June 2011 Ethanol Producer Magazine

www.ethanolproducer.com

ALSOCellulosic Enzymes Ready for CommercializationPage 62

Authors Advocate Open Fuel Standard Page 68

Examining New Racing Connection

as Indianapolis Hosts FEW

Page 44

INSIDE: driVinG down etHAnol Process wAter use

JUNE 2011

Ethanol Flags Fly over Indy

4 | Ethanol Producer Magazine | June 2011

JUNE ISSUE 2011 VOL. 17 ISSUE 6

contents

Ethanol Producer Magazine: (USPS No. 023-974) June 2011, Vol. 17, Issue 6. Ethanol Producer Magazine is published monthly. Principal Offi ce: 308 Second Ave. N., Suite 304, Grand Forks, ND 58203. Periodicals Postage Paid at Grand Forks, North Dakota and additional mailing offi ces. POSTMAS-TER: Send address changes to Ethanol Producer Magazine/Subscriptions, 308 Second Ave. N., Suite 304, Grand Forks, North Dakota 58203.

78 82 86

PROMOTIONIowa Does Its Part in Encouraging Adoption of E15 irFA leads effort to show retailers that consumers want higher blends.By Lucy Norton

YEASTYeast Management Provides Stable Fermentation Performancelooking at high-density seed cultivation as strategy to increase yields.By Peter Krasucki

FEAtUrES44 50

62

EVENT FEw Features high-octane Line-upindianapolis will host the 2011 international Fuel ethanol workshop & expo. By holly Jessen

WATERwater: reduce, reuse and recycle ethanol producers continue to drive water consumption lower.By holly Jessen

ENZYMESEnding the Enzyme Enigmadevelopers say cellulosic enzymes are ready for big debut in commercial plants. By Kris Bevill

dePArtMents

6 Editor’s Note see you in indianapolis BY SUSANNE RETKA SCHILL

10 the way I See It listen for the new drumbeat BY MIKE BRYAN

11 Events calendar upcoming conferences & trade shows

12 View From the hill ethanol standing Between us and oPec BY BOB DINNEEN

14 Drive the Affordable Alternative to record Gas Prices BY TOM BUIS

16 grassroots Voice Promoting our Policy Priorities BY BRIAN JENNINGS

18 Europe calling Finally, a Fair Fuel taxation sytem BY ROB VIERHOUT

20 taking Stalk talking tubers—energy Beets to ethanol BY COLE GUSTAFSON

22 Business Matters on water use and efficiency Advancements BY GEOFF MORGAN

24 Business Briefs

28 commodities report

32 Distilled

95 Marketplace

98 Ad Index

68

POLICYFuel choice: turn Oil into Salt Authors advocate open Fuel standard to sap Big oil’s power. By holly Jessen

MAINTENANCE - 90Dry Ice Blasting Solves Ethanol Plant Maintenance headachecleaning dust from surfaces safely without water.By Kellie grob

FIREFIGHTING - 92Fighting an Ethanol tank Fire Presents Unique challenges research needed to understand behavior shifts in large-scale fires.By henry Persson

WATERImplementing Integrated zero Liquid Dischargecomparing the results from 11 installations reveals zero discharge advantage.By todd Potas

cONtrIBUtIONS


We at Ethanol Producer Magazine and BBI In-ternational are in high gear, preparing for the 2011 International Fuel Ethanol Workshop & Expo, June 27-30 at the Indiana Convention Center in India-napolis. Behind the scenes, we have amazing people who seldom get recognized. Speakers at the event get to know Tim Portz and Sue Conroe. Portz manages the development of the solid agenda and tours and Conroe keeps in touch with speakers to gather current photos and bios and ensure that all goes smoothly with well over 100 slide presentations. The logistical guru is Michael Clarke, who coordinates arrangements at the convention center and hotels, making sure the 2,500 expected guests at FEW have a positive experience. Then there’s the account managers at BBI who do a yeoman’s effort working with the many sales representatives in the ethanol industry, helping them get their messages out to the people who matter. At the conference itself, Janice Sue German makes sure exhibitors have what they need so they can focus on the work they come to do.

The FEW is a barometer of the ethanol industry, revealing a renewed enthusiasm in the industry after a couple of tough years. It actually began last year, we learned from exhibitors who were well satisfied with the St. Louis event. It is apparent in the great re-sponse this year. From all indicators, the 2011 FEW in Indianapolis will be well attended.

A new way to follow happenings at FEW emerged spontaneously via Twitter last year. Tweeting isn’t hard, but like anything in computers these days, figuring it out the first time can be a puzzle. Head to Twitter.com and follow the instructions to set up an account. From there, mark the Twitterstreams to follow. Keep on top of ethanol news by following our postings at EthanolMagazine. You can also save search terms, such as a brand name, and keywords pertaining to your business or industry. For example, monitoring the keyword #ethanol will pull up any Tweets posted including the hash tag, #ethanol. Last year, folks started tagging their Tweets from the FEW; this year, we’ll use #FEW2011. Follow the conference, offer your comments as well, and in the meantime follow our regular coverage of the industry at Twitter.com/EthanolMagazine.

SuSannE REtka SChIll, [email protected]

SEE YOU IN INDIANAPOLIS

AssociAte editors

editor’s note

For industry news. Follow us: twIttEr.cOM/EthANOLMAgAzINE

kRIS BEvIll digs into enzymes this month, describing the tremendous progress that’s been made in driving down costs for cellulosic ethanol produc-tion, and hinting at the commercialization thrust soon to occur.

holly JESSEn fills us in on more details about the 2011 FEW in this issue. Ethanol’s water use is also on her radar this month, as she talks to several producers with water efficiency efforts and explores the question—just how does ethanol compare with oil in its water use?

June 2011 | Ethanol Producer Magazine | 7

TM

EDItOrIAL

editor Susanne retka Schill [email protected]

AssociAte editors holly Jessen [email protected]

Kris Bevill [email protected]

coPy editor Jan tellmann [email protected]

Art

Art director Jaci Satterlund [email protected]

GrAPHic desiGners Erica Marquis [email protected]

Lindsey Noble [email protected]

PUBLIShINg

cHAirMAn Mike Bryan [email protected]

ceo Joe Bryan [email protected]

Vice Presidenttom Bryan [email protected]

SALES

Vice President, sAles & MArKetinG Matthew Spoor [email protected]

eXecutiVe Account MAnAGer howard Brockhouse [email protected]

senior Account MAnAGer Jeremy hanson [email protected]

Account MAnAGerschip Shereck [email protected]

Marty Steen [email protected]

Bob Brown [email protected]

Andrea Anderson [email protected]

Dave Austin [email protected]

Nick Jensen [email protected]

circulAtion MAnAGer Jessica Beaudry [email protected]

suBscriBer AcQuisition MAnAGer Jason Smith [email protected]

AdVertisinG coordinAtor Marla DeFoe [email protected]

senior MArKetinG MAnAGer John Nelson [email protected]

EDItOrIAL BOArD

customer Service Please call 1-866-746-8385 or email us at [email protected]. Subscriptions to Ethanol Producer Magazine are free of charge to everyone with the exception of a shipping and handling charge of $49.95 for any country outside the united states, canada and Mexico. to subscribe, visit www.ethanolProducer.com or you can send your mailing address and payment (checks made out to BBi international) to: Ethanol Producer Magazine subscriptions, 308 second Ave. n., suite 304, Grand Forks, nd 58203. you can also fax a subscription form to (701) 746-5367. Back Issues, Reprints and Permissions Select back issues are

available for $3.95 each, plus shipping. Article reprints are also available for a fee. For more information, contact us at (701) 746-8385 or [email protected]. Advertising Ethanol Producer Magazine pro-vides a specific topic delivered to a highly targeted audience. we are committed to editorial excellence and high-quality print production. to find out more about Ethanol Producer Magazine advertising opportunities, please contact us at (701) 746-8385 or [email protected]. Letters to the Editor we welcome letters to the editor. send to Ethanol Producer Magazine letters to the editor, 308 2nd Ave. n., suite 304, Grand Forks, nd 58203 or e-mail to [email protected]. Please include your name, address and phone number. letters may be edited for clarity and/or space.

COPYRIGHT © 2011 by BBI International

Please recycle this magazine and remove inserts or samples before recycling

chippewa Valley ethanol co. lllP Mike Jerkecilion inc. Jeremy wilhelm

commonwealth Agri-energy llc Mick hendersoncorn Plus lllP Keith Kor

Golden Grain energy llc walter wendland

Neal Jakel illinois river energy llc

Bert Farrish lifeline Foods llc

Eric Mosebey lincolnland Agri-energy llc

Steve roe little sioux corn Processors lP

Bernie Punt siouxland energy & livestock co-op

For industry news. Follow us: twIttEr.cOM/EthANOLMAgAzINE

The New Ethanol.

Refined, retailed,and rolling across America now.

The New Ethanol.

Refined, retailed,and rolling across America now.


the Way i see it

listen for the new drumbeatBy Mike Bryan

Author: Mike BryanChairman, BBI International

[email protected]

Ethanol provides a growing sense of independence in a world that is constantly being reshaped by war. Protectionism and isolationism are seldom good options in a global economy, but self-preservation and self-reliance are.

A large part of the oil-producing region of the world is in utter turmoil, with no real end in sight. And when the current strife does come to an end, if it ever does, what is to follow? To assume that because bin Laden is dead and countries in the Middle East are searching for a new form of governance means that all is well, and the future is bright, could indeed be a miscalculation of gigantic proportion.

There has never been a time in the 30 year history of the ethanol industry that has been more important. Important to our national security, important to our energy security, important to our economy, all of which are being threatened. Ethanol, no matter where in the world it is produced, promotes peace. No wars have ever been fought over ethanol. No invasions of other countries or clandestine operations have ever been launched because of ethanol.

I suppose that’s why it is so frustrating, baffl ing, even maddening at times, to see the articles, conjured-up reports and outright lies that are perpetrated about ethanol and renewable energy in general. It’s sad that it has come to this.

We need to act with an urgent sense of self-reliance by developing our domestic oil and natural gas reserves. At the same time, it’s imperative that we share the stage with domestically produced renewable energy. These are not mutually exclusive objectives. They can act in unison to build a stronger economy, a cleaner environment and a greater degree of self-preservation. Anyone who says otherwise, either has their head in the sand, or has an opposing vested interest.

As young people around the world exchange ideas and ideologies on the Internet, Facebook, Twitter and a host of other social networks, the world becomes much smaller. What happens in rural China does not seem so distant to a student in Central Europe or America. Viewing the world from a classroom in Libya can inspire those to act who can clearly see there is a better way.

The youth of today represent our future, and luckily they don’t cling to the ideas of past generations. Oil will once again become prehistoric, from whence it came. Ethanol and other renewable forms of energy that we have today will also give way to even newer, cleaner and more energy effi cient solutions. Around the world, young people are rejecting the status quo as they always have, and demand that the world change to embrace new ideas.

Today’s energy sources are all just stepping stones to tomorrow. Stop for a moment and listen. You’ll hear the drumbeat of a new generation, a generation that’s connected on a global scale—a generation that will look at energy, the environment and, we hope war, in a whole new light. We’re like the infamous Hatfi elds and McCoys fi ghting for generations until eventually they forgot what they were actually fi ghting about in the fi rst place. Let’s join the youth of the world and work towards freedom, peace, understanding and a better, cleaner environment and greater self-reliance. They’ll wait for us to catch up.

That’s the way I see it.


events calendar

International FuelEthanol workshop & ExpoJune 27-30, 2011indiana convention center | indianapolis, indiana

the Few is the largest, longest-running ethanol conference in the world. Focused on production of grain and cellulosic ethanol, operational efficien-cies, plant management, energy use and near-term research and development, the Few will attract 2,500 attendees.(866) 746-8385 | www.fuelethanolworkshop.com

International Biorefining conference & trade Showseptember 14-16, 2011Hilton Americas – Houston | Houston, texas

the international Biorefining conference & trade show brings together agricultural, forestry, waste, and petrochemical professionals to explore the value-added opportunities awaiting them and their organizations within the quickly maturing biorefining industry. (866) 746-8385 | www.biorefiningconference.com

Northeast Biomass conference & trade Showoctober 11-13, 2011westin Place Hotel | Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

with an exclusive focus on biomass utilization in the northeast – from Maryland to Maine – the northeast Biomass conference & trade show will connect current and future producers of biomass-derived electricity, industrial heat and power, and advanced biofuels, with waste generators, aggrega-tors, growers, municipal leaders, utilities, technol-ogy providers, equipment manufacturers, investors and policymakers. speaker abstracts are now being accepted online.(866) 746-8385 | www.biomassconference.com/northeast

Algae Biomass Summitoctober 25-27, 2011Hyatt regency Minneapolis | Minneapolis, Minnesota

organized by the Algae Biomass organization and coproduced by BBi international, this event brings current and future producers of biobased products and energy together with algae crop growers, municipal leaders, technology providers, equipment manufacturers, project developers, investors and policy makers. it’s a true one-stop shop – the world’s premier educational and networking junction for all algae industries. (866) 746-8385 | www.algaebiomasssummit.org

FEw Agenda Offers Information for All

The International Fuel Ethanol Workshop & Expo will be convening for its 27th year June 27 to 30 at the Indiana Convention Center

in Indianapolis. As always, the event, sponsored by Ethanol Producer Magazine and organized by BBI International, has a packed schedule. Attendees can choose from 30 panels in four tracks that will feature industry experts sharing the latest information on innovation in the ethanol industry.

The production track will zero in on aspects of the ethanol process, from taking a closer look at contaminant control to keeping yeasts healthy, happy and productive. Other panels will talk about fine tuning the grind and other liquefaction strategies, advanced process control methodologies, water efficiency and process enhancement technologies.

The management track is aimed at directors and ethanol industry executives, with one panel addressing mergers and acquisitions, another talking about attracting and retaining quality employees and third panel talking about recruiting board members. There are many dimensions to being a successful ethanol producer. Other panels will address qualifying ethanol to ship into markets with new environmental standards, managing risk and mastering compliance and permitting requirements.

Product diversification—an important way to spread risk—is the focus of the conference’s third track. One panel in the coproducts track will explore the work being done on developing high-value coproducts from ethanol sidestreams. Other panels will examine fractionation and corn oil extraction from several angles, as well as maintaining quality in distillers grains.

The track devoted to cellulosic ethanol is among the most popular at the FEW—the place where attendees get brought up to date on the latest project developments and technology advancements. One panel will dig into the progress being made to integrate cellulosic production into first-generation corn ethanol plants. Others will address feedstock issues, enzyme developments, process improvements and economics.

Education doesn’t only occur in the panel presentations at FEW. The expo floor will be full of industry experts exhibiting their latest products and services and engaging in informative conversations. FEW takes pride in being the world’s largest ethanol conference, attracting people from all over the world to participate in the best ethanol networking opportunity available.

To register or for more information about speakers and conference events, sponsorships and exhibiting, visit www.fuelethanolworkshop.com.

06/27


vieW From the hill

ethanol standing Between us and oPec By Bob dinneen

Common sense suggests that when you replace 10 percent of a market with a cheaper alternative, it will put downward pressure on prices. That is currently the case with respect to America’s use of ethanol. And now, new research on the impact ethanol has on gasoline prices puts real dollar val-ues on what we all knew to be true.

According to two economics profes-sors from Iowa State University and the University of Washington, the use of more than 13 billion gallons of ethanol in 2010 alone, kept gasoline prices 89 cents cheap-er than they otherwise would have been. That translates to a savings of more than $800 a year for an average U.S. family.

The research also looked at the role of ethanol in helping rein in gas prices from the decade from 2000-’10. The growing production and use of ethanol helped keep gas prices 25 cents per gallon lower on average than they would otherwise have been. Based upon U.S. DOE data on gasoline use, that translates to more than $34 billion in savings at the pump annually during that time period. These savings dwarf the $6 billion in investment in 2010 in the form of the ethanol blenders credit.

Perhaps most interesting about the study is the hypothetical scenario that analyzes gasoline price reaction should ethanol supplies disappear overnight. Ac-cording to the professors, gasoline prices would rise anywhere from 41 to 92 percent. Assuming a gas price of $4 per gallon, such a scenario could send prices well above $7 per gallon. Now, we all know that such a scenario is unlikely. America’s ethanol pro-ducers have a history of providing a stable, dependable supply of renewable fuel 12 months out of the year. But, it should open the eyes of lawmakers and other industries that would seek to eliminate America’s domestic ethanol industry.

As Dermot Hayes, one of the study’s author notes, the expansion in domestic ethanol production “has substituted for an expansion and modernization of U.S. oil refi ning capacity that would otherwise have been needed. If ethanol production were to come to a sudden halt, perhaps due to a poor corn crop, there would be a dramatic increase in U.S. gasoline prices and the resulting increase in U.S. gasoline imports would also cause world gasoline prices to increase in the short run.”

As Congress debates American en-ergy policy in earnest, it must recognize the contributions of domestic ethanol produc-tion. Not only does ethanol production

provide the only sustainable, renewable alternative to gasoline today, it is funda-mentally altering oil and gasoline markets and helping shield consumers and the U.S. economy from the vagaries of OPEC and the world oil market.

It is time for Congress to pass strong energy legislation that properly and re-sponsibly incentivizes the continued growth and evolution of America’s ethanol industry while eliminating wasteful subsidies for last century’s energy technologies.

Author: Bob DinneenPresident and CEO of the

Renewable Fuels Association(202) 289-3835

Put BetaTec® natural hop extracts to work in your fermentation process to replace antibiotics and enhance yeast propagation. IsoStab® is the natural way to effectively control gram-positive bacteria while eliminating antibiotics and harsh chemicals. Plus, antibiotic-free DDGS adds value to your co-products. VitaHop® Silver yeast nutrient enhances yeast performance and vitality, inducing faster fermentations and larger yields. Combined with BetaTec® fermentation expertise and training, these technologies will significantly increase your plant’s efficiency.

BetaTec®…the natural hop to higher profits. For more information specific to fuel ethanol producers, visit www.bthp.info.

www.betatechopproducts.com

Visit us at FEWbooth 619


drive

the Affordable Alternative to record Gas PricesBy tom Buis

Analysts are saying that new record gas prices are likely this summer driving season. That won’t just hurt at the fi lling station. It’ll hurt throughout the household budgets of all Americans, as high oil prices will mean higher gas and grocery prices—and a threat to the still-recovering economy.

At the same time that everyday Americans are feeling the budget squeeze, the big oil companies are raking in enormous profi ts. Americans are starting to get angry. In the fi rst quarter this year, the top fi ve major oil companies in the United States reported soaring profi ts as gas and oil prices skyrocketed to their highest peaks in three years. Even BP, which set aside $400 million to cover costs from the Deepwater Horizon spill, reported a 17 percent increase in its profi ts of $7.1 billion for the quarter.

Public anger is spurring some members of Congress to action. We may see legislative support for President Obama’s proposal to end the excessive tax incentives the oil industry has enjoyed for years. Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), a senior member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said, “When BP makes billions in profi ts, even after the year they just had, you know

it’s time to cap the gusher of tax breaks that have been subsidizing the biggest oil companies for decades.”

Not only are the tax subsidies lopsidedly in support of deeply entrenched oil companies, but so are the market supports. Growth Energy is proposing that we redirect some portion of tax support for energy and use that to invest it in giving motorists greater access to the only commercially viable alternative fuel that we have today: domestic ethanol.

Today, the oil industry benefi ts from permanent subsidies and government regulations that give oil a near monopoly on the fuels market, forcing motorists to use gasoline refi ned from oil. That is why Growth Energy proposed its Fueling Freedom plan, which would redirect ethanol tax policy in a manner that would help boost the number of fl ex-fuel vehicles on the road and fl ex-fuel pumps at fi lling stations.

There are already nearly 300 fl ex-fuel pumps in the United States, and the recently announced USDA Rural Energy for America Program will provide loans and grants to help retailers install thousands more across the country in the next fi ve years. But we must take further steps.

With more fl ex-fuel vehicles on the road and more fl ex-fuel pumps to provide midlevel ethanol blends, Americans would have a genuine choice in the marketplace. Consumers could make their choice based on price or

performance, reducing the skyrocketing cost of gasoline derived from oil, and keeping more money here in America, instead of sending it overseas.

Ethanol is better for the environment than gasoline and it helps our rural communities thrive. Every gallon of imported oil we displace with domestic ethanol strengthens our national security and our economy.

Ethanol is the only progress this nation has made in reducing our dependence on foreign oil in more than 40 years. Blending 10 percent ethanol into our fuel reduces gas prices by as much as 35 cents a gallon, displaces millions of barrels of imported oil every year and removes harmful emissions from the air.

And we can do more if we open the market to higher blends.

This year, Congress has the opportunity to accelerate our nation’s progress toward energy independence by cutting oil subsidies and investing in job-creating, air-cleaning ethanol. By the time you read this article, we hope Congress will have already taken the fi rst step toward achieving these goals. If not, we will continue to work with them to open up the market to give consumers access to clean, affordable, domestically produced fuel.

Author: Tom BuisCEO, Growth Energy

(202)[email protected]


Grassroots voice

Promoting our Policy Priorities

By Brian Jennings

The American Coalition for Ethanol is grateful for the opportunity to communicate with readers of Ethanol Producer Magazine through our new monthly column, Grassroots Voice.

For nearly 25 years, ACE’s mission has been to make American ethanol the consumer fuel of choice. We’ve stood shoulder to shoulder with you to grow the industry and provide opportunities for farmers and ethanol producers to supply our nation with a domestic, reliable, and clean source of fuel.

Our members expect ACE to be team players and forge consensus within the industry and we believe our ability to bring people together is what sets us apart. As a grassroots organization we provide a home for ethanol producers to join forces with farmers, researchers, investors, rural electric cooperatives and businesses that supply the ethanol industry.

With the help of this grassroots family, earlier this year ACE organized the largest-ever ethanol advocacy effort to occur in the nation’s Capitol.

Over the course of two days, ACE members from 15 states met with more than 160 Members of Congress representing 44 states, including

meetings with about half of the 100 freshmen members of Congress.

ACE organizes an annual Washington fl y-in because no one is more qualifi ed to promote our policy priorities than grassroots advocates. As a professional lobbyist, I put my experience and expertise to work every day to promote ethanol before policymakers. But an ethanol plant board member like Dave Sovereign of Golden Grain Energy or CEO like Mike Jerke of Chippewa Valley Ethanol Company can do an even more effective job because folks like Dave and Mike can put a human face on the benefi ts and importance of ethanol.

Our fl y-in was hardly an exercise in preaching to the choir, rather, most of our meetings were with lawmakers who voted against allowing EPA to proceed with implementation of E15 or allowing USDA to help assist with blender pump installation. A team of ACE members even met with Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) regarding his bill to immediately repeal the ethanol tax credit. We were under no illusion that we’d change Coburn’s mind. However, ACE’s approach with him and other legislators who don’t support ethanol has been that we ought to talk to them because if we don’t take the time to explain why our industry and ethanol is important, who will? Our industry cannot afford to allow our opponents to defi ne us, we need to be proactive and talk to opponents as well as supporters of ethanol.

The timing of our fl y-in could not have been better. While ACE members urged the lawmakers to support legislation providing consumer fuel choice through blender pumps and FFVs,

President Obama gave a major speech recently outlining his vision for a new energy policy, which included a reference to corn ethanol’s ability to reduce foreign oil imports and the need for blender pumps and FFVs as well. And the week following the fl y-in, after our members urged senators to support S. 187, bipartisan legislation that provides for more FFVs and blender pumps, the Senate Energy Committee held a hearing on the bill, a real accomplishment in that this was the fi rst time the committee devoted a hearing to ethanol infrastructure. Finally, ACE members were able to lobby in support of reform, not repeal, of VEETC during the fl y-in and fi ght back against Coburn’s amendment to repeal the tax credit immediately. We effectively made the point with Congress that while Big Oil is clinging to their status-quo subsidies and reaping profi ts (and in some instances, avoiding paying taxes), ethanol is working to reform and even sacrifi ce our tax incentive in exchange for a level playing fi eld.

This is the fi rst step in what will be a challenging process of building relationships, educating new legislators, and reshaping ethanol policy this year, but an important step that we could not have taken without grassroots ACE members.

We are grateful for the opportunity to create powerful bonds with grassroots advocates and to stand and fi ght with them in support of ethanol.

Author: Brian Jennings, Executive Vice President,

American Coalition for Ethanol605-334-3381

[email protected]

®, TM, SM Trademarks and service marks of Pioneer Hi-Bred. All purchases are subject to the terms of labeling and purchase documents.© 2009 PHII BIOFL015738P238AVA

Access toMore Farmers

and Bushels

More Ethanolper Bushel

Better Grain Quality

PioneerMarketPoint®

Resource

PioneerQualiTrak®

System

Measuringthe Results

Right feedstock. Right value.

BIOFL015738P238AVA.indd 1 11/23/09 1:15:06 PM


eUroPe callinG

Finally, a Fair Fuel taxation systemBy robert Vierhout

A good way for governments to achieve their policy goals is to deploy tax instruments. Nothing new, but often highly disputed, whether it is about giving away or getting money. A recent proposal of the European Com-mission to modernize EU energy taxation policies confi rms that taxation matters generate controversy.

The idea to ‘upgrade’ the Energy Taxation Directive was on paper at the end of 2008, following the adoption of the Euro-pean climate and energy package. It made perfect sense to deploy tax measures that would help achieve the energy and climate targets set for 2020. Taxation policy within the EU is sensitive, however. Decisions on tax matters require unanimity among the 27 states and, with the June ‘09 EU elec-tions approaching, the proposal went into the freezer. In mid 2010, the idea nearly emerged again, but the climate was still not right. Faced with the fi nancial crisis, the EC did not want to push its luck and be accused of interfering in government rev-enues. The proposal stayed in the freezer.

Finally, April 2011, it was defrosting time.

What the commission now is propos-ing makes a lot of sense and is actually partly built upon the experience of some EU countries. Future energy taxes should be based on two components—CO2 emis-sions and energy density. Both have major implications for ethanol.

A fuel made from biomass does not emit CO2 as compared to fossil fuel, and thus biofuels will be exempted. A precondi-tion, however, is that the biofuel complies with sustainability criteria enshrined in the Renewable Energy Directive. For all forms of fossil fuel (gasoline, diesel, kerosene, propane and natural gas) a minimal tax will apply of €20 ($22.75) per ton of CO2 emitted.

Energy density taxation will likely also benefi t ethanol. By taxing the actual en-ergy that a product generates, measured in gigajoules (GJ), ethanol will be taxed much lower compared to fossil fuel, due to its lower energy density. The harmonized energy density tax is set at €9.6 per GJ for all motor fuels. Unfortunately, it will take until at least 2018 (and possibly another fi ve years) before the taxation difference between gasoline and diesel will be gone. The minimum tax on propane and natural gas is now as low as €1.5 per GJ and for diesel €8.2 per GJ.

This objective to harmonize the energy density tax is crucially important for ethanol because it will mean a boost for driving gasoline-powered cars. In almost all EU countries, diesel taxes are lower, sometimes much lower, than gasoline taxes—a strong driver for an ever-growing diesel fl eet. Even though the EU is short on its diesel needs (about 20 percent is imported), most EU governments have not harmonized the two. Only the UK has an equal tax between the two fuels.

The provision to increase the diesel tax to equal gasoline taxes could well be the element that brings the entire proposal into jeopardy, however. The day before the bill was proposed, the German car industry was up in arms and made it very clear

that it was poised to torpedo the proposal. German car manufacturers claim that a higher tax on diesel will push consum-ers away from driving very fuel-effi cient diesel cars. It is clear that companies like BMW, Mercedes and Volkswagen fear that the golden diesel technology goose will be butchered. Such a position was to be expected.

Somewhat unexpectedly German Chancellor Angela Merkel echoed the concerns of the car industry and said that Germany would not support the proposal. Oil companies have not yet, publicly, interfered in the debate, but insiders say this sector supports the proposal because it will bring the transport fuel market more in balance.

The UK government also reacted negatively—not so much because it would not agree to the content of the proposal; it would very well fi t the UK policy on energy taxation. No, the mere fact that Brussels is interfering in tax issues is too much for the UK government.

It is obvious that this is not a going to be an easy ride, but regulators don’t have that much time. The bill needs to enter into force by 2013—a very short period for such a sensitive topic and very ambi-tious, especially if one knows that it took 10 years to adopt the energy taxation law currently in force.

Author: Robert VierhoutSecretary-general, ePURE

[email protected]

For more information, visit www.fermentis.com or email [email protected]

Our fermentationexperts offer cus-

tom made recom-mendations to adapt

to your process, yourneeds & your economics.

From the selection of the yeaststrain to the definition of its format

up to onsite training of your staff, Fermentis offers yourethanol plant a global fermentation approach to maximizeyour efficiency & profitability.

Grap

hic

desi

gn s

Mar

ie R

IO


taKinG stalK

talking tubers—energy Beets to ethanol By cole Gustafson

I am temporarily changing the name of this column from Taking Stalk to Talking Tubers to focus on a unique public/private partnership involving Green Vision Group, Heartland Renewable Energy and North Dakota State University to create a new energy beet-to-biofuel industry in the Northern Plains.

Why beets? The Northern Plains is the nation’s lowest-cost producer of sugar due to a favorable growing climate and cold winters that extend feedstock storage and processing. The energy beet industry is well established in Europe, where biofuel yields per acre are twice those of corn, reducing impacts on food production. Thus, the technology risk of producing a new advanced biofuel from energy beets is low compared with cellulosic processes. Energy beets are an ideal rotational crop in arid, small grain/oilseed rotations due to the plant’s deep tap root that seeks water and nutrients left behind by other crops. The crop requires less nitrogen fertilizer, a key contributor to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Our partnership has worked the past three years to develop the industry by: 1) Completing an economic feasibility study for the region; 2) Conducting yield trials at fi ve locations across North Dakota; 3) Commercially testing a patented process that uses a coproduct to provide 70 percent of the biofuel plant’s thermal need; 4) Conducting grower education to secure feedstock supply agreements;

5) Initiating juice storage research that would enable year-round processing and plant utilization; and 6) Documenting “fi eld to wheels” life-cycle GHG reductions compared with gasoline to qualify as an advanced biofuel.

