NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.

Realizing the Potential of Advanced BioFuels

Thomas D. Foust, Ph.D., P.E. Director, National Advanced Fuels Consortium June 14, 2012

2

Project Objective – Develop cost-effective technologies that supplement petroleum-derived fuels with advanced “drop-in” biofuels that are compatible with today’s transportation infrastructure and are produced in a sustainable manner.

3 year effort - $50M/year

Consortium Partners Albemarle Corporation Amyris Biotechnologies Argonne National Laboratory BP Products North America Inc. Catchlight Energy, LLC Chevron Colorado School of Mines General Motors Honda Iowa State University

Los Alamos National Laboratory National Renewable Energy Laboratory Oakridge National Laboratory Pall Corporation RTI International Tesoro Companies Inc. University of California, Davis UOP, LLC Virent Energy Systems Washington State University 2

National Advanced Fuels Consortium

3

2011 EIA Crude Oil Price Projections

4

Conventional (Starch) Ethanol Biodiesel Cellulosic Ethanol Other Advanced Biofuels

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022

Billion Gallons

Actual Production Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) Targets

~ Equivalent to National E10

~ Equivalent to National E15

~ Equivalent to National E20

~ Equivalent to National E25

Marketplace for Renewable Fuels

Need to Create Market Demand for Cellulosic Ethanol

Conventional Gasoline

• E10 - saturated with corn ethanol

• E15 - EPA approved for 2001 and newer cars but not implemented in the field

• E85 – flex fuel vehicles grew but fuel at the stations never materialized ICBR investors asked to take on market risk as well as new technology risks Chicken-n-Egg problem between high ethanol fuel blends and vehicles in the market

5

Proposed Fuel Economy Legislation –

Current through 2025

6

Ethanol Can Enable More Efficient Engines

• Higher compression ratio yields higher efficiency

• Above CR of 14 piston ring friction dominates

• CR=14 is optimal

• Current engine CR about 10

• Higher CR would be enabled by HIGHER Octane Number

• Ethanol has a much higher blending Octane Number than hydrocarbon blendstocks

• Another advantage of ethanol is cooling effect of vaporization – much greater than hydrocarbon

7

Ethanol market

• EPA has approved E15 as substantially similar to gasoline for 2001 and newer models

– Currently be rolled out state by state

– Car manufacturers need higher octane specially high RON low MON to meet new café standards

• mid level ethanol blends are a cost effective manner to achieve this

• High RON low MON benefits to E25

• Butanol also good for high RON low MON

• Likely to start approving models in model year 2012 with more to follow in 2013 and 2014

– Small engines, pumps and dispensers remain an unresolved issue

– RFA aggressively working these issues and is strongly committed to E15

• E85 volumes gaining slightly but still very small as overall percentage of ethanol volumes

• VETC (ethanol tax credit) phased out on January 1, 2012

• Effect on EtOH production difficult to ascertain

•

Ethanol

8

U.S. Transportation Fuel Demand – gasoline use dropping rapidly

Gasoline* (Finished Motor Gasoline – E10) (cars & trucks)

Diesel (on-road, rail)

Aviation (jet fuel)

23 bgy

126 bgy

43 bgy

2010 2035 Gasoline 126 116 Diesel 43 52

Jet fuel 23 27

Source: Energy Information Agency

Products in a Barrel of Crude (gal)

* Peaked in 2004 at 136 bgy

9

Transportation Energy Use – Light-Duty Vehicles:

Conventional Gasoline: Reference Case

10

Transportation Energy Use – Heavy-Duty Existing Trucks

Diesel: Reference Case

11

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

USA Europe Asia Pacific

Pro

du

ct D

em

and

- 2

00

4

Other

Heavy Fuel Oil

Middle Distillate

Gasoline

US Refining System Is Built To

Meet Gasoline Demand

BP Statistical Review of World Energy June 2005

12

With all of the technological

improvements to gasoline and

diesel engines in the past 20

years and what will be

required to meet CAFÉ

standards, is our current fuels

menu optimum for maximizing

fuel economy ?

13

US GASOLINE POOL - RON

Year Pool RON Avg.

