U.S. Department of Energy Zia Haq Office of …...1 | Biomass Program eere.energy.gov DOE Perspectives on Advanced Hydrocarbon-based Biofuels U.S. Department of Energy Office of Biomass

1 | Biomass Program eere.energy.gov

DOE Perspectives on Advanced Hydrocarbon-based Biofuels

U.S. Department of Energy Office of Biomass Program May 18, 2012

Zia Haq DPA Coordinator

2 | Office of the Biomass Program eere.energy.gov

• Resource assessment – do we have enough biomass?

• Techno-economic analysis – can biofuels be produced at competitive prices?

• Integrated biorefineries – what is being funded at DOE and what are future plans?

Biofuels Topics


Resource Assessment – “Billion Ton Update”

U.S. Billion-Ton Update: Biomass Supply for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry

Data and analysis tools located on the Knowledge Discovery Framework: http://bioenergykdf.net

• Provides current and potential available biomass for 2012-2030

• Estimates are at the county level and for a range of costs to roadside

• Has scenarios based on crop yields and tillage practices

• Models land use for energy crops and ensures meet food, forage, and export commodity crop demands

• Includes sustainability criteria • Report and data on the web


U.S. Billion-Ton Update: Findings

Baseline scenario – Current combined resources from

forests and agricultural lands total about 473 million dry tons at $60 per dry ton or less; about 200 million dry tons from forestry

– By 2030, estimated resources increase to nearly 1.1 billion dry tons; about 300 million dry tons from forestry

High-yield scenario – Total resource ranges from nearly 1.4

to over 1.6 billion dry tons annually of which 80% is potentially additional biomass;

– No high-yield scenario was evaluated for forest resources, except for the woody crops


Potential County-level Resources at $60 Per Dry Ton or Less in 2030

Under Baseline Assumptions


• A National resource assessment identified ~430,000 km2 of suitable land for algae cultivation with potential for 58 BGY of algal oil production

• Optimizing to maximize productivity and minimize water use identifies 10,000 km2, or about 3.7M acres, mainly around the Southwest and Gulf Coast

• These optimized sites would support production of 5 BGY

Wigmosta, M. S., A. M. Coleman, R. J. Skaggs, M. H. Huesemann, and L. J. Lane, 2011, National microalgae biofuel production potential and resource demand, Water Resour. Res., 47, W00H04

Mean Annual Oil Production per hectare 1,000 L / ha-yr

2.5

4.0

5.0

6.5

8.0

Micro-algae Resource Assessment


• Citable source for budget justification • Setting R&D priorities • Benchmarking • Informing broader analytical activities (TEF, QTR) • Track Program R&D progress against goals • Identify technology process routes and prioritize funding • Program direction decisions:

• Are we spending our money on the right technology pathways? • Within a pathway: Are we focusing our funding on the highest

priority activities?

Techno-Economic Analysis


Market Driver for Alternative Fuels – Energy Price Volatility

• Long term price trends indicate significantly higher value and higher price volatility for crude oil compared to natural gas or coal

• Certain sectors (military, aviation, marine, long-haul trucking, and long-distance rail) have limited alternatives to liquid transportation fuels

Source: Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review, January 2012

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

1/1/

2006

4/1/

2006

7/1/

2006

10/1

/200

6

1/1/

2007

4/1/

2007

7/1/

2007

10/1

/200

7

1/1/

2008

4/1/

2008

7/1/

2008

10/1

/200

8

1/1/

2009

4/1/

2009

7/1/

2009

10/1

/200

9

1/1/

2010

4/1/

2010

7/1/

2010

10/1

/201

0

1/1/

2011

4/1/

2011

7/1/

2011

10/1

/201

1

Ener

gy P

rices

($/m

illio

n B

tu, N

omin

al $

)

Crude oil

Natural gas

Coal


Cost Competitive Fuel – Crude Oil Price Forecast

0

50

100

150

200

250

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Cru

de O

il Pr

ice

($/b

arre

l, 20

11$)

History

Reference

High Oil Price

194

117

Source: Energy Information Administration, “Annual Energy Outlook 2011”, DOE/EIA-0383(2011), available at http://www.eia.doe.gov, April 2011

http://www.eia.doe.gov/


Cost Competitive Fuel – Diesel

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Die

sel W

hole

ale

Pric

e Fo

reca

sts

($/g

allo

n)

Ref-Diesel

hwop-Diesel

3.44

5.16

Source: Energy Information Administration, “Annual Energy Outlook 2011”, DOE/EIA-0383(2011), available at http://www.eia.doe.gov, April 2011

http://www.eia.doe.gov/


• Nth plant economics – Costs represent the case where several biorefineries with this

technology have been built, which assumes lower contingency and other cost escalation factors

