting carbon dioxide with ethylene oxide and propylene oxide, respectively. According to Peter Shepard, executive vice president of polymers for Novomer, the company sees global opportunities for introducing coating resins based on low-molecular-weight polymers, noting that he envisions a potential application being the replacement of bisphenol A-based epoxy resins in can coatings.
&ldquo;There&rsquo;s no silver bullet to any of this,&rdquo; Shepard says. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s going to be a mix of solutions and a variety of technologies where each one will play a small role in improving the sustainability of how we conduct our lives.&rdquo; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Author: Bryan Sims Associate Editor, Biorefining Magazine (701) 738-4974 <a href="mailto:bsims@bbiinternational.com">bsims@bbiinternational.com</a>

Why a surge in demand for bioplastics will drive increased volumes

Making a Dent in 2012 and Beyond

The biorefining sector reached an important new milestone this year with at least five companies undergoing successful initial public offerings (IPOs). As we move into the new year, members of industry will take another important step as significant quantities of commercial production begin to come online. According to Biorefining Magazine archives, more than two dozen companies around the world have announced they aim to achieve monumental new milestones next year. Some will develop demonstration-scale projects in an effort to prove out their technologies at scale. Others will break ground on commercial-scale plants. A select few will even bring commercial-scale capacity online. By the close of 2012, the landscape of the industry could be changing. As advanced biofuel and biobased chemical plants begin putting commercial quantities of product into the marketplace, the industry should gain a new air of legitimacy.
Successful IPOs from companies such as Codexis Inc., Solazyme Inc., Gevo Inc., Amyris Fuels LLC, and KiOR Inc. have defined the biofuels industry in 2011. &ldquo;Those companies all went public this year, and they went public to great, great success,&rdquo; says Advanced Biofuels Association President Michael McAdams. &ldquo;That&rsquo;s a good sign for the future.&rdquo; Paul Winters, director of communications at the Biotechnology Industry Organization, adds that those IPOs not only demonstrate the maturation and progress made by the biorefining sector, but it represents a larger movement in the industry beyond biofuels as companies making renewable chemicals are also represented.
These IPOs are critically important to those individual companies as well as the industry as a whole, says Cobalt Technologies CEO Rick Wilson. &ldquo;To run a startup, you need financing,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;The people who invest in these early-stage companies do so realizing that many of them will fail. But, the ones that succeed will make a lot of money. Without an IPO they could never be convinced that there is a chance they could see their money. So, an early-stage investor would put their money in now that they have confidence the IPO window is open. The fact that there are going to be examples and cases where they will be able to get 10 times their money is only going to serve further investment in this segment.&rdquo;
Gevo CEO Pat Gruber says when Gevo went public, it demonstrated that a really good public offering could be done in this space. &ldquo;We 10-times oversubscribed,&rdquo; he says, &ldquo;and that gave confidence to the whole sector. No one really knew if there was an investment appetite for our kinds of businesses. Now, with us, Solazyme, KiOR and the rest, I think there probably is. That offers up a new way of raising money. That&rsquo;s good.&rdquo;
The success of the industry&rsquo;s first IPOs isn&rsquo;t all that defined this year. Gevo President Chris Ryan says another factor is the level of commercialization the sector has achieved. &ldquo;Up until this year, the only thing the world had seen was a bunch of joint development agreements,&rdquo; he says. Members of industry have now begun to put the first real commercial supply agreements into place. For Gevo this is reflected in the commercial offtake agreements for its biobutanol product. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s quite impressive, I think, that we have the majority of our first two plants sold out,&rdquo; Ryan says. &ldquo;And these aren&rsquo;t little plants.&rdquo;
James Iademarco, vice president of biobased chemicals and materials at DSM N.V., adds that 2011 has also been marked by significant advancements in biobased chemical production technology. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s very exciting,&rdquo; he says, noting there has been movement on advanced technologies in biological, thermochemical, chemo-catalytic and other catalysis pathways. Jim Sturdevant, director of Poet&rsquo;s Project Liberty, says that dozens of companies around the world have been working for nearly a decade to develop cellulosic ethanol production technologies. Several of those companies are now progressing with plans for commercial deployment. &ldquo;I think it&rsquo;s probably fair to say, from an industry perspective, the technology has made great advances, and is in many cases ready to go,&rdquo; Sturdevant says.
While access to funding has been a particularly troublesome issue in the biorefining sector since the start of the global recession, Sturdevant says that seems to be turning around. &ldquo;The challenge for the last couple of years has been financing,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Part of the problem there is our economy itself and the reluctance of lenders to lend to innovative technologies.&rdquo; He notes there has been some success, however, thanks to the U.S. DOE and USDA loan guarantee programs, adding that &ldquo;some cracks have been forming in the wall of this financing barrier.&rdquo; Into the Future
While 2011 was a big year for biorefining, 2012 is promising some impressive developments. On an individual basis, companies such as Gevo have plans to roll out commercial production. On an aggregate basis, the entire sector seems poised to move ahead with funding, scale-up and production plans.
Funding in general, and IPOs specifically, will continue to be a defining force in the industry. &ldquo;My prediction is there are lots of companies teeing up to do an IPO, and I think the bar is going to get raised for IPOs considerably,&rdquo; Wilson says. While some have been able to file an IPO on what essentially boils down to a promise, Wilson says he thinks the expectations will change. &ldquo;I think we could see the requirement that a company that files an IPO has commercial production and is making money,&rdquo; he says, adding there may also be a more rigorous expectation that companies fully prove out a technology on the demonstration scale. In addition, he says he expects investors will be less interested in supporting companies that depend on government subsidies.
Iademarco outlines three things he expects to see next year, and all involve investment or funding. &ldquo;I think you are going to see a continual investment in biobased chemicals,&rdquo; he says, provided the financial markets stay relatively stable. &ldquo;I think you are going to see some of these companies that are venture-backed go public.&rdquo; He also says larger, established chemical companies, either downstream customers or incumbents, will become more active in making investments in these technologies.
BIO partners with another organization to produce a quarterly business outlook survey. It&rsquo;s sort of a business confidence index for the bioenergy and biorefining industry, Winters says. While the first two quarters of the year showed a high degree of confidence in continuing IPO activity, the most recent report showed a decline and noted that there was expectation within the business community that more financial activity would be present in the form of mergers and consolidation. Winters also points out that the IPO market fluctuates within the year, and that the latest report could simply reflect a seasonal shift in the market. For the past dozen years, he says, the third quarter has tended to be slow for the biotechnology sector. &ldquo;The fourth quarter of the year will probably see some pickup,&rdquo; Winters adds. While there is likely to be another round of IPOs next year, Winters notes that whether they are as large as 2011&rsquo;s will depend on the overall state of the economy and market, as well as the strength of the companies that come out for public offerings.
