DOE to Award Up to $15M for High-Tonnage Supply Systems for Biomass Feedstocks for Cellulosic Biofuels
19 March 2009
The US Department of Energy (DOE) will award up to $15 million to stimulate the design and demonstration of a comprehensive system to handle the harvesting, collection, preprocessing, transport and storage of sufficient volumes of high-impact feedstocks required to achieve the rapid expansion of the commercial domestic cellulosic biofuels industry.
For the purposes of awards under this Funding Opportunity Announcement (DE-FOA-0000060), high-impact feedstocks must have the ultimate sustainable potential of providing at least 100 million dry metric tonnes per year.
Acceptable feedstocks include organic matter that is available on a renewable, reliable, year-round basis including energy crops; waste material, including crop reside such as stover or bagasse; and other vegetative waste material (including wood waste and wood residues). No plant based material that is generally intended for use as food can be employed as a feedstock.
For purposes of this FOA, algae, animal wastes, and municipal solid wastes (MSW) are not acceptable feedstocks.
DOE is seeking comprehensive systems that have the capability to proceed rapidly through demonstration to commercialization. All aspects of harvest, collection, preprocessing, handling, transport, storage and delivery should be addressed comprehensively in the proposal. To support DOE’s goals, system components proposed should be operational within one to two years after applicants are selected.
DOE is seeking applications from consortia that include at least one Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) of industrial/agricultural equipment used in harvest, collection, preprocessing, transport and storage of lignocellulosic feedstocks. The applicant must provide a minimum cost share of 50% of the total project budget. Total project budget includes both the DOE and cost share funds.
Typical entities that may partner with OEMs include: growers, transport companies, universities, national labs, and biorefineries or conversion facilities. Other interested entities may partner with any applicant consortium.
The DOE anticipates making 1 - 3 awards under this announcement, depending on the size of the awards, which it anticipates will be in the $5-million range for the total project period.
If you put a bio refinery every 10 miles in the farm belt, no bio mass would ever have to go more than 5 miles on average. Taking tons of crop stalks 5 miles is like bringing the farm machinery back to the barn.
Posted by: SJC | 19 March 2009 at 11:49 AM
There seems to be a blind spot in using the term 'sustainable'. The fuel used in trucks/trains/boats should be cellulosic, not petro. Although not part of the brief you could also ask that nitrogen fertiliser does not come from oil or gas.
The solution must be local that doesn't involve millions of tonnes of heavy haulage. Even if small scale equipment is not optimal for making cellulosic biofuel it should should eliminate the need for petro inputs like diesel powered harvesters.
Posted by: Aussie | 19 March 2009 at 01:00 PM
They can run the equipment on cellulose biofuels and make nitrogen fertilizer from biomass as well. Once you get the equipment made using fossil fuels, you can sustain on renewable energy.
Posted by: SJC | 19 March 2009 at 02:54 PM
This would seem to have some merit in separating the harvest able cellulosic from "algae animal, municipal solids and wood residue" which can be treated as separate streams for fuel, animal feeds, fertiliser,or reconstituted wood products.
By recognizing the most desirable end uses at this early stage ths proposal can entourage the currently under utilised difficult 'harvesting ' process over the already existant 'low hanging fruit' resources.
This therefore appears to be forward thinking. Resource separation,offers optimised processing while leaving amalgamation options open further down the line.
Purpose built company owned trailers in a range of sizes "tag" trailers
that can be delivered to farm or harvest site (as a back load or extra, left loaded , and retrieved to the depot by a range of ' certified' carriers that gain payments on a piece work basis 'ad hoc' may work . Like milk crates, pallets, skip bins.
This would reduce road miles to remote areas by better than 50% and provide extra income to the trucker.Also xtra income to the producer.
Fuel costs kept down by virtue of opportunistic movement.Trailers built and owned by the refinery are uniform and appropriate for the purpose and facility.
The certified carriers can be trained to assist ensure the correct material grade is supplied and anyone smuggling in more than a few bricks gets 3 chances or reprimands.
Posted by: arnold | 19 March 2009 at 03:09 PM
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS EFFORT FOCUS ON THOUSANDS OF ALGAE GROWING/PROCESSING LOCATIONS SCATTERED AROUND THE NATION.
Alcohol, like Hydrogen, is too far in the future to be practical in the short term. We could make a serious dent in oil imports and give our economy a major boost within the next two years with a full scale Algae effort.
Posted by: Lucas | 19 March 2009 at 04:52 PM
Assuming most of this is in rural areas, why not a line of wind turbines or solar facilities as part of the project to fuel BEV or PHEV vehicles to help haul feedstocks?
Posted by: JMartin | 19 March 2009 at 06:48 PM
From what I have read about corn, the harvester cuts the stalk 10-12 inches above the ground, puts the corn kernels in one bin and the stalks and cobs in another bin. The roots store the carbon and are plowed back into the soil. The nutrients required can be added. Nitrogen fertilizer can be made from the biomass and biochar is very good at keeping the soil loose.
Posted by: SJC | 20 March 2009 at 01:54 PM
Why not biogas? The technology is very simple, multiple feedstocks, return of digestate to the soil, strech supplies of natural gas. When electric vehicles take up mass adoption the biogas can be used for combined heat and power, solar assisted combined cycle power plants or compressed air energy storage.
Heat engines (automobile internal combustion engines and coal fired steam power plants) typically put out about twice as much waste heat as they do useful work. The same revolution which has come from the decentralisation of information in the internet is to be closely followed by the decentralisation of power especially electrical & renewable energy sources. Smaller distributed power generation station which can make use of the waste heat for building and / or water heating are far quicker and cheaper to install than larger centralised power plants, the fuel of choice for these plants would be natural gas (eventually including biogas) They would be highly adjustable and compliment a nuclear baseload and high levels of variable renewable energy technologies.
Solar assisted combined cycle plants can also make efficienct use of the gas, as could compressed air energy storage systems.
Posted by: 3PeaceSweet | 21 March 2009 at 04:15 PM
With biomass to methane by thermochemical processes, you would want oxygen and more hydrogen. The oxygen gets rid of nitrogen products and creates more methane before any conversion. The hydrogen allows you to make more biofuel per ton of biomass. Solar production of oxygen and hydrogen could be part of this.
Posted by: SJC | 22 March 2009 at 11:27 AM