EtOH % HC Pool

RON

1990 93.2 1 92.1

2000 92.8 1.5 91.0

2010 92.9 8.6 82.6

14

US GASOLINE SALES BY GRADE –

% OF TOTAL

Year Regular Mid Grade Premium

1990 69 9 22

2000 79 7 14

2010 88 3 9

US EIA/Petroleum Marketing Monthly, Feb. 2012

15

Ethanol Prices – April 2012

Prices NL E85 E10 E15 E30

Gasoline $3.3500 $3.3500 $1.0050 $3.0150 $2.8475 $2.3450

Ethanol $2.1300   $1.4910 $0.2130 $0.3195 $0.6390

Product Cost $3.3500 $2.4960 $3.2280 $3.1670 $2.9840

Fed Tax - Gas $0.1840 $0.1840 $0.1840 $0.1840 $0.1840 $0.1840

VEETC - Ethanol $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000

State Tax $0.2800 $0.2800 $0.2800 $0.2800 $0.2800 $0.2800

TOTAL COST   $3.8140 $2.9600 $3.6920 $3.6310 $3.4480

Copyright ©2012 Blend Your Own Ethanol Campaign. All Rights Reserved.

16

Light Duty Vehicle by Fleet Type

Exxonmobil.com/energyoutlook

17

Partial Hybrids, Hybrids and Plug-in Hybrids Electrics Extended Range Electrics Fuel Cell Vehicles Biofuels Alternative Fuels Low Temperature Combustion Diesel Engines Improved SI Engines/Transmissions

TECHNOLOGIES FOR IMPROVING FUEL ECONOMY

and REDUCING PETROLEUM IMPORTS

18

Advanced Biofuel Conversion Routes

Biomass Algae growth & oil harvest

Hydrotreating & Upgrading

Refinery

Pyrolysis/ Liquefaction

Gasoline Diesel

Jet

Sugar Catalytic-

Conversion

Fermentation with engineered microbes

Gasoline Diesel

Jet

Syngas gasification

Fischer-Tropsch Synthesis

Methanol Synthesis

19

Gasification

Technology fairly well developed

Classes of gasifiers

Air Blown Gasification (updraft or downdraft) – low cost and thermally efficient, product gas not well suited for fuel synthesis – high N2

content

Indirect Gasification – good thermal efficiency, syngas not diluted with N2 – product gas relatively high in tars

Direct Gasification – Good product gas, lower in tars, - high cost of O2,, lower thermal efficiency, syngas high in CO2

Entrained Flow Gasification – Excellent product gas, essentially no tars – high cost of O2, low thermal efficiency, higher capital cost because of increased complexity

20

Thermodynamics and kinetics of biomass conversion

Intermediates

• Gasification is inherently a lower efficiency process based on thermodynamic analysis

21

SyngasMethanol Synthesis

DME Reactor

Multiple MTG

Reactors

Product Separation Gasoline

LPG

Fuel Gas

Water

Combined Synthesis Reactors

Product Separation Gasoline

LPG

Fuel Gas

Water

Syngas

BASE CASE

IMPROVED CASE

Challenge - Fuel Synthesis is Process/Capital Intensive

Need to simplify the process to achieve economics

22

Pros/Cons and challenges of gasification routes

Pros

• Good experience base

• Only significant technical challenge is cost and complexity

• Capable of producing high quality diesel and jet fuels

• Chemistry works and is relatively proven

Cons

• Cost is a significant challenge

• Previous attempts to reduce costs have met with limited success

Challenges

• Reducing capital costs

• High process complexity

23

Sugar or Soluble Carbon Intermediate Pathway

Pretreatment & Conditioning

HC Fuels

Enzyme Production

Enzymatic Hydrolysis

Fermentative Cell

ANTI-MALARIAL DRUG

ISOPRENE

Aqueous Phase Reforming

Acid Condensation

Condensation & HDO

Dehydration & Oligomerization

Gasoline

Jet Fuel

Diesel Heat and Power

Lignin

Diesel

Value Add

24

Fermentation Pathway

Mevalonate Pathway

YEAST CELL

hydrolysate

Diesel & Chemical Precursor

Farnesene Synthase

-Farnesene

[1] [2] [3] [4]