McAdams adds that market volatility could also have an impact in 2012. &ldquo;I know there are several more looking to go for it,&rdquo; he says of companies filing IPOs. &ldquo;I don&rsquo;t know whether the market volatility will lend itself to having a year in 2012 like we had in 2011, or whether, for that matter, we have enough companies that are far enough along to go public. I think there is more in the queue and I hope we can keep this momentum going. All the companies are rooting for each other, which is a great sign.&rdquo;
For those that went public this year, 2012 will be when they have to prove themselves. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re going to find out who is real and who isn&rsquo;t in terms of what they&rsquo;ve promised the street,&rdquo; Gruber says. &ldquo;And I hope everybody is real.&rdquo;
These companies, including public and private firms that announced commercial construction and operation activities planned for 2012 are being watched closely by everyone, Winters says. The U.S. EPA is keeping close tabs on the biofuel companies in order to fulfill its obligation to set the RFS2 compliance levels, and Congress, the U.S. DOE and USDA are monitoring many projects backed by federal funding so they can produce a return on investment for tax payers. Institutional investors, such as banks, are looking for proof the industry can succeed. &ldquo;Once success is demonstrated, they are willing to back construction of new projects,&rdquo; Winters says.&nbsp;
Iademarco also stresses how important it will be for biorefining companies to meet their production goals. &ldquo;You hear a lot of noise,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;It is going to be interesting to see who is able to deliver on their promises and really get production going for customers, because that is going to be important anytime you have an emerging market. If biobased chemicals are going to be successful, these customers need to know that there are established, credible suppliers.&rdquo;
McAdams notes that the ability to meet stated goals will be important to the entire sector. &ldquo;I think the proof is in the pudding,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;I think it&rsquo;s very important for companies across the industry to deliver the goods. I think we are going to see a number of companies next year really begin to deliver some significant volumes. That&rsquo;s not only good for them personally, it&rsquo;s good for the industry.&rdquo;
While IPOs and private investment opportunities will obviously be an important issue in 2012, McAdams stresses that the U.S. military&rsquo;s contribution to the industry will represent the No. 1 opportunity for the advanced biofuels industry next year; specifically, the funding that will come from the defense department under Title 3, the Defense Production Act. &ldquo;I think that is probably the No. 1 opportunity to see some cooperation and partnership to actually build a commercial facility between the government and private sector,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;That is something that we all need to be watching, and rooting for and delivering. I&rsquo;d put it as No. 1 in the list of things to look for in 2012. I remain incredibly optimistic that we are going to be able to fund the $510 million and that will be the seed money to demonstrate that partnership.&rdquo;
Winters agrees that all branches of the U.S. military will be a driving force in the future of the biorefining industry. The military&mdash;not just the Navy, but every branch&mdash;has set goals for increased use of alternative energy, he says. &ldquo;The military is one of the best organizations in the world for setting goals and meeting them, and they have the expertise and knowhow to reach them.&rdquo;
The Farm Bill, in whatever form it becomes law, will also have a significant impact on the industry in 2012. The legislation is important because it has not only served as an R&amp;D driver, but also in production of biomass Winters says. &ldquo;We want to see the farm bill become a driver of the entire biorefinery range of products and uses for biomass,&rdquo; he adds.
In the current political environment, a lot of people are included to throw the baby out with the bathwater in terms of partnerships between government and clean energy technologies, McAdams says. That environment shows no signs of changing next year. &ldquo;I think it will be very important,&rdquo; he says, &ldquo;for those in the cleantech sector to remind policymakers of the great success that can result for partnerships between the federal government and new industry. For the federal government to walk away, particularly from advanced biofuels, at this time would be a really bad mistake. I think it would be a mistake where we would see our competition around the world in places like Brazil and China take the lead. I don&rsquo;t think this is a time in American history where we want others to take the lead on innovative and proprietary technologies that we invent right here at home.&rdquo; Author: Erin Voegele Associate Editor, Biorefining Magazine (701) 540-6986 <a href="mailto:evoegele@bbiinternational.com">evoegele@bbiinternational.com</a>
&nbsp;
<hr />
&nbsp;
Reaching New Milestones 2012 will bring many developments in biorefining. Here is a partial list of what&rsquo;s expected to happen next year.
&bull; Ineos New Plant BioEnergy&rsquo;s 8 MMgy cellulosic ethanol and 6 mW biopower plant is expected to be commissioned in April.
&bull; Solena Group Inc. is expected to begin construction on a 16 MMgy biojet fuel facility called GreenSky using Rentech&rsquo;s Fischer-Tropsch synthetic fuel technology platform in the U.K, with commercial operations scheduled for 2014.
&bull; DSM N.V. and Roquette Freres have plans to build a 10-kiloton-per-year commercial biosuccinic acid plant adjacent to an existing Roquette facility in Cassano Spinola, Italy, scheduled for operation in fourth quarter.&nbsp;
&bull; Cobalt Technologies and Rhodia will develop a demo plant in Brazil to produce biobased n-butanol from sugarcane bagasse. Cobalt also expects to complete its Alpena, Mich., demo plant to convert hardwood into biobased n-butanol, and the company expects to break ground on a commercial-scale facility.
&bull; Gevo Inc. is expected to begin operations at its first commercial-scale biobutanol plant, an 18 MMgy facility co-located with a corn ethanol plant in Luverne, Minn.
&bull; Fulcrum BioEnergy LLC recently filed for an IPO and is expected to complete construction on its 10.5 MMgy cellulosic ethanol plant and 16 mW biopower facility, Sierra Biofuels.
&bull; Novozymes partner Mossi &amp; Ghisolfi Group broke ground on a 13 MMgy cellulosic ethanol plant in Italy this year with production planned for next.
&bull; A joint venture between Novamont and Genomatica is working to complete a biorefinery at year&rsquo;s end to produce 40 million pounds of Genomatica&rsquo;s butanediol for use in Novamont&rsquo;s bioplastic products.
&bull; Elevance Renewable Sciences Inc. is retrofitting a Natchez, Miss.-based 80 MMgy biodiesel plant to produce specialty chemicals for use in personal care products, detergents, plastics, and lubricants, scheduled to be operational.
&bull; Dow Chemical Co. and Mitsui &amp; Co. Ltd. announced a new joint venture to produce biopolymers, the first phase of which will include construction of a new sugarcane ethanol plant in Brazil, followed by building adjacent ethanol-to-ethylene and polyethylene production facilities.
&bull; EdeniQ Inc. is developing a 2-ton-per-day cellulosic ethanol plant in Visalia, Calif., scheduled for operation in first quarter.
&bull; Independence Bio-Products aims to expand its algae demo plant in eastern Texas into a 390-acre commercial-scale facility.
&bull; ZeaChem Inc. is targeting development of a 25 MMgy commercial-scale facility using specialized microorganisms to convert biomass into fuel and chemical molecules.
&bull; UOP LLC, a Honeywell company, has begun construction on a pyrolysis demo plant in Hawaii that will convert forest residues, algae and other cellulosic biomass into transportation fuels. Initial production is expected to begin next year, with full operation in 2014.
&bull; Algae technology developer Heliae Inc. recently leased land to build a small commercial algae production facility near its headquarters in Arizona. Construction is scheduled to begin.
&bull; PepsiCo is scheduled to begin pilot-scale production of biobased polyethylene terephthalate.
&bull; Algae.Tec Ltd. is collaborating with the Manildra Group to construct a demonstration algae facility adjacent to an ethanol plant in Australia. The project could be operation by first quarter.
&bull; KiOR Inc. is developing an 11 MMgy renewable diesel plant in Columbus, Miss., which is scheduled to begin operations during second half of the year.