Thus far, results of all six projects have exceeded initial expectations. Central North Dakota research yield trials have averaged 28 tons per acre dryland and 38 tons per acre irrigated. Betaseed and Syngenta, beet seed genetic companies, have been key project partners. The commercial burn test indicated the coproduct could be burned at higher moisture levels than expected to provide process heat. Breakeven analyses show energy beet biofuel competes favorably with gasoline, without any subsidy. Initial life-cycle analyses fi nd energy beet biofuel may even qualify as cellulosic biofuel with over 60 percent reduction in GHG emissions.

These research fi ndings are important steps to lower project risks at each production stage. Historical energy beet yield histories are needed to secure federal crop insurance for feedstock producers to mitigate production risks and compete with other commodity enterprises. Use of a coproduct to provide plant thermal needs minimizes energy supply risk. Extended storage alleviates fall and spring weather risk, which lowers the amount of crop that can be processed.

While risk management has been a priority, the real goal of the partnership has been to foster rural development. Several plants are being considered, with each plant to be 20 MMgy, sourcing feedstock from 30,000 acres within a 20-mile radius. A short radius improves transportation costs and emissions, which

are again key to the life-cycle analysis. Each plant will employ 35 people from surrounding communities. Unlike granular sugar processing plants, the energy beet biofuel plants would operate year around and rely on novel juice storage processes now being researched. Since the plant provides the majority of its own thermal needs and energy beets are high in water, local infrastructure needs for water and natural gas are reduced.

The N.D. energy project is currently seeking an existing biofuel plant in the region to partner with. While all of the technologies used to produce energy beet biofuel have been commercially tested somewhere worldwide, they have not been utilized together. Co-locating the fi rst commercial energy beet plant with an existing biofuel plant would enable shared services for railroad transportation, utilities, product marketing, lab work, etc.

One risk the project must yet overcome is securing a reliable feedstock supply. Agricultural profi tability in the region has been at record highs for the past several years. Available labor poses a greater threat, however. Farm focus groups suggest that the region’s low unemployment rate (currently around 3 percent) presents challenges in fi nding additional labor for fall fi eld operations. Energy beet production is labor intensive, as the bulky crop requires transportation from fi elds to local piling stations.

More information on the project’s status can be found at www.BeetsAllBiofuels.com.

Author: Cole GustafsonProfessor and Biofuels Economist,

North Dakota State University(701) 231-7096

[email protected]

Speaker AbstractsNow AcceptingNow AcceptingNow Accepting

The 2011 Northeast Biomass Conference and Trade Show o�ers industry experts an unparalleled opportunity to showcase their industry knowledge and expertise to biomass professionals in the northeast region of the United States.

Speakers at BBI International Events enjoy:

• Complimentary Registration for the Conference• Inclusion in both print and electronic marketing campaigns• Opportunity for inclusion in a weekly ‘Panel Preview’ marketing series• Exposure at a well attended, well produced industry event

Don’t miss this unique opportunity. Submit an abstract today!

Deadline: June 24th

www.biomassconference.com/[email protected]


BUsiness matters

on water use and efficiency AdvancementsBy Geoff Morgan

No doubt about it, corn ethanol consumes large quantities of water in its production. Some studies conclude that, in the same period of time that ethanol production doubled, the related water use tripled. This has garnered some attention in the public eye, along with the food vs. fuel and other arguments that cast aspersions on corn ethanol.

Water occupies two distinct sources of use in the production of ethanol—that used for irrigating and growing the corn, and that used to boil, distill and ferment the biofuel. People argue that as corn production has increased in areas of the country that require more irrigation, more water is needed to produce a gallon of ethanol. True, but it is unclear what the allocation of corn use in those areas is—fuel or food.

So what are the facts surrounding water use generally and, in particular, what effect does water technology and regulation have in the corn ethanol industry and what can be done to improve the effi ciency of the water used?

The truth is that the production of ethanol has not had a signifi cant impact on water resources in the United States. U.S. Geological Survey data suggest that the industry uses less than 100 million gallons of water daily which equates to two one hundredths of one percent of total water use in the U.S. We sometimes hear the argument that it takes up to 4,000 gallons of water to grow a bushel of corn,

but seldom hear that the overwhelming majority of that amount comes from rain water.

Also, ethanol producers are constantly increasing the effi ciency of the use of water. The Renewable Fuels Association reports that in 1994, it took more than six gallons of water to produce one gallon of ethanol and now many plants can produce a gallon of ethanol using only three gallons. What technologies are making this possible? More effi cient use of recycling, advancements in the areas of water separation technology (utilizing sophisticated membranes to separate water and ethanol in biofuels production) are meaningful examples. R3 Fusion just announced this month the availability of a new commercial system for recovering ethanol from waste scrubber water. The system is designed to process 50 gallons per minute of scrubber waste generated from a 50 MMgy ethanol plant. Private industry continues to produce new developments that should continue to increase effi ciencies.

Many other technologies are also being pursued. Producing broths with higher ethanol concentrations can reduce the energy needed for distillation. Alternative technologies to distillation, such as pervaporation (a membrane separation process), also have the potential to signifi cantly reduce water usage. Another option for reducing water demand is to utilize a different

heat transfer medium, using forced-air fans for cooling instead of water where appropriate. This could potentially result in much lower evaporative and blowdown losses. Other conservation technology has resulted in signifi cant reduction in water use for cooling towers.

As cellulosic ethanol technologies develop and achieve commercial scale, effi ciencies should continue to increase, as most feedstock sources for cellulosic ethanol need far less water for their growth. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory is analyzing water use issues in cellulosic ethanol production as well as water use in the production of biofuel feedstocks. All of these positive developments also compare favorably to water used in the production of petroleum-based fuels. NREL estimates it currently requires about 2 to 2.5 gallons of water per gallon of gasoline.

So what does this tell us? First, private industry and innovation have resulted in a steady increase in the effi ciency of the use of water in biofuels production. Second, the use of water in the biofuels industry is minimal compared to water use generally in the United States. It is incumbent on the industry to continue to pursue advancements, but it is also worth noting what has been accomplished already.

Author: Geoff MorganPartner, Michael Best & Friedrich LLP

(414) [email protected]

A Tradition of Industry Education

For 30 years, The Alcohol School has been educatingfuel ethanol and distilled beverage producers in thescience of alcohol production. The weeklong program is designed for lab, plant, and managementpersonnel and is organized around lectures, laboratory demonstrations, seminars, and plant visits.

The program will cover the process of ethanol andbeverage alcohol production from milling and mashpreparation through fermentation and distillation.Enzyme usage, yeast biology, bacterial contamina-tion and control will also be discussed, along withother issues currently affecting both industries.

Registration is open to fuel ethanol, distilled beverage, and allied industries. Now is a good time to invest in education.

Registration materials and additional informationare available online at www.ethanoltech.com

6120 W Douglas Ave | Milwaukee WI 53218 USA+1 414 393-0410 | Fax +1 414 358-8012

For More Information

MontréalInterContinental Montréal

September18–23, 2011


Sanat Shetty has joined Victory Energy Operations LLC, an industrial boiler company, as its vice president of end market product devel-opment. He will coor-dinate the end market department’s initia-tives with engineering and thermal design

resources to lead the development and in-troduction of new products and engineered solutions for new and existing customers.

David Thomas is the new chief lobby-ist and Letica Phillips is the north ameri-can representative for UNICA (The Brazil-ian Sugarcane Industry Association). Based

at UnIca’s Washing-ton office, they replace Joel Velasco, who left UnIca in January to become senior vice president for external relations at Califor-nia biotech company Amyris. Thomas is a former deputy direc-tor of legislative affairs for Vice President Al Gore and director of congressional rela-tions at the U.S. Fed-

eral Trade Commission. More recently, he served as chief of staff for U.S. Congress-woman Zoe Lofgren. as a senior strategist with Washington law firm mehlman, Vogel, Castanetti, Thomas was directly involved with UnIca’s 2010 campaign against U.S. tariffs on imported ethanol. In her continu-ing role overseeing institutional and govern-ment affairs for north america since 2008, Phillips will now lead UnIca’s efforts as its representative for north america on a vari-ety of fronts.

Morris, Minn.,-based Superior Indus-tries, manufacturer of conveyor systems and components, introduced an extension to its line of Chevron wing pulleys. The company is now building and distributing a style that meets specifications of the rated conveyor Equipment Manufacturers Association. CEMA applications are often light duty, por-table conveyors that make infrequent starts and stops. With their patented v-shape con-struction, Chevron wing pulleys are designed to deflect material and prevent it from lodg-ing better than standard wing pulleys. Less opportunity for trapped fugitive material between pulley wings means longer lasting wing pulleys and less belt damage.

Montreal-based Circuit Design Corp. introduced its bPaL software for biomass feedstock procurement management. Devel-oped for the pulp and paper industry, bPaL functions allow advanced automation and integration of administrative and operational functions of a bulk feedstock procurement process, such as purchase planning, contract creation and control, truck reception and scaling, sample extraction and random labo-ratory testing, unloading site control, pay-ments to parties under contracts.

Rockwell Automation has developed a free, online tool that gives a manufacturer a complete analysis of its current water, air, gas, electric and steam (WAGES) manage-ment performance, allowing comparison with industry peers and across other sectors. Available at www.rockwellenergyevaluator.com, the 20-minute online assessment gen-

erates a baseline report. The results facili-tate identifying and implementing strategic changes, and setting improvement goals. Us-ers also can continuously access their report and update information to track their prog-ress. In other news, Rockwell announced the release of FactoryTalk Historian machine Edition version 2.2, which includes addi-tional functionality to help users quickly and easily optimize machine-level data collection. The company also announced its Centerline motor control centers can now be integrated with Ethernet/IP, facilitating more detailed production data collection. This allows plant engineers to predict potential problems and help prevent equipment downtime.

Ralph Christie, president and cEo of Merrick & Company, has been named the 2011-’12 chair of the national energy and environment commit-tee of the American Council of Engineer-ing Companies. The committee’s purpose is to develop industry-wide consensus po-sitions and national leadership on a wide range of issues im-portant to engineering firms in the United States, 5,000 of which belong to ACEC. The committee also undertakes a proactive leg-islative and regulatory advocacy program, develops public and private market informa-tional programs of interest to membership, and communicates with ACEC members on vital environmental and energy issues that will affect their businesses.

Poet LLC recently announced new gen-eral managers at three plants, appointed to supervise professional, technical and support staff at the ethanol plants, responsible for en-

BUSINESS BrieFsPeople, Partnerships & Deals

UNICA Lobbyist With almost two decades of experience in the Washington public policy arena, David Thomas is UNICA’s new chief lobbyist.

Committee Chair Merrick & Co.’s Ralph Christie assumed leadership of the engineering council’s energy and environment committee April 1.

Heat Transfer Expert Sanat Shetty has led the development of enhanced tube designs to achieve greater heat transfer efficiencies.


suring efficient production and that all rules and regulations are met. Ken Osmonson is the new general manager at Poet biorefin-ing–Ashton (Iowa). Before joining Poet, he spent more than 26 years in manufacturing

and operations man-agement positions in the flexible packag-ing industry and the U.S. Army. Gary Eis-chied is the new gen-eral manager at Poet Biorefining–Gowrie (Iowa). Before com-ing to Poet, he worked for more than 35 years at Bridgestone Fire-stone in several pro-duction management positions, including distribution manager. Eischied has also com-pleted a 35-year tour in the Iowa national Guard and Army Re-serve, reaching a rank of brigadier general. Chris Oehler is the new general manager at Poet biorefining–Lake crystal (minn.) Before joining Poet, he worked for more than 10 years with Del Monte Foods in Sleepy Eye, Minn. and Mendota, Ill. in a number of roles including field super-visor, assistant plant manager and area manager, overseeing business and plant operations, marketing and personnel.

Mark LeBel has joined Jansen Com-bustion and Boiler Technologies Inc., working out of the Atlanta area as a se-nior consultant. Lebel has had a long career with Combustion Engineering/ABB/Alstom Power Inc., most recently in the position of manager of boiler engineering services. He has broad ex-perience in design and operation of power, waste-to-energy and chemical recovery boil-ers as well biomass-fired circulating and bub-bling fluidized bed boilers.

The global Buhler Technology Group grew markedly in its anniversary year, 2010. order intake increased 21 percent, sales rev-enue 11 percent, and operating profits grew at a higher-than-proportional rate to 10.6 percent of total sales. The company says this success is attributable to the identification of market trends such as improved food safety and higher energy efficiency. both the ad-vanced materials and grain processing divi-sions of the Switzerland-based firm achieved significant sales growth, with the greatest strength in the Americas, Asia and Africa, while Europe and Eastern Europe markets contracted.

Flint Hills Resources has opened a new regional office in ames, Iowa, which will focus on supporting the company’s four new-ly acquired ethanol facilities in Iowa through corn purchasing and selling throughout the state. As many as 20 new jobs will be created to handle operations, human resources and purchasing. Flint Hills resources, an inde-pendent subsidiary of Koch Industries Inc. and producer of transportation fuels in the Midwest, acquired four Iowa ethanol plants since 2010 in Shell Rock, Menlo, Fairbank,

and Iowa Falls. In addition, the company distributes refined fuels throughout the Iowa and owns a fuel terminal in Bettendorf and operates asphalt plants in Algona, Daven-port and Dubuque.

Jiao Jiao has joined Fluid-Quip Inc. as a process engineer to further develop Flu-id-Quip’s coproduct separation technologies for dry-grind ethanol plants and corn wet-mills. Prior to joining Fluid-Quip, she con-ducted research at the University of Wiscon-sin-Madison focusing on alcohol aerobic oxidation catalysts and fuel cell catalysts. In addition to work-ing on coproducts and wet fractionation systems, she will work with the UW Depart-ment of Animal Sciences to conduct and evaluate feed studies on new coproducts.

Lechlers Inc. is offering a new low-flow, axial, hollow-cone spray. When very low flow rates and extremely small droplets are required for an application, the hydraulic nozzle performs. Applica-tions include disin-fection, humidifica-tion, and coating with water, oil, or other fluids in very low amounts. This nozzle comes with a cylindri-cal strainer that helps avoid clogging of the small orifice and in two grades of stain-less steel.

Sponsored by

BUsiness BrieFs

Boiler Expertise LeBel has experience in biomass and waste-to-energy boilers.

Veteran Engineer A native of Lansboro, Minn., Ken Osmonson is the new general manager at Poet Biorefining-Ashton.

General of the Guard Gary Eischied brings years of National Guard experience to his new position as manager at Poet Biorefining-Gowrie.

Community Man Chris Oehler had been active in the Sleepy Eye community before becoming general manager at the nearby Lake Crystal ethanol plant.

Process Engineer Jiao Jiao will work on Fluid-Quip’s maximized stillage coproducts and wet fractionation systems.


BUsiness BrieFs

Sandmeyer Steel Co. recently made a number of personnel announcements. John Curley was appoint-ed to the newly cre-ated position of vice president, interna-tional sales and global marketing. With the company since 1985, his latest position was general manager, sales and marketing. Shawn Fenerty has the new position of vice president nation-al sales. He will be re-sponsible for both the inside and field sales teams in the United States. Beginning with Sandmeyer as an of-ficer messenger at age 18, Fenerty was most recently a regional sales manager. Mary Osborne has joined Sandmeyer Steel as district sales manager in the West, bringing 22 years of sales ex-perience, mostly with HVa LLc and mDc Vacuum Products.

binmaster Level controls of Lincoln, neb., introduced binView, an innovative in-ventory management system that offers real-time bin level monitoring for solid materials over the Internet or via a company Lan or VPn. The components include binmaster’s SmartBob sensors mounted on the bins, a wireless or wired data communications net-work, a gateway to provide connectivity to a

personal computer or IP network, and data collection software that can be viewed se-curely by any authorized individual.

Asahi/America Inc. introduced the PE100 ball valve to its industrial piping products line as an innovative solution for gas, sewer and water applications to replace metal ball valves. The PE100 ball valve is 50 percent lighter than comparable metal valves and offers corrosion-resistant internal and external parts. Available in 1-to 2-inch sizes, the valve uses a two-step planetary gear sys-tem to ensure smooth opening and closing, eliminating water hammer. It is suitable for below-ground service, and valves larger than 2 inches are available with an integrated gear box.

Krohne Inc., a manufacturer and dis-tributor of measuring instruments for pro-cess industries, has created a new vodcast describing leak detection systems. In it, Joe Incontri, director of marketing, describes different leak detection systems and details the factors engineers should take into con-sideration when selecting one.

Martin Engineering has introduced a new generation of modular conveyor guards, enabling workers to do their jobs with re-duced risk and greater efficiency. The new EVo conveyor Guards are self-supporting and feature a rugged modular design. Stan-

dardized pan-els in a range of sizes, c o m b i n e d with wedge clamps for quick installa-tion, provide the flexibility to fit virtually any conveyer design, and comply with safety standards. The neponset, Ill., company also holds a Foundations Workshop series to teach bulk-materials handling personnel how to operate and maintain clean, safe belt conveyors.

The Indian River BioEnergy Center ethanol plant under construction near Vero Beach, Fla., will utilize a solids separation system developed by SmartFlow Technol-ogies, that results in a high concentrate of cells and proteins as well as 100 percent pure ethanol and water. Rather than using a cen-trifuge, which uses gravity for cell concentra-tion, the SmartFlow system uses a physical barrier in the membrane. This is the first contract to work on a commercial-scale proj-ect, but the apex, n.c., company’s technol-ogy is being used in research and trials within corn ethanol and a number of cellulosic eth-anol plants, and some cellulosic biochemical and cellulosic butanol plants. Ineos Bio and its joint venture partner, new Planet Energy, are constructing an 8 mmgy cellulosic etha-nol plant with plans to start producing etha-nol in mid-2012.

The U.S. DoE’s Argonne National Laboratory and industrial processing firm Nalco Co. struck a licensing agreement for a novel electrodeionization technology that can be integrated into biorefineries to convert biomass into fuels and chemicals. According to Seth Snyder, Argonne bio-chemical engineer whose group led the de-velopment of the technology, the patented separation technique allows for the deioniz-ing, or the continuous removal, of charged products like organic acids aqueous streams

Up Through the Ranks Sean Fenerty started working at Sandmeyer Steel as an officer messenger at age 18.

Heritage in Steel John Curley has a long heritage in the stainless steel plate industry, his family founded Eastern Stainless Steel.

Western Sales Mary Osborne brings sales experience servicing the industries comprising Sandmeyer Steel’s West Coast customer base.

share yoUr indUstry BrieFs to be included in Business Briefs, send information (including photos and logos if available) to: Business Briefs, Ethanol Producer Magazine, 308 second ave. n., suite 304, Grand Forks nd 58203. you may also fax information to (701) 746-8385, or e-mail it to [email protected]. Please include your name and telephone number in all correspondence.

BUsiness BrieFs

and eliminates the requirement to continu-ously add neutralizing agents like lime. This, Snyder said, is a dramatic improvement over conventional bioprocessing technologies that typically require significant capital expendi-ture on energy-intensive steps to recover bio-products, while generating large volumes of waste streams. “In our process, we’re actually separating the organic acid as it’s synthesized in the fermentation and it’s separated as the acid moves across the membranes.”

Mettler Toledo introduced a new prod-uct suitable for the ethanol industry. The new iro (intelligent remote operation) data log-ger records real-time measurements from in-line process analytical sensors. Designed for

temporary installation, the unit is fully com-patible with Mettler Toledo’s range of intel-ligent sensor management digital sensors, and covers measurement of pH, oxygen and conductivity from up to two sensors, simul-taneously.

Alberta-based Highmark Renewables Research received its sixth patent, this one for its trademarked Integrated biorefinery technology. The system integrates an an-aerobic digester with other bio-production systems for ethanol, biodiesel or algae, plus other possibilities. cEo Evan chrapko said the anaerobic digester and biogas plant at his family’s feedlot was recently expanded in anticipation of linking it to a proposed 40 MMly (10 MMgy) wheat-to-ethanol plant.

Indore Oil Co. has joined forces with Protec Fuel in opening their 14th E85 fuel-ing location in the atlanta area. Indore oil

partnered with Protec Fuel to offer E85 through the group’s turnkey E85 infrastruc-ture program. “We at Indore oil company are energized on the prospect of working with Protec to bring E85 to this chevron,” said mihir Patel, general manager. “our re-lationship with Protec and our customers continues to grow as we bring more alterna-tive fueling options throughout the Atlanta market together.”

Matt Horton, cEo of Propel Fuels, was honored with the biofuels Leadership award at the Third Annual Sustainable Bio-fuels awards in rotterdam, netherlands. Horton was recognized for providing thou-sands of drivers with convenient access to low-carbon, domestic fuels through Propel’s growing network of renewable fuel stations. California-based Propel’s business model is to build and maintain retail fueling islands for E85 and biodiesel, cited at filling stations with sufficient space. It also developed a cle-anDrive system that allows drivers to track the amount of carbon emissions reduced, and imported oil displaced, through their purchases of renewable fuels. In early May, Propel’s website reported the cumulative to-tal of co2 reductions for CleanDrive users was 16.7 million pounds and 1.18 million gallons of imported oil displaced.

A new photosynthetic bacteria-based process for biobutanol production now belongs to Phytonix. The north caro-lina company developed the process with the help of the angrstrom Laboratories at Uppsala University in Sweden, and recently received global licensing rights. The bacte-rium used to create the biobutanol only re-quires co2, sunlight and water, according to bruce Dannenberg, founder and cEo of Phytonix. The cyanobacteria are genetically programmed to self-destruct/die in the nat-ural environment. If for example, Dannen-berg explained, these bacteria are exposed to nitrogen in the natural atmosphere, a gene inside of them collapses the cell membrane, and the organism dies.

Mascoma Corp. named Stephen Ken-nedy its executive vice president of re-search and develop-ment. An industry veteran in research and development and commercial produc-tion experience, he will help move the company towards commercialization. Prior to joining Mas-coma, Kennedy was most recently execu-tive director at the novartis/mIT center for Continuous Manufacturing. For many years, he was involved with Genzyme Corp.’s bio-logics operations.

Accelerating Commercialization Stephen Kennedy is charged with developing and translating Mascoma’s research and development strategy into action and execution.


natural Gas report

corn report

All eyes are on storage BY cASEY whELAN

Market inversion adds interest for market watchers BY JASON SAgEBIEL

cOMMODItIES rePort

May 2—Corn planting lags compared to last year, keeping the market buoyant, al-though that infl uence should wane in may. After planting, the focus will shift to demand rationing amidst a perceived tight cash corn

situation. How will fl at prices affect demand in the feed, export and ethanol sectors? Evaluating the spreads will be crucial for the end-user during August and September. The inversion in the current market will make the

cash markets interest-ing during this time frame.

The April USDA report offered no change in carryout de-spite the March quar-terly stocks report be-ing bullish for corn. Feed demand decreased by 50 million bushels while ethanol increased by a like number, re-sulting in a corn car-ryout of 675 million

bushels—a 5 percent carryout-to-use ratio. Globally, corn carryout was reduced by 0.71 million metric tons (mmt) from the previous estimate to 122.43 mmt. This is 23.3 mmt less than year ago and 26.6 mmt less than 2008-’09.

In April, nearby corn futures breached the high for that contract in June of 2008. There is no room for error as corn needs to rejuvenate the ending inventory. A 5 percent carryout-to-use ratio is not comfortable and building back to 10 percent would dampen volatility.

The graph illustrates the national aver-age cash corn price versus the corn stocks- to-use ratio since 1990. It reveals the ratio’s impact on cash value. The price for 2011-’12 is an estimate. The 1995-’96 campaign is the data point below trend with $3.25 cash and 5 percent carryout to use.

CORN: Stocks/Use vs National Avg. Cash Prices

2010/11

2011/12 est.

$1.50$1.75$2.00$2.25$2.50$2.75$3.00$3.25$3.50$3.75$4.00$4.25$4.50$4.75$5.00$5.25$5.50$5.75

4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 22% 24% 26%

May 2--The number of rigs drilling for natural gas has dropped by 6 percent since last year, and by 39 percent since april 2008. The percentage of rigs drilling unconven-tional (shale or tight gas) wells, which pro-duce signifi cantly more natural gas than a conventional well, has increased from 26 per-cent to 57 percent of total activity since 2008. While the total has dropped, the number of rigs drilling unconventional wells continues to increase, which has so far offset the over-all decline in drilling activity. Year-over-year, monthly production is up by 6 percent. At what point does lower drilling activity offset the increased number of higher-producing wells? When (and if) we pass that point, natu-ral gas production will decline and prices will increase.

Actual natural gas production informa-tion tends to lag by several months, and is

subject to revision. As such, using Energy Information Administration production numbers does not provide “real time” information. A proxy used to estimate the supply/demand balance is the weekly storage injec-tion/withdrawal report, also published by the EIA. The storage report provides a glimpse of production changes, after normalizing for weather conditions. over the past several weeks, inventory changes have been weaker than expected, leading some to assert that nat-ural gas production may fi nally have peaked. Storage reports for the next several weeks will be monitored very closely to determine if there is trend pointing to a production drop,

8070605040302010

0-10-20

Inventory Differencefrom Five-Year Average (Bcf )

25-Mar-11 1-Apr-11 8-Apr-11 15-Apr-11 22-Apr-11

BCF

68

10 1023

-11

or if the weak numbers just refl ect volatility as we move from the withdrawal season to the injection season. The accompany chart shows the change in inventory volumes relative to the fi ve-year average over the past fi ve weeks. As you can see, we have moved from a “net positive” to a “net negative” relative to the fi ve-year average. all eyes are on storage.


ddGs report

ethanol report

Exports lag, but healthy meat sector demands DDgS BY SEAN BrODErIcK

gasoline prices rally on lower stocks BY rIcK KMENt

cOMMODItIES rePort

DDgS Prices ($/ton)

LOcAtION JUN 2011 MAY 2011 JUN 2010

Minnesota 195 210 105

Chicago 203 218 125

Buffalo, N.Y. 220 220 130

Central Calif. 244 250 155

Central Fla. 240 224 148SOURCE: CHS Inc.

Natural gas Prices ($/MMBtu)

LOcAtION MAY 1, 2011 APr 1, 2011 MAY 1, 2010

NYMEX 4.57 4.24 4.27

NNG Ventura 4.34 3.36 4.12

CA Citygate 4.34 4.46 4.53

SOURCE: U.S. Energy Services Inc.

regional Ethanol Prices Front Month Futures (AC) $2.649

rEgION SPOt rAcK

West Coast $2.715 $2.880

Midwest $2.580 $2.950

East Coast $2.670 $2.800SOURCE: DTN

regional gasoline Prices Front Month Futures Price (RBOB) $3.4648

rEgION SPOt rAcK

West Coast $3.493 $3.384

Midwest $3.553 $3.195

East Coast $3.295 $3.143SOURCE: DTN

corn Futures Prices (July Futures, $/bushel)

DAtE hIgh LOw cLOSE

May 3, 2011 7.43 7.21 1/4 7.23 3/4

April 3, 2011 7.71 1/2 7.40 3/4 7.67 1/2

May 3, 2010 3.78 1/2 3.68 3/4 3.68 3/4SOURCE: FCStone

cash Sorghum Prices ($/bushel)

LOcAtION APr 27, 2011

APr 1, 2011

APr 26, 2010

Superior, Neb. 6.77 6.45 3.14

Beatrice, Neb. 6.72 6.56 3.02

Sublette, Kan. 6.62 6.47 2.77

Salina, Kan. 6.60 6.57 3.27

Triangle, Texas 6.97 6.81 3.11

Gulf, Texas 7.30 7.31 3.66

SOURCE: Sorghum Synergies

U.S. Ethanol Production (1,000 barrels)

PEr DAY MONth END StOcKS

Feb. 2011 907 25,400 20,809

Jan. 2011 920 28,524 20,672

Feb. 2010 833 23,328 18,897SOURCE: U.S. Energy Information Administration

May 2—Gasoline inventory levels fell through April. An expected increase in summer driving and talk about the im-proving economy may draw money back into the market over the coming months. The national average gasoline price near-ing $4 may sharply curb consumer spend-ing ahead. For now, gasoline inventories are tighter than both last year and the five-year average, which has helped to push rbob gasoline futures nearly 20 cents over last month, as strong buying support is developing from commercial and noncommercial (speculative) trades. Current prices are in striking distance of all-time market gasoline highs set in 2008, with the current close just 4 cents lower. If gasoline prices do move to record levels in 2011, will overall demand start

to shut down, or will buyers continue to feed the beast?

Ethanol prices have softened over the past month, despite corn’s volatil-ity. Record corn prices have not limited ethanol producers, although traders re-main cautious given the recent wide price shifts. Margins are expected to remain ex-tremely tight. Ethanol futures are trading 10 cents below last month with corn still the main focus of most price direction. The ethanol-to-rbob price spread re-mains at, or near, record highs, with etha-nol futures holding an 82 cent discount to rbob futures at the end of april. The price spread is expected to continue to re-main wide as long as strong buying sup-port is seen through the energy market.

April 29—As April goes out like a lion, DDGS prices go out with a whim-per. Prices as a percentage of corn slipped from winter highs, which is not unusual, but the trade levels we are see-ing domestically have scared bulk export business away. Last year, there were trades happening regularly by now for spring and summer bulk export. Today, that would be big news.

Turkey, China and South Korea have only bought a fraction of last year’s orders, each for different internal rea-sons—Gmo/political, political/philo-sophical, and hoof-and-mouth herd reduction. Containers to Asia are about $25 per metric ton cheaper than bulk vessels on a delivered basis, so it may be awhile before we see more large-scale

bulk export. Mexico has been a pretty steady buyer, but plants balance the transit time of the cars that they lease with the prices they receive. The river is flooded for now, so sales for barge movement will be loaded beginning in late May.

Domestically, cattle, dairy and hog production, all being profitable, cre-ates healthy local markets. Even poultry feeders lose less when they incorporate DDGS, offsetting corn and soymeal.