[1] Cane juice [2] Fermentation broth [3] Separations [4] Purification

25

Catalytic Pathway

Soluble Sugars

Lignin

PolysaccharidesC5&C6 SugarsFuransPhenolicsAcids

DehydrationAlkene

Oligomerization

Base Catalyzed Condensation

AlkeneSaturation

HDO

ZSM-5

Hydrogenolysis

HydrogenationSugar Alcohols

C2-C6

Oxygenates

Bio

ma

ss F

ract

ion

atio

n

and

Pre

tre

amen

t

H2

H2

Aqueous Phase Reforming

Process Heat

LignocellulosicMaterials

Starches

Gasoline

KeroseneJet Fuel

Diesel

Aromatics, Alkanes

Alkanes

Alkanes

C1-C4

Alkanes

26

Extracting from lignin via low energy approaches

Fractionation/ Catalytic Deconstruction

Dis

tilla

tio

n

C6-C9 stream

C number

Pro

du

ct d

istr

ibu

tio

n

C6 C9 C20

Lignin is a heterogeneous alkyl-aromatic polymer with labile C-O bonds

C9-C20 stream

>C20 stream

Catalytic Upgrading

Catalytic Upgrading

Heat/Power

Research needs: - Fractionation process development - Catalyst and process development for lignin deconstruction - Catalyst and process development for lignin upgrading to fuels

C9-C20 hydrocarbons/ Diesel & Jet Fuel Range

Potential strategies - Fractionation: lignin post Prt/EH, upstream fractionation of carbs/lignin - Deconstruction: base-catalyzed depolymerization, acid hydrolysis,

transition metal catalysts - Upgrading: Retro-Diels Alder, partial ring saturation, selective ring

opening, acid oligomerization

27

Pros/Cons and challenges of sugar routes

Pros

• Produces high quality components for diesel and jet – both fermentative and catalytic routes

• Initial higher value applications

• Builds upon OBP cellulosic ethanol technologies so good building base

Cons

• High capital cost approaches

• Overall yields and efficiencies lower than thermal routes

• Lignin component only used for heat and power at high capital cost

Challenges

• Better organisms –fermentative

• Better catalysts – catalytic

• Lower costs

• Better utilization of lignin

28

TAGs

Lipid (Autotrophic/Heterotrophic) Intermediate

HC Fuels

Fatty Acids TAGs

Reduction/Decarbonylation

n-Alkanes Olefins

Algae Cyanobacteria

Photosynthetic Bacteria

Commodity Chemicals (Ethylene)

Specialty Chemicals

(Carotenoids)

Pretreatment & Conditioning

Enzyme Production

Enzymatic Hydrolysis

Algae Yeast or Bacteria Fungi

29

Conversion and End-use

• Process optimization • Thermochemical

• Biochemical

• Fuels characteristics

• Co-Products

• Energy efficient harvesting

and dewatering systems

• Biomass extraction and

fractionation

• Product purification

• Algal Strains - Growth,

productivity, stability, and

resilience

• Cultivation system design

• Temperature control

• Invasion and fouling

• Input requirements

• CO2, H2O sources, energy

• Nitrogen and phosphorous

• Siting and resources A nano-membrane filter being developed by a NAABB partner.

A gasifier being used by a NAABB partner to convert algal biomass to fuels

Algal routes to advanced biofuels

Biomass Harvesting and

Recovery

Biology and Cultivation

30

Pros/Cons and challenges of algal routes

Pros

• Capable of producing high quality fuels

• High yields

• Negates food versus fuel debate

• Does not need fresh water

Cons

• Significant technical risk

• Cost barriers significant and numerous

Challenges

• Cell biology

• Cultivation

• Harvesting and extracting

• Economic uses of cell mass

31

Bio-Oil Intermediate

Initial Results (NABC data) Good • Feasibility tests very positive • Economics show the potential to be very attractive (< $2.00 gge for refinery

integration case) • Refiners are very interested Bad • Products are almost exclusively aromatics mostly in the gasoline range • Chemistry is very complex and poorly understood making process design

dubious

32

Fast pyrolysis oil is converted to fuels in a 2-step process

The product carbon recovery based on biomass was about 35% Process is capital intensive Logistics issue since pyrolysis oil is highly corrosive and unstable Process may not be scalable or replicable for large volume fuel production without new infrastructure

Holmgren, J. et al. NPRA national meeting, San Diego, March 2008.