The biorefining sector is poised for commercial scale-up as funding strategies mature and production capacity grows

Hitting a New Stride

Developing effective biomass conversion technologies is only one component of building out the advanced biorefining industry. Those in the sector must also figure out ways to effectively and economically store, transport and deliver biomass to the many conversion facilities that will likely dot our national landscape.
A team of researchers at Texas A&amp;M University is working on a modeling system that is designed to add to that process. Wilbert Wilhelm, a professor of Industrial Engineering, and Stephen Searcy, a professor of Biological and Industrial engineering, along with doctoral student An Heung, have formulated a statistical model that deals with multiple time periods and multiple commodities to address supply chain design problems for lignocellulosic biomass. The model considers all components of the supply chain, from feedstock suppliers to biofuel customers.
One of the big questions for biorefinery developers is whether you should have a centralized supply chain that serves a single large plant, or several smaller conversions facilities that are closer to sources of feedstocks, says Wilhelm. &ldquo;There is a problem in moving biomass,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;It doesn&rsquo;t have a lot of energy content, and you may invest more energy moving it that you will be able to extract.&rdquo;
The model developed by Wilhelm and his colleagues is flexible, allowing for the evaluation of various feedstocks. &ldquo;You can define a particular feedstock by identifying certain parameter values,&rdquo; he says, such as moisture content, energy content, and harvest area. According to Wilhelm, the model also addresses elements in the supply chain such as storage facilities. For example, he says, the model can evaluate the potential differences between small on-farm storage versus a larger, more regional storage solution. The model can also account for different conversion process parameters.
The research team is about to publish its third academic paper regarding the modeling system, and is hoping to continue to expand on this line of research in the future. &ldquo;We are looking for funding to continue this work, and I have several colleagues who are interested in collaborating on such a project,&rdquo; Wilhelm says, noting that the next step in the research would likely look to develop a solution methodology that would enable the model to better evaluate supply chain issues over larger geographical areas.&nbsp;
&mdash;Erin Voegele

Researchers develop a biomass supply chain model

Designing a Solution

Efficiently reducing waste while lowering greenhouse gas emissions at landfills has become epidemic, and Florida-based Eco Energy Management LLC may be at the forefront of bridging the gap between economic and ecological waste management solutions through its new Wastech system, a fully-integrated microprocessing unit that can dispose of, recycle and convert virtually any waste material into saleable byproducts such as fuel oil, biogas and carbon black char.
The key behind the Wastech&rsquo;s conversion process lies in an advanced double pyrolysis steam injection technology that processes waste material at temperatures reaching 850 degrees Celsius (1,562 degrees Fahrenheit) under normal pressures, making it easier to control explosive fuel gas that contains hydrogen discharged during the pyrolysis process, according to CEO Ed Faraone. He adds that a single Wastech unit is capable of processing up to 50 tons of waste material continuously in a 24-hour period, doesn&rsquo;t need to be shut down to cool and is much more energy efficient than traditional pyrolysis batch systems because the biogas produced in the process is used to power the machine. By incorporating self-generated biogas and steam, the feedstock is heated uniformly throughout as the steam penetrates to the center of the material. This, Faraone says, is much more efficient than the limitations of one single heat source. &ldquo;The reason we have the double pyrolysis is because of the high heat necessary to crack certain organic and inorganic materials,&rdquo; Faraone says. &ldquo;We didn&rsquo;t feel that single pyrolysis was sufficient enough to effectively crack those high degrees of temperature.&rdquo;
EEM&rsquo;s Wastech unit, according to Faraone, can handle all types of organic and inorganic waste material typically found in MSW such as plastic, rubber, medical waste, tire chips, industrial sludge, agricultural residues, coal, food waste and wood waste.
Depending on the variables such as flash point setting, needs of the customer and feedstock used, Faraone says the two-stage system can dial in the amount and quality of each byproduct a user desires. The unit, he says, is capable of producing a fuel oil similar to diesel fuel with a sulfur content of less than 1 percent, which is suitable for use in furnaces or diesel generators straight from the reactor without the need for further upgrading. The carbon black byproduct can contain less than 0.1 percent oil that meets N220 or N330 specifications, which can be pelletized and bagged for sale to the industry for a variety of uses such as for air and water filters, tire production, laser printer carbon and ink, to name a few. If left untreated in the reactor, the carbon black is classified as biochar, he adds, which can be sold as fertilizer.
Faraone says EEM provides turnkey installation of the Wastech system with a typical turnaround time of six months. A base Wastech system carries a price tag of about $5 million, but with a typical return on investment of around 20 months after start-up of production, Faraone says the system more than pays for itself.
&ldquo;Because the machine provides high-value byproducts and usable forms of energy it&rsquo;s able to gain ongoing revenue streams,&rdquo; he says, &ldquo;which plays into the rapid ROI.&rdquo;
&mdash;Bryan Sims

A Breakthrough in Waste Management

The Donald Danforth Plant Science Center has announced the addition of several new scientists, including one that will head up the center&rsquo;s Enterprise Rent-A-Car Institute for Renewable Fuels. Thomas Brutnell will join the center in January, serving as the new director for the ERAC Institute for Renewable Fuels.
&nbsp;&ldquo;I&rsquo;m really excited to be moving to the Danforth Center as it is an excellent opportunity to expand the research at the Danforth Center into new and challenging areas,&rdquo; says Brutnell. &ldquo;I am very much aligned with the mission of the center and will be striving for global food and energy security through improved crop varieties and new bioenergy grasses. We will tap technological breakthroughs in DNA sequencing technology and computational biology to drive discovery and innovation that will contribute to achieving energy security both here and abroad.&rdquo;
Additional new hires include Todd Mockler, DDPSC associate member; James Umen, ERAC Institute for Renewable Fuels associate member; Leslie Hicks, DDPSC assistant member; and Dmitri Nusinow, DDPSC assistant member.&nbsp;
&mdash;Erin Voegele

Donald Danforth Plant Science Center adds five new scientists

Rapid Expansion

Biofuels used for maritime applications are gaining ground since Maersk Line Ltd., one of the largest shipping companies in the world, partnered with WR Systems Ltd. Megan Jones, transportation maritime program manager for WR Systems, says that Maersk has worked with WR Systems in the past and after the U.S. Navy sought the help of Maersk, the shipping giant looked to WR Systems to perform the emissions testing. &ldquo;There are a lot of snake oil salesmen out there saying they have something that will reduce emissions,&rdquo; Jones says of the need for emissions testing. &ldquo;Unless you have something that can verify that reduction, it is kind of moot.&rdquo; The two companies will now put the Emsys laser-based Emissions Monitoring System to the test on the AP Moller-Maersk vessel Maersk Kalmar, which has been chosen for the U.S. Navy biofuel testing trial. Following two previous trials on U.S.-based Maersk shipping vessels that tested for system efficacy and the compatibility of the vessel under the marine approval process supervised by the American Bureau of Shipping, the U.S. Navy will use the EMS to determine and collect comprehensive emissions and particulate matter data.
The Emsys system was developed in part, Jones says, with the help of Maersk engineers, and the final testing system features a quantum cascade laser that tests emissions samples drawn from the main stacks through heated pipes that maintain the integrity of the sample during the entire testing process. The system records everything from particulate matter to sulfur oxides present in the emissions. Although Jones says she isn&rsquo;t sure what the biofuel in use for the testing is, she insists emissions testing for maritime applications is an area that will grow. &ldquo;Over the next couple of years as the marketplace goes towards abatement systems,&rdquo; she explains, &ldquo;companies will look to be monitoring what they are trying to reduce.&rdquo;&nbsp;
&mdash;Luke Geiver