Looking ahead, the manner in which plants deal with their margin structure is going to affect DDGS sup-ply. With the meat sector having decent profit margins, and whatever happens in spring planting, the DDGS that get pro-duced will stay in demand.

With good chemistry great things happen.™

We off er more thanjust chemistry — we deliver improved profi tability.Armed with innovative chemistries and a thorough understanding of biorefi ning, Ashland is well positioned to help you operate more effi ciently and profi tably. Our state-of-the-art product portfolio for biorefi neries includes:

– Corn oil extraction aids – Ethanol corrosion inhibitors – Liquid/solid separation aids

– Boiler water treatments – Cooling water treatments – Wastewater treatments

To learn more, visit us online or stop by our booth at the International Fuel Ethanol Workshop & Expo.

ashland.com

® Registered trademark, Ashland or its subsidiaries, registered in various countries

™ Trademark, Ashland or its subsidiaries, registered in various countries

* Trademark owned by a third party© 2011, AshlandAD-11031


distilled Ethanol News & Trends

Biofuels BarnstormingusdA stages events at multiple locations

From April 13-20, USDa officials visited the sites of a cellulosic ethanol plant under con-struction, an algae dem-onstration co-located with an ethanol plant, a biodiesel plant, an agri-cultural cooperative that supplies ethanol and a university conducting bioenergy research. And that’s not all—more events highlighting re-newable energy projects were expected through May.

The goal was to express support for the biofuels industry, says Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, who at-tended three of the five events. “There are tre-mendous opportunities here,” he says. “The last thing anybody should be doing is cutting the legs out from under this industry at a time when oil prices are unsta-ble.”

Poet LLc cEo Jeff broin was at the April 19 roundtable discussion with Vilsack, U.S. EPa administrator Lisa Jackson and others. “Any time we get the opportunity to discuss the biofuels industry with govern-ment leaders, it’s a positive,” he tells EPM. “I felt like Secretary Vilsack and Administra-tor Jackson were impressed with how tech-nology has helped the ethanol and biodiesel industries evolve. That was a message that they thought the public needs to hear more often.” High gas prices are prompting a feel-ing of urgency to speed the development of alternatives, he says. Though that’s a positive for the ethanol industry, it’s a challenge as

well. “We’ve got to continue moving toward a free and open market, and staying engaged with USDA and EPA is important.”

Also at the roundtable was Rick Schwark, president and cEo of absolute Energy LLc, a 115 mmgy ethanol plant near Saint ansgar, Iowa. He also got a sense that Jack-son understood the increasing efficiency of ethanol production during the last 20 years. “Ethanol and biofuels are not a mature, stagnant industry,” he says. “We are mak-ing process improvements continually.” He calls Vilsack one of ethanol’s strongest ad-vocates in Washington, who understands its value to rural America as well as supply and demand fundamentals—that corn prices are high because of weather events, not ethanol production—and that without ethanol, the

U.S. would still be spending large amounts to subsidize corn. “Vilsack has a firm grasp of the facts surrounding ethanol,” he says.

chris chung, cEo of the missouri Partnership working to attract and facilitate new business investment, was also pleased with the attention paid to biofuels projects. on april 13, USDa rural business-coop-erative Service Administrator Judith Canales visited the construction site of the ICM Inc. cellulosic ethanol pilot plant in St. Joseph, Mo. “As home to one of only 12 pilot-stage biomass projects supported by the Depart-ment of Energy, it is not surprising that ICM is garnering the attention of the USDA,” he says. —Holly Jessen

Touring Progress USDA’s Canales tours the R&D lab at the ICM cellulosic ethanol pilot and demonstration plant in St. Joseph, Mo., on April 13.

PH

OTO

: ST.

JO

SE

PH

NE

W-P

RE

SS


Ethanol News & Trends

distilled

Citing its support for greater consumer choice at the fuel pump as motivation, the U.S. EPa recently modified regulations for manufacturers of alternative fuel conversion kits to make it easier to sell their products. “Use of alternative fuels opens new fuel supply choices and can help consumers ad-

Making choice EasierePA modifies conversion kit regulations

dress concerns about fuel costs, energy security and emissions,” the EPA stated in an overview of the modifications. “EPa supports such innova-

tion and encourages the development of clean aftermarket technologies that enable broader transportation fuel choices.”

Conversion systems are used to modify gasoline or diesel engines to run on natural gas, propane, alcohols, electricity or a blend of fuels. Modifying fuel systems is a poten-

tial violation of the Clean Air Act, unless ap-proved by the EPa. Previously, a certificate of conformity was required from the EPA to be exempted from the tampering prohibi-tion. The EPA says it now recognizes that not all conversions are the same, and that they vary depending on the age of the ve-hicle and the type of engine being converted. Therefore, the new regulations, testing and compliance procedures will now differ based on those factors. The EPA says this stream-lined, updated approach will save money for conversion kit manufacturers. —Kris Bevill

Much hype has been made over the USDa’s modification of its rural Energy for America Program to allow fuel retailers the chance for grants and/or loan guarantees to install blender pumps. The changes are, un-doubtedly, an important step toward expand-ing ethanol infrastructure, and the USDA deserves credit for finding ways to continue to provide financial support for domestic biofuels during difficult economic times. but there’s a hitch to the fresh funding: retailers must be located in communities of popula-tions of 50,000 or less. This has some fuel retailers, such as Propel Fuels Inc. cEo matt Horton, doubtful of the overall effectiveness of the program.

“We are hugely supportive of what the USDa is doing,” Horton says. “I think it will inspire some retailers to install blender pumps. Unfortunately I don’t know that it’s going to be, on its own, a big enough incen-tive to get the kind of adoption that we re-ally need in this country. our experience has shown that the highest-performing fuel sta-tions don’t tend to be in those rural areas. So a lot of the best real estate is not eligible for this program, which is a bit disappointing.”

USDA’s Under Secretary for Rural De-velopment Dallas Tonsager agrees that it would be beneficial if rEaP funding could be used for alternative fuel pump installations

in urban areas, but says much of the traffic moving through those higher-populated ar-eas originates in rural areas. Adding blender pumps as an eligible project to REAP is one step in “keeping the ball moving” toward continued biofuels growth, he says.

While the USDA funding is a positive step, Propel believes the best way to drive retailers to install flex-fuel pumps is to ex-tend and expand federal tax credits. The federal government currently offers an in-frastructure tax credit of 30 percent, up to $50,000, for alternative fuel dispensers. The credit is scheduled to expire at the end of the year. Propel would like to see the tax credit offer extended and expanded to offset up to 50 percent, not to exceed $100,000, of the total project costs. The company would also like the program to be modified so that the tax credit can be claimed based on the entire cost of the project, rather than the in-cremental cost of the equipment, as is cur-rently the case. “We talk a lot in this industry about grant programs, and we like grants, we’ve benefited from grant programs, but they take a long time to implement and are very cumbersome for individual retailers,” Horton says. “a tax credit is a more straight-forward way to incentivize the industry.”

Horton says Propel plans to file applica-tions for REAP assistance in its home state

of California as well as other states where the company has identified promising rural locations for its pumps. And, while he says he hopes the REAP funding will be “the first round of a long-lived program,” he also hopes the USDA will consider waiving the rural requirements as it has done for other programs in order to open up greater pos-sibilities for urban expansion. —Kris Bevill

rEAPing the Benefits?usdA program for blender pumps leaves out urban sites

Pump Proprietor CEO Matt Horton plans to expand Propel in 2011 and will apply for USDA assistance to expand the availability of Propel’s E85 fuel dispensers.

PH

OTO

: PR

OP

EL

FUE

LS IN

C.


distilled

More than 300 people, including curi-ous locals, biofuels industry representatives, state offi cials and Secretary of agriculture Tom Vilsack, attended the offi cial grand opening april 15 of bioProcess algae LLc’s commercial-scale algae bioreactor project, held at Green Plains Renewable Energy Inc.’s 55 MMgy Shenandoah, Iowa, ethanol plant. The event marked a truly celebratory moment for the company and the biofuels industry as a whole by bringing wide atten-tion to an innovative technology that could transform the ethanol industry, according to GPrE cEo Todd becker. “What we are accomplishing is showing the world that not only does carbon have value, but that carbon and other byproducts from this ethanol plant can create a product that will give Americans food, feed and fuel,” he says.

Vilsack cut the red ribbon at the event and toured the facility. Calling it a “remark-able project” and, declaring that he’s never seen anything quite like it, Vilsack noted four components necessary to the success of the project thus far: fi nancial investment, inno-vation, networking and a “sense of place,” indicating rural areas are more likely to em-brace ethanol-related technologies.

The bioreactor project is a collaborative venture between GPrE, fi ltration product manufacturer clarcor Inc., bioProcessH20 LLc, a wastewater purifi cation technology company, and nTr plc, an international re-newable energy investment group. Waste heat, waste water and co2 from the ethanol plant are converted to algae using BioPro-cess algae’s trademarked Grower Harvester bioreactors. Algae harvested from the biore-actors is comprised of more than 90 percent water, so a dewatering process is applied post-harvest, which results in a product with toothpaste-like consistency.

When the project was launched three years ago, the collaborators believed that

downstream markets would be ready when it became commercial. The project has ad-vanced more rapidly than expected, howev-er, leaving GPRE and the others to become product developers as well. Becker says the most likely use for the algae is as a feed prod-uct, although it has many other possible ap-plications as well. “Algae gives us one of the greatest opportunities to break our depen-dence on foreign oil,” he says. Lipids and oils extracted from the algae can be used to pro-duce biodiesel, but the algae could possibly be sent directly to refi neries to produce bio-crude. a refi ner is currently evaluating this possibility. Additionally, tests show it is pos-sible to produce ethanol from the algae. at least at a lab scale, though Becker says that’s probably the lowest-value product that can be produced using the algae.

The rate at which the algae project has achieved commercial ability has surprised even the developers. Earlier this year, GPRE announced work would begin next year on a commercial-scale algae farm at the ethanol plant site. But during the bioreactor grand opening, bioProcess algae cEo Tim burns made a surprise announcement that con-struction would begin much sooner. And in fact, in late april burns confi rmed that

site work had begun for the 5-acre farm and said the outdoor reactor will be operational later this summer. Though Burns didn’t specify the capacity of the commercial farm, becker noted during a recent GPrE fi nan-cial report conference call that if the entire 150,000 tons of co2 produced annually at the Shenandoah plant were to be captured for algae production, it could be used to pro-duce up to 50,000 tons of biomass. once the project reaches the point at which all of the co2 is being used for algae production, it is possible that ethanol produced at plants using the technology might qualify as ad-vanced biofuels.

Burns says that while the bioreactors can be fed a wide range of co2-rich emis-sion streams, such as those from coal-fi red power plants, cement producers and petro-leum refi neries, the established infrastructure for transportation fuels and animal feed co-products is viewed as a huge advantage for the ethanol industry. Therefore, the com-pany’s initial goal is to commercialize co-lo-cated algae production facilities throughout the ethanol industry, he says, which will al-low BioProcess Algae collaborators to fo-cus on what they do best—“grow algae.” —Kris Bevill

green Stuff grows Up Grand opening marks important step for ethanol-to-algae

Green Machines BioProcess Algae CEO Tim Burns (left) shows Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack (center) and his wife, Christie, the Grower Harvester Technology bioreactors in Phase two at the BioProcess Algae facility at Green Plains Renewable Energy Inc. in Shenandoah, Iowa, on April 15.

PH

OTO

: LA

NC

E C

HE

UN

G, U

SD

A


distilled

In april, the Grain Farmers of ontario and Global Renewable Fuels Alliance both attempted to put an end to the food vs. fuel debate. It has been shown many times that food price spikes were not caused primarily by biofuels as originally thought, but by a va-riety of factors, the main one being higher oil prices. Will now be the time the debate is fi nally put to rest?

The Grain Farmers of ontario released a study on the effects of biofuels on crop prices, food prices and world hunger. Au-thored by Terry Daynard and KD Commu-nications, the 117-page study identifi es four key points. First, biofuels and bioproducts reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the use of fossil fuel—a defi nite positive for the environment. Since 2007, biofuels have had only a marginal effect on Canadian and inter-national food prices and the small increases have been offset by the fact that biofuels help lower the price of gas for consum-

ers. Current food and crop price spikes will stimulate agricultural development in devel-oping countries. Finally, biofuels and other bioproducts provide an opportunity to use excess agricultural productivity in Canada, as well as address other societal goals.

The world’s hungry number about 900 million and have for 40 years. Most hungry people are in Asia, although the numbers are declining there and rapidly growing in Africa, and most live in rural areas. “The ‘grain defi -ciency’ for the hungry people in the world’s most hungry countries is equivalent to 1.1 percent of annual world grain production,” the study says. “The problem is lack of local food production in hungry rural areas, not supply of grain from the developed world.” To feed the hungry, more local grain produc-tion is needed, rather than imports from de-veloped countries, the study added.

The spike in grain prices in 2007-’08 was higher for rice and wheat than corn. Rice is much more important as direct human food in most developing countries than corn, the grain most commonly used for biofuel pro-duction. World grain supplies did not decline during the price spikes, which were caused mostly by higher energy prices, hoarding, ex-port bans and panic buying by governments,

says the study. In north america, the corn price increase caused by biofuels affected food prices by less than 1 percent.

In April, GRFA called on the United nations Food and agriculture organization to focus on oil prices, the real driver behind rising food costs. “There is very clear evi-dence that oil prices are continuing to have a disproportionate affect on the price of our food,” said Bliss Baker, spokesperson.

The organization points to a USDA report released in early 2011 that answers the question, “For what do our food dol-lars pay?” (See illustration below.) The re-port identifi es labor costs, packaging and processing, among other inputs. In addition, the USDA estimates that 33 percent of ev-ery dollar spent on food covers energy costs, adding that unpredictable energy costs are responsible for the recent food price spikes. “The USDA’s report echoes the GRFA’s po-sition that oil prices are responsible for rising food prices,” Baker says. “The world needs to take decisive action today and expand our capacity to produce reliable, clean and sus-tainable biofuels in order to move away from our reliance on crude oil.” —Holly Jessen Your Dollar at the Grocery Store

What is the cost of marketing your food?

Food Price Increase: What’s the Real Story?

Important food items like

bread, eggs and milk have

high prices that are largely

unrelated to ethanol or corn

prices, but correspond to

fundamental supply/demand

relationships in the world.

The farm share of the food

dollar is the share received

by farmers from the sales of

raw food commodities. The

marketing share includes other

costs like labor, transportation,

energy and packaging.

SOURCE: USDA ERS

15.8¢ 84.2¢

FARM SHARE MARKETING SHARE

SOURCE: DATA FROM USDA ERS/IMAGE COURTESY GROWTH ENERGY

Fool vs. Fuel debate keeps getting recycled at ethanol’s expense

GR

AP

HIC

: IN

FO

OD

VS

FU

EL

FOLD

ER

IN D

ISTI

LLE

D A

RT

Your Dollar at the Grocery StoreWhat is the cost of marketing your food?

Food Price IncreaseWhat’s the Real Story?

Important food items like bread, eggs and milk have high prices that are largely unrelated to ethanol or corn prices, but correspond to fun-damental supply/demand relationships in the world.

The farm share of the food dollar is the share received by farmers from the sales of raw food commodities. The marketing share includes other costs like labor, transportation, energy and packaging.


distilled

Funding Better Biomass usdA, doe seek collaborative projects

The USDa and the U.S. DoE will jointly fund five to 10 projects over the next several years focused on researching and developing advanced biofuels, bioenergy and high-value biobased products. The USDa national In-stitute of Food and Agriculture will contrib-ute $25 million to the Biomass Research and Development Initiative, while the DoE will provide up to $5 million through its Biomass Program. The agencies anticipate providing between $3 million and $7 million to each approved project.

Eligible projects will need to cover three focus areas—feedstock development, prod-uct development and biofuels development analysis. The agencies said integrating these technical areas into each project will encour-age collaborative problem-solving approach-es and will assist in identifying and address-ing knowledge gaps. Among the issues to be addressed by these projects are the critical ar-eas of harvest, transport, preprocessing and

storage of biomass for biofuels production. The lack of logistics systems for biomass feedstocks has been a significant barrier to the commercialization of advanced biofu-els such as cellulosic ethanol. The agencies want projects to focus on dedicated biofuel crops, innovative equipment designs and sys-tems for biomass conversion and strategies for incorporating feedstock production with existing managed land, among other things. Approved projects will also be expected to develop analytic tools that can be used to evaluate the impact of expanded biofuel production on the environment and to as-sess the potential of using available federal land for feedstock production.

The agencies are also interested in proj-ects focused on the research, development and demonstration of technologies using biochemical conversion, thermochemical conversion and chemical conversion to pro-duce advanced biofuels and/or biobased

products. In the funding announcement, the agencies noted that the DoE biomass Pro-gram has been focused on making cellulosic ethanol cost competitive with corn ethanol, resulting in the first generation of cellulosic ethanol technology now reaching demon-stration scale. Cellulosic ethanol projects will be allowed to apply for the new funding, but the agencies are interested in also supporting such projects on biobutanol, hydrocarbons and Fischer-Tropsch gasoline and diesel.

Additionally, the USDA is seeking farm-based and commercial demonstration proj-ects that will quantify the benefits of using biodiesel to produce ethanol. The objectives are to improve the sustainability footprint of ethanol production, to determine the ben-efits of using biodiesel over traditional diesel and to update economic and environmental models, the agency stated. Approved proj-ects are expected to be announced later this year. —Kris Bevill

Ecocar challenge Midwest team tests e85 hybrid

As the three-year competition for the first Eco-car challenge wrapped up in early June, the U.S. DoE announced the 16 uni-versities selected to compete in EcoCar2. A partnership of General Motors and the DoE, the competition is meant to prepare future engineers for opportunities in clean energy and advanced vehicle industries. “The department is proud to support a program that provides real-world, hands-on experi-ence to the students who will lead the way in designing and building the next genera-tion of automobiles,” says DoE Secretary Steven Chu. “We look forward to seeing the exciting vehicle designs that these promising engineers of the future develop.”

on the list of competitors in Ecocar2 is the team from ohio State University, which is wrapping up work on the first competi-tion. The oSU team, made up of graduate and undergraduate students, chose E85 for the first year competition for a variety of reasons, says Eric Schacht, an electrical engi-neering graduate student at oSU. although the renewable fuel is a likely frontrunner for its Ecocar2 effort, the final decision has not yet been made. The team chose E85 from options of electricity or four standard fuels: b20, E10, E85 or hydrogen, Schacht says. The team then converted two compressed natural gas engines to E85, helping it to achieve high efficiency with a compression ratio of 12:5:1, higher than the compression rates for a standard gasoline engine. “The team’s ve-hicle is for the first time in these competitions getting emissions levels below the U.S. certifica-

tion level,” he adds. “The engine efficiency is actually averaging 40 to 41 percent, whereas the diesels it is competing against are only getting 38 percent and the gasoline engines closer to 35 to 36 percent.”

In addition to using E85, the vehicle is a hybrid electric. It uses electricity for about the first 40 miles, after which the E85 engine automatically turns on. “When the engine is on, the vehicle runs as a hybrid electric vehicle with regenerative braking and two modes, a low-speed-series hybrid mode and a highway-speed-parallel hybrid mode,” he says. —Holly Jessen

Earth friendly The U.S. DOE’s EcoCar2 challenge will span the next three years.

PH

OTO

: EC

OC

AR

2


distilled

on april 27, may futures for reformu-lated gasoline (rbob) were $3.45 per gal-lon, compared to $2.64 per gallon for etha-nol—81 cents higher. With recent crude oil prices, that price spread ranged from 60 to 80 cents per gallon for most of april and has averaged about 40 cents per gallon since the beginning of 2011, says Geoff Cooper, vice president of research and analysis for the Re-newable Fuels Association.

The price spread, along with savings from the blenders credit, translates into real savings at the gas pump. In addition, Cooper points out, ethanol also impacts gas prices by adding to the fuel supply, an effect that grows

as ethanol production increases. “Several economists have estimated that the ability of ethanol to extend fuel supplies, coupled with ethanol’s relative discount to gasoline, means gasoline is 40 to 60 cents per gallon less than it would be without ethanol,” he says. “The impact may be even larger in cases where oil prices are extremely high, as we are seeing today.”

A report from the Center for Agricul-tural and rural Development confirms that from January 2000 to December 2010, etha-nol production reduced wholesale gas prices by an average of 25 cents per gallon. In the Midwest, the impact was larger, reducing gas prices by 39 cents per gallon. Looking at 2010 only, thanks to the impact of crude oil prices and increased ethanol production, ethanol reduced the price of gas an average of 89 cents per gallon—58 cents per gallon in the East Coast and $1.37 per gallon for the Midwest.

The report also delved into what might happen to U.S. gas prices if ethanol produc-

tion were halted immediately. With the etha-nol industry now supplying 10 percent of the U.S. fuel supply, oil refiners would not be able to make up for that supply in the short term, leading to increased gas prices. “Un-der a very wide range of parameters, the gas price increase would be of historic propor-tions, ranging from 41 to 92 percent,” the report said.

Meanwhile, at the same time the CARD report was released, oil companies an-nounced massive profits, leading to more calls for an end to oil subsidies. BP raked in $5.5 billion in 2011 first-quarter profit, topped by Exxon’s $10.65 billion and Royal Dutch Shell’s $6.3 billion in profits. notably, Exxon’s first-quarter profits amounted to a 69 percent increase. “It’s time we end the handouts to big oil companies,” says Tom buis, cEo of Growth Energy. “It’s time we take what are the hidden costs and put them out in the sunlight. Let’s see what it really costs the taxpayer for our addiction to for-eign oil.” —Holly Jessen

Savings at the Pump 89 cents per gallon saved in 2010

The first national boat racing asso-ciation Ethanol Challenge Series was held in Somerville, Texas, in early May. At that event,

and for the entire 2011 nbra series event races, hydroplane and runabout racing boats will fly across the water powered by none

other than E10. “American boaters have been utilizing ethanol-blended fuel safely and effectively for years,” says Ver-non barfield, nbra s p o k e s p e r s o n . “Ethanol-blended fuel provides the high-performance engines in this series with the horsepower and performance they need to win. We are excited to show that our racing boats are able to perform to their best capa-

bility using E10 fuel, shaking the myths that ethanol harms marine engines.”

The fuel will be supplied through a new-ly formed partnership between the Renew-able Fuels association and nbra. “We are thrilled to partner with nbra to dispel any notion that ethanol is an unfit fuel for marine engines,” says Robert White, RFA director of market development. “The use of E10 in these racing boats proves that this fuel is as effective during your weekly commute in your automobile as it is on your weekend boating trips.”

Information packets will be given out to educate fans and the “Fueled with Pride” logo will be displayed on signs, uniforms, course buoys and flags, T-shirts sold at the races, national trophies and near refueling ar-eas of all boats. In addition, cash awards will be given to race participants that promote the fact that they are using E10. —Holly Jessen

E10 on the water Proving ethanol and boating can coexist

Boating on E10 The Renewable Fuels Association and the National Boat Racing Association have teamed up to fuel hydroplane and runabout racing boats with E10 for the 2011 NBRA racing season.

PH

OTO

: NB

RA


distilled

Three ethanol projects in China were announced this spring.

A demonstration plant, which will pro-duce ethanol from steel mill off-gases, is a project of LanzaTech, the chinese acad-emy of Sciences and Baosteel Group Corp. They have formed a joint venture, Shanghai baosteel LanzaTech new Energy company Ltd., to build a 100,000 gallon-a-year facility near Shanghai to be completed by the end of the year. The model will be quickly scaled up for the first commercial plant in china, potentially capable of producing 50 MMgy of ethanol as well as chemicals for the pro-duction of polymers and drop-in fuels from co2 or carbon monoxide. “Because China produces 50 percent of the world’s steel and already has ethanol mandates in many of its provinces, it is a natural first market for LanzaTech’s technology,” says Jennifer Hol-mgren, cEo of Lanzatech.

The company’s technology ferments and converts gases into fuels and chemicals. It can utilize industrial flue gases from steel mills and processing plants, coal-derived syn-gas and steam-reformed methane or syngas

generated from any biomass resource. “Chi-na is keenly aware of the importance of pro-ducing fuels without impacting the food sup-ply, making LanzaTech’s technology ideally suited for implementation there,” Holmgren tells EPM. “In addition, the production of ethanol at Chinese steel mills enables savings on the total cost of production of alternate fuels as most steel mills are in large industrial centers, which are highly populated. The use of biomass to make fuels in China requires the addition of large transport costs, as the biomass is typically a considerable distance from the urban centers where the fuel etha-nol is needed.”

Another project under development is a 33.5 mmgy ethanol plant in Harbin, china. american Jianye Greentech Holdings Ltd., a developer, manufacturer and distributor of alcohol-based fuel in China, and partner GeneSyst International announced comple-tion of the design of the Suihua Waste-to-Fuel Plant. Expected to be completed in 18 months, the plant will process more than 500,000 tons of garbage and 1 million tons of sewage a year into ethanol and power,

generating annual sales of about $100 mil-lion annually.

The fuel produced by this process is cleaner and costs less than conventional fu-els, says Haipeng Wang, chairman and presi-dent of Jianye Greentech. “By producing our own ethanol from municipal solid waste and sludge, we can lower the input costs for our blended fuels in excess of 15 percent,” he added. “our blended fuel combines ethanol and petroleum fuel, along with our proprietary fuel catalyst, which allows us to increase the concentration of ethanol up to 85 percent.”

Finally, GE announced that it would provide its Jenbacher biogas engine technol-ogy to power an ethanol plant under con-struction in nanYang by Henen Tianguan Group. The engines will be installed in a 36 megawatt power plant to utilize the ethanol plant’s waste methane biogas to generate renewable electricity that will be sold to the grid and used to power the ethanol plant. “Installing GE’s Jenbacher biogas engines at our ethanol production facility will offer clear environmental benefits and help us achieve significant energy efficiency gains to help us generate more profits and become more competitive throughout the region,” says Zhang Xiaoyang, chairman of the Henan Tianguan Group. —Holly Jessen

renewable Fuel in china Ge, lanzatech, Greentech advance ethanol projects


distilled

Fermentation Products &Technical Services

859.402.8707www.ferm-solutions.com

Have you heard about our New High Performance FermPro Yeast!

FermGuard Antimicrobials - Fermentation Support - FermPro Active Dry Yeasts

Technical ServicesTechnical Training Bacterial Control OptimizationProcessing Aids

Active Dry Yeast FermPro FermPro S

Antimicrobials FermGuard, Xtreme, Sentry

[email protected]

FEW Booths #221

Approximately 10 million pounds of corn oil will be produced this year at the 57 mmgy Poet biorefining-Hud-son (S.D.) ethanol plant and sold into the biodiesel and feed markets, says Clayton Vaughan, director of business development at Poet nutrition. The plant is the first of Poet’s 27 produc-tion facilities to produce the company’s trademarked Voilá corn oil, which is extracted through technology installed on the back end of the fermentation process. According to Poet, because the corn oil is captured after corn is subjected to the company’s unique cold-cook fermentation process, the oil produced contains a low free fatty acid, making it a high quality product.

Plans are being finalized to install the technology at Poet’s other plants, this year Vaughan says. —Kris Bevill

The USDA is providing $36 million through its national Institute of Food and Agriculture research initiative to 42 projects focused on advancing the production of biofuels, bioenergy and biobased products. Projects are spread throughout 25 states and primarily focus on feedstocks and products that can be cultivated and utilized within each specific region. Switchgrass and sugarcane, for example, will be the topics of research in California. Prairie grasses and perennial energy crops will be explored in oklahoma, Kansas, Minnesota and Virginia. Michigan research will focus on woody biomass while researchers in Texas and Pennsylvania will conduct work on sorghum-focused projects. other research projects will be conducted to develop life-cycle analysis methods for bio-fuels, to develop technology and equipment for use with biomass conversion processes, and to study potential pests affecting future bioenergy feedstocks.

Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack says the wide-ranging projects are consistent with the federal government’s plan to out-educate, out-innovate and out-build other nations also ramping up renewable energy efforts. “These projects will give us the sci-entific information needed to support bio-fuel production and create coproducts that will enhance the overall value of a biobased economy,” he says.

The nIFa research initiative was estab-lished as part of the 2008 Farm bill and is focused on six areas: plant health and pro-duction and animal products; food safety, nu-trition and health; renewable energy, natural resources and environment; agriculture sys-tems and technology; and agriculture eco-nomics and rural communities. The average grant through this round was about $863,000, while three received $1 million each. Auburn University researchers in Auburn, Ala., will explore the sustainable production of hydro-carbon fuels and chemicals. South Dakota State University researchers will work on a long-term project to design a bioenergy feed-stock production system. A Virginia Tech project will identify switchgrass rust resis-tance genes that can be incorporated into the plants to ensure large-scale and sustainable production of the crop. —Kris Bevill

Sustainability Doesn’t come cheap usdA grants $36 million for research

Voilá! Poet’s corn oil technology arrives


distilled

Biodiesel | Ethanol | Solar | Wind

Known for getting the deal done right, we’ve been

assisting with the development and financing of

renewable energy projects since 1996. The next

time you need guidance with financing, debt

restructuring, tax and securities issues, contracts,

government compliance, permitting, or general

business plan advice, turn to the experienced

attorneys that make up Lindquist & Vennum’s

renewable energy groups.

Denver | Minneapolis | lindquist.com

Feel good

about your

law firm.

minnesota will pay the final round of state ethanol producer payments to nine facilities in the next year. The legislative ap-proval of approximately $13 million in funds marks the end of an incentive program that was launched in the mid-1980s. “It basically

is the final chapter in the story,” says ralph Groschen, senior marketing specialist at the Minnesota Department of Agriculture. “This program allowed Minnesota to build a dozen ethanol plants that were farmer cooperatives and is what really got the ball rolling for oth-er plants. Without this program, we wouldn’t have the ethanol industry we have.”

The incentive program was initially set to expire in 2010, but budget troubles led to paying only 13 cents for each gallon pro-

duced in 2004-’07, rather than 20 cents per gallon, deferring the rest. Plants constructed after 2010 do not qualify and some of the first plants have closed, Groschen says, so the money approved in this year’s agriculture bill should bring the balance owed to zero.