– Assumes no risk premiums, no early-stage R&D, or start-up costs • Learning curves

– The factors applied to costs to adjust pioneer to nth plant costs to account for learning

• Pioneer plant – Costs represent a first-of-a-kind construction, where added cost factors

are included for contingency and risk – Most closely represented by IBR projects – Few estimates available in the public domain

• Time value of money – Basis of time when comparing costs because of the changes in costs

due to inflation – Currently 2007$

Terminology and Concepts


• Design Case: – Detailed, peer reviewed process simulation based on ASPEN or

Chemcad – Establishes cost of production at biorefinery boundary – Provides estimate of nth plant capital and operating costs – Based on best available information at date of design case – Scope: feedstock cost (harvest, collection, storage, grower payment),

feedstock logistics (handling, size reduction, moisture control), conversion cost, profit for biorefinery

– Excludes: taxes, distribution costs, tax credits or other incentives

• State of technology (SOT): – Assessment of the current state of development for a given technology

pathway – Based on best available information from literature, bench scale tests,

integrated pilot scale operations

Terminology and Concepts


Cost of Production for Hydrocarbon Biofuels

Sources: 1. Sue Jones et. al., “Production of Gasoline and Diesel from Biomass via Fast Pyrolysis, Hydrotreating and Hydrocracking: A Design Case”, Pacific Northwest National

Laboratory, PNNL-18284, available from http:/www.pnl.govFebruary 2009. 2. Sue Jones et. al., “Techno-Economic Analysis for the Conversion of Lignocellulosic Biomass to Gasoline via the Methanol-to-Gasoline (MTG) Process”, Pacific

Northwest National Laboratory, PNNL-18481, available from http://www.www.pnl.gov, February 2009. 3. Anex, R. A., et. al., “Techno-Economic Comparison of Biomass-to-Transportation Fuels via Pyrolysis, Gasification, and Biochemical Pathways”, Fuel, July 2010.

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Methanol-to-gasoline Pyrolysis Fischer-Tropsch

Co-product

O&M

Capital

Feedstock$/gal

s

• Other economically viable technology routes for hydrocarbon biofuels exist, such as conversion of waste and plant oils, and sugar-to-hydrocarbons

• These costs are projected for the Nth Biorefinery Plant, after operation of initial commercial-scale Pioneer Plants

http://www.www.pnl.gov/


Biofuel Production Costs Example of renewable fuels via pyrolysis

$0.82 $0.74 0.5 $0.65

$0.30 $0.29 $0.11

$4.69

$2.01

$0.47

$0.54

$0.52

$0.34

$1.33

$0.99

$0.75

$7.68

$4.55 5%

4% 34%

4% 2%

$2.32

$0.00

$1.00

$2.00

$3.00

$4.00

$5.00

$6.00

$7.00

$8.00

2009 State of

Technology

2012 Projection Feedstocks Fast Pyrolysis Upgrading tostable oil

Fuel Finishing Balance ofPlant

2017 Projection

Mod

eled

min

imum

con

vers

ion

cost

($/g

al to

tal f

uel)

Pyrolysis costs by unit and projected cost reductions through R&D

Renewable gasoline and diesel via pyrolysis

FeedstocksFeed Drying, Sizing, Fast PyrolysisUpgrading to stable oilFuel FinishingBalance of Plant

49% overall cost reduction (2012 - 2017)


Algae Design Configuration

15

Green = algae cell density

Lipid Extraction

Phase Separation

Solvent Distillation

Upgrading (hydrotreater)

Anaerobic Digestion

Algae Growth

CO2

Makeup nutrients

Recycle nutrients/ water

Makeup solvent Solvent recycle

Spent algae + water

Sludge

Biogas for

energy Flue gas from turbine

Hydrogen Offgas

Naphtha

Diesel

Raw oil

Power

Flocculent

Recycle water Blowdown

Makeup water

Centrifuge DAF Settling

0.05% (OP) 0.4% (PBR)

1% 10% 20%

Steam turbine combined cycle

10%

5%

Red = harvesting/extraction losses

10%


FY11 Techno-economic Analysis: Algal Baseline Costs

$523

Direct Installed Capital, $MM (PBR) PBR System

CO2 Delivery

Harvesting

Extraction

Digestion

PowerGenerationInoculum System

Hydrotreating

$114

Source: Davis R et. al., “Techno-Economic Analysis of Autotrophic Microalgae for Fuel Production”, Applied Energy 88 (2011) 3524 – 31.