Shipping giant Maersk will employ laser emissions testing system

U.S. Navy Biofuel Trials Go High-Tech

A Chicago-based feedstock developer has attracted two new strategic investors; BP Ventures and Unilever Technology Ventures. In late October, Chromatin Inc. announced the completion of a $10 billion first closing round of its Series D financing round. In addition to the two new investors, three investors who participated in earlier financing rounds also participated. Repeat investors included Quantitative Investment Holdings, the Malaysian Life Sciences Capital Fund, and Illinois Ventures.
According to Chromatin, the additional capital will help fund the company&rsquo;s programs to develop supply chains of energy crop feedstocks. Chromatin is working to develop sorghum varieties that can be used as biorefining or biopower feedstocks. The company is also developing next-generation sorghum seeds using its proprietary crop-breeding technology and biotechnology programs.
Earlier in the month, Chromatin was named as one of 10 companies to receive an award from the U.S. DOE&rsquo;s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) under the Plants Engineered to Replace Oil, or Petro, program. The ARPA-E award will support the company in its efforts to engineer sweet sorghum to produce high-energy molecules in the plant, providing drop-in, low-cost transportation fuel.
Information published by ARPA-E further specifies that the plants will be engineered in a way that allows them to produce up to 20 percent of their biomass as farnesene, which can be converted into renewable diesel. This substance will accumulate in the sorghum plants in much the same way sugar accumulates in sugarcane.
&ldquo;This investment signals BP's continued commitment to renewable energy feedstocks,&rdquo; says Justin Adams, head of BP Ventures. &ldquo;Chromatin is beginning to develop an exciting bioenergy business with their sorghum platform, and we are interested in understanding how we could deploy their feedstock technologies in our own activities.&rdquo;&nbsp;
&mdash;Erin Voegele

Feedstock company names new investors following ARPA-E announcement

A Sweet Deal

Brian Goodall, vice president of business development for SRS Energy, and his team have been working on algae oil separation technology since 2007, and according to him, &ldquo;If we aren&rsquo;t making money by 2014, I&rsquo;m just going to give up.&rdquo; The SRS Energy technology platform isn&rsquo;t just about algae oil separation, but it actually covers a wide scope of oil separation. The company formed after an engineer in a southeast Michigan compressor plant began researching ways to separate contaminants found in metalworking fluids. Using a modified centrifuge-based approach, that engineer quit his job at the compressor plant and formed what is known today as SRS.
Today, SRS is working on a wet-extraction technique, because Goodall says their work with supercritical CO2 or dry-hexane extraction of lipids proved to be either too costly or too energy intensive. The preferred SRS process utilizes heat and chemical conditioning of the cells followed by a physical extraction process they call the &ldquo;sledgehammer,&rdquo; which doesn&rsquo;t destroy the cells. The problem with algae cells, Goodall says, &ldquo;is that the lipids are spread throughout the algae cell&mdash;they are everywhere.&rdquo; Even if you break the cell open (via cell disruption technology), the oil still stays where it is and you can&rsquo;t get it all out, Goodall explains. And for making value-added products, you need all of the oil out.
&ldquo;The solution is to make the membrane permeable,&rdquo; he says, and that&rsquo;s achieved through a combination of chemicals, heat and pH balance. &ldquo;The secret is partial and selective hydrolysis to break open the polysaccharides.&rdquo; Although the SRS Energy team hasn&rsquo;t made their processes fully commercial yet, (they haven&rsquo;t even issued a press release Goodall says), the company appears to be on its way to success given a number of tests at the bench- and demonstration-scale. The technology can be leased today, and if a company has a specific need like fish meal or lipid extraction, Goodall says the company can tweak its systems. &ldquo;I&rsquo;m done spending money,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;I want to make money.&rdquo;&nbsp;
&mdash;Luke Geiver

It's 2014 or bust for the algae extraction company

What SRS Energy Wants, Everybody Wants

The first-generation ethanol industry extended a helping hand to its sister industry as Colorado-based cellulosic ethanol and biochemical firm ZeaChem Inc. signed an agreement with California-based corn-ethanol producer and marketer Pacific Ethanol Inc. to provide operations, maintenance and accounting services for ZeaChem&rsquo;s 250,000-gallon-per-year demonstration-scale facility under construction in Boardman, Ore. Under terms of the agreement Pacific Ethanol Management Services Corp., a subsidiary of Pacific Ethanol, will provide operating services for ZeaChem&rsquo;s demo facility, located adjacent to Pacific Ethanol&rsquo;s existing 40 MMgy ethanol plant in Boardman, beginning in the fourth quarter.
In addition to its Boardman facility, Pacific Ethanol has two other operating ethanol plants, a 60 MMgy plant in Burley, Idaho, and a 60 MMgy plant in Stockton, Calif. &ldquo;This agreement reflects the value of our diversified business model as we extend our asset management expertise beyond the four Pacific Ethanol plants to provide plant operating and maintenance services to ZeaChem,&rdquo; says Neil Koehler, president and CEO of Pacific Ethanol. &ldquo;We are well positioned to leverage our extensive knowledge of low-carbon renewable fuel production to operate and maintain ZeaChem&rsquo;s advanced cellulosic biorefinery.&rdquo;
ZeaChem employs a hybrid biochemical and thermochemical approach that utilizes an acetogenic process to ferment C5 and C6 sugars into intermediate chemicals such as acetic acid and ethyl acetate, as well as cellulosic ethanol, from woody biomass such as hybrid poplar. According to ZeaChem, its demo plant is scheduled to begin producing test quantities of ethyl acetate and acetic acid by the end of this year using hybrid poplar as its primary feedstock. Cellulosic ethanol volumes are expected to commence in the first half of 2012. The company also recently received a USDA grant to develop biogasoline and jet fuel production from hybrid poplar.&nbsp;
&mdash;Bryan Sims

A first-gen ethanol producer helps its second-gen counterpart go commercial

Cross-Industry Support

If there&rsquo;s ever a blueprint of the integrated biorefinery of the future, it could well be&nbsp; the one operated by Blue Marble Biomaterials in Missoula, Mont. Since it opened in July, the Seattle-based firm has demonstrated how sustainable biomass refining and chemical manufacturing can convert virtually any organic feedstock imaginable via flexible conversion platforms into a range of biobased chemicals for the food, fragrance and cosmetic industries, while producing zero waste in the process.
Blue Marble&rsquo;s biorefinery recycles nearly 100 percent of its water through a reverse osmosis system, which saves more than 26,000 gallons of water monthly. Recycled water is returned and used in the company&rsquo;s algae remediation systems. In addition, the company has devised novel pathways to recycle biogas, which then enters an algae-based photobioreactor system developed by partner Bionavitas where it&rsquo;s populated with several microalgae strains. The remaining biogas is routed to a proprietary pyrolysis and gasification unit where emissions and excess undergo a thermochemical process to become pyrolysis oil.
&ldquo;The issue of uneven economics of scale for each platform technology is an issue that companies like Blue Marble will have to contend with in the future,&rdquo; says Blue Marble CEO Kelly Ogilvie. &ldquo;From an ecosystem perspective, the more companies that actually employ these technologies, the better the industry is going to get at figuring out how to make them work together.&rdquo;
While the biorefinery is only producing several thousand kilograms per month, Ogilvie says the company expects to be delivering samples of biochemicals to its commercial partners later this year with purchase orders expected to go out the door by first quarter next year.&nbsp;
&mdash;Bryan Sims