Minnesota’s initial goal was to establish an industry with an operating capacity of 200 MMgy, providing 10 percent of the state’s transportation fuel needs. “And now we have 1.1 billion gallons of capacity in the state,” Groschen says. “I think most people are thinking, ‘mission accomplished. Let’s go on and do other things now.’” He says the state is ready to invest in other biofuel projects, such as cellulosic ethanol and renewable die-sel. “Something to carry on this legacy of new ways to add value to Minnesota agricul-ture commodities,” he says. —Kris Bevill

Label change tabled nebraska ethanol labeling effort held over

Legislation introduced in nebraska to eliminate required labels for ethanol-blend-ed fuels has been tabled by the bill’s sponsor following backlash from the local petroleum lobby and concern from the ethanol industry that an amended bill would do more damage than good.

In January, State Sen. Mark Christensen introduced a bill to eliminate the need for any retail pumps dispensing fuel contain-ing more than 1 percent ethanol to be la-beled. The measure passed the first of three rounds of votes, but was amended to instead require that any fuel containing no ethanol be marked with a “no ethanol” label. This change concerned the nebraska Ethanol Board, according to Christensen. “When the industry decided it may not be beneficial to them, I knew the bill was going to die so we just opted to lift the bill,” he says. “I think we can amend it next year and maybe get this passed. We’re just trying to take a positive approach and make sure we’re doing things the right way,” he adds. —Kris Bevill

End of an Era Minnesota to pay final state incentives


distilled

It’s the next best thing to the real thing and it’s almost ready to be put to the test. A group of students and researchers at Iowa State University, led by agricultural and bio-systems engineering associate professor Da-vid Grewell, has designed a virtual biorefin-ery control room that lets users experiment with new feedstocks and technologies, as well as gain experience with the daily operations of a plant, complete with realistic emergen-cies. The Interactive biorefinery operations Simulator, or I-boS, has been under devel-opment for almost three years and should be available for widespread use by September.

The USDA, Renewable Energy Group Inc., Lincolnway Energy LLc, Fastek Internation-al Ltd., crown Iron Works co. and Emerson Electric Co. all contributed to the $300,000 project.

Grewell, who calls the virtual control room “nintendo for biofuel nerds,” says the simulator is based on existing Iowa ethanol and biodiesel facilities. The program will be used this fall by students in a biorenewables technology class at the university to train them on production processes and plant emergency procedures “before they get to play with the real expensive toys,” he says.

Because the USDA is a sponsor of the project, it will be made available to all U.S. producers at no cost. Grewell says the ap-plication will be made available for down-loading through a website so that produc-ers can train their employees or test new technologies and feedstocks. Given enough information—results from pilot-scale test-ing for example—the program could even be used to determine the feasibility of newly

developed technologies and/or feedstocks. “Everything is based on fundamentals, so if we put a new feedstock in there, we have to have an understanding of what happens to it as we send it through pre-treatment,” he says. “Whether you’re doing something like an ammonia steeping process or a hot water treatment for switchgrass, for example, we would have to know what happens and be able to characterize those.”

The industry has supported the research project because it will increase the produc-tivity of biorefineries, Grewell says, adding that workers will be better trained with less on-the-job training required. By late April, Grewell said he was already swamped with requests from producers interested in both the training aspects and the technology test-ing abilities of the program. —Kris Bevill

‘Nintendo for Biofuel Nerds’ Virtual biorefinery control room coming soon

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

ACE-00111_PrintAd_EthanolProducer.pdf 1 5/2/11 3:44 PM

Make plans now to be a part of the largest ethanol conference &

expo in the world. As an attendee of the FEW, you’ll meet,

network and learn from like-minded ethanol industry

professionals. In addition, you’ll gain knowledge on the listed

industry topics that will help make your business successful.

• Production

• Management

• Coproducts/Product Diversification

• Cellulosic Ethanol

27th ANNUAL

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

ACE-00111_PrintAd_EthanolProducer.pdf 1 5/2/11 3:44 PM


event


event

less than a year ago, american Ethanol announced a six-year agreement with naSCaR, kicking off a high-profile marketing effort aimed at its millions of fans. At the International Fuel Ethanol Workshop & Expo, set for June 27-30, conference goers will have a chance to hear more about that decision directly from the man behind the wheel of naScar, cEo brian France, the grandson of naScar’s co-founder, bill France Sr.

High-octane

this year’s international Fuel ethanol workshop & expo is in indianapolis—a perfect place to examine nAscAr’s historic move to e15 BY hOLLY JESSEN

Line-up

FeaturesFEW

Ethanol Salute The American Ethanol fl ag waves over the fi eld during the start of the NASCAR Sprint Cup Series Kolbalt Tools 400 at Las Vegas Motor Speedway.

PHOTO: TODD WARSHAW/GETTY IMAGES FOR NASCAR


St. Helena CA | Healdsburg CA | McMinnville OR | Roseburg OR | Walla Walla WA

ACCREDITED

TESTING LABORATORIESCertificates #1257-01-02-03

ilac-MRA

SAVE MONEY BY PREEMPTIVE SCREENING

WITH ETS SCORPIONS™

[email protected] | 707 963 4806www.etslabs.com

“The contamination of fuel ethanol

fermentations by bacteria and by

non-Saccharomyces yeast results in a loss of fermentation efficiency”

“

nyea

ETS SCORPIONS™

Early detection of microbial contamination enables more effective control treatment

Determine appropriate anti-microbial treatment based on identification of specific microbes

Detect low levels of contamination

Troubleshoot contamination issues:

- Incoming feedstock - Starter cultures - Process additives

Preemptive screening enables early intervention resulting in shorter process time and increased yields

NoMorePaper

France and Growth Energy cEo Tom buis will share a keynote speaking spot the morning of June 28, the first full day of FEW. Directly following, a plenary panel including na-SCAR representa-tives mike Lynch, director of green-

ing, and Eric nyquist, president of stra-tegic development, will dig into the details of how the partnership between stock car auto racing and American-made ethanol is a win from start to finish. “There’s no sport more american than naScar and there’s no fuel more American than ethanol,” Buis tells EPm. “So that fit is just perfect.”

By the end of April, Buis had at-tended two na-SCAR races, the first of the season at the Daytona Inter-national Speedway and a second at Las Vegas Motor Speed-way. The American Ethanol brand is prominently visible at races, with more than 100,000 people

waving green flags bearing the logo. For the viewers, television commercials promote domestic ethanol, such as one that features tractors rolling down highways from their farms to enter the race track. There’s also an American Ethanol in-car camera, which gets moved to various vehicles, providing even more visibility for ethanol. no less significant is the fact that every vehicle on the track uses E15. “Every weekend in victory lane is a car powered by American ethanol,” Buis says.

American Ethanol also holds promo-tional events, where race fans learn more about the fuel from farmers and those in-volved in the ethanol industry. American Ethanol also has spokespeople in race car

drivers Kenny Wallace and Clint Bowyer. Promoting E15 is easy, Bowyer tells EPM, because it’s such a great product. “I’m from the Midwest,” he says. “I’ve seen the impact that it’s made throughout the Mid-west.”

Other HighlightsAlthough racing will be a big part of

the 27th annual FEW, it won’t be the only game in town. The plenary session on day two of FEW includes some big names as well. First, Bob Dinneen, president and cEo of the renewable Fuels associa-tion will give attendees a legislative update, speaking about broadening the industry’s scope. Following will be a plenary panel titled “Forming a Voice for the next Gen-eration of Ethanol Production.” Brooke Coleman, executive director of the Ad-vanced Ethanol Council, will moderate the panel that will include Wes Bolsen, chief marketing officer and vice president of government affairs, coskata Inc.; bill bra-dy, president and cEo, mascoma corp.; and John mccarthy, president and cEo, Qteros Inc., all founding members of the newly formed group. “The advanced and cellulosic ethanol industry has finally come together, but now is the time for the en-tire biofuels industry to speak with one voice,” Bolsen says. “With enduring support, advanced biofuels will create jobs, help reduce our country’s depen-dence on foreign oil, lower greenhouse gas emissions and help reduce the fed-eral trade deficit.”

RFA and a group of companies in the advanced ethanol arena announced formation of the AEC in February. The group, whose founding members also in-clude Abengoa Bioenergy Corp., BlueFire Renewables, Enerkem Inc., Fulcrum Bio-Energy Inc., Inbicon A/S, Iogen Corp. and osage bio Energy LLc, will zero in

event

Policy Update Bob Dinneen, president and CEO of the Renewable Fuels Association, will keynote the second day of FEW.

NASCAR Chief CEO Brian France announces that NASCAR would use Sunoco Green E15 in October at Charlotte Motor Speedway.

Promoting E15 Growth Energy CEO Tom Buis will join NASCAR’s CEO in the keynote discussion on American Ethanol’s sponsorship.


on commercializing advanced ethanol. “American ethanol production is one of the most dynamic industries anywhere in the world,” Dinneen says. “The innovative companies founding the AEC are leading the evolution of domestic ethanol produc-tion to include a vast array of feedstocks. The RFA is proud to join with the mem-bers of the AEC and continue its work building a bigger and broader American ethanol industry.”

The afternoons of June 28 and 29 will be jam-packed with useful information in four areas: production, management, cel-lulosic ethanol and coproducts/product diversification. attendees can either select the track that most interests them and sit in from the first panel presentation to the last, or pick and choose among the various presentations. In all, more than 80 speakers have been selected to give presentations, with more being added to the list as the event approaches.

matt Henry, an environmental engi-neer with Pinnacle Engineering Inc., will speak on compliance during a panel pre-sentation in the management track. He’ll be covering the differences and similarities be-tween oSHa’s Process Safety management program and the U.S. EPA’s Risk Manage-

ment Program. As a past FEW attendee, Henry points out that even though the event is only for a few days, it’s a great place to learn about many up-and-com-ing issues in a short period of time. “I always find FEW to be a very compact source of informa-tion,” he tells EPM.

Fruit of the FiberAs has been true for many years, cellu-

losic ethanol is one of the hottest topics at FEW. one of the many speakers to tackle that subject is Sabrina Trupia, an assistant director of biological research at the na-tional Corn-to-Ethanol Research Center,

who will speak on a panel called “Breaking the Feedstock Code: Pathways to Cellulosic Ethanol from new Inputs.”

Trupia will present the findings of three years of research to characterize, sac-charify and ferment corn kernel fiber. The goal is to help producers add cellulosic ethanol production at existing corn ethanol plants by fractionating the corn at the front end and using the fiber as an additional feedstock. “The idea of our research is, let’s look at the easiest cellulosic material to get, from existing ethanol production and then move forward,” she says, adding that producers could later add corn stover and corn cobs to their feedstock repertoire.

The research is ready to move past the bench scale for optimization, she says. ncErc, which is a non-profit organiza-tion with the goal of helping the ethanol industry, is interested in developing a pro-tocol that all ethanol producers could use to make additional fuel from corn fi-ber. “The next step we are hoping to get funded is a scale-up procedure,” she says.

Another area of research is pre-treatment to access the sugars in corn fiber. ncErc has studied pretreatment procedures such as steam explosion, dilute acid pretreatment, liquid ammonia soaking, caustic pretreat-ment and lime pretreatment. Dilute acid pretreatment came out on top, resulting in about 75 percent liquefaction of the total mass as well as complete saccharification of the hemicellulose component while al-lowing for the highest degree of cellulosic enrichment. The other methods of pre-treatment resulted in up to 60 percent of mass liquefaction and rendered cellulose component digestible by commercial cel-lulases, she says.

event

Compliance Comparison Matt Henry with Pinnacle Engineering will cover OSHA and EPA’s programs that impact ethanol plants.

Converting Fiber Sabrina Trupia with the National Corn to Ethanol Research Center will report on their continuing research.

1-800-279-4757

Call us for a free, no-obligationconsulation today.

Natwick Associates Appraisal Services1205 4th Ave. S., Fargo, ND 58103

[email protected]

The Specialistin Biofuels Plant

Appraisals• Valuation for financing

• Establishing an asking price

• Expert witness testimony

• Partial interest valuation

Few certified appraisers in the United States specialize in ethanol plant and relatedbiofuels properties. The firm of Natwick Associates offers more than 50 years of worldwide experience. Your appraisal will be completed by a certified general appraiser and conformto all state and federal appraisal standards.


Coproducts AdvanceA coproduct that’s getting a lot of atten-

tion right now is zein. Douglas Tiffany, as-sistant extension professor at the University of Minnesota, will talk about zein in a panel presentation called “High-Value coproducts from Ethanol Sidestreams.” There’s a mar-ket for zein in food preservation—it can be sprayed on fruits or vegetables to keep them fresh. The question is whether zein from DDGS can break into that existing market, Tiffany says.

In the past, ethanol plants produced only two products: ethanol and DDGS. With a technology developed by Pavel Kra-sutsky, program director of the natural re-sources Research Institute at the University of Minnesota, Duluth, heated ethanol can be leached through distillers grains, resulting in zein and other coproducts. The alcohol pulls out corn oil, which can then be diverted to biodiesel production. The process also pulls out solubles, which contain a fair amount of glycerin and can be converted by bacteria into

additional ethanol. “In terms of products to be sold, an additional 10 percent ethanol and 10 percent biodiesel or jet fuel beyond the amount of ethanol already recovered from starch fermentation can be sold from every bushel of corn processed,” he says, adding that the additional ethanol from glycerin

should be considered an advanced biofuel.

not only does the method remove all traces of antibiot-ics used in the ethanol process, but it leaves behind a high-protein DDG product. Typi-cally DDG is 28 per-cent crude protein, Tiffany says, but this back-end process re-sults in DDG protein concentrated to 34

percent. With tight margins due to high-price corn, this extraction process would help eth-

anol producers get more out of every bushel of corn. “Research results suggest that as little as 1 percent of the ethanol used in ex-traction is lost in the process, residing mostly in the high protein feed,” he says.

The research group he is part of is now working with Crown Iron Works Co. to take what was learned in the lab and see how it will perform at a bigger scale. In addition, a substantial amount of the high protein DDG was made available for different livestock feeding trials. By the time FEW rolls around, Tiffany hopes to have more solid numbers to report on the extraction research and feeding trials, he says.

Other EventsWhile the education, networking and

business opportunities at FEW are invalu-able, the event is also known for its stellar entertainment. In keeping with the racing theme, it’s all about the brickyard this year. The brickyard nickname came about because the Indianapolis Motor Speedway was once

event

Zein Process Douglas Tiffany from the University of Minnesota will bring FEW goers up to date on work to commercialize a zein process that has many benefits.


paved in bricks and still has some bricks at the starting/finish line. naScar races were first held there in 1994 at the first brickyard 400 and in 1996 driver Dale Jerret started the tradition of “kissing the bricks,” when the winning driver and crew pucker up and actu-ally kiss the bricks at the finish line.

The FEW fun starts with the traditional golf outing, held this year at the Brickyard Crossing golf course, which has four of its holes inside the speedway and remnants of the old pit walls used in bulkheading around the lakes on the outside holes.

June 29, the final day of panel presen-

tations at FEW, wraps up with a trip to the Indianapolis motor Speedway Hall of Fame Museum, located within the speedway oval. The original hall of fame was established in 1956 but was only large enough to display a few vintage cars. The current museum opened in 1976 and has at least 75 vehicles on display at all times, including winning Indy 500 cars and a rare 1935 Duesenberg model Jn four-door convertible passenger car. Participants will also have the chance to do a lap around the museum track in a small bus and take pictures inside a real Indy race car.

on the last day of FEW, June 30, par-ticipants will be offered a tour of the Poet biorefining plant in cloverdale, Ind. The 90 MMgy ethanol plant is the company’s 27th plant, and first acquisition, that was retrofit-ted with Poet technology and restarted in late March.

Author: Holly JessenAssociate Editor,

Ethanol Producer Magazine (701) 738-4946

[email protected]

event

Racing History The IMS Hall of Fame Museum has one of the world’s largest, most varied collections of racing, classic and antique cars including more than 30 Indianapolis 500 winning cars.

PH

OTO

: IN

DIA

NA

PO

LIS

CO

NV

EN

TIO

N &

VIS

ITO

RS

AS

SO

CIA

TIO

N


Water


Water

not content to simply go with the flow, ethanol producers are working to reduce water use BY hOLLY JESSEN

Water conservation is a top priority for Poet llC, which recently surpassed archer daniels Midland Co. as the largest ethanol producer in the u.S. “Fresh water is a pre-cious natural resource that we do our utmost to conserve,” says Jeff Broin, CEo of Poet. “We have seen tremendous efficiency gains in the 23 years I’ve been in this business, but we can and will continue to do better.”

In March 2010, Poet said it would aim for a 22 percent reduction in water use across all its facilities by 2012. The company, which today includes 27 production

Water: Reduce, Reuse and Recycle


Water

Stop losing money on energy costs.

Increase your efficiency with a step

grinding solution from CPM.

Ethanol producers are turning to

CPM for step grinding solutions to

reduce operating costs and improve

particle size control.

For a free consultation,

call 800-336-2563.

800-366-2563 | WWW.CPM.NET

WATERLOO, IOWA

STEP UPYOUR GRINDWITH CPM

facilities with a combined 1,696 MMgy of ethanol production, is aiming for an aver-age of 2.33 gallons of water per gallon of ethanol produced.

Industry wide, the amount of water it takes to produce ethanol has decreased steadily over the years. The latest numbers, taken from a 2010 report by Steffen Muel-ler of the University of Illinois at Chicago, reveal that on average, a dry mill corn-ethanol plant in 2008 used 2.72 gallons of water to produce one gallon of ethanol and discharged 0.46 gallons of water. The survey also revealed that ethanol producers are continuing to consider installing more efficient water use technologies.

To produce corn from ethanol, water is required for grinding, liquefaction, fer-mentation and separation as well as pro-cess water, cooling water and steam gener-ation for heating and drying, according to the argonne national Laboratory, “Water Consumption in the Production of Etha-nol and Petroleum Gasoline,” published in 2009 in the Journal of Environmental Man-agement, the most current study available. Water losses happen during evaporation, drift, blowdown from the cooling tower, deaerator leaks, boiler blowdown, evapora-tion from the dryer and incorporation into ethanol and DDGs. By far, the heaviest water users are the cooling tower, which accounts for 53 percent, and the dryer, which accounts for 42 percent.

Those numbers show that alterna-tive cooling technologies would be a good place for further research, says Andy Aden, senior research engineer for the national renewable Energy Laboratory. There are existing technologies, such as dry cool-ing or air cooling, offering opportunities for significant reduction. “Unfortunately, those tend to come with a trade-off, which is increased cost,” he says.

The argonne report identified several areas for potential water reduction mea-sures at ethanol plants, including increasing process water recycling by such methods as capturing water vapor from the dryer and recycling boiler condensate; increas-ing cycles in the cooling tower; or recy-cling treated process water and/or cooling

tower blowdown. If those measures were coupled with steam integration, water intensity can be reduced even more. “The ethanol industry maintains that net zero wa-ter consumption is achievable by water reuse and recycling using existing com-mercial technology and with additional capital investment,” the report says.

Michael Webber, associate director of the Center for International Energy & Environmental Policy, offers ethanol pro-ducers another reason to conserve water. Although not many make the connection, he says, water is needed to generate energy, such as at a power plant or ethanol plant, and energy is needed to deliver clean wa-ter. “Many people are concerned about the perils of peak oil—running out of cheap oil,” he says in a 2008 article he authored for Scientific American. “A few are voicing concerns about peak water. But almost no one is addressing the tension between the two: water restrictions are hampering solutions for generating more energy, and energy problems, particularly rising prices, are curtailing efforts to supply more clean water.”

Ethanol producers are very aware of the water conservation issue. overall, the industry has reduced water use 48 percent in less than 10 years, the Argonne report says. Poet isn’t the only example of an ethanol producer that is applying the “re-duce, reuse and recycle” principle to water consumption. other producers on the cut-ting edge of water conservation include a north Dakota plant that uses wastewater for 100 percent of its water needs and a Minnesota plant that got tough on water discharge.

Waste Not WaterWhen the site in casselton, n.D., was

selected for Tharaldson Ethanol LLc, it

Tracking Use A senior research engineer at NREL, Andy Aden says water use comparisons are difficult when different parameters are used in studies.


Water

[email protected]

Clean Air & Energy Technology

Lower your cost per gallon, improve plant operabiility and lower your carbon footprint.

BIOGAS-TSwas because it had good access to corn and energy, as well as rail and road transporta-tion infrastructure. The weakness was wa-ter supply, says russ newman, vice presi-dent of public relations and governmental affairs for the 150 MMgy ethanol plant.

The company started the process to get permission from the north Dakota Water Commission to drill wells at one of the nearest aquifers. not only are the aquifers located 20 or more miles away, but there was no guarantee Tharaldson would get approval after going through the long process of required public hearings. That’s when the idea of using wastewater from Fargo started looking more attractive than wells that would be tapping into the same groundwater used by some area farmers to irrigate the corn they’d be selling to the ethanol plant. “We thought, why fi ght with those farmers for that same wa-ter, when we can recycle city waste-water?” newman says.

It’s an elegant

solution for all parties involved. not only does the ethanol plant reuse wastewater that would typically be treated and dis-charged into the Red River, but it generates income for the City of Fargo and Cass Ru-ral Water rather than sucking up groundwa-ter, says Jerry Blomeke, general manager of the Cass county system, which completed the project cooperatively with Tharaldson and Fargo.

The $15.3 million project included building a wastewater treatment plant and installing 26 miles of underground lines, with 12-inch pipe used for pumping wa-ter to the ethanol plant and a 4-inch line returning to Fargo. First, Fargo treats its wastewater at the city’s wastewater treat-ment facility. Then, about 10 percent of the water it would normally discharge into the Red River is diverted to a separate wa-ter treatment plant where it undergoes mi-crofi ltration and reverse osmosis in prepa-ration for use at the ethanol plant, Blomeke tells EPM. Cass Rural Water purchases the water from Fargo and sells it to Tharald-son for $2.92 per thousand gallons, which works out to 0.03 cents a gallon.

The Tharaldson facility produces about 400,000 gallons of ethanol a day us-ing 1 million gallons of water in the sum-mer and about 800,000 gallons in the win-

Water Cooperation The lack of water at the Tharaldson Ethanol plant site led to a partnership to use treated waste water from nearby Fargo, N.D., says Russ Newman.

ND State Water Commission900 East Boulevard Ave.Bismarck, ND 58505(701) 328-4989 2010

LAKEMETIGOSHESTATE PARK

TURTLERIVERSTATEPARK

ICELANDICSTATE PARK

FORT RANSOMSTATE PARK

BEAVER LAKESTATE PARK

FORT LINCOLNSTATE PARK

FORTSTEVENSON

STATEPARK

LAKE SAKAKAWEASTATE PARK

CROSSRANCH

STATE PARK

LEWIS & CLARKSTATE PARK

LAKE NETTIENWR

ARROWWOODNWR

LAKE

LONGLAKENWR

SLADENWR

UPPERSOURISNWR

J. CLARKSALYERNWR

LOSTWOODNWR

TEWAUKONNWR

SHEYENNELAKE NWR

DES LACSNWR

LAKE ILONWR

CHASE LAKENWR

WHITE LAKENWR

HESKETTSTATION

COYOTESTATION

MILTON R. YOUNGSTATION

LELAND OLDSSTATION

STANTONSTATION

ANTELOPE VALLEYSTATION

GREAT PLAINSSYNFUELS PLANT

Beulah

Hazen

Dickinson

Mandan

Harvey

Carrington

Jamestown

ValleyCity

Lisbon

Wahpeton

WestFargo

Fargo

GrandForks

Grafton

Mayville

Langdon

Rugby

Bottineau

Minot

Williston

TONGUE R.

PARK R.

FOREST R.

TURTLE R.

GOOSE R.

ELM R.

MAPLE R.

RUSH R.

SHEYENNE R.

SHEYENNE R.

WILD RICE R.

JAMES R.

JAMES R.

PIPESTEM C

R.

WILLOW CR.

MOUSE R.

MOUSE R.

MO

USE R.

DEEP R.

DES LACS R.

WINTERING R.

WH

ITE

EAR

TH R

.

LITTLE KNIFE R.

L. MISSOURI R.

KNIFE R.

N. FORK GRAND R.

HEART R.

CANNONBALL R.

CANNONBALL R.

CEDAR CR.

SPRING CR.

APPLE CR.

BEAVER CR.

MAPLE R.

STATE LINEWATER COOP

MISSOURI WESTWATER

McLEAN-SHERIDANRURAL WATER

CENTRAL PLAINSWATER DISTRICT

STUTSMAN RURALWATER DISTRICT BARNES

WATER DISTRICT

SOUTHEASTWATER DISTRICT

CASSWATER DISTRICT

DAKOTA RURALWATER DISTRICT

TRAILL RURALWATER DISTRICT

TER DISTRICT

AGASSIZWATER DISTRICT

WALSH RURALWATER DISTRICT

NORTH VALLEYWATER DISTRICTLANGDON RURAL

WATER DISTRICT

GRAND FORKS/TRAILL WATER DISTRICT

ALL SEASONSWATER DISTRICT

NORTH PRAIRIERURAL WATER

UPPER SOURISRURAL WATER

WILLIAMSRURAL WATER

RENWICKDAM

SENATOR YOUNG

DAM

MOUNT CARMEL

DAM

HOMMEDAM

BYLIN DAM

FORDVILLEDAM

LARIMOREDAM RIVERSIDE

PARK DAM

HARVEY DAM

LAKE JUANITA

CONTROL STRUCTURE

ENGLISH COULEE DAM

GOLDEN LAKE DAM

BEAVER CREEKDAM

AUGUSTADT DAM

ELM RIVER DAM #1

BALDHILL DAM

ARROWWOODDAM

JIM DAM

JAMESTOWNDAM

PIPESTEM DAM

DEAD COLT CREEK DAM

COTTONWOOD CREEK DAM

NORTH BAY DAM

GREEN LAKE OUTLET

CONTROL

BEAVER LAKE DAM

SWEETBRIAR CREEK DAM

HEART BUTTE DAMAND LAKETSCHIDA

INDIAN CREEK DAM

DICKINSONDAM AND

PATTERSONLAKE

SQUARE BUTTE CREEKDAM 4 SQUARE BUTTE

CREEK DAM 5

NELSON LAKEDAM

F

BOWMAN-HALEY DAM

LAKE ILO DAM

LAKE ZAHL DAM

BLACKTAIL DAM

DESLACSDAM 2

LAKE DAR-LING DAM

DAM 96

LAKEMETIGOSHE

DAM

LORDSLAKEDAM

CARBURYDAM

DAM 357

DAM341

DAM 332

DAM 326

DAM 320

SAKAKAWEA

LAKE

RED

RIVER

OF

THE

NORTH

LAKE

OAHE

Cavalier

ParkRiver

Casselton

Oakes

Ellendale

Bowman

Hettinger

WatfordCity

Garrison New Rockford

Washburn

NEW ROCKFORD CANAL

McCLUSKYCANAL

JOINT SWPP/BASIN INTAKE

CANNONBALL R.

GREEN R.

DAKOTALAKENWR

TLE

CR

.

LAKE ZAHLNWR

LITTLEMISSOURI

STATE PARK

SULLY CREEKSTATE PARK

THEODORE ROOSEVELTNATIONAL PARK (South Unit)

THEODORE ROOSEVELTNATIONAL PARK (North Unit)

DRAYTONDAM

INDIAN HILLSSTATE PARK

Forman

Ashley

LaMoure

Napoleon

Steele

Hillsboro

Finley

Cooperstown

Fessenden

Minnewaukan

Rolla

Mohall

Towner

Bowbells

Stanley

McClusky

Crosby

Manning

MedoraBeach

Amidon

Mott

Carson

Linton

Center

CAVENDISHFARMS

CARGILLMALT

MINN-DAKFARMERS COOP

CARGILLINC.

CITYOF FARGO

(TharaldsonEthanol)

AMERICANCRYSTAL SUGAR

ALCHEMETHANOLPLANT

ADMETHANOLPLANT

FortYates

S O U T H D A K O T A

M I

N N

E S

O T

A

Rivers, Streams & Lakes

Rural & Regional Water Systems

Major Watershed Boundaries

Glacial Drift Aquifers

Irrigation Districts (SW=Surface Water; GW= Ground Water)

WATERUSERS

STANDING ROCKRURAL WATER

FORT BERTHOLDRURAL WATER

BELCOURT PUBLIC UTIL.

McKENZIE RURAL WATER

Grand ForksAFB

MinotAFB

Walhalla

Larimore

CARGILLINC.

Hankinson

Thompson

ADMPROCESSING

Kenmare

VelvaADMPROCESSING

Belcourt

Burlington

New Town

Tioga

Wishek

BUFFALO LAKEDIVERSION DAM

COALMINELAKEDAM

ROCKLAKEDAM

MIDDLE BRANCHPARK RIVER DAM 5

SEITZDAM

SQUARE BUTTE CREEKDAM 6

STORMLAKENWR

WILD RICELAKENWR

MAPLERIVERNWR

BONEHILLNWR

SPRINGWATERLAKE NWR

APPERTLAKE NWR

SUNBURSTLAKE NWR

LAKE PATRICIANWR

PRETTY ROCKNWR

STEWART LAKENWR

HUTCHINSONLAKE NWR

LAKEGEORGE

NWR

HALF-WAYLAKENWR

TOMAHAWKNWR

HOBART LAKENWR

STONEYSLOUGHNWR

SIBLEYLAKENWR

JOHNSON LAKENWR

LITTLEGOOSE

KELLYSSLOUGH

NWR

ARDOCHNWR

ROCK LAKENWR

BRUMBA

PLEASANTLAKENWR

BUFFALOLAKENWR

RABBLAKENWR

WILLOWLAKENWR

SCHOOL SECTIONLAKENWR

LORDSLAKENWR

SHELLLAKENWR

HIDDENWOODLAKE NWRMcLEAN

NWR

WINTERINGRIVERNWR COTTONWOOD

LAKE NWR

CAMPLAKENWR

LAKEOTISNWR

NORTHEASTERNIRR. DISTRICT

(GW)

EASTERN DAKOTAIRR. DISTRICT

(GW)

IRR.DISTRICT

CENTRAL DAKOTAIRR. DISTRICT

(GW)

HORSEHEADIRR. DISTRICT

(GW/SW)

TURTLE LAKEIRR. DISTRICT

(GW/SW)

NESSON VALLEYIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

BUFORD-TRENTONIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

LOW. YELLOWSTONEIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

ELK/CHARBONIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

YELLOWSTONEIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

SIOUXIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

CARTWRIGHTIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

WESTERN HEARTIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

BIG BENDIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

DESLACSDAM 4

TESOROREFINING CO.