HC

light products

medium products

heavy products

H2

HT

H2O aqueous byproduct

Hydroprocessed Bio-oil (from Mixed Wood)

Petroleum Gasoline

Min Max Typical

Paraffin, wt% 5.2 9.5 44.2

Iso-Paraffin, wt% 16.7 24.9

Olefin, wt% 0.6 0.9 4.1

Naphthene, wt% 39.6 55.0 6.9

Aromatic, wt% 9.9 34.6 37.7

Oxygenate, wt% 0.8

33

Catalytic Fast Pyrolysis (CFP) Hydropyrolysis (HYP)

Based on Fluidized Catalytic Cracking (FCC) Technology

Pervasive in Petroleum Refining

34

CFP/HYP Catalyst Impact

min0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5

pA

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

FID1 A, (PY_081010-24\NB3425221R108IPA_2-1.D)

Area

: 20.5

488

0.5

49

1.2

72

2.5

94 2

.644

2.6

85 2

.827

- A

ceta

dehy

de 3

.250

3.4

17 3

.470

- A

ceto

ne 3

.779

- IP

A 4

.034

4.3

27 4

.385

4.5

61 4

.648

4.8

53 4.9

04 4

.959 5.2

29 -

2-B

utan

one

5.5

90 -

Ace

tic a

cid

+ 5

.637

5.8

91 6.5

15 6

.683

- m

ethy

l-pro

pano

l 7

.052

7.2

73 -

Ben

zene

7.4

24 7

.581

7.6

21 7

.738

7.8

14 7

.873

7.9

00 7

.980

8.1

20 8

.176

8.2

25 8

.416

8.7

27 8

.771

9.0

51 9

.184

9.2

50 9

.316

9.4

81 9

.569

9.7

57 9

.792 9.8

58 9

.938

10.

117

10.

299

10.

562

- To

luen

e 1

0.73

2 1

0.82

1 1

0.94

4 1

1.22

2 1

1.31

6 1

1.54

8 1

1.60

6 1

1.68

7 1

1.76

5 1

1.80

8 -

Furfu

ral

11.

897

- O

ctan

e 1

2.08

7 1

2.20

5 1

2.29

3 1

2.38

4 1

2.49

6 1

2.66

2 1

2.69

6 1

2.76

1 1

2.85

0 -

dim

ethl

ycyc

lohe

xane

12.

936

13.

013

13.

087

13.

154

13.

283

- Et

hylb

enze

ne 1

3.30

8 1

3.42

3 1

3.47

6 -

p-Xy

lene

13.

618

13.

663

13.

748

13.

827

13.

908

13.

954

13.

980

14.

019

14.

089

14.

155

14.

199

- o-

Xyle

ne 1

4.30

3 1

4.48

7 1

4.55

8 1

4.65

8 1

4.76

6 1

4.86

0 1

4.93

7 1

5.03

9 1

5.10

6 1

5.21

2 1

5.27

6 1

5.31

8 -

Fura

ncar

boxa

ldeh

yde

15.

378

15.

432

15.

472

15.

604

15.

653

15.

846

- Ph

enol

15.

952

16.

012

16.

093

16.

147

- C

9H20

O2

ethe

r 1

6.23

3 1

6.30

1 1

6.37

6 1

6.51

7 1

6.60

0 1

6.70

5 1

6.74

1 1

6.81

4 1

6.86

0 -

C10

H22

O2

ethe

r 1

6.91

0 -

Dec

ane

17.

107

17.

151

17.

198

17.

348

17.

430

17.

469

17.

524

- C

reso

l iso

mer

-1 1

7.57

0 1

7.61

3 1

7.68

3 1

7.78

1 1

7.82

9 1

7.89

1 1

7.93

8 -

Cre

sol i

som

er -2

18.

028

18.

064

18.

108

18.

185

18.

221

18.

326

18.

376

18.

500

18.

599

18.

678

18.

769

18.

869

18.

927

19.

058

19.

161

19.

202

19.

400

19.

453

19.

491

19.

573

19.

734

19.

764

19.

807

19.

893

19.

959

20.

066

20.

152

20.

217

20.

266

20.

355

20.

412

20.

453

- m

etho

xy-m

ethy

l Phe

nol

20.

510

20.

624

20.

772

20.

850

20.

959

21.

031

21.

142

21.

363

21.

421

21.

554

21.

586

21.

625

21.

674

21.

794

21.

866

21.

993

22.

089

22.

122

22.

375

22.

435

22.

535 22.

653

- m

ethy

l-Nap

htha

lene

22.

772

22.

969

- di

met

hoxy

Phe

nol

23.

098

23.

219

23.

285

23.

436

23.

479

23.

661

23.

737

23.

885

23.

940

24.

073

24.

148

24.

223

24.