Blue Marble continues to refine the economics of biorefining

Gaining Efficiency

Advanced biofuel companies such as ZeaChem, Primus Green Energy, Terrabon, Coskata, Chemtex, Imperium Renewables and Bluefire Renewables all believe the national debt reduction efforts should not lead to massive cuts in the 2012 Farm Bill Energy Title. In a letter written by Westar Trade Resources, which represents all of those advanced biofuel companies, to a few U.S. senators and representatives, the companies spoke as expected in their requests to avoid drastic Energy Title cuts, but more importantly they provided actual evidence that any such cuts would be detrimental not only on the job front, but also to the pocketbook of the U.S. government.
In the letter, the group pointed out the need for programs like the 9003 Biorefinery Loan Guarantee Program offered through USDA. &ldquo;Loan guarantees are the most cost-effective way to develop new jobs and create these new fuels that are needed for our national security and long-term price stability.&rdquo; But all general assertions aside, look at what those loan guarantees actually provide the government. To achieve the goals of the 9003 program, Westar points out, it would take only $293 million in actual appropriations to meet the goal of $1.17 billion in loan guarantee authority by the government. And, in addition to this instance of getting a lot for a little, fees (of up to 2 percent) charged to loan recipients generate $23.37 million in addition to a 0.5 percent annual fee charged for up to 20 years that will generate roughly $116.84 million. So, if there were no loan defaults, &ldquo;the government would actually receive an income of $140.21 million,&rdquo; Westar says.
But given the recent events involving the high-profile loan default by the solar company Solyndra, it might be easy to dismiss the monetary gains such loan guarantee programs can create. Westar, however, and the rest of the advanced biofuels community would disagree&mdash;especially those who&rsquo;ve received the benefit of the USDA&rsquo;s loan programs.
In addition to helping the country reach a number of key national goals (think energy security, fossil-fuel reduction, etc.), Westar points out the importance advanced biofuels play in maintaining and growing the rural economy. Look at the link between advanced biofuels, the military and rural economies. According to Westar, although rural residents account for only 17 percent of the population, they make up 44 percent of the military, and since July, post 9/11 veterans have reached an unemployment rate of 12.4 percent. All of that shows the need for advanced biofuels production in rural areas to provide jobs to the same veterans living in those rural communities who can resupply their community members who also joined the military, and, however small, give the government back a few bucks.&nbsp;
&mdash;Luke Geiver

Why Biorefining Loan Guarantees Give Back

1. California-based LS9 Inc. has successfully ramped up its technology to the 20,000-liter (5,283 gallon) scale, demonstrating continued progress in the scale-up and commercialization of its biobased chemicals and fuels technology platform. Initial production at the 1,000-liter scale was completed at the company&rsquo;s pilot plant in San Francisco. The company has since increased the scale of production 20-fold to produce approximately 1 ton of a specific chemical for its strategic partner Proctor &amp; Gamble. The company says the 20,000-liter batch was produced at a tolling site. LS9&rsquo;s fermentation technology uses sugar as a feedstock and depending on the metabolic pathway engineered into the bacteria, the company can produce various chemicals or fuels. The company intends to continue production at the tolling site for the next few months, with the potential of moving up to the 50,000-liter production level. The increase in production will lead into the start up of LS9&rsquo;s demonstration facility in Okeechobee, Fla., which is expected to become operational during the first quarter of 2012. 2. Tampa, Fla.-based Culturing Solutions was scheduled to host the grand opening of its algae-to-biofuel demonstration plant in New Port Richey, Fla., on Nov. 17. The company says it will produce transportation fuel, energy, nutritional products, cosmetics, medicine and other household items from algae. Culturing Solutions will use carbon dioxide from industrial gases to grow the algae. This is the company&rsquo;s first demonstration plant in Florida. Its technologies are being used in Florida, Rhode Island, Australia, Romania, Hungary and Russia. Culturing Solutions is a company that designs and manufactures photobioreactors and other algae processing production tools. Continuous algae production with its Phyta-Platform Photobioreactor offers superior control over conventional algae growing platforms. 3. The consolidation of the biobased chemicals industry by major companies is taking shape as Eastman Chemical Co. integrated the assets of biobased n-butanol and acetone developer TetraVitae Bioscience Inc. into its wholly owned subsidiary Eastman Renewable Materials LLC. TetraVitae's core technology lies in a mutant, nongenetically modified organism, Clostridium Beijerinckii. TetraVitae personnel will be integrated into Eastman Renewable Materials as part of the acquisition of assets. Last December, TetraVitae successfully retrofitted an integrated corn dry-mill pilot facility at the National Corn-to-Ethanol Research Center on the campus of Southern Illinois University Edwardsville for production trials of bio n-butanol. During the demonstration at NCERC, TetraVitae worked with the Separations Research Program at the University of Texas in Austin to refine production purification. To achieve this, the company took the raw chemical products produced at NCERC and manufactured purified n-butanol and acetone in a continuous distillation. 4. Longtime corn-ethanol process technology provider Vogelbusch USA Inc. has been awarded a contract to supply ethanol distillation and dehydration equipment for Ineos New Planet BioEnergy&rsquo;s future demonstration-scale cellulosic ethanol and renewable power biorefinery, dubbed the Indian River BioEnergy Center, currently under construction in Vero Beach, Fla. The foundations are set and work with vertical equipment is expected to take up the remainder of the fall and winter. The company says about 250 construction workers are busy on site to meet the project&rsquo;s anticipated start-up in the second quarter 2012. The facility broke ground in February and, when operational, will use Ineos Bio&rsquo;s patented anaerobic fermentation step, which involves a unique combination of gasification and fermentation technologies capable of converting a range of waste biomass feedstocks, including municipal solid waste, into 8 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol and 6 megawatts of renewable power annually. In September, Air Products and Chemicals Inc. provided the plant with onsite gaseous oxygen via a proprietary gas generation system and supplied bulk liquid oxygen and nitrogen by truck for the plant&rsquo;s production process. 5. Missoula, Mont.-based Rivertop Renewables has received $1.5 million in a bridge round investment&nbsp; from Cultivian Ventures, a venture fund focused on accelerating high technology in the food and agricultural sectors. The money will be used to continue commercialization of cost-competitive and high-performing biobased chemicals, expand its facilities for continued research, development and precommercial production through future contract manufacturing deals. The funding will also allow the company to grow its presence and become the anchor tenant at the Montana Technology Enterprise Center (MonTEC), a business incubator for technology spin-outs from the University of Montana in Missoula. Kolstad said that Rivertop&rsquo;s ongoing presence at MonTEC is expected to generate additional revenue, jobs and education opportunities for UM graduate chemistry students, adding that he anticipates doubling the company&rsquo;s workforce over the next 18 months.
6. Algenol Biofuels Inc. announced in October that it has broken ground on its pilot-scale integrated biorefinery. This production facility will be the first large-scale deployment of Algenol's patented Direct To Ethanol technology, which produces ethanol directly from carbon dioxide, sunlight and salt water using blue-green algae in patented photobioreactors. With support from the U.S. DOE, Lee County, Fla., and Algenol's strategic partners, the 36-acre facility will contain 3,000 of Algenol's patented photobioreactors in a commercial module, Algenol's advanced Vapor Compression Steam Stripper ethanol concentration technology and new membrane-based ethanol dehydration technology. The plant will have a target capacity of approximately 100,000 gallons of fuel-grade ethanol per year. In addition, Algenol's joint development program with Dow Chemical Co. has come to an end, and the focus of the relationship will shift to purchasing specialty plastics and films developed during the program for use in Algenol's patented photobioreactors for the pilot-scale biorefinery. The efforts of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, the Georgia Institute of Technology and Membrane Technology &amp; Research will continue. 7. Envergent Technologies LLC, a Honeywell company, has signed a memorandum of understanding with Finland-based Green Fuel Nordic Oy. Under the agreement, the companies will collaborate on projects to convert biomass into renewable fuel for use in district heating systems. According to Envergent, the companies will evaluate the installation of new facilities to convert forest residue into liquid biofuel via Envergent&rsquo;s Rapid Thermal Processing technology. The technology is a fast pyrolysis process, which generates higher yields of higher energy biofuel and less low-value char and gas coproducts when compared to other pyrolysis technologies, and it has been used in seven commercial facilities in North America for more than 20 years. Envergent will provide expertise and technical knowledge as the Finnish company develops plans for its proposed facilities. 8. Houston-based Waste Management Inc. has exchanged its equity interest in S4 Solutions LLC, formerly a joint venture between Waste Management and Bend, Ore.-based plasma arc gasification technology company InEnTec, for an equity position solely in InEnTec. S4 Solutions was formed by both companies in 2009 to design, build and operate a 25-ton-per-day waste gasification demonstration plant in Arlington, Ore., using InEnTec&rsquo;s proprietary trademarked Plasma Enhanced Melter technology. The construction of the Arlington project was recently completed and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality has issued all necessary permits to begin operation of the plant. In addition to InEnTec, Waste Management also holds investments in Enerkem, Terrabon and Agylix. The agreement is expected to help propel Waste Management toward meeting two of its sustainability goals: doubling its renewable energy production by 2020, and investing in emerging technologies for managing waste. 9. Mountain View, Calif.-based biobutanol developer Cobalt Technologies and international specialty chemical giant Rhodia have formed a strategic alliance to jointly develop biobased n-butanol biorefineries throughout Latin America. The facilities will deploy Cobalt&rsquo;s technology for conversion of sugarcane bagasse into n-butanol for the chemicals and fuels markets. Under terms of the alliance, Cobalt and Rhodia will initially identify and develop options for deploying Cobalt&rsquo;s technology at a sugar mill. Following this step, the partners will jointly develop a demonstration-scale facility that incorporates Cobalt&rsquo;s technology at a to-be-determined location in Brazil. Following the demonstration plant project, the parties intend to build multiple biorefineries co-located with sugar mills, first in Brazil and then in other Latin American countries. These commercial-scale facilities will be designed to produce 40,000 metric tons of n-butanol a year.&nbsp; The goal set as part of Cobalt&rsquo;s alliance with Rhodia is to begin construction of the first demonstration facility by next year with construction of the first commercial-scale plant to begin in 2013, with commercial volumes of n-butanol anticipated for launch by 2014. 10. Two leading developers, BioAmber Inc. and Myriant Technologies, each formed partnerships with separate major chemical companies to further their strategies of delivering cost-competitive, high-performing biobased chemicals to market. BioAmber, through its subsidiary Bluewater Biochemicals, partnered with Mitsui &amp; Co., a leading global trading company, to build and operate a biobased succinic acid and 1,4 butanediol production facility in Sarnia, Ontario, Canada, a project that was announced in August. The initial phase of the project is expected to have an annual production capacity of 17,000 metric tons of biosuccinic acid and is anticipated to be commissioned for commercial operation in 2013. Permitting work for the facility began in June. The companies intend to subsequently expand capacity and produce 35,000 metric tons of succinic acid and 23,000 metric tons of 1,4 butanediol at the site. BioAmber and Mitsui also plan to build and operate a second plant in Thailand, which is projected to come online in 2014. Quincy, Mass.-based Myriant Technologies and Japanese global trading firm Sojitz Corp. formed a partnership to collaborate on the sales and marketing of biosuccinic acid in Japan, China, South Korea and Taiwan for applications such as platicizers, polymers, urethanes and solvents. Sojitz, a $150 billion company, has a strong presence in chemical sales, marketing and distribution throughout Asia with more than 25 sales offices. According to Sojitz, the plan is to develop a biobased derivatives manufacturing plant somewhere in the Asia Pacific region that will consume 150 million pounds of Myriant&rsquo;s biobased succinic acid annually.
&nbsp;
Share your industry briefs: To be included in Business Briefs, send information (including photos and logos if available) to: Industry Briefs, Biorefining, 308 Second Ave. N., Suite 304, Grand Forks, ND 58203. You may also fax information to (701) 746-8385, or e-mail it to <a href="mailto:rkotrba@bbiinternational.com">rkotrba@bbiinternational.com</a>. Please include your name and telephone number in all correspondence.