HESSCORPORATION

BURLINGTON OIL & GAS

Lincoln

INTERNATIONAL PEACE GARDEN

Energy Facilities

25 Largest Industrial Water Users(Point of Diversion)

Cities (Pop. >1000) & County Seats

LONG CR.

COW CR.

L. MUDDY R.

STONY CR.

CLEAR CR.

T O

BA

CCO

GA

RDEN

C

R.

BEAVER CR.

TIMBER

CR.

HORSE

CR.

CHARBONNEAU CR.YELLOW

STO

NE

R.

CH

ERRY CR.

BENNIE PEER CR.

BEICEGEL CR.

CROSBY C

R.

MAGPIECR.

WHITETAIL CR.BLACKTAIL CR.

BEAVER CR.

L. KNIFE R.

KNIFE R.

CROOKED CR.

ELK CR.

GARNER CR.

BULLIONCR.

L. M

ISSO

URI R

.

L. BEA

VER

CR.

ALKALI CR.

COLD TURKEY CR.

SPRING

CR.

LIGHTNING CR.

BUFFALO CR.

CEDAR CR.

N. CEDARCR.

CHANTA PETA CR.

TIMBER CR.

SHEEP CR

.

THIRTYMILE CR.

ANTELOP E CR.

GOVERNMENT CR.

DEEP CR.

LOUSE CR.

DOGTOOTH CR.

ANTELOPE CR.

HEART BUTTE CR.

CROW

N BU

TTE CR.

BIG MUDDY CR.

SWEETBRIAR CR.

ELM CR.

COYO

TE CR.

OTTER CR. SQ

UA

RE BUTTE CR.

DO

UG

LAS

CR

.

D

EE

PW

ATE

R C

R.

SHELL C

R.

W. CUT BANK CR.

SPRING COULEEL. DEEP CR.

EGG CR.

HAY COULEE

BOU

NDARY CR.

CU

T B

AN

K C

R.

STO

NE

CR.

OA

K C

R.

WO

LF C

R.

OX CR.

OAK CR.

L. HEART R.

L. BEAVER CR.

S. BRANCH BEAVER

CR.

ELM

R.

BRA

NC

H R

.

DRY

S. FORK MAPLE R.

MAPLE CR.

CO

TTONWOOD CR.

BONE HILL CR.

BEA

R C

R.

SHO

RT

FOOT CR.

AN

TELOPE C

R.

SPR

ING CR.

LOWER BRANCH RUSH R

.

SWAN CR.

BUFFALO

CR.

SILVER CR.

BALDHILL CR.

ELM

R.

S. BRANCH

N. BRANCH ELM R.

S. B

RA

NC

H G

OOSE

R.

N. BRA

NC

H G

OO

SE R.

BEAVER CR.

GOOSE R.

L. GOOSE R.

TURTLE R.

S. BRANCH

ANCH TURTLE R.

M. BRA

NC

H FO

RES

L. SOUTH PEMBINA R.

PEMBINA R.

CYPRESS CR

.

CO. DITCHES 20 & 66WILLOW CR.CA

RT CR.

N. BRANCH PARK R.

M. BRANCH PARK R.

S. BRAN

CH PA

RK R.

N. BRANCH FOREST R.

BIG C

COULEE

THARALDSONETHANOL

PLANT

HANKINSONRENEWABLEENERGYETHANOLPLANT

DEAD COLT C

R.

DICKEY-SARGENTIRR. DISTRICT

(GW)

JAMES RIVERIRR. DISTRICT

(GW)

DOYLE MEMORIAL STATE PARK

L. P

IPES

TEM

CR.

ROCKY RUN CR.

KELLY CR.

JAMES R.

SHEYENNE R.

BUFFALOCOULEE

N. FORK S

HEYENNE R.

BIG C

OU

LEE

KNIFE RIVERINDIAN VILLAGES

NATIONALHISTORIC

SITE

FORT UNIONNATIONALHISTORICSITE

FLAT CR.

DUCK CR.

HEART R.

L. MISSO

UR

I R.

MOUNTRAIL RURALWATER DISTRICT

Parshall E. FORK SHELL CR.

ENCOREOPERATING

HESSCORPORATION

CU

T BAN

K CR.

DAKOTAGASIFICATION

STATE WATERCOMMISSION

(Red Trail Energy)

WESTMORELANDCOAL CO.

INTAKE

CONTINENTALRESOURCES

LONGLAKENWR 7

LONGLAKE

NWR 6 Enderlin

MAPLERIVERDAM

LAKEARDOCH

DAM

SAN

D CR.

DEEP C

R.

BEAR DEN

CR.

PORCUPINE CR.

LONG LAK

E CR

.

BEAVER CR.

BUFFALO CR.

M. BRANCH GOOSE R.

SALT

WATER COULEE

WIL

D RIC

E R

.

ELM C

OULEE

COLE

CR

.

N. M

AR

AIS

R.

R.

NORTHWEST AREAWATER SUPPLY

SOUTHWESTPIPELINE PROJECT

Where’s the Water? The Casselton, N.D., location was good for supplies of corn, energy and access to transportation for Tharaldson Ethanol, but not located very near groundwater to drill wells, shown in this map as shaded areas.

STATE TATE TA PARKPARKP

FORT LINCOLNRT LINCOLNRSTATE TATE TA PARKPARKP

CROSSRANCH

STATE TATE TA PARKPARKP

LAKE NETTIENWR

ARROWWOODNWR

LAKE

LONGLAKENWR

SLADENWR

J. CLARKSALYERLYERLNWR

SHEYENNELAKE NWR

CHASE LAKENWR

HESKETTSTATIONTATIONTA

MILTLTL ON R. YOUNGSTATIONTATIONTA

Mandan

Harvey

Carrington

Jamestown

ValleyValleyVCity

Langdon

Rugby

Bottineau

Minot

SHEYENNE R.

JAMES R.

JAMES R.

PIPESTEM C

R.

WILLOW CR.

MOUSE R.

MO

USE R.

DEEP R.

WINTERING R.

APPLE CR.

MISSOURI WESTWAWAW TERATERA

McLEAN-SHERIDANRURAL WAWAW TERATERA

CENTRAL PLAINSL PLAINSLWAWAW TER DISTRICTATER DISTRICTA

STUTSMAN RURALWAWAW TER DISTRICTATER DISTRICTA BARNES

WAWAW TER DISTRICTATER DISTRICTA

DAKOWAWAW

TER DISTRICT

LANGDON RURALWAWAW TER DISTRICTATER DISTRICTA

ALL SEASONSL SEASONSLWAWAW TER DISTRICTATER DISTRICTA

RENWICK

SENATATA OR YOUNG

DAM

MOUNT CARMEL

DAM

HOMMEDAM

BYLIN DAM

HARVERVER YDAM

LAKE JUANITATAT

CONTROLSTRUCTURE

BALDHILLDAM

ARROWWOODDAM

JIM DAM

JAMESTOWNDAM

PIPESTEM DAM



CREEK DAM 5

NELSON LAKEDAM

LORDSLAKEDAM

CARBURYRYRDAM

DAM341

DAM 332

DAM 326

DAM 320

New Rockford

WashburnWashburnW

NEW ROCKFORD CANAL

McCLUSKYCANAL

TLE

CR

.

Napoleon

Steele

Finley

Cooperstown

FessendenFessenden

Minnewaukan

Rolla

TownerTownerT

McClusky

Center

CAVENDISHAVENDISHAFARMSFARMSF

CARGILLMALTLTL

ADMETHANOLPLANTBELCOURTRTR

PUBLIC UTIL.

MinotAFB

VelvaVelvaVADMPROCESSING

Belcourt

BUFFALO LAKEFALO LAKEFDIVERSION DAM

COALMINELAKEDAM

ROCKLAKEDAM

MIDDLE BRANCHPARK RIVER DAM 5PARK RIVER DAM 5P

SEITZDAM


BONEHILL

HUTCHINSONLAKE NWR

LAKEGEORGE

NWR

HALF-WAWAW YAYALAKENWR

TOMAHAWKAWKANWR

HOBART LAKERT LAKERNWR

STONEYSLOUGHNWR

SIBLEYLAKENWR

JOHNSON LAKENWR

LITTLEGOOSE

ROCK LAKENWR

BRUMBA

PLEASANTLAKENWR

BUFFALOFALOFLAKENWR

WILLOWLAKENWR

LORDSLAKENWR


LAKE NWR

CAMPLAKENWR

LAKEOTISNWR

NO

CENTRAL DAKOL DAKOL TATATIRR. DISTRICT

(GW)

TURTLE LAKERTLE LAKERIRR. DISTRICT

(GW/SW)


(SW)

TESOROREFINING CO.

Lincoln

RIRIR AIAI RARA

CR.

E CR.


EGG CR.

HAYAYA COULEEY COULEEY

BOBOBU

OU

ON

DARYRYR CCRR.

CU

CU

CT

UT

UBABAB

NA

NA

KN

KN

CR

.

STSTSOTOT

NE

CR.

OA

K C

R.

WO

WO

WLF

CR

.

OX CR.

OAK CR.

L. HEARARATRTR R.

BOBOB NE HILL CR.

SPR

INGNGN

CR.

SISIS LVLVLERERE

CR.

BALDHILL CR.L CR.L

BEAVER CR.

AVER CR.

A

S. BRANCH

A

M. BRARAR

NA

NA

CN

CN

HFOFOF

RERERS

OUTH PEMBIBIBNINI ANAN R.

SSC

R.

N. BRARAR NANA CH PAPAP RK

M. BRANCHCHCS.BRBRB A

NC

NC

N

HCHCPAPAP

R

A

R

A

KRKRR.

N. BRBRBARAR NANA CH FOREST

BIGC

COULULU ELEL EEEE

L.PIPIP

PIPIES

TEM

CR.

ROCKYKYK RURUR NUNU CR.

KELLYLYL CR.

Y CR.Y

JAMES R.

SHEYENNE R.

BUBUBFUFU FAFAF LOCOCOC

UOUO LEE

N. FOFOF

RORO

KRKRSH

EYENNE R.

BIGC

OU

LEE

ENCOREOPERATINGATINGA

HESSCORPORATIONATIONA

AN

KCR.

INTAKETAKET

LONGLAKENWR 7

LONGLAKE

NWR 6

LONONOG

LAK

BEAVAVA

EVEVR CR.

BUFFAFAF LO CRCRC .

M. BRBRB

ARARNANA

R

ND State Water Commission900 East Boulevard Ave.Bismarck, ND 58505(701) 328-4989 2010

LAKEMETIGOSHESTATE PARK

TURTLERIVERSTATEPARK

ICELANDICSTATE PARK

FORT RANSOMSTATE PARK

BEAVER LAKESTATE PARK

FORT LINCOLNSTATE PARK

FORTSTEVENSON

STATEPARK

LAKE SAKAKAWEASTATE PARK

CROSSRANCH

STATE PARK

LEWIS & CLARKSTATE PARK

LAKE NETTIENWR

ARROWWOODNWR

LAKE ALICE NWR

LONGLAKENWR

SLADENWR

UPPERSOURISNWR

J. CLARKSALYERNWR

LOSTWOODNWR

TEWAUKONNWR

SHEYENNELAKE NWR

DES LACSNWR

AUDUBONNWR

LAKE ILONWR

CHASE LAKENWR

SULLYSHILL NWR

WHITE LAKENWR

HESKETTSTATION

COAL CREEK

STATION

COYOTESTATION

MILTON R. YOUNGSTATION

LELAND OLDSSTATION

STANTONSTATION

ANTELOPE VALLEYSTATION

GREAT PLAINSSYNFUELS PLANT

Beulah

Hazen

Dickinson

BismarckMandan

Harvey

Carrington

Jamestown

ValleyCity

Lisbon

Wahpeton

WestFargo

Fargo

GrandForks

Grafton

DevilsLake

Mayville

Langdon

Rugby

Bottineau

Minot

Williston

TONGUE R.

PARK R.

FOREST R.

TURTLE R.

GOOSE R.

ELM R.

MAPLE R.

RUSH R.

SHEYENNE R.

SHEYENNE R.

WILD RICE R.

JAMES R.

JAMES R.

PIPESTEM CR.

WILLOW CR.

MOUSE R.

MOUSE R.

MOUSE R.

DEEP R.

DES LACS R.

WINTERING R.

WH

ITE

EART

H R

.

LITTLE KNIFE R.

L. MISSOURI R.

KNIFE R.

N. FORK GRAND R.

HEART R.

CANNONBALL R.

CANNONBALL R.

CEDAR CR.

SPRING CR.

APPLE CR.

BEAVER CR.

MAPLE R.

STATE LINEWATER COOP

SOUTH CENTRALWATER DISTRICT

MISSOURI WESTWATER

McLEAN-SHERIDANRURAL WATER

GARRISON RURAL WATER

CENTRAL PLAINSWATER DISTRICT

STUTSMAN RURALWATER DISTRICT BARNES

WATER DISTRICT

SOUTHEASTWATER DISTRICT

CASSWATER DISTRICT

DAKOTA RURALWATER DISTRICT

TRAILL RURALWATER DISTRICT

TRI-COUNTYWATER DISTRICT

AGASSIZWATER DISTRICT

WALSH RURALWATER DISTRICT

NORTH VALLEYWATER DISTRICTLANGDON RURAL

WATER DISTRICT

RAMSEY COUNTYRURAL WATER

GRAND FORKS/TRAILL WATER DISTRICT

ALL SEASONSWATER DISTRICT

NORTH PRAIRIERURAL WATER

UPPER SOURISRURAL WATER

WILLIAMSRURAL WATER

RENWICKDAM

SENATOR YOUNG

DAM

MOUNT CARMEL

DAM

HOMMEDAM

BYLIN DAM

WHITMANDAM

MATEJCEKDAM

FORDVILLEDAM

LARIMOREDAM RIVERSIDE

PARK DAM

LAKEALICE DAM

BIGCOULEE DAM

HARVEY DAM

LAKE JUANITA

CONTROL STRUCTURE

ENGLISH COULEE DAM

GOLDEN LAKE DAM

BEAVER CREEKDAM

AUGUSTADT DAM

ELM RIVER DAM #1

BALDHILL DAM

ARROWWOODDAM

JIM DAM

JAMESTOWNDAM

PIPESTEM DAM

DEAD COLT CREEK DAM

COTTONWOOD CREEK DAM

NORTH BAY DAM

GREEN LAKE OUTLET

CONTROL

BEAVER LAKE DAM


HEART BUTTE DAMAND LAKETSCHIDA

INDIAN CREEK DAM

DICKINSONDAM AND

PATTERSONLAKE


CREEK DAM 5

NELSON LAKEDAM

GARRISONDAM ANDHYDROPOWERFACILITIES

BOWMAN-HALEY DAM

LAKE ILO DAM

LAKE ZAHL DAM

BLACKTAIL DAM

DESLACSDAM 2

LAKE DAR-LING DAM

DAM 96

LAKEMETIGOSHE

DAM

LORDSLAKEDAM

CARBURYDAM

DAM 357

DAM341

DAM 332

DAM 326

DAM 320

MISSOURI

RIVER

SAKAKAWEA

LAKE

DEVILSLAKE

RED

RIVER

OF

THE

NORTH

LAKE

OAHE

Cavalier

ParkRiver

Casselton

Oakes

Ellendale

Bowman

Hettinger

WatfordCity

Garrison New Rockford

Cando

Washburn

NEW ROCKFORD CANAL

McCLUSKYCANAL

SNAKECREEK

PUMPINGPLANT

LAKEAUDUBON

JOINT SWPP/BASIN INTAKE

CANNONBALL R.

GREEN R.

DAKOTALAKENWR

PAINTED WOODS CR.

TURT

LE C

R.

LAKE ZAHLNWR

GRAHAMSISLANDSTATEPARK

LITTLEMISSOURI

STATE PARK

SULLY CREEKSTATE PARK

THEODORE ROOSEVELTNATIONAL PARK (South Unit)

THEODORE ROOSEVELTNATIONAL PARK (North Unit)

CHANNEL A

DRAYTONDAM

INDIAN HILLSSTATE PARK

Forman

Ashley

LaMoure

Napoleon

Steele

Hillsboro

Finley

Cooperstown

Lakota

Fessenden

Minnewaukan

Rolla

Mohall

Towner

Bowbells

Stanley

McClusky

Crosby

Manning

MedoraBeach

Amidon

Mott

Carson

Linton

Stanton

Center

CAVENDISHFARMS

CARGILLMALT

MINN-DAKFARMERS COOP

CARGILLINC.

CITYOF FARGO

(TharaldsonEthanol)

AMERICANCRYSTAL SUGAR

ALCHEMETHANOLPLANT

ADMETHANOLPLANT

FortYates

S O U T H D A K O T A

M I

N N

E S

O T

A

Rivers, Streams & Lakes

Rural & Regional Water Systems

Major Watershed Boundaries

Glacial Drift Aquifers

Irrigation Districts (SW=Surface Water; GW= Ground Water)

WATERUSERS

Map Legend

STANDING ROCKRURAL WATER

FORT BERTHOLDRURAL WATER

SPIRIT LAKEWATER DISTRICT

BELCOURT PUBLIC UTIL.

McKENZIE RURAL WATER

Grand ForksAFB

MinotAFB

Walhalla

Larimore

CARGILLINC.

Hankinson

Thompson

ADMPROCESSING

Kenmare

VelvaADMPROCESSING

Belcourt

Burlington

New Town

Tioga

Wishek

BUFFALO LAKEDIVERSION DAM

COALMINELAKEDAM

MORRISON LAKEOUTLET DAM

ROCKLAKEDAM

MIDDLE BRANCHPARK RIVER DAM 5

SEITZDAM


STORMLAKENWR

WILD RICELAKENWR

MAPLERIVERNWR

BONEHILLNWR

SPRINGWATERLAKE NWR

APPERTLAKE NWR

SUNBURSTLAKE NWR

LAKE PATRICIANWR

PRETTY ROCKNWR

STEWART LAKENWR

LOSTLAKENWR

FLORENCELAKENWR

CANFIELDLAKENWR

HUTCHINSONLAKE NWR

LAKEGEORGE

NWR

HALF-WAYLAKENWR

TOMAHAWKNWR

HOBART LAKENWR

STONEYSLOUGHNWR

SIBLEYLAKENWR

JOHNSON LAKENWR

STUMPLAKE NWR

ROSE LAKENWR

WOODLAKENWR

SILVERLAKENWR

LAMBSLAKENWR LITTLE

GOOSENWR

KELLYSSLOUGH

NWR

ARDOCHNWR

ROCK LAKENWR

BRUMBANWR

SNYDERLAKENWR

PLEASANTLAKENWR

BUFFALOLAKENWR

RABBLAKENWR

WILLOWLAKENWR

SCHOOL SECTIONLAKENWR

LORDSLAKENWR

SHELLLAKENWR

HIDDENWOODLAKE NWRMcLEAN

NWR


LAKE NWR

CAMPLAKENWR

LAKEOTISNWR

NORTHEASTERNIRR. DISTRICT

(GW)

EASTERN DAKOTAIRR. DISTRICT

(GW)

IRR.DISTRICT

CENTRAL DAKOTAIRR. DISTRICT

(GW)

HORSEHEADIRR. DISTRICT

(GW/SW)

TURTLE LAKEIRR. DISTRICT

(GW/SW)

NESSON VALLEYIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

BUFORD-TRENTONIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

LOW. YELLOWSTONEIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

ELK/CHARBONIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

YELLOWSTONEIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

SIOUXIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

CARTWRIGHTIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

WESTERN HEARTIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)


(SW)

DESLACSDAM 4

TESOROREFINING CO.

HESSCORPORATION

BURLINGTON OIL & GAS

Lincoln

INTERNATIONAL PEACE GARDEN

DEVILSLAKESTATE

OUTLET

FORT CLARKIRR. DISTRICT

(SW)

M O

N T

A N

A

C A N A D A

ApprovedIrrigated Acresin 2010

*Includes 17,717 acres irrigated from a Montana point of diversion.**Includes 13,538 acres from the Bureau of Recla- mation permit on the Heart River.

Completed Water Facilities

Dams (>5000 Acre-Feet Max. Volume)

National Wildlife Refuges (>1000 Acres)

National Wildlife Refuges (<1000 Acres)

State, National, & International Parks

Energy Facilities

25 Largest Industrial Water Users(Point of Diversion)

Cities (Pop. >1000) & County Seats

LONG CR.

COW CR.

L. MUDDY R.

STONY CR.

CLEAR CR.

T O

BACC

O G

ARD

EN C

R.

BEAVER CR.

TIMBER

CR.

HORSE

CR.

CHARBONNEAU CR.YELLOWST

ON

E R.

CH

ERRY CR.

BENNIE PEER CR.

BEICEGEL CR.

CROSBY C

R.

MAGPIE CR.WHITETAIL CR.BLACKTAIL CR.

BEAVER CR.

L. KNIFE R.

KNIFE R.

CROOKED CR.

ELK CR.

GARNER CR.

BULLIONCR.

L. MIS

SOUR

I R

.

L. BEA

VER

CR.

ALKALI CR.

COLD TURKEY CR.

SPRING

CR.

LIGHTNING CR.

BUFFALO CR.

CEDAR CR.

N. CEDARCR.

CHANTA PETA CR.

TIMBER CR.

SHEEP CR.

THIRTYMILE CR.

ANTELOP E CR.

GOVERNMENT CR.

DEEP CR.

LOUSE CR.

DOGTOOTH CR.

ANTELOPE CR.

HEART BUTTE CR.CROW

N BUTTE CR.

BIG MUDDY CR.

SWEETBRIAR CR.

ELM CR.

COYOTE CR.

OTTER CR. SQUA

RE BUTTE CR.

DO

UG

LAS

CR.

D

EEPW

ATER

CR.

S

HELL CR.

W. CUT BANK CR.


EGG CR.

HAY COULEE

BOU

NDARY CR.

CUT

BAN

K CR

.

STO

NE

CR.

OAK CR.

WO

LF C

R.

OX CR.

OAK CR.

L. HEART R.

W. BRANCH APPLE CR.

E. BRANCH A

PPLE

CR.

L. BEAVER CR.

S. BRANCH BEAVER C

R.

ELM

R.

BRA

NC

H R

.

DRY

S. FORK MAPLE R.

MAPLE CR.

COTTONWOOD CR.

BONE HILL CR.

BEA

R C

R.

SHORT

FOOT CR.

AN

TELOPE CR.

SPR

ING CR.

LOWER BRANCH RUSH R.

SWAN CR.

BUFFALO

CR.

SILVER CR.

BALDHILL CR.

ELM

R.

S. BRANCH

N. BRANCH ELM R.

S. B

RAN

CH

GOOSE

R.

N. BRAN

CH G

OO

SE R.

BEAVER CR.

GOOSE R.

L. GOOSE R.

TURTLE R.

S. BRANCH

N. BRANCH TURTLE R.

SKUNK COULEE

M. BRA

NC

H FO

REST R.

L. SOUTH PEMBINA R.

PEMBINA R.

CYPRESS CR.

CO. DITCHES 20 & 66WILLOW CR.CART CR.N. BRANCH PARK R.

M. BRANCH PARK R.

S. BRAN

CH PARK R.

N. BRANCH FOREST R.

BIG CO

ULEE

CALI

O C

OU

LEE

STARKWEATHER

CO

ULE

E

MAUVA

IS COULEE

EDMORE COULEE

THARALDSONETHANOL

PLANT

HANKINSONRENEWABLEENERGYETHANOLPLANT

DEAD COLT C

R.

DICKEY-SARGENTIRR. DISTRICT

(GW)

JAMES RIVERIRR. DISTRICT

(GW)

DOYLE MEMORIAL STATE PARK

L. P

IPES

TE

M CR.

ROCKY RUN CR.

KELLY CR.

JAMES R.

SHEYENNE R.

BUFFALOCOULEE

N. FORK SH

EYENNE R.

BIG COULEE

KNIFE RIVERINDIAN VILLAGES

NATIONALHISTORIC

SITE

BLUEFLINTETHANOLPLANT

FORT UNIONNATIONALHISTORICSITE

FLAT CR.

DUCK CR.

HEART R.

L. MISSO

URI R.

MOUNTRAIL RURALWATER DISTRICT

Parshall E. FORK SHELL CR.

ENCOREOPERATING

HESSCORPORATION

CU

T BAN

K CR.

DAKOTAGASIFICATION

STATE WATERCOMMISSION

(Red Trail Energy)

WESTMORELANDCOAL CO.

BLUE FLINTINTAKE

CONTINENTALRESOURCES

LONGLAKENWR 7

LONGLAKE

NWR 6 Enderlin

MAPLERIVERDAM

LAKEARDOCH

DAM

LAKE IRVINECONTROL

STRUCTURE

North Dakota’s Major Drainage Basins

Water

63%Irrigation

21%Municipal

9%Industrial

7%Rural

GroundWater Use

Total:140,000 acre-feet

87%Industrial/Power/

Multi-Use(Non-Consumptive)

7%Irrigation

SurfaceWater Use

Total:1,358,000 acre-feet

3% Industrial/Power/Multi-Use (Consumptive)

3% Municipal<1% Rural

ANNUALWATER USE

in North Dakota2000 to Present

Potential for Development, North Dakota’s Ground Water Aquifers

North Dakota 30-Year Average April-September Rainfall, 1977-2006

PRECIPITATIONIN INCHES

SOURCE: NDARB Cooperative Observer

Network

Bakken & Three Forks-Sanish Oil Formations, Western North Dakota

DIVIDE

WILLIAMS

BURKE RENVILLE BOTTINEAU ROLETTE TOWNER CAVALIER PEMBINA

WALSHRAMSEYPIERCEMOUNTRAILMcHENRY

BENSON

WARD

GRAND FORKS

NELSON

McLEAN SHERIDAN WELLS EDDY

GRIGGS STEELE TRAILL

McKENZIE

DUNN FOSTER

GOLDENVALLEY

BILLINGS

BURLEIGH

KIDDER STUTSMAN

MERCER

OLIVER BARNES CASS

EMMONSLOGAN LaMOURE RANSOM RICHLANDHETTINGERSLOPE

STARK MORTON

McINTOSH DICKEY SARGENTBOWMAN ADAMS

GRANT

SIOUX

The red shaded area represents the maximum extent of rocks belonging to the Bakken Forma-tion in North Dakota, while the green outline represents the extent of the Three Forks-Sanish, lying below the Bakken. Significant amounts of water are required to support oil drilling operations in these areas.

RED TRAILENERGYETHANOLPLANT

SAN

D CR.

DEEP CR.

BEAR DEN

CR.

PORCUPINE CR.

LONG LAKE CR.

BEAVER CR.

BUFFALO CR.

M. BRANCH GOOSE R.

SALT

WATER COULEE

DIVIDE

WILLIAMS



BENSONWARD

GRAND FORKSNELSON



McKENZIE

DUNN FOSTER

GOLDENVALLEY

BILLINGS BURLEIGH KIDDER STUTSMAN

MERCER

OLIVER BARNES CASS

EMMONS LOGAN LaMOURE RANSOM RICHLANDHETTINGERSLOPE

STARK MORTON


GRANT

SIOUX

5,711 465 175 1,389 1,1773,719

33 3,989

3,5842,053

6,828

1,69618,5922,984

1,46242,994

13,366410 1,748

2,281

6,977

1,414 26,082

8,647 2,890 2,296

13,9162,9016,36327,49110,719

13,2783,081

281

7,9445,462

895

27,781

16,92318,681

5,546

15,653**

7,902

8,6843,796

1,584

2,047 1,581

1,895

3,311 746

734

27,103*0-1,0001,001-5,0005,001-10,00010,001-15,000>15,001

Flood-Related Disaster Declarations in North Dakota, 1989-2010DIVIDE

WILLIAMS



BENSONWARD

GRAND FORKS

NELSON



McKENZIE

DUNN FOSTER

GOLDENVALLEY

BILLINGS BURLEIGH KIDDER STUTSMAN

MERCER

OLIVER BARNES CASS

EMMONS LOGAN LaMOURE RANSOM RICHLANDHETTINGERSLOPE

STARK MORTON


GRANT

SIOUX

1 to 34 to 67 to 910 to 1213 to 1516 to 17

Flood-Related Disaster Declarations in North Dakota, 1989-2010

sDakota’NorthResources

WILD R

IC

E R

.

ELM C

OULEE

COLE C

R.

N. M

ARA

IS R

.

S.BR.FOREST R.

NORTHWEST AREAWATER SUPPLY

SOUTHWESTPIPELINE PROJECT

Regional Water Systems in North Dakota

NOSERVICE

DESIGNATED

Red

DevilsLake

JamesMissouri

M I S S O U R I

H U D S O N Continental

Divide D R A I N A G EB A Y

D R A I N A G E

R I V E R

Souris/Mouse

SO

UR

CE

: N.D

. STA

TE W

ATE

R C

OM

MIS

SIO

N


••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

•••••••

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

BOILERSSELL•RENT•LEASE

IMMEDIATE DELIVERYCALL:800-704-2002

24 / 7 EMERGENCY SERVICE

wabash444 Carpenter Avenue, Wheeling, IL 60090

POWEREQUIPMENT CO.