$9.28

$17.52

$10.66

$19.89

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

OP(TAG)

PBR(TAG)

OP(Diesel)

PBR(Diesel)

2012

Pro

duct

sel

ling

pric

e ($

/gal

)

TAG/Diesel Selling Prices (OP vs PBR)

Operating ($/gal of product) Capital ($/gal of product)

$67

$12

$46 $18 $12

$13

$24

$9

$21

$22

Direct Installed Capital, $MM (Ponds)

Ponds

CO2 Delivery

Harvesting

Extraction

Digestion

PowerGenerationInoculum System

Hydrotreating

Total = $637 million

Total = $243 million


Projecting Future Algal Costs – How Can We Get There?

Growth rate 25 g/m2/d 25 g/m2/d 30 g/m2/d 30 g/m2/d 1.25 g/L/d 1.25 g/L/d 1.5 g/L/d 1.5 g/L/d

Lipid content 25% 40% 50% 50% 25% 40% 50% 50%

Harvesting cost

Base Cut by 50% Cut by 50% Cut by 50% Base Cut by 50% Cut by 50% Cut by 50%

Extraction cost Base Base Cut by 50% Cut by 50% Base Base Cut by 50% Cut by 50%

Spent biomass utilization

AD AD AD Sell @ $500/ton

AD AD AD Sell @ $500/ton

$9.28

$5.45

$3.99

$2.27

$17.52

$11.19

$7.74

$6.10

$0

$2

$4

$6

$8

$10

$12

$14

$16

$18

$20

OP(base)

OP(target 1)

OP(target 2)

OP(high-valuecoproduct)

PBR(base)

PBR(target 1)

PBR(target 2)

PBR(high-valuecoproduct)

Prod

uct s

ellin

g pr

ice

($/g

al)

Capital ($/gal of lipid) Operating ($/gal of lipid)


Integrated Biorefinery Projects

IBR project investments will accelerate U.S. bioindustry growth and ramp up production of a range of biofuels and bioproducts.

A groundbreaking in February 2011 at the INEOS demonstration IBR.

• Over $1 billion Biomass Program investment is being cost shared with over $1.7 billion from industry

• DOE investment has enabled equity investments, initial public offers (IPOs), venture capital (VC) funding, joint ventures (JVs), and joint development agreements (JDAs)

Over $1B in DOE investments in 29 IBR projects is helping bridge “Valley of Death” 5 projects have received loan guarantees to build first-of-kind commercial facilities At least 3 projects have IPOs that support their commercialization strategies The successful first-of-kind facilities will allow for rapid replication and expansion of capacity


DOE Biomass Program and Hydrocarbon Fuels

11 integrated biorefinery projects are investigating hydrocarbons from biomass resources:

Flambeau New Page Haldor GTI REII Elevance Solazyme ClearFuels Amyris Sapphire UOP

GTI and Elevance are R&D projects. 9 projects are pilot, demonstration, or commercial scale.

For more information visit: http://www.eere.energy.gov/biomass/integrated_biorefineries.html


Status of Technology

• Throughput – DOE assumptions (nominal), Pilot minimum 1 tons/day, Demonstration minimum 50 tons/day, commercial minimum 500 tons/day

• Run time – DOE assumptions (nominal), 1,000 hours of integrated run time to provide basic understanding of conversion process characteristics

• Production scale – Pilot, Demonstration, and Commercial • Conversion process data

– Process simulation leading to mass and energy balance – Cost of production pro-forma data

• Structuring advanced biofuels initiatives – Multiple phases with go/no-go decisions – Financial and technical milestones that form the basis of go/no-go decisions – Annual comprehensive project reviews

Scale Feed in (dry tons/day)

Yield (gallons/dry ton)*

On-stream Time (days/year)

Production (million gallons/year)

Pilot 1 35 100 0.0035

Demonstration 50 40 200 0.4

Commercial 500 45 350 8

*Assumed yields for calculation purposes only. Actual yields could be higher.


Innovative Pilot/Demo FOA

• Objective – Production of hydrocarbon fuels at pilot or demonstration scale facilities that meet military blend fuel specifications. Two topic areas will be supported: – Technologies that utilize algae (micro, macro, cyanobacteria,

heterotrophic – Technologies that utilize ligno-cellulosic biomass and other

waste feedstocks

• The innovative pilot FOA will: – Enable the production of hydrocarbon blendstocks at pilot or

demonstration scales – JP-5 (jet fuel primarily for the Navy), JP-8 (jet fuel primarily for the Air Force, or F-76 (diesel)

– Lead to better understanding of the cost of production, fuel characteristics, and emissions impacts of biofuels

Documents

U.S. Department of Energy Zia Haq Office of …...1 | Biomass Program eere.energy.gov DOE Perspectives on Advanced Hydrocarbon-based Biofuels U.S. Department of Energy Office of Biomass