Obtaining patents can be critical for companies that use innovative technology for competitive advantage. Recent amendments to U.S. patent law will change the boundaries of what can and cannot be patented. Unless innovators take heed of those changes, those seeking to patent their inventions in the U.S. may inadvertently surrender valuable proprietary rights.&nbsp;
On Sept. 16, the America Invents Act was enacted, starting a series of changes to U.S. patent law that will occur over about 18 months. Two important changes are: the patent system will transition from a first-to-invent system, in which patent rights are awarded to the first inventor, to a first-to-file system, in which patent rights are awarded to the first inventor to file a patent application; and the one-year grace period, which under current U.S. patent law excludes certain information and acts from the prior art, will be effectively eliminated. Both of these changes will expand the universe of prior art that precludes patenting. Unless patent applicants alter their practices to conform to the new law, patent rights can be inadvertently lost.
Under current U.S. patent laws, an inventor obtains a patent by submitting to the government an application that adequately describes the invention. Prior to awarding a patent to the applicant, the government compares the invention with the prior art&mdash;information considered in the public domain relative to the invention. A patent is awarded if the invention is neither identical to nor an obvious variant of what is in the prior art. Thus, the content of the prior art is critical to patentability.
Under pre-AIA U.S. patent law, the prior art was defined, in part, by the date on which the inventor(s) made the invention. Thus, an inventor could avoid at least some prior art by proving an invention date earlier than the filing date of the corresponding patent application. Furthermore, some acts and information that would otherwise qualify as prior art were excluded from the prior art on account of the date or geographical location of their occurrence.
Under the AIA, the following changes to each of these aspects of the prior art will take effect on March 16, 2013. The AIA will eliminate an inventor&rsquo;s ability to rely on an invention date earlier than his earliest patent application filing date. It will remove geographical restrictions on prior art information. And it will effectively eliminate the one-year grace period previously provided under U.S. patent law for excluding certain information and acts from the prior art.&nbsp;
The grace period will technically remain available to disqualify prior art in limited circumstances. Those circumstances relate generally to nonpatent disclosures made by the inventor(s) and by others who derive the disclosed information from the inventor(s). Significant details remain unresolved (pending Patent Office rule-making and judicial interpretation of the AIA) regarding the types and quality of inventor-made disclosures that will satisfy the grace-period requirements. Also, the grace-period requirements for disclosures made by non-inventors will likely be difficult and expensive for inventors to prove.&nbsp; In short, it would be unwise to believe that acts and information adverse to patentability can reliably be excluded from the prior art by grace-period exclusions from the AIA. Instead, innovators should alter their behavior to avoid the expanded prior art after the AIA changes are implemented.
What this means in a practical sense is that innovators should carefully assess protection for their potential U.S. patent rights before foreseeable prior art is created&mdash;especially after the March 16, 2013, date on which the universe of prior art is expanded by the AIA. For example, situations in which it can be appropriate to consider or reconsider the sufficiency of current patent protection include: innovative subject matter has been recently conceived or successfully tested; others are developing similar subject matter; innovative technical subject matter will be disclosed to someone (e.g., a potential collaborator, a customer, a noninventor employee, an investor) not having a strong, vested interest in maintaining its secrecy; a sale or an offer to sell may be made for an innovative product or service; a competitor may have enough information about your development plans to prospectively prepare an &ldquo;offensive&rdquo; public disclosure that will preclude patenting by you.
The AIA will increase the frequency with which innovators need to consider the adequacy of their patent protection.&nbsp; The AIA will also likely require earlier and more frequent patent filings to prevent unintended surrender of proprietary rights in innovative technologies.&nbsp;
Innovators should work with their patent counsel to develop and implement ways to assess threats to potential patent rights and procedures for securing them.&nbsp; In view of the likely increase in the frequency of patent filings, innovators and their counsel should also seek patenting strategies that minimize cost and disruption to other business activities. Author: Gary D. Colby Patent Attorney, Dilworth Paxson LLP (215) 575-7075 <a href="mailto:gcolby@dilworthlaw.com">gcolby@dilworthlaw.com</a>