10HP TO 250,000#/hr250,000#/hr Nebraska 750 psig 750OTTF

150,000#/hr Nebraska 1025 psig 900OTTF


150,000#/hr Nebraska 350 psig



80,000#/hr Erie City 2000 psig 800OTTF





20,000#/hr Erie City 200 psig

10-1000HP Firetube 15-600 psig

ALL PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURECOMBINATIONS SUPERHEATED

AND SATURATED

RENTAL FLEET OF MOBILETRAILER-MOUNTED BOILERS

75,000#/hr. Nebraska 350 psig

75,000#/hr. Optimus 750 psig 750°TTF





75-300HP Firetube 15-600 psig

ALL BOILERS ARE COMBINATION GAS/OIL

ENGINEERING • START-UP

FULL LINE OF BOILER AUXILIARYSUPPORT EQUIPMENT.

Electric Generators:• 50KW-30,000KW

WEB SITE: www.wabashpower.com847-541-5600 • FAX: 847-541-1279

E-mail: [email protected]

ter. one of the sweetest things about the project, newman says, is that of the water used at the ethanol plant, about 15 percent is returned to Fargo as gray water, where it is retreated to drinking water standards. of the total amount of water the plant re-ceives from Fargo, it uses about 2.7 gallons of water per gallon of ethanol produced. However, looking at only the net water us-age, subtracting the amount sent back to Fargo for reuse, the plant uses around 2 gallons. To achieve that, the plant reuses the water it gets from Fargo as much as it can until it is piped back to the city, new-man says.

cass rural Water financed the con-struction of the project with a loan through the north Dakota Public Finance author-ity, Blomeke says. It then turned over the

water treatment plant to Fargo, which op-erates and maintains it. The pipes are oper-ated and maintained by Cass Rural Water. Fargo’s portion of the project is about $1.6 million, which it pays back from the mon-ey generated by selling water to Cass Ru-ral Water. In all, Tharaldson will pay back about $13.8 million of the loan, in addition to the fees it pays for water, he says.

All in all, Tharaldson ethanol is pretty pleased with how the project turned out. It cost more than drilling wells would have, newman says, but it just made sense in the long term. Besides reducing the impact to the environment by using wastewater, the ethanol plant also eliminated the need for a lagoon, which can cause odor issues. “That’s another big strength here,” he tells EPM.

Elegant Solution Tharaldson Ethanol in Casselson, N.D., utilizes 100 percent wastewater pumped in 26 miles from Fargo, N.D.

Conservation’s the Ticket The cooling towers at Tharaldson Ethanol give off steam on a spring morning.

Water

PH

OTO

: HO

LLY

JES

SE

N, B

BI I

NTE

RN

ATIO

NA

LP

HO

TO: H

OLL

Y JE

SS

EN

, BB

I IN

TER

NAT

ION

AL


A Little ‘Ingreenuity’ Poet’s water conservation efforts are

part of its Ingreenuity initiative, a sustain-ability effort to reduce its water use by 22 percent in five years—or about one billion gallons saved across all its plants by 2014. That translates into an average of 2.33 gal-lons of water per gallon of ethanol pro-duced, down from an average of 3 gallons. “If we can surpass that goal, by all means, we will,” says Erin Heupel, director of en-vironment and technology, public policy and corporate affairs for Poet.

Poet engineers developed a proprietary process called Total Water Recovery, which recycles cooling water rather than discharg-ing it. When the announcement was made, the system had already been installed in three Poet plants in bingham Lake, minn., caro, mich., and Hudson, S.D., where it reduced water use to an average of 2 to 2.5 gallons of water per gallon of ethanol. one year later, 13 of Poet’s 27 plants have adopted the water conservation measures, resulting in more than 400 million gallons of water savings compared to the com-pany’s 2009 water use levels, Heupel tells EPm. Ingreenuity isn’t the first of Poet’s water conservation efforts, however, as it began working to reduce water use in 1988. “The first Poet plants used 17 gallons of water per gallon of ethanol, so it’s part of the learning curve and the continual push to improve,” she says.

Beyond just re-using water within the plant, two Poet plants recycle water used by nearby in-dustries. In Portland, Ind., the Poet plant uses water from a limestone quarry for 100 percent of its water needs. Instead of being pumped into the river, the water goes to settling ponds before being used at the 73 MMgy ethanol plant. In Big Stone, S.D., the 81 mmgy Poet plant gets 80 percent of its water from the cooling ponds of a power plant. “You are getting a lot of use per gallon of water, because it is running through two industries,” Heupel says.

other water recycling efforts include the use of treated effluent from the corn-ing Waste Water Treatment Plant for cool-ing water at the 73 MMgy Poet plant in Corning, Iowa. Previously, that water was discharged into the river. The idea originat-ed with city officials before the plant was built and Poet was glad to cooperate. “We knew that water would be a challenge for the community,” she says.

Just as it did with its corn-based etha-nol production facilities, Poet will continue water conservation efforts with the next

Total Recovery As part of its Ingreenuity effort, Poet seeks to drive down its water use at all plants, says Erin Heupel.

Water Conservation Star The Poet Biorefining plant in Big Stone, S.D., uses water from the cooling ponds of an adjacent power plant, in addition to getting steam from the power plant for its process heat.

Water

PH

OTO

: GR

EG

LAT

ZA


Discharge Crackdown A proprietary system installed at Guardian Energy brought down the water use at the plant to about 2 gallons of water used to produce one gallon of ethanol.

Water

PH

OTO

: GU

AR

DIA

N E

NE

RG

Y


generation. Project Liberty, the company’s first commercial-scale cellulosic ethanol plant, is scheduled to start operating in early 2012, using corn cobs, leaves and husks as the feedstock. The 25 MMgy plant is in the design phase, Heupel says, and will be built in Emmetsburg, Iowa. Although the plant will use Poet’s water recovery system, it will likely use more water than corn-ethanol pro-duction because cellulosic ethanol is still new. “Using what we’ve learned, some with the corn ethanol process improvements, they’ll roll as much of that as they can into the cel-lulosic ethanol process improvements,” she says.

Reducing water use at an ethanol plant could save producers money but it also costs money to save water. For example, Heupel says, the company had to pay to install the settling ponds at its Portland plant. For Poet, it’s about water conservation, not saving money. “Ethanol is a renewable fuel,” she says. “I think if you don’t look at your entire environmental footprint, you’re missing the importance of the renewable fuel.”

Poet isn’t limiting its work to its own 27 production facilities. First, the company wants to make its Total Water Recovery pro-cess available to other ethanol producers. It also plans to survey corn producers that deliver feedstock to its plants to nail down exactly how much is irrigated. Finally, the Poet Foundation has also promised more than $420,000 to help the non-profit Global Health ministries to repair, construct and maintain 90 wells in nigeria, giving more than 300,000 people access to pure water.

Guardians of WaterIn 2009, Guardian Energy LLc’s first

year of operation, the 100 MMgy ethanol plant used an average of 3.6 gallons of wa-ter to produce 1 gallon of ethanol. In late 2010, the company worked with U.S. Water Services to install a proprietary system that shaved more than 1.6 gallons of water off that number. The project wrapped up in ear-ly February. “We’ve seen an overall reduction of about 38 percent,” says Tom Hanson, vice president of operations for the Janes-ville, Minn., plant.

The plant, which utilizes groundwater,

has always been considered a zero process liquid discharge, meaning water that came into contact with any part of the ethanol process was not discharged. Two other water uses, however, were discharged those being the water from cooling tower blowdown and reverse osmosis water, the process used to purify water for the heat exchanger and boil-er. “With our new technology we no longer discharge that water,” Hanson says.

The water conservation system cost

Guardian less than $100,000 to install and is already saving the facility money—reducing the cost for sampling and chemical treatment of discharge water. In addition, the compa-ny is saving money on phosphorus credits, which the State of Minnesota requires of plants that discharge water. “It’s definitely a cost savings on a daily, yearly basis,” Hanson says.

Still, it’s not really about the money for Guardian either. Reducing water use at the

Water

Essential Expertise

for Water, Energy and Air

SM

Don’t waste it… trace it! And maintain consistent concentration.


ethanol plant helps the plant be good neigh-bors in its community and be good stewards of the environment. “The major reason (for installing this), first and foremost, was water conservation,” he says.

overall, the company feels it is impor-tant to identify areas of concern with etha-nol production and then attempt to address them. Water conservation, energy conserva-tion and increased efficiencies are all part of that, as Guardian Energy continues to

evaluate new technology coming to the fore-front, he says. cEo Don Gales echoes that thought. “Guardian Energy is committed to being a leader in the industry and continues to look towards technologies that will allow for higher yields and increased efficiencies,” he says. “The implementation and execution of this technology is consistent with Guard-ian Energy’s commitment to the community, environment and the industry.”

Ethanol, Oil Compared When ethanol skeptics start talking

about the amount of water used to produce a gallon of ethanol, it would be nice to hit back with stats about how much water is used by the petroleum industry. That’s not easy to do, however.

The problem is picking a number. Vari-ous sources offer up anything from 2 gallons of water used per gallon of gasoline pro-duced, all the way up to 25. That’s because many doing the analysis use different pa-rameters and methods, Aden says. Does the number include water used in oil produc-tion/extraction and exploration? or does it include just the water used in the refining process, or both?

oil production and exploration is the major water user, while refining gas from crude uses less, according to the Argonne study. Looking at combined numbers for crude extraction and refining, water use de-pends on the recovery method and region. For U.S. offshore oil, the study gives a range of 3.4 gallons to 6.6 gallons water used per gallon of gasoline produced. Canadian oil sands numbers range from 2.6 to 6.2 gallons, while conventional oil from Saudi Arabia is estimated at 2.8 to 5.8 gallons.

on the biofuels side, the report consid-ers both irrigation to grow corn, as well as the amount of water used to produce etha-nol, resulting in a higher number than gener-ally cited by the ethanol industry. The report concludes that nearly 70 percent of ethanol is produced with 10 to 17 gallons of water used to produce each gallon of ethanol. Cel-lulosic ethanol is estimated at a range of 1.9 to 9.8 gallons of water. Ethanol production facilities are increasingly less water intensive, the report notes, excluding the issue of irri-gated corn. on just the fuel production side, the report says an average of 3 gallons of water is used to produce 1 gallon of ethanol, citing a 2007 Renewable Fuels Association survey of existing ethanol plants.

An updated Argonne report is currently being worked on, says May Wu, one of the authors, that will contain new figures reflect-ing water conservation efforts in both the ethanol and petroleum industries. In addi-tion, it will also consider precipitation as well

Water


Jumbo™

Tankman™

Sellers 360

ROTATING WASH HEADS FOR ALL PROCESS VESSELS

Effi cient, Powerful, Dependable cleaning heads for tanks and fermenters up to 70 feet in diameter.

Unmatched versatility Low-maintenance operation Long-term reliability Industry specifi ed

Cloud/Sellers, 4120-A Horizon Lane, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 USAPhone: 805-549-8093 Fax: 805-549-0131E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.cloudinc.com

as irrigation to show a more complete water-footprint analysis. Although water used in ir-rigation and precipitation are different types of water, both evaporate and go through the hydrological cycle, eventually returning to earth again. “not to your local area though,” Wu tells EPM. “To another area, usually. Look at the wind—it goes northeast from southwest.”

Talking about irrigated corn being used to produce ethanol can be misleading for the public, who may assume all or most corn is irrigated, Heupel says. according to the na-tional Corn Growers Association, only 11 percent of the total corn crop was irrigated in 2010. Wu acknowledges this too, pointing out that a large portion of ethanol produc-tion happens in the Midwest, where rainfall is ample and little irrigated corn is raised.

Examining water use statistics can be tricky, Aden cautions. Are they talking con-sumptive water or water footprint, which as Wu mentions, includes a full life cycle from growth to production? Adding precipitation to water use figures could give a more com-plete picture, as Wu says, or it could make biofuels look like a major water hog, even though many of those gallons are part of the natural cycle of rain, evaporation and back to rain again. “If you look at it in cer-tain perspectives it does favor fossil fuels,” Aden says.

For example, a water use comparison cited by Webber claims it takes 130 to 6,200 gallons of water for a flex-fuel vehicle to travel 100 miles. Compared to those num-bers, plug-in electric vehicles look great at only 24 gallons per 100 miles and gasoline vehicles look even rosier at 7 to 14 gallons. He sees some positives for biofuels but feels there are some potential problems to watch out for—such as water use. “Whether pro-ponents realize it or not, any plan to switch from gasoline to electricity or biofuels is a strategic decision to switch our dependence from foreign oil to domestic water,” he says.

on the other hand, aden says the stud-ies he’s seen show there should be enough water for biofuels production. Some drier ar-eas of the U.S. will have limitations on water availability. But where corn ethanol may not be appropriate, a feedstock such as sorghum

might. “By and whole, I think people expect there’s going to be enough water for biofu-els,” he says, “even if biofuels continues to grow.”

Another thing to keep in mind is that water conservation is an important issue for many industries, and not just ethanol. It takes a lot of water to produce and process every-thing from newspapers to meat. “I think that’s one of the things we need to strive to do, is keep everything in perspective,” Heupel

says. “If you look at something in isolation, and you don’t have anything to compare it to, you get things really out of kilter.”

Author: Holly JessenAssociate Editor of Ethanol Producer Magazine

(701) 738-4946 [email protected]

Water

WILL WORK FOR FLIES.

» INTERVIEW ME AT BOOTH #1011 AT THE FUEL ETHANOL WORKSHOP.


Small Starts, Big Results Genencor scientist Mian Li examines a biomass substrate used in ethanol production.

PHOTO: GENENCOR, A DANISCO DIVISION

enzymes


enzymes

a decade ago, the cost of enzymes was at the top of the list of concerns for most would-be cellulosic ethanol pro-ducers. With some estimates placing them at around $5 per gallon of ethanol produced, enzyme costs were higher than the cost of feedstock in some cases, making cost-effective production nearly impossible to achieve. But after hun-dreds of millions of dollars spent on collaborative research and development efforts that crisscrossed the globe, enzyme costs have been dramatically reduced

Figuring out how to produce enzymes at a feasible cost is just part of the puzzleBY KrIS BEVILL

Ending the

EnzymeEnigma


enzymes

and are now being proven for commercial-scale use. There is still work to be done, but developers say they are continuously improv-ing their enzyme systems and, with the help of producers, are ready to launch the cellu-losic ethanol industry into full-speed com-mercialization mode.

‘Sea of Change’“We think this is a year that is quite

pivotal for the industry because we will see groundbreakings for commercial plants,” says Cynthia Bryant, global business develop-ment manager of bioenergy for novozymes. “I’m hoping this is going to be the sea of change shift that we need in order for people to finally agree and see that the technology is no longer two or three years out. It is avail-able. It’s here today. It actually has been here for awhile.”

novozymes has been working for years to develop cost-effective enzymes for the ethanol industry. Its most recent develop-ment in this arena has been its trademarked Cellic CTec 2 enzymes, which Bryant says is the result of a goal set by the company’s cEo in 2008. Steen riisgaard declared then that the company would deliver commercial-ly viable enzymes to the cellulosic ethanol in-dustry by 2010. Last February, the company unveiled Cellic CTec 2, which Bryant says enables producers to reduce enzyme dosage requirements and improve performance by

1.8 times on average, regardless of feed-stock. The product will soon be put to the test in a real-world, commercial-scale scenario. Italy-based chemicals and plastics firm mossi & Ghisolfi Group has been collaborating with novozymes for a few years and re-cently broke ground on a 13 MMgy wheat straw/Arundo donax-

to-ethanol facility in northwestern Italy. The project, expected to be the largest cellulosic

plant in the world, is scheduled to begin pro-duction, using Cellic CTec 2 enzymes, next year.

Genencor, a division of Danisco, has been investing heavily in cellulosic ethanol enzyme development since 2000, accord-

ing to the company’s business develop-ment director, Aaron Kelley, and has been aggressively launch-ing new enzyme packages for the in-dustry since 2007 when it introduced its Accellerase line of cellulose enzymes. “That was an inter-esting internal deci-sion for us, because we knew at that time there wasn’t a signifi-cant market and we

weren’t going to sell a lot of the product,” Kelley says. “But we felt it was important to start the conversation.”

Genencor’s most recent improvement, DUET, was also introduced last year. The product offers an im-provement on hemicel-lulase, which also im-proves the digestibility of C6 sugars. Kelley says the overall result for users is a three-fold reduction in enzyme requirements. Genen-cor is also expected to soon have a commer-cial-scale home for its cellulosic ethanol en-zymes. Dupont Danis-co Cellulosic Ethanol LLc is scheduled to break ground on its 25 MMgy corn stover-fed facility, dubbed Project Blackhawk, in Iowa this summer. The plant will use a Genencor en-zyme system tailored

to suit that specific facility, so kelley says it will serve as a good showcase for Genencor’s technology, but won’t be used as an indicator of all the company has to offer.

Progress on All Frontsnovozymes and Genencor may control

the lion’s share of the enzyme manufacturing industry, but several smaller players appear to be making their own headway in producing enzymes for the cellulosic ethanol industry. Verenium Corp., which was initially an en-zyme developer, famously ventured into the production side of cellulosic ethanol a few years ago with its demonstration-scale facil-ity in Jennings, La. Its partner for the project, BP, has since acquired all of the production-related activities and Verenium continues its research and development of enzymes for cellulosic ethanol production. Royal DSM, a netherlands-based life sciences and materi-als company is also involved in a multiyear enzyme development project for the cellu-losic ethanol industry.

mark Emalfarb, president and cEo of Florida-based Dyadic International, believes smaller firms like his offer a unique ability to service the cellulosic ethanol industry. His

Pivotal Year Cynthia Bryant, global business development manager of bioenergy for Novozymes,expects several commercial plants will break ground this year, including its partner in Italy.

No Small Business Aaron Kelley, business development director for Genencor, a division of Danisco, says cellulosic ethanol enzyme development is the most complex project he’s been involved with in a decade worth of work within the enzyme industry.

Packing a Punch Genencor’s cellobiohydrolyase enzyme (shown here in a 3D rendering) is one example of the types of enzymes used in the production of cellulosic ethanol.

SOURCE: GENENCOR, A DANISCO DIVISION


Call

enzymes

company has been developing enzymes to produce sugars from biomass for years and he says that because his company is smaller than some of the other enzyme developers, (it has about 18 people on its research team) it is more able to adapt and as a result has created “a better mousetrap” than the large firms. Dyadic’s most notable collaborator to date is Abengoa Bioenergy, which acquired a stake in Dyadic in 2007 and signed a license agreement with the company in 2009, giving Abengoa the rights to continue developing the enzyme technology.

Gerson Santos, corporate director for abengoa bioenergy new Technologies, says Abengoa’s fully staffed research and devel-opment lab in Spain is currently optimizing the technology that will be used for its enzy-matic hydrolysis process. The company had a significant breakthrough last summer when it began using its enzymes in Abengoa’s demonstration-scale facility in Salamanca, Spain. “This was a success and we are meeting our goals,” he says.

Abengoa plans to break ground on its 25 MMgy corn stover/wheat straw-to-ethanol plant in Hugoton, kansas, this summer. The facility will utilize the enzyme technology being developed in Spain and Santos is confident that en-zymes will be a non-issue for the facility. “our enzyme system will be ready when the plant is ready, there is no doubt about it,” he says.

At What Cost?As mentioned, the cost to use cellu-

losic ethanol enzymes has been a major factor thus far in the development of a commercial-scale cellulosic ethanol in-dustry. Developing the enzyme systems has not been exactly cheap either, to put it mildly. Genencor alone has invested more than $100 million in its develop-ment projects. Emalfarb says his company has raised $70 million since going public. The U.S. federal government is also heav-ily invested in this arena. Andy Aden, a se-nior research engineer at the U.S. DoE’s national renewable Energy Laboratory says the DoE has invested more than $1

billion in more than 20 integrated biorefin-ery projects in the past decade and has pro-vided multiple grants to many of the enzyme manufacturers. This combined effort has garnered tangible results. Aden says the most common price range for cellulosic ethanol enzymes has dropped from $5 per gallon 10 years ago to between 50 cents and $1 per gal-lon today. “If it is that range, yes it’s still an important cost component, but it’s not the overall hurdle it once was,” he says.

aden is part of an nrEL team that is auditing and validating the enzyme develop-ment work of four manufacturing firms—novozymes, Genencor, Verenium and DSM—as part of a project funded by the DoE’s Energy Efficiency and renewable Energy Biomass Program. The program has provided the companies with a total of $1.3 million since 2007 for research to improve

the activity and production efficiency of en-zymes. The original funding announcement cited an objective of achieving an enzyme cost of 12 cents per gallon by 2011 and hav-ing requisite quantities of enzymes available for pilot testing by 2012. because the final evaluation of the projects is currently being conducted, Aden wasn’t able to share early results, but he says he’s not sure the original price target per gallon is still applicable. The project is scheduled to end next September.

Abengoa has pegged a goal of 40 cents per gallon for its enzyme system input costs. “That’s in line with what our competitors are doing and right now we believe that is achiev-able based on the progress we’ve been mak-ing and on the progress others have made as well,” Santos says. “I’m fairly confident we will be achieving that objective.”


ADI SYSTEMS INC AD 02.pdf 1 11-03-22 3:16 PM

enzymes

Collaborative EffortsKelley says that while enzyme costs are

still significant, focusing only on the cost per gallon of enzymes is too narrow a view when evaluating the cost of cellulosic ethanol pro-duction. Pretreatment methods and costs are directly related to enzyme costs and, there-fore, reducing enzyme costs requires exten-sive collaboration between ethanol producer and enzyme producer.

In fact, everyone involved in develop-ing enzymes, from manufacturers to pro-ducers to government researchers, believes collaborations are vital to reducing enzyme costs and commercializing the industry, and nearly every cellulosic ethanol producer is partnered with one or more manufacturing firm. “We’re very proud of all of our part-ners and the dedication that they’ve put into this because it’s not easy,” novozymes’ bry-ant says. “They really believe in this and they see the light at the end of the tunnel and we see them continuing to make progress.”Bales to Convert Novozymes produces enzymes for the production of cellulosic ethanol.

PH

OTO

: NO

VO

ZYM

ES


Expansion or maintenance needs???With over 40 years of experience sellinginto your market, we know and havewhat you need...when you need it.

No order is too small.

www.rjsales.com

IN-STOCKSTAINLESS PVFFrom 1/8" to 36"

Indianapolis, IN 800-777-0510Minneapolis, MN 800-777-1355Raleigh, NC 800-565-5525

Buffalo, NY 800-666-0088Cleveland, OH 800-777-0820Chicago, IL 800-777-2008Cranbury, NJ 800-777-1858

LWC628-RJS-0446 Biorefining Ad #2 1/8/11 10:52 PM Page 1

enzymes

“We’re really getting to the stage as folks integrate these processes where we’ve got to work together to find the optimal system and understand the input costs from all the different directions,” Kelley says. That is, of course, easier said than done in many ways. Production processes vary so widely depend-ing on feedstock and technology that en-zyme manufacturers must address each facil-ity’s specific needs. and while the industry is moving together jointly to commercialize the end-product, companies are still competing for market shares and must seek to protect their own intellectual property (IP). Bryant says that while some processes are more sim-ilar than others, most have a unique niche in one or all of three specific areas—feedstock, process technology and business model. “We work with each one on a very individual level because they are so unique,” she says. “The more open we can be with a partner and the more open they are with us, the quicker we’re able to meet our milestones and get to suc-

cess. But this has to be tempered with the fact that there is concern about IP and IP ownership. It’s a real balancing act.”

Forging AheadCellulosic ethanol enzymes may never

be cost-comparative to starch ethanol en-zymes but that perhaps should never be the goal, considering the complexity of the cel-lulosic systems makes it unfair to compare the two processes. “I think this is one of the most complex systems we’ve worked on,” kelley says. He points out that starch ethanol uses two or three enzymes and requires vari-ous enzyme activities to digest the starch. “In the cellulose process you’ve probably got at least eight different families and multiple en-zymes in each of those families of activities,” he says. “And all of those activities need to work together to get to your optimum yield and conversion.”

“The technical challenge of breaking down biomass is always going to be a lot

more difficult than breaking down starch,” Aden says. Improving the productivity of the enzymes and activity of the overall system, all in a sustainable fashion, is what will con-tinue to drive down the cost of the process, he says, and that is where enzyme manufac-turers are focusing their efforts now. It will require dedication and significant continued financial investment, but those involved in the process don’t appear to be lacking mo-tivation to continue. “once you are in this business, this is something you don’t stop,” Santos says. “It is an ongoing process where you continue to improve and optimize tech-nology that you are working on. The plan is to continue working on this package until we prove it.”

Author: Kris Bevill Associate Editor, Ethanol Producer Magazine



Policy


Policy

BY hOLLY JESSEN

When Gal luft and anne korin talk about flex-fuel vehicles they mean vehicles that are warranted to run on any combination of ethanol, methanol and gas, or on biodiesel. As a bonus, they’d like to see that vehicle also be a plug-in hybrid for electric power. For them, what alternative fuel powers the vehicle isn’t as important as choice for the consumer. “This is about opening cars to fuel competition so that drivers can react on the fly to changes in oil price by choosing a fuel that is more economic on a per-mile basis,” Korin tells EPM, “whether that fuel is made from corn or coal or natural gas or sugarcane or anything else.”

Turn OilFuel Choice:

the authors of “turning oil into salt” believe the ethanol industry should make passing an open Fuel standard priority no. 1

into


Policy

Who are Luft and korin? The pair co-direct the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, a Washington-based think tank fo-cused on energy security. Together they also founded the Set America Free Coalition, which has three main goals: educate people about the dangers of U.S. dependence on foreign oil and the need for fuel choice; increase demand for and use of flex-fuel vehicles (FFVs) and plug-in hybrids; and to generate support for policies that increase fuel choice. In 1999 the pair published “Turning oil into Salt: Energy Independence Through Fuel Choice.”

They are strong advocates for the open Fuel Standard, which would require mandated quantities of FFVs. The legislation has been set before Congress since 2005 and was re-introduced in the U.S. House of represen-tatives in early May. The bill, sponsored by Reps. John Shimkus, R-Ill., Eliot Engel, D-n.Y., roscoe bartlett, r-md., and Steve Israel, D-n.Y., aims to increase the number of FFVs on the road gradually, requiring 50 percent of new vehicles be FFVs by 2014, 80 percent in 2016 and 95 percent in 2017. Besides being warranted to operate on combinations of ethanol blends, natural gas, hydrogen or gas, the bill also mentions biodiesel, fuel cell or plug-in electric drive as possible technology combinations.

Last, but certainly not least, they are outspoken critics of oil’s virtual monopoly in transportation fuel. The organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries—oPEc— controls 78 percent of world oil reserves but accounts for only 40 percent of global oil production, they point out in their book, add-ing that the cartel is manipulative and deliber-ately constrains supply. For example, oPEc’s crude oil production has not increased since 1973, despite adding Angola and Ecuador as new members. In that same time, global oil de-mand and non-oPEc production has nearly doubled. “oil’s virtual monopoly over trans-portation fuel is the source of its strategic im-portance,” Korin tells EPM. “It is the source of the power of the oPEc oil cartel to bring our economy to its knees. opening vehicles up to fuel competition is key to knocking oil off its strategic pedestal and reducing our vul-nerability to oPEc’s machinations.”

Fuel Choice Champs Anne Korin and Gal Luft are co-founders of the Set America Free Coalition and would like to see the ethanol industry get behind the Open Fuel Standard Act, currently introduced in the House.


Policy

When you need to perform maintenance, time wasted is money lost.

Reduce downtime—make your spare parts inventory THE prime directive of your maintenance department.

We will handle all of your hammermill spare parts needs. Call our parts sales department today for the professional service and expert advice you have come to expect from Roskamp Champion.

Preserve th e integrity of your mills.Use original replacement parts. Buy genuine Roskamp Champion parts.

800-366 -2563 | WATERLOO, IOWA

WWW.CPM.NET

ARE YOU STOCKED?

Competitors or Allies? But what would motivate the ethanol

industry to support legislation that would al-low drivers to fuel up with methanol? Why should it root for the commercial success of electric vehicles? Luft and korin present strong cases for both.

Luft sees it as just plain “silly” that the ethanol industry views electric vehicles as competition and that the electric vehicle industry feels the same way about etha-nol. And he doesn’t think the U.S. industry should feel threatened by Brazilian ethanol either. Methanol, Brazilian ethanol, elec-tric vehicles—if the U.S. can break free of oPEc’s control there’s room for all to profit. “I think the more groups you have out there pursuing solutions to alternatives to oil, the more chance that we could end the monopoly of oil,” he tells EPM.

Laws mandating FFVs have not gone anywhere, Korin says, because legislators coming from states outside the Corn Belt have no reason to support ethanol FFVs. If methanol were added to the mix, however, FFVs would become much more attractive to legislators from states strong in coal and natural gas production. While most metha-nol is made from natural gas, China makes a large amount of it from coal. If the produc-ers and supporters of corn, natural gas and

coal were to join together to ask lawmakers to mandate FFVs, that would be a nearly un-beatable coalition, she says.

Congress is currently divided into two categories when it comes to ethanol—those that love it and those that hate it, Luft says. often legislators from coal and natural gas producing states are among those that are very hostile toward ethanol. However, if all FFVs also operated on methanol, those states would be much more sympathetic to the goals of the open Fuel Standard, Luft says, because their states would get a bigger piece of the liquid transportation fuels pie. And, so would ethanol.

In contrast, the effort to go from E10 to E15 won’t tear down the blend wall. “That might buy you a little bit of time but a few years later you are going to hit it again,” he says. “What then?”

If every vehicle were a FFV there would be no such thing as the blend wall. The transportation sector would absorb as much ethanol as the industry can produce, as well as methanol. “It means that there will be much more impact in terms of energy security, because there will be a much big-ger market for alternative fuels than there is today,” he says.

That would cause a shift in people’s minds, Korin says, transforming alcohol

Road to Freedom from Oil Korin and Luft’s book delves into how they feel the passage of the Open Fuel Standard will lead to freedom from the oil cartel OPEC.

