The latest BioEnergy News from RenewableEnergyWorld.com arrived yesterday and generally continued the skepticism about biofuels. Mind you, this is coming from a promoter of this technology. However, at the end of this posting I will provide some great news as a rebuttal to my article last week entitled:
The information that was shared with me from my prime contact at the U.S. Department of Energy on this subject was influential in adjusting my attitude about cellulosic ethanol.
Here are these headlines from RenewableEnergyWorld.com:
Argentina Files WTO Claim Over Biofuels Duties
Well, Cliff Claven is back (Anyone know who he really is???):
Science continues to be trampled by politics in the realm of alternative energy. It is long overdue for this growing groundswell of intellectual awakening to emerge in Europe, and hopefully soon it will cross the Atlantic and our universities will stop parroting politically correct propaganda for the state, start doing some intellectual heavy lifting, and dutifully challenge the greenwashing of biofuels.
Jim Lane's world is a fantasy. If America is to survive in the 21st Century against all its threats and competitors, we will need more Americans who are willing to deal with the real world and its pesky limitations like the laws of physics, and who are able to apply basic math skills to determine what is possible and impossible, and who consider all the interconnected costs and benefits of courses of action instead of treating the world as a one-dimensional problem where all we need to do is reduce one atmospheric gas.
If you've been following my postings on biofuels, you will be familiar of his feud with Jim Lane, editor of Biofuels Digest. Lane is in a difficult position because he is advocating a transitional technology that has no proven track record, yet. Claven picks holes in the logic because there has been over-hyping in the past, and the true commercialization of these biofuels is not yet quite here. They are both right, yet maybe wrong. This is all so controversial. But good news follows.
Neil Rossmeissl is the USDOE Manager for Integrated Biorefinery Platform Technology in the Office of Bioenergy Technologies Program. But this information is a couple of years old, so he'll let me know if any corrections need to be made. Like me, he is a chemical engineer. I've known him since 1993 when he was in the Hydrogen Program. Neil indicated to me that:
- cellulosic ethanol can be produced today from $2.15/gallon--INEOS is making 8 million gallons per year of cellulosic ethanol at this price today through gasification of municipal solid waste and fermentation of the CO/H2 to ethanol
- drop-in jetfuel and gasoline from biomass remain expensive at $5/gallon ($210/barrel)
- thermochemical routes would be cheaper, but the catalysts are not yet available
- the biggest issue is feedstock cost (if $35/bone dry ton, ethanol can be made for under $2.25/gallon)
- Abengoa and Poet will use corn stover at $75/bdt and should have a production cost of $2.60/gallon
Remember though that to the $2.60/gallon, other costs need to be added, including profits. In any case, I am really surprised that INEOS, Abengoa and Poet are on the verge of attaining the commercial production of cellulosic ethanol. No, make that, I'm shocked. But I've long been retired and Neil manages this program for our country. Who would you believe? I want to be optimistic, and trust that these companies continue to survive, and, I hope, prosper.
* From this article is a comparison of various green feedstock oil cost/gallon compared to petroleum and jet fuel:
** I later added this entry from the National Algae Association
$2.86/gal algal biofuel now possible?
The entry goes on to say that as attractive as the above price might be, $120/barrel (equivalent of $2.86/gallon) is not good enough, and the production cost needs to be brought down to $1.50/gallon ($63/barrel). I'm afraid, though, that even $2.86/gallon today is a not realistic. The hype in this field perhaps exceeds any other sustainable commercialization opportunity. A lot more basic science and engineering will be required to get anywhere close to $3/gallon, and this fundamental work is just not being funded today .
-
0 comments:
Post a Comment