288

24.

396 2

4.74

2 2

4.96

0 2

5.06

8

Standard Fast Pyrolysis

min0 5 10 15 20 25 30

pA

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

FID1 A, (PY_100410-32\NB3425253R134IPA_2-5.D)

2.559

2.643 3.7

62 - IP

A 4.5

72

7.252

- Benz

ene

10.52

1 - To

luene

13.24

0 - Et

hylben

zene

13.46

2 - p-X

ylene

14.07

1 - o-X

ylene

16.86

3 - De

cane

20.52

4 - Na

phthal

ene

22.61

4 - me

thyl-N

aphtha

lene

22.91

0 - dim

ethoxy

Pheno

l

30.17

7

Catalytic Fast Pyrolysis/Hydropyrolysis

Quality Yields

35

Hydrothermal Liquefaction

Hydrothermal Liquefaction

Liquid hydrocarbons

H2

Catalytic upgrading

solids

Wet biomass

~350ºC, 200 atm, biomass slurry in water Long residence times

Slow pyrolysis in pH-moderated, pressurized water

36

Bio-Oil Intermediate Research Needs

Pyrolysis Vapor 4” FBR

Research Needs • Determine chemistry mechanisms

• Minimize BTX (aromatics) • Form C-C bonds towards diesel

and jet fuels (straight and branched chain alkanes)

• Develop and test deoxygenation catalysts

• Test catalyst deactivation and regeneration

• Produce sufficient quantities of oil for refinery integration testing

• Investigate effects of catalytic pyrolysis (effects of alkali metals, etc)

• Test in reactor representative of petroleum refinery FCC reactor

This area has very big promise but significant research needs to be done

37

Potential Co-Processing Points

Source: Wikipedia

• Typically designed to remove sulfur • Potentially suitable to deoxygenate triglycerides or other bio-oils

Hydroprocessing Units

Conversion Units

• Designed to break down larger molecules into smaller ones • Potentially suitable for upgrading of pyrolysis oils into fuels

Refineries contain many potential insertion points for co-processing of a variety of biomass-derived feedstocks

38

Conclusions

• Ethanol future still uncertain – Café standards driving to higher compression engines – Significant activity in commercialization – Butanol also a possibility

• Future is advanced biofuels “drop- in”. Although preliminary results are promising many challenges remain:

Biomass

• Yields and costs • Lignin utilization • Must integrate into future fuel mix need

Algae

• Significant technical challenges – Cell biology – Cultivation – Harvesting – Cell mass utilization

39

Biomass for Transportation Deployment

Near Term Impact (< 5 yrs) Mid Term Impact ( 5-10 yrs) Long Term Impact (> 10 yrs)

Bio

fuel

s D

eplo

ymen

t B

iop

ow

er

An

alys

is

Battery Electric Vehicles

Biochem/Thermochem Cellulosic Ethanol

Advanced Biofuels From Simple Sugar

Feedstocks

Algal Biofuels R&D - Gasoline

-Diesel -Jet

Advanced Biofuels Market Analysis

- 3rd generation - 4th generation

Sustainability Analysis - Cellulosic ethanol - Advanced biofuels

Advanced Biofuels Lignocellulosic

Feedstocks - Gasoline

- Diesel - Jet Fuel

Breakthrough Technology Anal. - direct PS -Genetically modified plants

Pathway Technoeconomic Analyses

4th Gen Biofuels - direct photosynthesis

-GMO plants

IGCC Cofiring

40

Biomass for Advancing America

Questions?

41

Pros/Cons and challenges of catalytic pyrolysis routes

Pros

• Based on proven technology – FCC technology in petroleum industry

• Low cost – both operating and capital

• Integrates well with petroleum refining

Cons

• Produces only gasoline and only aromatics which are least desirable from a refinery perspective

• Produces a less desirable co-product steam that must be utilized to achieve economics and GHG benefits

Challenges

• Better catalysts

• Shift product ratio to higher percentage of fuel fraction versus co-product portion

• Better understanding of underlying chemistry

42

16.76

15

8

5

6

5

3

27

32

14

8

8

11

5

5

0 10 20 30 40

North America

Non-OECD Asia

OECD Europe

OECD Asia

Central and South America

Middle East

Non-OECD Europe and Eurasia

Africa

2007

2035

Figure 27. World liquids consumption by region and country group, 2007 and 2035 million barrels per day Figure 27. World liquids consumption by region and country group, 2007 and 2035 million barrels per day

