DuPont-Danisco JV Breaks Ground for Biofuels Facility; Corn Residue and Switchgrass for Feedstock
15 October 2008
The DuPont-Danisco cellulosic ethanol joint venture (earlier post), DuPont Danisco Cellulosic Ethanol LLC (DDCE), has broken ground for its first pilot-scale biorefinery and state-of-the-art biofuels research and development facility in Vonore, Tenn.
The joint venture has partnered with the University of Tennessee Research Foundation, through Genera Energy LLC, to develop the pilot facility and the agronomic supply chain for switchgrass in Tennessee. The facility design will incorporate the flexibility to operate on two different non-food biomass feedstocks—corn stover, cobs and fiber; and switchgrass—for production into ethanol. It is expected to be operational in 2009.
Speaking at the Platts 3rd Annual Cellulosic Ethanol and Biofuels conference in Chicago several days before the ground breaking, Joseph R. Skurla, President of DDCE, said that feedstock was going to be a major issue for the nascent cellulosic biorefinery industry.
[with] the technology resolved and the capex managed, the question is what is the true cost of a bone dry ton of biomass to a plant owner who has to deal with market price revenue...We need to think about the oil industry in this respect. Are we going to have integrated producers, or will we have refineries. At this point, it becomes an interesting economic question.
—Joseph Skurla
Skurla said that DDCE was looking at a feedstock solution for the cornbelt states, and one for the rest of the states surrounding the corn belt—the “belt around the corn belt.” DDCE’s go-to-market strategy for the corn belt is to sell the dry mill industry an add-on unit to process cob and fiber into ethanol.
However, he said, the total market potential for corn residue is limited. Looking outside the cornbelt, DDCE has determined that switchgrass is the most likely crop to develop.The successful cellulosic ethanol technology and provider is the one that provides the most flexible technology to address the most types of biomass.
—Joseph Skurla
Skurla said that DDCE could break even with a feedstock cost of $75 per bone dry ton. While the biorefinery has the potential to produce more complex molecules in the future, for now DDCE is only focused on cellulosic ethanol. However, echoing other speakers at the Platt’s conference, he noted that there were similarities between the cellulosic biofuels industry today, and the nascent petroleum industry of the 19th century, the primary product of which was kerosene.
I believe that this is the beginning of a very complex and exciting industry that i think will mirror the petrochemical industry. I'm sure that there will be more complex molecules that will be developed through these technologies. It’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when. I’m not sure where the market is on peak oil right now. When that tipping point occurs, we’ll see an awful lot of change.
—Joseph Skurla
The integration of the DDCE partners’ individual technology platforms combines:
A differentiated pretreatment process developed by DuPont through its collaboration with the US Department of Energy National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) that allows for reduced capital costs. The process is a proprietary mild alkaline process that allows for lower cost of capital than other pretreatments. Work is ongoing to optimize this pretreatment technology for other cellulosic feedstocks.
Enzyme technologies and production platforms enabling high biomass-to-sugars conversion rates developed by Genencor, a division of Danisco. Genencor has developed enzyme complexes that deliver a 30-fold decrease in enzyme costs.
A proprietary ethanologen, also developed through the DuPont-NREL collaboration, based on Zymomonas mobilis. This ethanologen has the ability to convert sugars contained in the feedstock into high yields of ethanol with fewer byproducts.
The companies’ joint engineering capabilities in process integration and facility design.
Any technology that can convert cellulostic materials to food like materials should be used to provide food not fuel. Fuel for plug-in-hybrid vehicles can be made cheaply with nuclear reactors.
These enzymes can convert these materials to others that are more easily digested by cattle to produce milk. In India, it was determined that grass treated with small amounts of lye was more completly digested to produce more milk.
There is not enough biomass for the world to eat and certainly not enough to make much difference in the US fuel supply. Two hundred years ago there was not enough forests to fuel the beginning of the industrial revolution; there is not enough for the end. ..HG..
Posted by: Henry Gibson | 15 October 2008 at 07:41 AM
While it's somewhat concerning to see big chemicals like Dupont and Genencor enter the cellulosic field - more efficient conversion of feedstock is a necessity. It certainly indicates that this is a field experiencing significant growth.
@Henry, the use of cellulose waste and crops for fuel is a temporary process. Liquid biofuels for light vehicle transport have a lifespan of 25-30 years maximum. By then the energy density of battery storage will exceed the need for range extended ICEs in hybrids. And unless you think switchgrass-based sugars are a nutritional food source - forget the food argument.
The world will not be fed by converting grasses to sugars. It will be fed by balancing population against available cropland. And growing non-synthetic, nutritional foods on that cropland.
Posted by: rryfe | 15 October 2008 at 10:05 AM
@rryfe
Balancing population is indeed the answer to most of the ecological problems of the earth. Easily enforceable non-human areas can be created by eliminating humans and their effects from small islands and large ones, starting with Tasmania and including Australia. Even the so called natives must be moved.
Right now humans are experiencing caloric nutritional deficiencies due to high Oil speculation prices that also have diverted many tons of useable food products into substitute fuels. This speculation has also led to deforestation for substitute fuels and feed for animals that now turn cellulose into food. I am an alien soon to depart. ..HG..
Posted by: Henry Gibson | 15 October 2008 at 01:29 PM
Stanford University identified over One Billion Acres of farmland, abandoned, and lying fallow.
Farmland isn't the problem. The Capital, and Knowledge to farm it, That's the problem. This is a good start.
Oh, and people "Log" forests to get "Logs." Cutting down a forest in order to farm subprime land is silly when there are hundred of millions of good land lying fallow around you.
Posted by: Kum Dollison | 15 October 2008 at 03:02 PM
@rryfe - Genencor is not a big company. They're a mid-sized biotech company that specializes in enzymes. Why is that concerning?
Posted by: Tim | 15 October 2008 at 08:17 PM
For those that are interested in controlling population, you may want to avoid Tennessee, the shoot something state. How does a discussion about a solution for Tennessee get to Tasmania?
Posted by: Kit P | 16 October 2008 at 06:53 AM
@ Henry:
"I am an alien soon to depart. ..HG.."
I have enjoyed your posts and the copious knowledge you offer. I hope that you will not depart unhappily. Any contribution to the energy issues of the Earth are of value.
BTW, isn't your statement a violation of protocol?
@Tim:
Danisco is a $3.4B/yr company with a presence in 47 countries. I'm concerned about biotech patents. There have been numerous applications in biogenetics that attempt to patent portions of the genome. While enzymes are far less worrisome, we'd like to see unrestrained development in this area. The products look very promising.
Posted by: rryfe | 16 October 2008 at 06:13 PM
How can we produce a few extra trillion tonnes of biomass/year (to produce enough fuel for one billion + vehicles) without affecting food price and/or availability? It is very doubtful that it can be done. Sooner or latter a limit will have to be applied.
If not regulated properly, this quest for liquid fuel is going to look a lot like subprimes and a $800,000+ house and $100,000+ on credit cards for everybody within 4 or 5 years.
A much better solution is just around the corner. Use a lot less liquid fuel with more efficient HEVs, PHEVs and BEVs. The current gas guzzlers can all be replaced within 20 years. Legislate them progressively out of service if you have to. A malus-bonus system could do it smoothly and at no cost to the state.
Using food products directly or indirectly to keep our gas guzzlers going strong is not sustainable. However, tranforming wastes into essential liquid fuel and chemicals is a win-win solution an should be supported.
Posted by: HarveyD | 19 October 2008 at 07:57 AM