PH

OTO

: HO

LLY

JES

SE

N, B

BI I

NTE

RN

ATIO

NA

L


from an additive to a fuel. If 15 percent of the vehicle fleet—meaning all vehicles, not just new ones—were FFVs, there would be a strong business case for fuel station owners to retrofit or put in new pumps to sell alcohol. “As long as oil is above the price at which alco-hol is economic, on a per mile cost compari-son, drivers will prefer to fuel with alcohol,” she says. In the book, the case is made that critics are on the wrong track when talking about ethanol’s lower energy content com-

pared to gasoline, because the relevant metric is cost per mile, not miles per gallon.

Getting it DoneFFVs today aren’t warranted to run on

both ethanol and methanol, but they could be, with just slight tweaks by the manufacturer. To show it is possible, the authors examine Bra-zil’s success in going from an oil-dominated market to fuel choice. In 2008, 80 percent of the vehicles sold in Brazil were FFVs. It costs

only about $100 more for manufacturers to add a fuel sensor and a corrosion-resistant fuel line, creating an FFV. “Lest anyone think it can’t be done in the United States, many of the flexible fuel vehicles sold in brazil are made by General Motors and Ford,” they say.

natural gas is also widely used for trans-portation in Brazil. When oil prices soared in 2008 the brazilian government began subsi-dizing natural gas. At the time the book was written, 10 percent of the brazilian fleet, or more than 1.5 million vehicles, ran on natu-ral gas. Many of those vehicles are also FFV so they can run on any combination of etha-nol, gas or natural gas—much like the etha-nol, methanol and gas FFVs Luft and korin would like to see mandated here in the U.S.

Getting the open Fuel Standard passed for fuel choice in the U.S. will require the sup-port of the ethanol industry in a direction it hasn’t embraced in the past. “If the ethanol industry makes it a true priority and joins forces with the methanol industry, I think it quite likely that an open Fuel Standard bill would pass,” Korin says. “If it is not a prior-ity for the industry, and priority means emails and letters and phones ringing off the hook, then that will have a consequence.”

Things will have to change in Congress as well if the bill is to fare better than it has in previous years. Although there are 60 U.S. Senators from farm states, in 2010 the open Fuel Standard had the support of only seven co-sponsors in the Senate, Korin says. The bill introduced in the House this year only has four. In contrast, a bill to promote the production and use of natural gas-fueled vehicles, intro-duced in april, had 180 co-sponsors in early May. With numbers like that its clear to Korin that legislators from farm states don’t feel the bill is important to their constituents—and they won’t, unless the ethanol industry makes it clear that fuel choice is a priority. “When the industry decides something is important, it knows how to do that very well,” she says.

Luft thinks the bill has a good chance of passing in 2011 because it won’t cost the tax-payers anything, Luft says. It’s not a tax incen-tive, it’s simply a mandate for automakers to produce FFVs. “Right now Congress is very wary of anything that costs money,” he says.

The political fight will be with auto-

Policy


makers. That’s not a reason to back off, however. The auto industry also opposed seatbelts and airbags—all standard fea-tures in vehicles today. “The way I see it, we bailed them out, we might as well get something in return,” Luft says.

Korin scoffs at politicians’ hesi-tation at passing mandates for FFVs. Didn’t Congress cooperate long enough to mandate the transition from analog to digital television broadcasts? That’s an en-croachment on a much more trivial part of our lives than fuel choice, she says.

Persistent MythsBesides outlining the need for fuel

choice, the authors tackle misconcep-tions facing corn ethanol—“the fuel the pundits love to hate.” For one thing, everywhere he goes, Luft meets misin-formed people who believe that ethanol causes starvation. This myth has its roots in 2008 when ethanol faced its fiercest

critics, who gave the industry a black eye by claiming biofuels was at the root of a commodity price boom. The source was an “orchestrated campaign” by big oil, food makers and others opposed to etha-nol on the grounds that it is a waste of taxpayer money, Luft says. “all of these groups came together and helped each other and funded each other,” he says. “They did huge damage to the industry.”

Food companies perpetuate the myth out of resentment, Korin says. When oil prices pass a certain point, ethanol makes corn economic, she said, which means price supports for corn are no longer necessary. In that scenario the food industry has to pay market prices for corn syrup and animal feed. “Big Food for years has used underpriced corn syrup, enjoying taxpayer dollars paid as price supports to corn farmers, as a replacement for sugar, because the U.S. has a sugar quota and tariff system

Why Oil and Salt?The fact that most people haven’t a clue

what salt might have to do with oil is the very reason korin and Luft compared it to oil in the title of their book. Until about 100 years ago, salt was one of the most sought after commodi-ties, according to Mark Kurlansky who wrote “Salt: a World History”. It was used to preserve food and was so important Roman soldiers were actually paid in salt—hence the word sal-ary is derived from the Latin word for salt.

Indeed, salt played an important role in many wars, including the American Revolution. In the seventeenth century, British leaders ur-gently talked about “the dangerous national de-pendence on French salt,” Kurlansky says. What seems laughable today was very serious business until food preservation technologies and refrig-eration broke salt’s strategic importance as a commodity. With fuel choice, the authors hope that oil’s strategic status will be broken as com-pletely as the hold salt once held—thus turning oil into salt. When that happens, perhaps suc-ceeding generations will say, “oil? What coun-tries produce oil?”—just as most people today have no idea what nations produce salt.

Policy

|continued on page 75|


downtime cr ipples your pl ant.S o w h e n i t c om e s t o c l e a n i ng, w e ge t i n, w e ge t ou t, a n d e v e ryon e ’s s a f e .

(888) 549-1869www.premiumplantservices.comHydroblasting i industrial vacuum services i disposal

premps

kz

Ethanol Producer

17069-2

8.5 x 10.875

.25

v1 4.20.09

4c

6.1.09

20340_premps_epm.indd 1 1/20/10 2:05:28 PM

Policy

Why ‘Friendly’ Oil Isn’t the Answer

Luft and korin call it a fallacy that buying less oil from the Middle East and more from friendly nations, such as Canada, is the answer. The idea sounds reasonable, they say, but doesn’t work because oil is a fungible commodity. In other words, the oil market is like a swim-ming pool where oil from all sources comingles.

“We don’t get all or even most of our oil from the Middle East,” they write. “In fact, the Middle East is the source of barely one quarter of our imports. But that doesn’t lessen the control the Middle Eastern countries, which sit on some two-thirds of world oil reserves, have over the world market. We don’t import a drop of oil from Iran, but anything that impacts Iranian supply affects the whole market, affects oil prices for everyone, not just those who buy directly from Iran. If Iran’s president decided to cut the country’s oil exports or block the Straits of Hormuz, the increase in price would be felt across the board. Therefore, if we just shuffle around our sources of oil supply by buy-ing oil from different countries than we do today, it will not reduce our vulner-ability to the oil cartel’s market manipula-tions. Someone else will buy the oil we would have bought from supplier A, and we will buy the oil they were buying from supplier B—no difference whatsoever will be felt by the suppliers (or us).”

Likewise, the push to drill for more domestic supplies of oil or the call to use less oil both perpetuate oil’s monopoly in the transportation sector and do nothing to weaken oPEc, they say. The policies might, at best, keep some U.S. dollars from going overseas.

“When non-oPEc countries drill more, oPEc simply drills less, and when we use less, oPEc also uses less—wit-ness the multiple production cuts in 2008 and 2009 geared to propping up oil pric-es. neither efficiency or drilling will serve to strip oil of its strategic status.”

Source: “Turning oil into Salt,” pages 6,7.


that keeps sugar prices much higher than else-where in the world,” she says. “But instead of taking on the sugar lobby, Big Food has mas-queraded itself as a defender of the market and the poor, in the hopes of reverting to a world in which ethanol goes away, corn price supports are required, and it gets all the under-priced corn syrup it wants.”

Even more than big Food, big oil is the real culprit, Luft says. Food prices go up when oil prices go up. “The major factor in the pro-duction of food is oil, the shipping the pack-aging, the fertilizer, and everything, that goes into making food,” he says.

In 2010 the World bank reversed its 2008 analysis that biofuels caused a spike in com-modity prices, and said financial investors, high oil prices and other factors were likely culpable. Yet the food versus fuel argument is still getting recycled at ethanol’s expense in public opinion. This time around, Luft hopes the ethanol industry will go on the offense rather than the defense to fight the myths about ethanol while continuing to highlight the dangers of addiction to foreign oil. “All of this needs to be communicated in a very sophisticated way so that the public under-stands that ethanol is a friend,” he says. “It’s not some sort of corrupt lobby that is taking their money and squandering it.”

The book also delves into the Volumet-ric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit and efforts to stop subsidizing the renewable fuel. Although Luft and korin oppose subsidies, they make it clear ethanol isn’t the only energy source re-ceiving government support. Personally, Luft tells EPM, he’d like to discontinue all subsidies and let everyone compete in the free market. Still, if he had a choice between tax incentives for the oil industry—which has been getting billions for decades—or the ethanol industry, the choice, for him, is clear. “I’d rather give my money to Americans, who will plow the money back into the economy, than send it overseas,” he says. Conversely, ethanol haters attack ethanol over VEETC while ignoring the government support received by big oil. “It’s not intellectually honest to discriminate against one fuel and not the other,” he says. “You have to apply the same logic.”

Another part of the problem is that many don’t realize that VEETC is actually a blend-

ers credit, not a tax credit to ethanol produc-ers. If the public were polled they’d say the tax credit was a handout to the ethanol industry and farmers, when the recipients are actually companies like BP and Valero. “This is where I think the industry is missing a big opportu-nity,” he says. “It’s a handout to big oil, and I think the industry needs to make this point much more known to the public.”

Another thing ethanol critics love to shout about is that it takes more energy to make ethanol from corn than the energy pro-duced when it’s burned in a vehicle. This isn’t a so much a myth as it is “irrelevant and intel-lectually dishonest,” korin and Luft argue. It’s a law of nature that when raw energy is con-verted to a usable form it takes more energy than the energy produced, be it crude oil, coal, corn or sugar cane. Food takes 10 calories of fossil-fuel energy to produce a single calorie of food for sale in today’s supermarkets, ac-

cording to food expert Michael Pollan—and the U.S. is still addicted to breakfast, lunch and supper, plus snacks. a 2008 study by bruce Dale concluded that it takes 1.19 mega joules of fossil fuel to produce one mega joule of gasoline compared to only 0.77 for corn etha-nol and 0.10 for cellulosic ethanol. “The point is, gasoline’s energy requirement is greater than ethanol’s … and yet this hasn’t prevented any of us from using this ‘net energy loser,’” Luft and korin write.

Author: Holly JessenAssociate Editor,

Ethanol Producer Magazine. (701) 738-4946

[email protected]

Policy

|continued from page 73|

Since 1981, the Renewable Fuels Association has proudly served our members as the voice of the ethanol industry, delivering the landmark legislative, regulatory, and tax policy victories that helped create the industry we enjoy today. And our work continues. From our industry-leading technical and research expertise to our market development activities that continue to expand opportunities, we owe our success to all of our ethanol producer members. Thank you for 30 years of commitment.


there are many technological solutions available to help etha-nol plants achieve zero liquid dis-charge (Zld). Traditional ZLD systems use brine concentrators and evaporators for the undesired, salt-laden cooling tower (CT) blowdown and reverse osmosis (ro) con-centrate, which is evaporated and the solids hauled off-site to solid waste handling facili-ties. Some permits allow discharging of CT blowdown and ro concentrate in the near-est flowing river or stream.

U.S. Water Services has designed ZLD systems at more than a dozen ethanol plants in the U.S., trademarking its integrated system iZLD. Some implemented ZLD during initial construction; others transitioned an existing facility to ZLD or sought to optimize an existing ZLD. The facilities analyzed in this article demonstrate cT blowdown and ro concentrate can be successfully integrated into the ethanol facility process while main-taining process water quality compatible with biological processes, cooling tower assurance and coproduct quality. ongoing monitoring,

however, becomes extremely important be-cause a poor trend, such as high chlorides or biological fouling, can take months to cor-rect, even leading to plant shutdown.

Many ethanol facilities are required to have a national Pollutant Discharge Elimi-nation System permit for industrial non-contract water discharge. The renewal pro-cess typically occurs every five years, which allows the regulatory agencies to review and update permit limits and/or provide addi-tional protection for degraded or sensitive surface water resources. In many instances, these renewals result in new discharge limits that facilities cannot achieve without retro-fits. as soon as a facility has a discharge limit that is more stringent than a contaminant

reviewing results from 11 installations shows what can be achieved BY tODD POtAS

CONTRIBUTION

implementing integrated Zero liquid dischargecharge

Treating Minerals The cold lime softening tank pictured is a key component in a process to remove minerals from water.

Water

The claims and statements made in this article belong exclusively to the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Ethanol Producer Magazine or its advertisers. All questions pertaining to this article should be directed to the author(s).


parameter level in the incoming water, ZLD becomes a very viable alternative. For exam-ple, if a facility receives a conductivity limit of 1500 µmhos/cm (micromhos per centi-meter) for their water discharge permit, and the conductivity of the incoming water is the same value, discharge no longer benefits the overall water balance for a facility.

Typically, water is obtained from on-site wells, surface waters or municipalities. Wa-ter leaves the facility through evaporation, in the distillers grain, discharged wastewa-ter streams or liquid, or solid waste hauled off-site or pumped to evaporation ponds. If regulations require the discharge to be as good as, or better than, incoming water, re-use of the water simply makes more sense than using more raw water and continuing to discharge under a restrictive and burden-some discharge permit.

Quality ParametersLooking at a few important water qual-

ity parameters, such as conductivity, sulfate and chloride, reveals general trends and sug-gests what process changes may be necessary to implement an iZLD scenario at a new or existing facility. Table 1 shows the average across 10 ethanol plants for water quality and performance parameters for discharge water, as well as projected iZLD performance and actual results. The 10 dry mill corn-ethanol

plants analyzed produce between 50 and 120 MMgy. Table 2 shows the range in raw water quality at the 10 plants.

The iZLD system utilized by these 10 plants improved chloride levels in the pro-cess water as shown in Table 1. The sum-mary data shows that chloride-contributing chemicals, such as hydrochloric acid or chlo-ride-containing biocides like bleach, were re-placed or eliminated. If chloride is allowed to cycle up, corrosion in the plant process equipment and piping will likely result.

Table 1 also shows the iZLD operations tended to concentrate sulfate levels in pro-cess water when compared to operating with discharge. Unlike chloride, sulfur cannot be readily reduced or eliminated. Therefore, control and management of sulfate levels becomes more significant. Encouragingly, increased sulfate levels in water do not result in a significant increase in the sulfur content of DDGS, indicated by the sulfur levels for DDGS in Table 1 that averaged a projected value of 0.06 percent.

The average conductivity levels in the 10 plants also show a concentrating trend once iZLD is applied, requiring ion-specific, plant-by-plant review to determine where and how much the concentration of conductivity-contributing ion levels can be tolerated, as well as the chemistry controls required. The problematic ions can include sodium, silica

and hardness, which can increase fouling or corrosion.

In addition to water quality issues, changes to air quality must be considered when planning iZLD systems. The levels of collective total dissolved solids (TDS) are often limited for the cooling tower exhaust, commonly stated as drift loss. Evaporated solids from the cooling tower are particu-late emissions generally subject to regulation, and any increase due to ZLD may require mod-ification to a facility air permit.

Plant Conversion once regulatory

requirements are com-pleted, including any needed permits, equip-ment installation or modifications can be-gin. In virtually every instance of iZLD installation reviewed here, it makes technical and economic sense to replace sulfuric and hydrochloric acid with plant-generated co2 for recarbonation (pH adjustment) of the treated plant water. This replacement is critical for managing process water ion balance, which can include sulfate loading in the DDGS. The recovered co2 can also be used for acidification in other ar-eas of the facility.

The conversion to iZLD begins with integration of the two primary wastewater streams, beginning with cooling tower wa-ter. once the cT blowdown is integrated and observations of ion cycling in the water system at all stages stabilize, ro concentrate is introduced. Integration is typically com-plete in one or two weeks, depending upon site-specific issues. Subsequent water testing, both on-site and with samples sent off-site for more detailed lab analysis, monitors plant operation. Water specifications monitored include cooling tower makeup, boiler water makeup, and most importantly, process wa-ter used in fermentation.

While the 10 facilities reviewed using

Table 2. Ranges for Raw Water Quality Parameters

Parameter Low High A Verage

Conductivity, µmhos/cm 250 2100 1139

Sulfate, ppm SO4- 11 900 296

Chloride, ppm Cl- 2 300 44

Table 1. Ethanol Plant Water Qualities & Performance

Cond. (µmho/cm)

Sulfate(ppm)

Chloride(ppm)

gal H20/galETOH

DGS % increase

Average for 10 plant

Raw Water 1139 296 44 NA NA

Process Waterw/discharge 1676 410 96 4.1 NA

ZLD Process Water projected 2381 749 57 3.2 0.064

ZLD Process Water actual 1340 430 50 2.0 NA

SOURCE: U.S. WATER SERVICES.

Maximized Recycling Todd Potas, biofuels business leader for U.S. Water Services, shares comparisons of 11 systems installed to achieve zero liquid discharge.

Water


iZLD have achieved satisfactory perfor-mance, there are examples where other iZLD systems are needed. one iZLD facility with an evaporator/crystallizer and storage pond was reviewed, and its water quality param-eters given in Table 3. The raw water quality is very challenging in this example, showing a clear advantage to using an evaporator/crystallizer and brine storage pond to handle the high salts. While there was some cycling up of the key water quality parameters, con-centrations of conductivity, sulfate and chlo-ride did not reach the levels demonstrated for the averaged iZLD facilities. In addition, relatively good water usage performance was achieved at 2.81 gallons of water/gallon of ethanol produced and the projected versus

actual results were fairly consistent.

Total Water Savings

Facility water use efficiency per-formance was an average of 4.3 gal-lons of water/gallon of ethanol produced for all the facilities reviewed prior to ZLD implementa-tion. The projected, worst-case water use after going to

ZLD was an average of 3.1 gallons of wa-ter per gallon of ethanol produced, or close to 1 billion gallons of water per year on the combined 800 mmgy ethanol production of all plants reviewed here. The actual per-formance was closer to 2 billion gallons of water saved per year. The large difference between projected and actual performance for water use per gallon of ethanol occurs often, primarily because the projections are done on a worst-case water balance, raw wa-

Table 3. Example of a ZLD facility with evaporator/crytallizer and storage pond

Cond. (µmho/cm)

Sulfate(ppm)

Chloride(ppm)

gal H20/galETOH

Raw Water 3560 335 846 NA

Process Water w/discharge 70 7.1 17 5.26

ZLD Proce Water projected 156 17.3 40.0 2.76

ZLD Process Water actual 300 4.1 35.3 2.81

SOURCE: U.S. WATER SERVICES

First System The first zero liquid discharge system in the U.S. utilized cold lime softening and was designed for a dry mill ethanol plant in Madera, Calif., to meet stringent discharge restrictions.

Water


LEADERSHIP,

AT YOUR SERVICE!

Des Moines Duluth Phone (515) 283-0500 www.hydro-klean.com

R

Emergency

Dependable Service 24/7

Hydroblasting Services Tank Cleaning & Inspection

Wet/Dry Industrial

Vacuum Services

Dryer Cleaning

Waste Collection,

Transport & Disposal

Dry Ice Blasting

Filter Media/Sieve

Bead Removal Response

VISIT OUR

BOOTH #511

At the FEW ShowAt the FEW Show

VISIT OUR

BOOTH #511

ter quality and supply information. Many facilities were able to optimize in-coming water among multiple wells, municipal supply, and/or graywater and stormwater, both on-site and off-site. The relatively soft water properties of storm water can be very favorable to any ZLD operating scenario, especially if a facility already has a pond for containment and control of stormwater.

While projections for water use per gallon of ethanol differ greatly from ac-tual performance, this review of the con-ductivity, sulfate and chloride levels for the plants analyzed demonstrates good agreement between projected and actual results. Based on these results, facilities contemplating an iZLD system can pre-dict the likely operating differences with some level of confidence.

The financial and environmental li-ability benefits of not discharging can be significant. monitoring, testing and re-porting of discharges for permit compli-ance have become much more costly in recent years. Requirements for whole ef-fluent toxicity (WET) testing, for example, can greatly increase costs. Many facilities have, or are considering, voluntary ZLD conversion, which can permit optional discharge of nonprocess water and storm-water. If no discharge occurs, reporting can be as simple as stating “no discharge” in monthly nPDES discharge monitoring reports. no sampling and analysis costs would be required, and no potential dis-charge permit violations would occur.

Each facility location will have unique advantages and disadvantages that require a customized engineering approach to op-timally design a ZLD system that accounts for local water quality and quantity, as well as process and operational variations in the ongoing effort to conserve water us-age.

Author: Todd PotasBiofuels Business Leader, U.S. Water Services

[email protected]

Water


CONTRIBUTION

leading ethanol producing state wants to lead the nation in promoting new blendBY LUcY NOrtON

iowa does its Part in encouraging Adoption of e15

Promotion


today the state of Iowa’s re-newable fuels industry is strong and looking to the future. Iowa leads the nation in ethanol production with 41 ethanol production facilities with the combined ability to produce nearly 3.7 bil-lion gallons of ethanol annually.

While the future holds many opportuni-ties, there are significant challenges as well.

We must work to knock down the artificial barriers that hold back renewable fuel use. America has smacked into the E10 blend wall, and the federal blenders tax credit for ethanol is set to expire at the end of this year. So, it’s obvious that 2011 is the year to seri-ously evaluate ethanol’s future.

When the U.S. EPA announced the ap-proval of E15 for 2001 and newer model

vehicles and light-duty trucks, it opened the door for an exciting market for ethanol to help overcome the E10 blend wall. With 85 percent of all vehicles on the road by 2014 capable of using E15, it’s time to start the groundwork for bringing E15 to motorists.

When E10 was introduced in the 1970s, Iowa led the nation to embrace this new fuel produced from Iowa’s farm fields. The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association is work-ing to put Iowa in position to lead the nation again—this time in embracing E15. Adop-tion of 15 percent ethanol blends opens up a


Promotion

new 7 billion-gallon-per-year market, which is twice the size of Iowa’s 2010 ethanol pro-duction. As ethanol acceptance has grown, E10 is no longer considered a “boutique” fuel. now it is the base fuel. So, it’s time to move on to the next generation of ethanol blends and strive for adoption of E15.

The challenge for E15 is making it wide-ly available so every motorist driving a 2001 and newer vehicle has the option to buy this higher-octane, lower-cost fuel. Retailers and convenience stores can make this happen. Iowa should seize the opportunity E15 of-fers to expand the ethanol market and keep more dollars in the local economy, since Iowa imports most of its energy needs.

Policies for incentives and financial as-sistance for infrastructure build out are need-ed to encourage retailers to offer E15. While EPA approval of the fuel creates an oppor-tunity, E15 becomes a reality for consumers only if retailers make the fuel available. Re-tailers are understandably concerned about misfueling penalties and consumer lawsuits. While we can debate forever the likelihood of these perceived threats, there is no deny-ing that the concerns will hold back many retailers from offering E15.

Why? Today, most Iowa fuel stations have two gasoline storage tanks—one hold-ing non-ethanol fuel, and one holding E10. For E15 to become readily available in the near term, a retailer is going to have to fill one of those two tanks with E15. Providing some type of meaningful E15 incentive can provide a counterbalance to liability fears and reward retailers who decide to offer their customers E15.

The IRFA is working to prove to retail-ers that E15 is a wise choice and that custom-ers will buy E15 if they offer it. The IRFA recently launched a retailer campaign driven by their potential E15 customers. Motorists are dropping off cards at their local retail-ers informing them that they “own a 2001 or newer vehicle and that they would buy E15 when it’s available.” It also tells retailers they want more American fuel choices that are better for the environment.

E85 also paints a bright future for etha-nol. With the commitment by the three ma-jor U.S. automakers to make 50 percent of their 2012 production as flex-fuel vehicles, more motorists will have the option to pur-chase renewable fuels. To make this happen, we need to move toward every gas station in Iowa having a flex-fuel pump that offers not only E85, but midlevel ethanol blends such as E30 and even the new E15 blend. This is how we break the big oil monopoly over consumer fuel choice and high-priced gasoline.

It’s time to take a serious approach to cutting our addiction to foreign oil and it’s time to seriously commit to locally-produced renewable choices. by spending $28 billion a month on imported oil, the U.S. is trans-ferring a massive amount of wealth during a period of economic hardship. over the past 30 years, this reliance on foreign oil has cost U.S. taxpayers over $7 trillion.

We’re taking a 10 percent bite out of for-eign oil, thanks to E10 use, which currently eliminates the need for 445 million barrels of imported oil annually, the equivalent of our imports from Saudi Arabia each year. Just consider how many barrels of oil could be eradicated and how many dollars would stay in this country if another 7 billion gallons of ethanol were sold as E15.

E15 is not the only challenge facing the ethanol industry today. While the federal re-newable fuels standard (RFS) expands the market for ethanol, anti-corn environmen-talists convinced policymakers to cap corn ethanol at 15 billion gallons a year. The RFS calls for the growth in renewable fuels pro-duction above 15 billion gallons to be from “advanced biofuels”—biofuels that achieve a 50 percent reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions compared to a base-line 2005 petroleum fuel. but the fine print in this regulation states that corn ethanol

Kansas

Nebraskask

NortNoNo h Dakotak

SoutoutoutoutS h Dah Dah Dah Dakotakkotk

9494

9090

8080

7070

!!!!!!!!!

!

! !

!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!

!

!! !!!

!!!!!! !!!!!! !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!

!

!

!!!!!!

!

!!!!!!

!

"

!!!

Minnnesota

onsionsion nnnnnn

!!!!!

!onsionsionsionsisii

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Iowa

WWWiscWiscisccoooWWWWWiscWiscWiscWisciscWWW ccWi oooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!

!!

!

!!!!

!

!

!

!!!!!!!!!

! !

!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!

!!

! !!!!!

!!

!!

! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!

!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!

!!!!

!

!!!!! ! !

!

!!!

!

!! !!!!!!

!!!

!

!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!

!!!! !

!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!

!!!!

! !!!!!

!

!!!

!!!!!!!

!!

!!!!!!"

!

!

!!

!

"!!!!!!!

!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!

"

Iowa Leads The round gold dots show existing corn ethanol plants in Iowa and orange indicates plants under development. A square indicates a cellulosic ethanol plant.SOURCE: EPM SPRING 2011 ETHANOL PLANT MAP

Corn Conversion IRFA says corn ethanol contributes 49,000 jobs to the state providing $2.4 billion in income and $ 588 million in state tax revenue last year.

doesn’t qualify regardless of its environmental performance. no matter how much corn ethanol may reduce GHG emissions in the future, it is statutorily forbidden from ever participating in the ad-vanced biofuels part of the federal RFS.

This is an unfair character-ization of ethanol because it is continually advancing in reducing greenhouse gas emissions world-wide. According to (S&T)2 Con-sultants Inc., ethanol has a positive impact on reducing global GHG. In 2010, world ethanol production is estimated to have reduced GHG emissions by 101 million tons. This reduction would be equal to taking 18.7 million cars off the road, which we know will never

Promotion

PH

OTO

: IO

WA

RE

NE

WA

BLE

FU

ELS

AS

SO

CIA

TIO

N

happen. So why not boost ethanol use as an alternative to forcing mass transit and rec-ognize ethanol for what it is—an advanced biofuel—that has far superior environmental benefits over petroleum-based fuels?

The excitement raised by prospects for increasing ethanol production to meet new demand is tempered by the continual criti-cism by those who don’t understand—or choose not to—the role of corn in provid-ing food, feed and fuel. What the naysayers choose to overlook is that one-third of every bushel of corn processed into ethanol also produces a high-energy, protein-rich feed ingredient known as distillers grains. This distillers grain is feeding livestock around the globe and reducing the cost of producing beef, poultry and pork. And, currently distill-ers grains replace 1 billion bushels of corn previously used as livestock feed.

As for the claim that ethanol takes a bite

out of food supplies, ethanol production actually uses only 3 percent of the world’s feed supply on a net basis. So the feed grains mostly consumed as human food—wheat and rice—are not affected by ethanol pro-duction. Through new ethanol production technology, seed genetics and agriculture

production efficien-cies, no new acres have been needed to produce ethanol. These trends will continue, so there’s no better time to advance domestic, renewable energy production.

The benefits of using more ethanol are significant to this country and Iowa’s

future. In addition to supporting 49,000 jobs and providing $2.4 billion in income, Iowa’s ethanol industry contributed $588 million in state tax revenue last year. If Iowa takes the lead in developing new markets for ethanol, it will provide economic stability, keep dol-lars from being sent to unstable oil-produc-ing nations and improve the environmental health of this nation.

Author: Lucy NortonManaging Director, Iowa Renewable Fuels Association


Promoting E15 IRFA is asking consumers to drop off cards at their gas stations saying they’d buy E15, says Lucy Norton.

Promotion


CONTRIBUTION

yeast


yeast Management Provides stable Fermentation Performance

Grain pricing volatility and the comparatively low mar-gins associated with commodity products such as ethanol require diligent reevaluation of material and energy balances of every unit operation in the ethanol indus-try. To remain competitive, these significant market pressures demand absolute focus on

optimal ethanol yield and maximum process efficiency.

There are inherent limitations due to the complexities of carbohydrate process-ing and yeast metabolism, although 88 to 93 percent of the theoretical maximum yield is frequently achieved in the corn ethanol pro-cess. The typically closed-loop bioprocessing configuration of ethanol plants and the de-

pendence on the biocatalytic activity of the living microorganism, Saccharomyces cerevisiae (yeast), offers many challenges and a very limited number of economically feasible so-lutions.

While the self-limiting nature of the industrial scale, batch-fermentation process would appear to offer very few options, a promising new technology option—High Density Seed cultivation—may significantly improve the performance of the standard dry grind ethanol plant.