How changes to patent law may affect your inventions

Prior Art Under the 2011 Patent Law Amendments:Traps for the Unwary

When looking ahead in the biofuels world, it makes sense to take a walk through the world of high technology in 1983. CPM was the operating system of choice, Apple was a small PC maker and IBM was still flaunting large systems sales. But change was in the air; companies like Commodore, Osborne, Kay and Actrix were showing glimmers of what was to come. Networked office systems using word processing to feed printers, communications over phone lines and the first cell phones were the executive perk of choice. The Altair, a kit-built, wire wrapped &ldquo;computer&rdquo; was a thing of the past, the future was clear, the path ahead, however, was fuzzy.
It is 2012 and in biotechnology, we are in the exact same situation as we were in digital 1983 facing a world full of amazing possibilities. Now it seems that everything is up for grabs and the new geeks are chemical engineers and biology majors with attitudes. The technologies are well understood, the science unchanged for 20 years except that they have become highly refined and infinitely flexible. It seems that enzymatic tribulations and feedstock options are defining the new biotech. Diesel from pond scum, long a dream, is now a reality in demonstration plants; sugar production from a massive new catalog of waste matter is invading the ethanol market while opening new avenues for critical chemicals from the same hardware with different software combinations.
In a scenario eerily similar to 1983 high-tech, big money is slowly coming on stream. Solazyme, LS9, Amyris and others floated huge IPOs and signed massive mutual assistance contracts with establishment partners. Procter &amp; Gamble is supporting LS9, ExxonMobil has its hands in several biotech companies and probably not for corporate write-offs. Reminiscent of when Hambrecht and Quist bird-dogged Apple and Intel was subtly salting the market with cash and technology? Those days are back, only now they are part of an international network that includes biofuels giant Brazil, the hungry Chinese, Iranian money begging to be free, Vinod Khosla and other visionaries betting megabucks on tiny organisms. There are large, inscrutable hedge funds, gently prodding small companies in the right direction.
If we accept that high-tech is the paradigm, then where is this going? It means more from less, cheaper, faster and more efficient conversion technologies. The biotech industry still has very little idea of how big and how transformative it will be. Right now medicines, fuels, cosmetics, food additives and derivatives have each spawned their own revolution.
Take the narrow world of biofuels. Not so long ago, there was either bioethanol or biodiesel from renewable sources. In that microcosm, biodiesel came from soy oil and ethanol from corn. In the past few years alone, we have seen ethanol booming in Brazil based on sugarcane, switchgrass in California, trees in the U.K. and literally hundreds of new varieties of possible feedstock. Ethanol now comes in Heinz 57 varieties from drop-in fuels to additives and chemicals like biobutanol, tire black, road slurry and other weird and wonderful things. Biodiesel is even more bizarre, from soy to animal fats, jatropha, algae, camelina, poppy seeds, waste vegetable oil and strange plants and animals and anything in between. The end product is becoming popular in New England as heating oil, powering jumbo jets, cleaning up after oil spills and changing a petroleum-hungry world into a renewable alternative world, and, oh yes, knocking carbons out of the sky by the ton.
On a practical level, how does this affect us all right now? The biology major of today is the computer engineer of 1983. The richest people in the world, apart from the Walton family, are the computer and software engineers like Bill Gates, the late Steve Jobs and others. So send yourself and your children back into the life sciences if you want to change the world. Because of a natural confluence of a number of unrelated facts, we are really only seeing the tip of the iceberg: the human genome project is done, and genetic engineering has become a fact of life. Small bacteria can be modified to produce a number of living organisms and the whole ethical challenge of a Monsanto suing people for unwillingly using their seeds needs to be reviewed. Third World countries becoming harvesting gulags for large concentrations of plantations paying minimal wages are starting to appear. Jatropha trees, while politically correct because they are nonfood, also raise the specter of subsistence farmers being forced off their land because they cannot compete with multinational agronomy monsters.
Looking ahead, from 1983, will we track the ups and downs of the Silicon Valley revolution and master the mistakes that were made then?&nbsp; That&rsquo;s a difficult question with no clear answer. We can only hope that 2012 will fulfill the promises of the early days of the microchip by bringing stability to our world without the penalties of high-tech allowing a world that resembles 1984 more than 2012. Author: Peter Brown Principal, Euro Marketing Tools (408) 426-5585 <a href="mailto:peter@euromarketingtools.com">peter@euromarketingtools.com</a>

Looking to the past can help forecast the future

So Where Do We Go from Here?

As I write to you, I am witnessing history at 40,000 feet above the U.S., a rare privilege, as one of the first commercial passengers on board the Alaska Airlines flight from Seattle to Washington, D.C. It is the first cross-country flight and one of two commercial flights in the U.S. to utilize renewable jet fuels.&nbsp;
When you consider that Congress only passed in 2007 the renewable fuel standard legislation calling for 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels, it is an amazing accomplishment for an industry in its infancy to actually fly a plane less than four years after legislation was signed into law by President George W. Bush. So, as I sit here gazing across the horizon at a spectacular sunset, I have to wonder if all this would even be possible if lawmakers in Washington had not helped in expediting the deployment of the innovative technologies powering this Boeing 737-800. I think we all know the answer.
As the super committee struggles to find a compromise on the reduction of the federal budget to the tune of $1.5 trillion over 10 years, many of the clean energy efforts by the federal government to support and expedite their commercial deployment are on the chopping block. Some in Congress would like to withdraw all federal dollars invested in clean energy. They have latched upon the failed loan guarantee of a California solar company as the justification to end all efforts in this area. But let&rsquo;s put this into context, as Congressman Ed Perlmutter, D-Colo., said to me recently, we spend more each day in Iraq than the loss incurred by the solar company loan.
It makes you want to scratch your head after reading all the sensational headlines, but unfortunately, this effort to throw the baby out with the bath water is only getting worse. In November, The Washington Post released a new poll showing support for alternative energy is slipping. The paper asked: When it comes to developing new energy technology, do you think government is necessary; or will business produce the technology we need without government investment? In 2009 the split was 58 percent to 32 percent in favor of government support. In today&rsquo;s polling, the number has slipped to 52 percent to 39 percent in favor of government support. When asked do you favor government policies for more subsidies for ethanol, 48 percent responding opposed and 38 percent supported. Not helpful to the advanced and cellulosic sectors, especially as we enter what is known in Washington as &ldquo;funny season,&rdquo; or the presidential election year.
Now here&rsquo;s what&rsquo;s even more frustrating; the poll also finds a developing partisan divide with Democrats more closely aligned with alternative energy and Republicans with increased government engagement to open on- and offshore drilling and mining. As an industry, we cannot fail to familiarize conservative candidates with the benefits of advanced biofuels and the promise we have already started delivering on by creating new jobs, reducing foreign oil consumption, strengthening our economic and national security. This is not a partisan issue; this is an issue of whether we deploy innovative technology for America and has nothing to do with whether you are Democrat or Republican.&nbsp;
So as I&rsquo;m talking to other passengers aboard this historic flight, I&rsquo;m hearing questions like those from Suzi Arndt, a farmer from Edwall, Wash., and Irene Padilla, a librarian for the state of Maryland, who both asked me how much the fuel cost versus regular fuel, and how much is available. I acknowledged the fuel may be more expensive today because it&rsquo;s the first of its kind. In order to bring down the cost of the new fuels, we need to build a strong demand for advanced renewable fuels that require the scale-up of significant gallons.
That is the way markets work. In fact, I told them that is actually how the U.S. government helped build the airline industry of today. Following the invention of the airplane by the Wright brothers, England began to perfect the manufacture of airplanes for the purpose of national defense. America followed that lead by building airplanes for defense purposes, and the U.S. Postal Service entered the market for aircraft to fly postage back and forth across the country. This created a viable demand for the planes and led to the financing of scalable, affordable aircraft.
I concluded that the same needs to happen with advanced renewable fuels. Both my fellow passengers smiled and said that seemed to make sense. And that, my friends, is the message we need to remind all Americans, specifically those politicians who now believe the government should leave everything to the free market.&nbsp;
We have much to gain from clean renewable advanced biofuel&mdash;jobs, energy diversity, environmental sustainability and national security. With the current economically challenging environment, only with continued government support will we expedite the use of these fuels in commercial flights, and ultimately be the catalyst for change around the world. Author: Michael McAdams President, Advanced Biofuels Association (202) 469-5140 <a href="mailto:Michael.McAdams@hklaw.com">Michael.McAdams@hklaw.com</a>