U.S. demand is leveling off but world wide demand is rapidly increasing

25

43

US Situation – future looking better

44

But…. Nobody likes

• CNG vehicles – short range, safety issues in a crash and trunk taken up by large tanks •Ethanol – lower mileage, higher food prices plus specialty engine issues • Small underpowered cars and hybrids

45

Need • Better fuel efficient vehicle options • Better natural gas vehicles and/or better fuels from natural gas – gas to liquids • Better biofuels

46

Natural Gas to Liquid Fuels (Gasoline (naptha), Diesel and Jet Fuel)

Fischer-Tropsch Process

47

Corn Ethanol

• 97% of gasoline used in U.S. is E10 • 14 Billion gallons produced in 2011 • 40% of US corn crop is used for

ethanol production • Ethanol production is the biggest

use of corn has now overtaken animal feeding

• Much debate on the impact on food prices but corn prices have doubled over the past decade from historic levels

• No detrimental impact on modern cars (2000 and newer) however can have negative impacts on lean burn, marine or small engines

48

Cellulosic Ethanol

• Made from plant material not corn and hence does not compete with food

• Environmentalists like it better – lower CO2 emissions and environmental impacts in general

• Higher cost near-term, lower-cost long-term

• Still ethanol

49

Ethanol Can Enable More Efficient Engines

• Higher compression ratio yields higher efficiency

• Above CR of 14 piston ring friction dominates

• CR=14 is optimal

• Current engine CR about 10

• Higher CR would be enabled by HIGHER Octane Number

• Ethanol has a much higher blending Octane Number than hydrocarbon blendstocks

• Another advantage of ethanol is cooling effect of vaporization – much greater than hydrocarbon

50

Why not just make gasoline, diesel and jet from biomass

Gasoline (cars & trucks)

Diesel (on-road, rail)

Aviation (jet fuel)

25 bgy

140 bgy

43 bgy

51

Make biomass a liquid

Initial Results Good • Feasibility tests very positive • Economics are superb (< $2.00 gge for refinery integration case) • Refiners are very interested Bad • Products are almost exclusively in the gasoline range • Chemistry is very complex and poorly understood making process design

dubious

52

TAGs

Fuels from Algae

HC Fuels

Fatty Acids TAGs

Reduction/Decarbonylation

n-Alkanes Olefins

Algae Cyanobacteria

Photosynthetic Bacteria

Commodity Chemicals (Ethylene)

Specialty Chemicals

(Carotenoids)

Pretreatment & Conditioning

Enzyme Production

Enzymatic Hydrolysis

Algae Yeast or Bacteria Fungi

53

53

Co-Process biomass with petroleum

53

54

Evolution of Cars

1970s Car

• 15.8 mpg

• 136 hp

• 0-60 in 14.2 seconds

• carbureted

• 3 spd transmission

• Minimal emission controls

2012 Car

• 32.7 mpg

• 192 hp

• 0-60 in 9.5 seconds

• Direct injection

• 6 -8 spd transmission

• Emit 95% less pollutants – sophisticated electronic engine management systems

55

Evolution of Fuels 1970s Refinery

• Distillation only

• Sulfur 1000 ppm

• Minimal specs

• No specs on N levels

• Leaded to bypass octane ratings

2012 Refinery

• Multiple processes

• Sulfur < 15 ppm

• Must blend ethanol, RFS, CAA

• Extensive specifications that vary by region and season

56

Bio-fuels are actually beneficial to making better fuels

Source: Wikipedia

• Typically designed to remove sulfur • Potentially suitable to deoxygenate triglycerides or other bio-oils

Hydroprocessing Units

Conversion Units

• Designed to break down larger molecules into smaller ones • Potentially suitable for upgrading of pyrolysis oils into fuels

Refineries contain many potential insertion points for co-processing of a variety of biomass-derived feedstocks

57

Take away points

• The days of cheap fuels from petroleum are over

• The Middle East controls oil prices o Not the President

o Not Congress

o Not the oil companies

• US situation is improving o Reduce demand

– More and better fuel efficient cars and trucks

o Increase supply – Offshore drilling in the near term

– Canadian tar sands

– Natural gas to liquid fuels

– Biofuels (gasoline, diesel and jet fuels)

• Ethanol may reach 15- 25% of gasoline but E85 is essentially dead