Ethanol manufacturing platforms de-

PH

OTO

: © S

TOC

KP

HO

TO.C

OM

/SV

EN

GIN

E

new propagation technique offers savings while increasing yieldsBY PEtEr KrASUcKI


yeast

pendent on batch- or continuous-yeast propa-gation may improve performance by incorpo-rating advanced technologies already utilized in other biotechnology industries using fed-batch fermentation platforms. The core bio-processing systems in the ethanol process require high throughput, and any modifica-tion of current systems may be economically unreasonable. Improvements could be made, however, to the accessory bioprocesses such as yeast propagation that can be appropriately scaled while maintaining or improving perfor-mance. The modernization of current yeast management strategies through use of the high-density seed cultivation platform targets production of low-volume, high-density fer-mentation inoculums. When combined with cell recycling and fed-batch yeast cultivation, it can lower operations costs while improving fermentation performance.

Yeast InoculumEthanol fermentation is first dependent

on the availability of yeast biomass. In con-trast to other bioprocess ingredients where concentrations are based on the effluent and influent composition and additions, yeast acts as a self-reproducing biocatalyst, properties of which are functions of plant processes. While the properties of various commercial yeast products have significant impacts, these

properties alone do not ensure satisfactory performance. Instead, successful process per-formance depends on economical production and maintenance of the viable yeast biomass. Currently, the ethanol industry mostly uses ac-tive dry yeast products as the source of the initial yeast inoculum. These products are closely related industrial strains of typically polyploidy Saccharomyces cerevisiae. a definitive review was written by W.M. Ingledew in 2005, covering the properties and performance of seven such products and similar reviews are available on yeast performance under differ-ent saccharification conditions, chemical bal-ances and process conditions.

Fermentation RequirementsThe overall fuel ethanol biological pro-

cess can be separated into two distinct phas-es—yeast biomass propagation (inoculum build up) and ethanol fermentation. The bio-logical process culminates in the beer well and downstream distillation and recovery. These two steps are common across various fermen-tation industries where a required biomass is first propagated and then used as a biocatalyst in the production phase.

In view of the overall process principles, propagation design targets are based on fer-mentation inoculum density requirements of 5 to 10 x 106 cells per milliliter. Additionally,

propagation processes are designed and based on the selected yeast product properties, pro-cess cycle, temperature, medium composition, specific growth rate target and fermentative capacity of yeast biomass. The yeast cultiva-tion process has a big impact on the specific fermentative capacity of the yeast biomass. beside yeast biomass considerations, signifi-cant attention needs to be devoted to con-trolling microbial contamination that could reduce ethanol yield.

Industrial-scale fermentations are run as self-limiting batch processes where only the final substrate and product concentrations are of consequence. That self-limiting nature provides, on one hand, wide latitude in initial conditions, yet, it also prevents reasonable control or optimization of the fermentation process itself. Such variability in initial condi-tions, which results in seemingly similar per-formance, frequently leads to the false sense of “process control.”

Yeast Propagation Performance

The inherent engineering-scale limita-tions dictating the use of the self-limiting, batch-fermentation platform offers many process control challenges resulting in often unpredictable performance. Review of the current industrial data and relevant publica-tions reveals that in view of the specific at-tainable fermentation goals, the propagation process contributes an unreasonable amount of uncertainty—frequently resulting in per-formance losses. The unnecessary limitations imposed on the current propagation process lead to the very low volumetric productivity, and to final yeast biomass with less than op-timal fermentative capacity. A focused propa-gation platform, however, should provide significant control over self-limiting batch fermentations.

Using standard-scale factors, fermenta-tion inoculum density requires production of 484 to 726 kilograms of yeast in active dry yeast equivalent (ADY) during biomass prop-agation. This process is typically initiated by using approximately 40 kg (ADY equivalent) of yeast and results in the initial yeast propa-gation density of between 10 to 20 x 106 yeast cells per milliliter. after eight hours, the final

Basic High-Density Seed Yeast Cultivation System

FromCook

Mash Enrichment Fed Batch Control

Acid

Caustic

Air

Fed-Batch Cell RecycleControl Targets

• Growth Rate• Metabolism• Culture Density• Products Yields• Secondary Metabolite• Fermentative Capacity

Control Loops

• Temperature• pH• Nutrient Utilization• Exhaust Composition• Biomass

Yeas

t C

ell R

ecyc

le L

oopHIGH DENSITY SEED

REACTOR2ND STAGE

HIGH DENSITY SEEDREACTOR

1ST STAGE

Yeast SlurryToFermentation

SOURCE: FERMATRIX


CROWN IRON WORKS COMPANYCall 1.651.639.8900 or visit www.crowniron.com

FRACTIONATION • EXTRACTION • OIL PROCESSING • DEMO FACILITY

yeast biomass concentration of 320 to 640 x 106 yeast cells per milliliter is produced in four to five generations. regardless of the yeast strain, the batch propagation conditions can create significantly imbalanced metabolic flux-es in the yeast biomass, resulting in increased production of secondary metabolites such as glycerol, acetate and acetaldehyde that can in-hibit fermentation.

Alternative TechnologiesThe current targets for inoculum of

1 to 2 percent, volume to volume, are ex-cessive, and based on a low-density yeast cultivation process. Current processes pro-ducing biomass densities of only 8 to 12 grams per liter versus the more ideal 137 grams per liter, illustrate that there are clear optimization opportunities, as well as sig-nificant potential savings in adopting new approaches.

Advanced, yet inexpensive, features such as integrated fed-batch control loops can be easily incorporated into existing computer control systems. Furthermore, additional advanced features such as medi-um enrichment, cell recycling, mixed yeast cultures and feedstock flexibility can all be easily implemented to realize additional cost savings and performance gains. Com-pared to existing propagation processes, single-stage or multi-stage, cell-recycling, fed-batch systems offer the following ad-vantages:

Production of high-density, low-vol-• ume fermentation seed.Faster fermentations.• Improved fermentation process stabil-• ity.Improved material and energy bal-• ance.Decreased risk of infection, lower • sanitation costs.Reduced costs of about 50 percent. • Reductions in commercial yeast use, • regardless of strain, of up to 95 per-cent. Elimination of commercial yeast • product variability impacts on fermen-tation.Stringent control over final fermenta-•

tion inoculum properties and fermenta-tion process kinetics.Feedstock flexibility beyond c6 carbohy-• drates.Pure culture and mix culture process • flexibility.Full process control automation.• Immediate return on investment.• Additional bioproducts options.•

Economical technologies such as cell-recycle, fed-batch yeast cultivation promise to be the next step in development for biorefin-eries. Additional options in fermentation pro-cess management are also available to the fuel ethanol industry.

Author: Peter KrasuckiGeneral Manager, Fermatrix

[email protected]

yeast


Prior to the introduction of dry ice blasting for cleaning, many in the ethanol industry faced significant challenges with maintenance. Distillers dried grains (DDGS) and corn dust coats the walls of

buildings, tunnels and grain pits, working its way throughout the plant.

The dry ice method of cleaning has had excellent results, particularly in the energy centers at ethanol plants, which include ther-mal oxidizers, stack economizers, coils and

induced draft (ID) fans. Hardened corn dust gathers on these pieces of equipment and greatly reduces thermal efficiency and their ability to generate steam.

According to guidance from the U.S. EPA, ethanol producers cannot have more than one-sixteenth of an inch of dust on building or equipment surfaces. For many ethanol producers, the commonly available method for cleaning their plants and remov-ing dust is water blasting. When it comes

CONTRIBUTION

dry ice Blasting solves ethanol Plant Maintenance HeadacheFaster cleaning with fewer workers is possible when dry ice is used instead of waterBY KELLIE grOB

maintenance

Pellet Power High density dry ice pellets in a variety of sizes are used in dry ice cleaning systems.



maintenance

time for a plant’s semiannual cleaning, a maintenance crew brings in tanker trucks of water—enough to fill a pond outside the facility three feet deep when the project is done. The cleaning process typically takes 36 to 48 hours and requires 15 to18 workers to clean the equipment and handle the sec-ondary waste, which consists of water, dirt, grease and dust.

The ProblemCleaning with water can create prob-

lems, explained Shawn Easterly, an ethanol energy center expert. He coordinates main-tenance for four facilities in the Midwest, and previously managed 16 ethanol plants for an-other ethanol producer. “The biggest chal-lenge when it comes to cleaning with water is the chance of damaging the ceramic block refractory that is used to insulate the interi-ors of several of the pieces of equipment. If this refractory becomes wet, the damaged blocks have to be replaced—an added ex-pense that many plants simply cannot afford.

In addition, there are also certain areas of the facility and pieces of equipment and electronics that sim-ply cannot get wet.” Rather than clean the economizers with water, Easterly com-mented that some in the industry simply avoided cleaning the equipment, which ultimately impacts

production. “Even in the plants that I began over-

seeing,” Easterly added, “they had avoided cleaning the economizers, either because they feared damaging the refractory or sim-ply because they didn’t understand the im-pact that the blocked economizer tubes had on their bottom line. once I started to cal-culate the lost efficiency due to the clogged stacks, however, we realized that we needed to find an alternative to water.”

“Many of our customers have decided

that they simply cannot afford to use water in their plants,” said brad Potts, owner of new Age Cryo, a service offered by Stoc Products Inc. “Water does not mix with the grease on the machines, and equipment with electron-ics and computer chips have to be covered or avoided. Despite efforts to remove the water, it can be weeks before it is completely gone, and if not removed, the plant could develop a mold problem.”

A SolutionDry ice blast cleaning provides all the

benefits of high pressure water without the negative impacts. Dry ice blasting uses re-claimed co2 in the form of dry ice pellets to remove the layers of DDGS and dust from various surfaces within an ethanol plant. Blasted by controlled, pressurized air, the dry ice pellets sublimate upon contact with equipment without damaging the surface be-ing cleaned and without producing any sec-ondary waste.

Using Cold Jet Aero series dry ice blast cleaning systems, new age cryo can clean the economizer and boiler tubes, ID fans, grain tunnels, DDGS tunnels and pits, gas stations, lime slurry stations, wet cake areas and offload buildings. In addition, since dry ice blasting is a dry cleaning process, new Age Cryo can also clean electronic compo-nents without worrying about damaging the equipment.

“The process works extremely well in ethanol plants,” stated Easterly. “We are able to clean these areas in the plants with fewer people and without the mess left behind by high-pressure water blasting. It is safe to say that dry ice blasting will likely become the standard cleaning practice in these areas of the ethanol plants.”

The BenefitsAs a result of being able to more ef-

fectively clean the equipment and areas of the plant, ethanol producers are finding sig-nificant costs and energy savings by adopting dry ice blasting. According to Easterly, it was not uncommon for his plants’ energy cen-ters to see a 20 to 30 degree drop in stack

temperatures after each cleaning. This results in increased production, sig-nificant savings in natural gas and fewer emissions. “By cleaning our stack economizers every six months, we saved $100,000 per plant in natu-ral gas savings alone,” Easterly said. “With four plants, the annual savings totaled roughly $400,000 for the company. The economizer coils preheat the water for the etha-nol production process, but when the coils are cov-ered by the refrac-tory, they are less efficient at heat-ing the water and producing steam, so we have to use more natural gas. Dry ice blasting has allowed us to reduce the amount of gas that we use, while also help-ing us to run at higher rates.”

Potts emphasized that these savings and benefits are not unique to Easterly’s plants. “A reliable, durable cleaning system that cleans faster, with zero secondary waste and less mess is clearly something that can help the industry. Many ethanol plants across the country are identical in design and struggle with the same cleaning challenges. That said, many ethanol plants can also realize similar savings and benefits as described above by implementing dry ice blast cleaning into their maintenance process.”

Author: Kellie A. Grob Senior Vice President, Cold Jet, LLC


Blast Cleaning Kellie Grob says Cold Jet’s dry ice blast cleaning systems work well in cleaning critical areas of ethanol plants.


CONTRIBUTION

FireFiGhtinG

Fighting an ethanol tank Fire Presents unique challenges swedish group seeks better understanding, new and better firefighting methods BY hENrY PErSSON

one obvious consequence of increasing ethanol blends, both in Europe and the u.S., is that the volume of bulk ethanol trans-ported, handled and stored will increase dramatically in com-ing years, creating new risks and

challenges for fire protection and response. The increasing diameter and volume of storage tanks is also making any potential firefighting operations a significant challenge. Experience in tank firefighting in-volving ethanol or other water miscible fu-els is very limited, and those few tank fires

that have occurred have resulted in burnout rather than extinguishment. Some critical differences between fighting fires involving petroleum-based products and ethanol need to be better understood.

What Makes Ethanol Different?The most important differences in

terms of fire performance between ethanol The claims and statements made in this article belong exclusively to the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Ethanol Producer Magazine or its advertisers. All questions pertaining to this article should be directed to the author(s).

2004 Fire A blaze started in a 32 meter (100 foot) diameter tank containing about 4,000 cubic meters (more than 1 million gallons) of ethanol at Port Kembla, Australia, in 2004.

PH

OTO

: NSW

FIR

E BR

IGAD

ES


FireFiGhtinG

and gasoline concern flammability proper-ties, burning behavior and extinguishment methods.

In a closed vessel or a tank, pure ethanol forms flammable fuel vapors at a tempera-ture range of about 12 to 40 degrees Cen-tigrade (12 to 104 de-grees Fahrenheit while gasoline needs to be

below about minus 20 C for such formation. Ethanol blends have a flammability range between pure ethanol and gasoline, depend-ing on the specific composition. as a result, the possibility for flammable conditions in a storage tank, and thereby the risk for igni-tion, is greater for ethanol than gasoline.

A very important and related issue is that the burning behavior of a large-scale ethanol fire might be significantly differ-ent from a petroleum fire. Experience from small-scale fires shows that radiation is signif-icantly lower from an ethanol fire compared to gasoline. There are indications, however, that the opposite may be true in a large-scale fire. Such observations were made during a 200 square-meter fire-test series conducted in Sweden using a mixture of acetone and ethanol. Measurements showed that the heat flux from the acetone/ethanol fire was about twice that of gasoline at this scale, although gasoline produced a significant higher heat radiation in small-scale tests. The reason for this is probably that a large-scale gasoline fire generates large amounts of smoke that tend to block the visible parts of the flames, thus reducing the heat radiation. The acetone/ethanol fire was almost free from smoke, and the associated heat radiated was there-fore not dissipated by smoke. This is likely to be true for pure ethanol fuels. Indeed, such observations were made during a 2004 Port kembla ethanol tank fire in australia. one consequence of this phenomenon could be an increased risk for escalation and complex-ity in firefighting operations due to higher

heat exposure of personnel and equipment. The most important difference from a

fire-extinguishing perspective is that ethanol is a water miscible fuel. Some data concern-ing foam firefighting of ethanol fuels and other water miscible products is available, even for reasonably large-scale scenarios, but they all represent spill fires. Early in the1980s, SP conducted a large test series using metha-nol where approximately 80 tests were con-ducted ranging from 0.25 square meters (0.29 square yards) to 50 square meters using a fuel depth of about 200 millimeters (7.8 inches). In the large scale acetone/ethanol tests mentioned above, two extinguishing tests were performed using an average fuel depth of about 150 millimeters. In 2006, a series of small-scale tests (0.6 square meters) were conducted to investigate the influence of low blending of ethanol in gasoline on existing firefighting capabilities. approxi-mately 30 tests were conducted with between 2.5 to 10 percent ethanol blends, using both gentle and forceful foam application.

a series of fire tests were also con-ducted in the U.S. in 2007 by the Ethanol Emergency Response Coalition. Tests were conducted both on E95 (denatured ethanol) and E10 using several types of foam con-centrates. The tests on E95 showed that the requirements of UL 162 were only fulfilled when using an AFFF-AR and a Type II ap-plication, which is a gentle application shown in the accompanying photo where the foam is first bounced on the ground..

Similarly, existing test standards for alco-hol-resistant foam concentrates (ISo 7203-3, En 1568-4, UL162, etc.) all employ thin fuel layers and short pre-burn times—spill fires. Even spill fires pose serious firefight-ing issues and the general conclusion from various large-scale tests and standard test methods, is that the use of alcohol resistant (AR) foams is a fundamental requirement to obtain extinguishment of water miscible fu-els. The tests have also shown, however, that even AR foams will fail unless gentle foam application onto the burning fuel surface can be achieved.

as tank fires are usually extinguished

using large capacity foam monitors, gentle application is not possible and therefore ex-tinguishment cannot be expected. Further-more, a tank fire will present a more severe situation compared to a spill fire due to the large fuel depth, as the dilution effect from the fire fighting foam will be limited. In most situations, the pre-burn time will also be longer than that expected in a spill fire, thereby increasing the temperature of the fuel and creating hot steel surfaces making extinguishment even more difficult.

ETankfire Clearly, existing test data, both from

large-scale tests and in performance accord-ing to standardized tests, cannot be immedi-ately extrapolated to tank fire scenarios. In response, SP Fire Technology and the Swed-ish Petroleum Institute have developed a research project on ethanol tank firefighting called Ethanol Tank Fire Fighting, or Etank-fire.

The goal of the proposed tank fire re-search project is to develop and validate a methodology for firefighting of tank fires containing ethanol fuels and to determine the large-scale burning behavior of ethanol fuels. The results will form a platform of knowl-edge to ensure adequate investments for the fire protection of ethanol storage facilities. To achieve the goal, it will be important to

Fire Planning Henry Persson explains how the behavior of an ethanol tank fire differs greatly from a fire occurring in a scenario involving a spill.

Foam Test One of the extinguishing tests bounced foam on the ground in front of a 200 square meter (240 square yard) acetone/ethanol fire to obtain a gentle foam application.

PH

OTO

: BIR

GE

R M

AR

KU

SS

ON

SR

V


FireFiGhtinG

It’s not a “black box” but it performs magic just the same. The

R3 Fusion SPaCeRTM ethanol recovery system will increase your plant’s production and profitability by removing the low concentrations of ethanol in your waste scrubber water and concentrating it for recovery.

With no capital investment required, fully automated and remotely monitored operation, no chemicals or membranes required, the patent-pending SPaCeRTM system will improve your cash flow from the moment you turn it on.

Contact us today to find out how R3 Fusion’s SPaCeRTM technology, designed and developed by our process intensification team, can

turn your waste water into profit – like magic!

R3 Fusion, Inc.Business Office – 640 Ellicott St., Suite 499, Buffalo NY 14203Technical Center – 405 Jordan Rd., Troy NY 12180www.r3fusion.com | 716-818-5500 (phone) | 716-299-2102 (fax)

better understand the challenges in fight-ing tank fires presented by the increased depth of fuel, the longer pre-burn time and the difficulty in achieving a gentle ap-plication of the foam when compared to better-understood spill fires.

Based on the results of initial labora-tory tests, the most promising extinguish-ing methods and media will then be select-ed for further evaluation and verification at larger scales. Questions regarding the burning behavior and heat radiation from ethanol fuels will primarily be investigated in the large-scale tests.

Stakeholder Input SoughtThe project idea was presented in

april at a meeting in France to the Lastfire group. Two additional public workshops are planned, the first on June 28 in Lon-don. The second will be held in the U.S. with a date and location yet to be deter-mined. Interested representatives from various organizations, companies and agencies will be given the opportunity to obtain more detailed information about the project goals and plans and to influ-ence the planning process as we progress.

A steering committee will be formed by those willing to participate in the fund-ing of the tank project that will participate in the final detailed planning, including the choice of venue for the large-scale tests.

Author: Henry PerssonResearch Project Leader SP Fire Technology,

SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden+46 (0)10 516 51 98

[email protected]

For information about the tankfire project and the date and locations for the workshops visit: www.sp.se/en/index/research/etankfire

on the WeB


FansPremium Plant Services, Inc. 888-549-1869 www.premiumplantservices.com

Heat Exchanger

Heat Exchanger Services 303-947-7864 www.hexservices.com

Seneca Companies 800-369-5500 www.senecaco.com

Hydro-BlastingHydro-Klean, Inc. 515-283-0500 www.hydro-klean.com

EPM MARKETPLACE

Ag Products & ServicesEquipmentHTH Companies 636-584-4586 [email protected]

Associations/OrganizationsGrowth Energy 202-545-4000 www.growthenergy.org

Clean CitiesRed River Valley Clean Cities 651-227-8014 www.CleanAirChoice.org

Twin Cities Clean Cities Coalition 651-223-9568 www.CleanAirChoice.org

ChemicalsAnti-MicrobialFerm Solutions 859-402-8707 www.ferm-solutions.com

DenaturantMethanol of Orlando407-234-1788 [email protected]

DesiccantInterra Global 847-292-8600 www.interraglobal.com

EnzymesCTE Global, Inc.847-564-5770 www.cte-global.com

YeastFerm Solutions 859-402-8707 www.ferm-solutions.com

Xylogenics, Inc.317-697-7514 www.xylogenics.com

CleaningDryer SystemsHTH Companies 636-584-4586 [email protected]

Hydro-Klean, Inc. 515-283-0500 www.hydro-klean.com

Premium Plant Services, Inc. 888-549-1869 www.premiumplantservices.com


Emergency Spill ResponseHydro-Klean, Inc. 515-283-0500 www.hydro-klean.com


Evaporators Hydro-Klean, Inc. 515-283-0500 www.hydro-klean.com


Reach your customers

Your Solution.Advertise Today.

EPM MARKETPLACE


EPM MARKETPLACE

Reach your customersYour Solution. Advertise Today.

EPM MARKETPLACE

Railcar Spill Response Hydro-Klean, Inc. 515-283-0500 www.hydro-klean.com

Tank Cleaning Equipment Gamajet Cleaning Systems Inc 877-GAMAJET www.gamajet.com

Scanjet, Inc.281-480-4041 www.scanjetinc.com

Spraying Systems Co.800-95-SPRAY www.tankjet.com

Tank Cleaning ServicesHydro-Klean, Inc. 515-283-0500 www.hydro-klean.com



Tank Cleaning Systems Spraying Systems Co.800-95-SPRAY www.tankjet.com

Conferences/Trade Shows & MeetingsAlgae Biomass Summit763-458-0068 www.algaebiomasssummit.org

Algal Biomass Organization763-458-0068 www.algalbiomass.org

ConstructionFabricationAgra Industries, Inc. 715-536-9584 www.agraind.com

Andy J.Egan Company 616-791-9952 www.andyegan.com

MechanicalL&M Ethanol Maintenance Contracting, Inc. 515-955-2010 www.lmethanol.com

Plant Construction Agra Industries, Inc. 715-536-9584 www.agraind.com

Roeslein & Associates, Inc.314-729-0056 www.roeslein.com

TanksAgra Industries, Inc. 715-536-9584 www.agraind.com

J.C. Ramsdell Enviro Services, Inc. 877-658-5571 www.jcramsdell.com

ConsultingEnvironmentalCantley Inc. 865-360-4080

ICM, Inc. 877-456-8588 www.icminc.com

Seneca Companies800-369-5500 www.senecaco.com

Feasibility StudiesHarris Group Inc. 206-494-9422 www.harrisgroup.com

Plant OptimizationICM, Inc. 877-456-8588 www.icminc.com

SafetyRail Safe Training, Inc. 712-212-4145 www.railsafetraining.com

EducationBismarck State College701-224-5735 www.BismarckState.edu/energy

EmploymentRecruitingSearchPath of Chicago 815-261-4403, x100 www.searchpathofchicago.com

EngineeringDesign/BuildAgra Industries, Inc. 715-536-9584 www.agraind.com

Burns & McDonnell 816-333-9400 www.burnsmcd.com

Process DesignADF Engineering Inc. 937-847-2700 adfengineering.com


Vogelbusch USA, Inc. 713-461-7374 www.vogelbusch.com

Equipment & ServicesBiogas ScrubbersEco-Tec, Inc. 905-427-0077 www.eco-tec.com

Blowers & FansFlaktWoods 716-845-0900 www.flaktwoods.com

CatwalksL&M Ethanol Maintenance Contracting, Inc. 515-955-2010 www.lmethanol.com


EPM MARKETPLACE

CentrifugesAaron Equipment 630-350-2200 www.aaronequipment.com

Control SystemsICM, Inc. 877-456-8588 www.icminc.com

Kahler Automation Corp. 507-235-6648 www.kahlerautomation.com

Cooling TowersDelta Cooling Towers, Inc. 800-BUY-DELTA www.deltacooling.com

Corn Oil RecoveryICM, Inc. 877-456-8588 www.icminc.com

DDGS DieselTotal-Yield Diesel from Distillers 402-640-8925 www.total-yield.com

Dryers-Fluid BedBuhler Aeroglide 919-851-2000 www.aeroglide.com

Dryers-Rotary DrumICM, Inc. 877-456-8588 www.icminc.com

Dryers-Rotary Steam TubeICM, Inc. 877-456-8588 www.icminc.com

Fractionation-CornBuhler Inc. 763-847-9900 www.buhlergroup.com/us

Cereal Process Technologies 217-779-2595 www.cerealprocess.com

Crown Iron Works Company 651-639-8900 www.crowniron.com


Grain Handling & StorageAgra Industries, Inc. 715-536-9584 www.agraind.com

Sukup Manufacturing Co.641-892-4222 www.sukup.com

Laboratory-Testing Services Foundation Analytical Laboratory 712-225-6989 www.foundationanalytical.com

Loading EquipmentBear Boring LLC 309-695-5150 www.bearboring.com

Loading Equipment-LiquidPFT-Alexander, Inc.1-800-696-1331 www.pft-alexander.com

Maintenance ServicesL&M Ethanol Maintenance Contracting, Inc. 515-955-2010 www.lmethanol.com

PFT-Alexander, Inc.1-800-696-1331 www.pft-alexander.com

Maintenance SoftwareICM, Inc. 877-456-8588 www.icminc.com

MetersPFT-Alexander, Inc.1-800-696-1331 www.pft-alexander.com

MillwrightAgra Industries, Inc. 715-536-9584 www.agraind.com

Molecular SievesICM, Inc. 877-456-8588 www.icminc.com

Parts & ServicesICM, Inc. 877-456-8588 www.icminc.com

PipeL&M Ethanol Maintenance Contracting, Inc. 515-955-2010 www.lmethanol.com

Robert-James Sales, Inc. 800-666-0088 www.rjsales.com

Pipe-FittingsHammertek Corp. 717-898-7665 www.hammertek.com

Robert-James Sales, Inc. 800-666-0088 www.rjsales.com

Pipe-FlangesRobert-James Sales, Inc. 800-666-0088 www.rjsales.com

Productivity EnhancementsICM, Inc. 877-456-8588 www.icminc.com

PumpsPeopleFlo Manufacturing 847-929-4774 www.peopleflo.com

Structural FabricationAgra Industries, Inc. 715-536-9584 www.agraind.com

L&M Ethanol Maintenance Contracting, Inc. 515-955-2010 www.lmethanol.com

TanksAgra Industries, Inc. 715-536-9584 www.agraind.com

With all contact information placed in one convenient

location, Ethanol Producer Magazine not only contains top editorial content but also a useful directory in each publication. Whether a first-time advertiser wanting to raise awareness of your business or a frequent display advertiser looking for added exposure, EPM Marketplace is the perfect solution.

EPM MARKETPLACE


AdIndexEPM MARKETPLACE

• 60 Years of Experience

• 500+ RTO Installed Base

• 100% Uptime Guarantee

• 24/7/365 Emergency Response Service Guarantee

Clean Air & Energy Technology

www.eisenmann.com/usaEmail: [email protected]

Marketplace_EthanolProducer.indd 1 1/31/2011 11:45:54 AM

Thermal Oxidizers

Used EquipmentUPM Machine713-440-8200 www.upmmachine.com

ValvesCashco, Inc.785-472-4461 www.cashco.com

Wastewater Treatment ServicesICM, Inc.877-456-8588 www.icminc.com

Water TreatmentH2O INNOVATION763-566-8961 www.H2OINNOVATION.com

Yield Enhancement EdeniQ, Inc.559-302-1780 www.edeniq.com

FinanceInsuranceERI Solutions, Inc.316-927-4294 erisolutions.com

Mergers & AcquisitionsMoglia Advisors847-884-8282 www.mogliaadvisors.com

MarketingFuel EthanolCHS Renewable Fuels651-355-6271 www.chsinc.com

MiscellaneousMaas Companies507-424-2640 www.maascompanies.com

Research & DevelopmentEngine TestingRoush Industries734-779-7736 www.roush.com

TransportationRailcar Gate OpenersThe Arnold Company800-245-7505 www.arnoldcompany.com

61 2011 International Biorefi ning Conference & Trade Show

42 2011 International Fuel Ethanol Workshop & Expo

21 2011 Northeast Biomass Conference & Trade Show

89 2011 Southeast Biomass Conference & Trade Show

43 American Coalition For Ethanol

66 ADI Systems Inc.

38 Agra Industries

30 Ashland Hercules Water Technologies

13 BetaTec Hop Products

49 BrownWinick Law Firm

59 Cloud/Sellers Cleaning Systems

52 & 71 CPM Roskamp Champion

88 Crown Iron Works Company

53 EISENMANN Corporation

46 ETS Laboratories

77 Fagen Inc.

39 Ferm Solutions Inc.

19 Fermentis - Division of S.I. Lesaffre

73 Flottweg Separation Technology

56 Foundation Analytical Laboratory

70 Freez-it-Cleen

55 Gamajet Cleaning Systems, Inc.

31 & 100 GENENCOR® - A Danisco Division

2 Growth Energy

81 Hydro-Klean Inc.

5 ICM, Inc.

8 & 9 Inbicon

48 Indeck Power Equipment Co.

23 Lallemand Ethanol Technology

40 Lindquist & Vennum PLLP

85 Maas Companies

57 Nalco Company

47 Natwick Associates Appraisal Services

99 North American Bioproducts Corp.

3 Novozymes

17 Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.

60 POET LLC

74 Premium Plant Services, Inc.

94 R3 Fusion

76 Renewable Fuels Association

67 Robert-James Sales, Inc.

84 Roeslein & Associates, Inc.

75 Sturtevant, Inc.

15 Verenium

72 Vicam

80 Vogelsbuch USA, Inc.

54 Wabash Power Equipment CO.

65 WCR Incorporated

41 WINBCO

Spezyme® CLConventional Liquefaction, Superior Performance Call 1-800-847-5311 to add us to your teamwww.genencor.com

Documents

June 2011 Ethanol Producer Magazine