As it helped build the airline industry, government should also assist advanced biofuels development

Flying High on Advanced Biofuels!

This year began on a high note as many biofuel tax provisions that had either already expired, i.e., the $1 per gallon biodiesel and renewable diesel blender credits, or were set to expire at the end of 2010, had just been renewed&mdash;although with little expectation of being renewed again. Michael McAdams, president of the Advanced Biofuels Association, alluded to the need for more collaboration among the various biofuel trade associations in his January column, and foreshadowed political difficulties we would face in the coming 12 months. &ldquo;Our industry&rsquo;s enhanced efforts to work more closely together over the past six months must continue, with an even clearer focus on how to sustain current first-generation fuels while building the necessary public policy to expedite the deployment of second-generation advanced biofuels,&rdquo; McAdams wrote. &ldquo;We will return to a new Congress in 2011 with a quarter of the entire House being freshman members. This will require an extensive and compelling education effort on behalf of the biofuels industry. The political fights that we witnessed over the past six months on tax policy will not go away. They will be renewed afresh and a new policy discussion will begin. The biofuels industry will need to be ready to engage as a collective force once again, as we will be faced with the last year of the tax provisions, again.&rdquo;
In that same January issue, Associate Editor Erin Voegele authored a feature article titled, &ldquo;Searching for Unity,&rdquo; a story about the multitude of trade associations representing the various segments of biofuels, and how a more unified voice to Congress might benefit the industries. Just months later, the heads of seven renewable fuel trade associations dawned the stage of the 2011 International Biomass Conference &amp; Expo and discussed, among other topics, how they can continue working together. As the year progressed, the runaway debt and deficit situation came to a head; and the political appetite toward helping fund our national interests in terms of providing advanced biofuels a hand up&mdash;not a hand out&mdash;switched from diet mode to one of fasting.
Despite these setbacks, however, advanced biofuels have never seen a more productive year of achievements and milestones. Tons of concrete and steel have been installed for pilot, demonstration and industrial-scale facilities, helping give commercial shape to years of research and development. A proliferation of joint ventures made this year between big, and not so big, companies gives us a glimpse of what next year will hold. Markets such as that of biojet fuel continue to expand with every additional commercial flight crossing the skies. And speaking of commercial biojet flights, check out McAdams&rsquo; column on page 6 as he gives a 30,000-foot view of biojet&rsquo;s progress&mdash;literally. He was a passenger on the November Alaska Airlines flight from Seattle to Washington, D.C.
Author: Ron Kotrba Editor, Biorefining Magazine <a href="mailto:rkotrba@bbiinternational.com">rkotrba@bbiinternational.com</a>

What a Year

1/16. Presented by the California Biodiesel Alliance and Biodiesel Magazine, the California Biodiesel &amp; Renewable Diesel Conference is the first event of its kind and will serve as the state&rsquo;s most important conversation between policymakers, investors, researchers, producers and fuel users regarding the economic and environmental benefits of producing, distributing and utilizing biodiesel and other forms of renewable diesel.
Join the California Biodiesel Alliance and Biodiesel Magazine in this inaugural event Jan. 16 at the Marriot Marquis in beautiful downtown San Francisco.
Informative tracks include: &bull; New Production Technologies, Energy Integration and Financing &bull; The Low Carbon Fuel Standard and the California Market &bull; International, Federal and State Regulations and Incentives &bull; Advanced Feedstocks, Algae and Beyond Since 2006, the California Biodiesel Alliance has championed the cause of biodiesel in California and has worked behind the scenes on every important issue faced by biodiesel in the state and at the national level. It has been instrumental in working with the following agencies to achieve these results: &bull; U.S. EPA; designing, implementing the RFS1 and RFS2 programs &bull; California Department of Food and Agriculture Division of Measurement Standards; on the fuel variance program and biodiesel pump labeling regulations &bull; The state legislature; getting proper definitions for biodiesel and renewable diesel in California &bull; California Air Resources Board; completing the life-cycle analysis of waste feedstock biodiesels to ensure that they receive the full benefits of their low carbon properties &bull; California Energy Commission; insuring that biodiesel receives a fair share of government grant funding through AB 118, specifically developing a focus on biodiesel infrastructure grants. Some of the current challenges the California Biodiesel Alliance is helping to overcome, which will be discussed at the workshop, include ensuring California&rsquo;s emissions regulations don&rsquo;t unfairly subject biodiesel to laws based on old NOx data; the LCFS is properly implemented and biodiesel&rsquo;s carbon reductions are fully realized in the legislation; increasing biodiesel infrastructure funding through AB 118; and developing regulations allowing for storage of biodiesel in underground tanks.

March 2012

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Columns

An Abundance of Opportunities

Small Government, Big Changes to Biomass Regulations

Fueling America: The Need for Standardization of Solid Biofuels

Economic Analysis of a Mobile Indirect Biomass Liquefaction System

Arranging Debt Financing for Biomass Projects

Prior Art Under the 2011 Patent Law Amendments:Traps for the Unwary

So Where Do We Go from Here?

Flying High on Advanced Biofuels!

What a Year

Featured

Biomass Sustains Business

The Breadbasket's Biomass Belt

Four Days in the Algae Epicenter

Making a Dent in 2012 and Beyond

Hitting a New Stride

March 2012.css-7jxktu{position:absolute;bottom:0px;left:0px;right:0px;height:3px;border-radius:3px;background-color:var(--chakra-colors-brandBlack);}

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Columns

An Abundance of Opportunities

Small Government, Big Changes to Biomass Regulations

Fueling America: The Need for Standardization of Solid Biofuels

Economic Analysis of a Mobile Indirect Biomass Liquefaction System

Arranging Debt Financing for Biomass Projects

Prior Art Under the 2011 Patent Law Amendments:Traps for the Unwary

So Where Do We Go from Here?

Flying High on Advanced Biofuels!

What a Year

Featured

Biomass Sustains Business

The Breadbasket's Biomass Belt

Four Days in the Algae Epicenter

Making a Dent in 2012 and Beyond

Hitting a New Stride

March 2012